Notices. Notice of Availability (NOA)

166,845 words·~758 min read·/register/2008/05/16/08-1244

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

BILLING CODE 6050-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Availability for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project of the Port of Long Beach, Los Angeles County, CA AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, DoD. ACTION: Notice of Availability (NOA). SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (Corps) in coordination with the Port of Long Beach has completed a Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Middle Harbor Redevelopment project in the Port of Long Beach.

The Corps is considering an application for Section 404 and Section 10 permits to conduct dredge and fill activities associated with the proposed consolidation of Piers D, E and F into a single 345-acre marine terminal with a 4,250-foot-long wharf at build-out. This would include redevelopment of 294 acres of existing land, creation of 10.7 acres of new open water and the placement of dredged material in 65.3 acres open water for a net gain of approximately 54.6 acres of new land in the consolidated terminal.

The new terminal, which would be constructed over a 10-year time period, is intended to accommodate increasing cargo volumes being produced by the new generation of larger container vessels, and would include four deep-water berths, a container terminal yard, and an intermodal rail yard. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comments and questions regarding scoping of the Draft EIS/EIR may be addressed to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, Regulatory Branch, ATTN:

File Number 2004-01053-AOA, P.O. Box 532711, Los Angeles, California 90053-2325. Comments or questions can also be sent to Stacey Crouch, Port of Long Beach, P.O. Box 570, Long Beach, CA 90801-0570. Phone messages or questions should be directed to Antal Szijj at 805-585-2147. Dated: April 29, 2008. Mark Durham, Acting Chief, Regulatory Division, Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers. [FR Doc. E8-10908 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-KF-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Remediation of Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory and Conduct Public Scoping Meetings AGENCY:

Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Public Scoping Meetings. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE)announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)and conduct public scoping meetings under the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)for remediation of Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL Area IV). The SSFL, approximately 2,852 acres in the hills between Chatsworth and Simi Valley, CA, was developed as a remote site to test rocket engines and conduct nuclear research. Area IV was established at the SSFL in 1953 and occupies 290 acres of the SSFL. The DOE Energy Technology Engineering Center

(ETEC)is located on 90 acres within SSFL Area IV. DOE is preparing the EIS in part as a response to a May 2, 2007, decision by the U.S. District Court of Northern California that DOE was in violation of NEPA for its 2003 decision to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and to conduct remediation of the ETEC site, on the basis of an environmental assessment

(EA)rather than an EIS. DOE recognizes the need to follow the NEPA process and will evaluate the range of reasonable alternatives for remediation of SSFL Area IV. DOE will evaluate alternatives for disposition of radiological facilities and support buildings, remediation of the affected environment, and disposal of all resulting waste at existing, approved sites. DOE will consider the cumulative impacts from exposure to chemical and radiological constituents in SSFL Area IV from future land uses. DOE invites public comment on the scope of this EIS during a scoping period that will end August 14, 2008. During this period, DOE officials will conduct public scoping meetings in the region surrounding the SSFL and in Sacramento, California, to provide the public and other stakeholders with an opportunity to comment on the scope of the EIS. DOE recognizes the value of the public's perspectives, and will inform, involve, and interact with the public during all phases of the EIS process. DOE is issuing this Notice of Intent

(NOI)in order to inform and request comments and assistance from Federal and state agencies, state and local governments, Tribal Nations, natural resource trustees, the general public, and other interested parties on the appropriate scope of the EIS, alternatives, environmental issues, and the environmental impacts related to DOE's remediation activities for SSFL Area IV. DOE invites those agencies with jurisdiction by law or special expertise to be cooperating agencies. DATES: The public scoping period starts May 16, 2008 and will continue until August 14, 2008. DOE will consider all comments received or postmarked by August 14, 2008, in defining the scope of this EIS. Comments received or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent practicable. ADDRESSES: Public scoping meetings will be held to provide the public with an opportunity to present comments on the scope of the EIS and to learn more about the proposed action from DOE officials. *Public scoping meetings will be held at the following locations on the following days and times:* • *Simi Valley, California:* Grand Vista Hotel, 999 Enchanted Way, July 22, 2008, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.; • *Northridge, California:* World Vision Church, 19514 Rinaldi Street, July 23, 2008, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.; and • *Sacramento, California:* Sacramento Central Library, 828 I Street, July 24, 2008, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. *Written comments on the scope of the EIS should be sent to:* Ms. Stephanie Jennings, NEPA Document Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, P.O. Box 10300, Canoga Park, CA 91309, Express Mail Delivery Address: 5800 Woolsey Canyon Road, Canoga Park, CA 91304, telephone number: 818-466-8162, fax: 818-466-8730, or e-mail to *stephanie.jennings@emcbc.doe.gov* (use “Scoping comments” for the subject). All comments whether offered in person at the scoping meeting, or in writing as described above will be considered. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request further information about this EIS or about the public scoping activities, or to be placed on the EIS distribution list, use any of the methods (mail, express mail, fax, telephone, or e-mail) listed under ADDRESSES above. For general information concerning the DOE NEPA process, contact Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0119, e-mail to: *AskNEPA@hq.doe.gov,* telephone: 202-586-4600, leave a message at 1-800-472-2756, or fax: 202-586-7031. This NOI will be available on the internet at: *http://www.eh.doe.gov/NEPA* and at *http://www.etec.energy.gov,* click on the Area IV EIS link on the toolbar. Further information about SSFL Area IV can be found at *http://www.etec.energy.gov* and click on the SSFL Area IV EIS link in the toolbar. *Reading rooms with information about the SSFL Area IV are available to the public and are located in:* • *Simi Valley, California:* Simi Valley Library, 2969 Tapo Canyon Road,

(805)526-1735; • *Woodland Hills, California:* Platt Branch Library, 23600 Victory Blvd.,

(818)340-9386; and • *Northridge, California:* California State University Northridge Oviatt Library, 2nd Floor, Room 265,

(818)677-2285. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background SSFL, located on approximately 2,852 acres in the hills between Chatsworth and Simi Valley, CA, was developed as a remote site to test rocket engines and conduct nuclear research. The Atomics International Unit of Rockwell International's Canoga Park-based Rocketdyne Division began testing in 1947. An estimated 17,000 open-air rocket tests that supported the space program were conducted at the site. In 1996, Rockwell International sold its aerospace and defense business, including the SSFL, to The Boeing Company (Boeing). SSFL is divided into four administrative areas, Areas I, II, III, and IV, and two undeveloped land areas. Area I consists of about 713 acres, including 671 acres that are owned and operated by Boeing and 42 acres that are owned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA)and operated for it by Boeing. Area II consists of about 410 acres that are owned by NASA and operated for it by Boeing. Area III consists of about 114 acres that are owned and operated by Boeing. Area IV consists of about 290 acres that are owned by Boeing, a portion of which it operated for the DOE. Boeing also owns a contiguous undeveloped land area of 1,143 acres to the south and a contiguous undeveloped land area of 182 acres to the north. Starting in the mid-1950s, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), a predecessor agency of DOE, funded nuclear energy research on a 90-acre parcel of SSFL Area IV leased from Rocketdyne. ETEC was established by the AEC on this parcel in the early 1960s as a “center of excellence” for liquid metals technology. A total of 10 small reactors were built for various research activities over the years of operation. The most notable of the reactors was the Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE). SRE was an experimental development-stage sodium-cooled nuclear reactor that operated from April 1957 to February 1964 at the SSFL. SRE was the first commercial nuclear power plant to provide electricity to the public (powering the City of Moorpark in 1957). An accident occurred at the SRE in July 1959 when there was an accidental blockage of sodium coolant in some of the reactor coolant channels resulting in the partial melting of the fuel cladding in 13 of the 43 reactor fuel assemblies. Radioactive gases from the accident were contained within the facility. Over a period of two months, the gases were vented and released to the atmosphere. The controlled releases were always below those levels allowed by requirements in existence both then and today. Following cleanup, the facility was refueled, brought back online, and operated until February 1964. All SSFL reactor operations ended in 1980 and nuclear research work was completed in 1988. Cleanup of ETEC began in the 1960s and was performed in an ongoing manner as unnecessary facilities were decommissioned. In March 2003, DOE issued an *Environmental Assessment for Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center,* DOE/EA-1345. Based on the results of the EA, DOE determined that an EIS was not required and issued a FONSI in March 2003. Comments on the Environmental Assessment were received by DOE from Federal and State agencies, elected officials, and from local community members. The comments addressed the following concerns: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9

(EPA)said that the EA did not clearly identify the decisions that were to be made, how those decisions related to each other, or how or when the decisions would be made. EPA also expressed concern that the conclusions reached by DOE in the EA were based upon inadequate standards and information. *EPA stated:* “* * * that the [Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)] process should be used to evaluate and select a cleanup alternative.” EPA and the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control

(DTSC)criticized the Rocketdyne survey of radiological contamination, which the EA relied upon, as being insufficient for not addressing multiple exposures to radiological contamination, contamination through combinations of radiological and chemical contamination, and contamination from different radionuclides. They also expressed concern that there was no plan to examine SSFL Area IV beyond the 90 acres of ETEC, that groundwater contamination was not addressed, and that there was a failure to address past releases of contamination. The City of Los Angeles and local community members expressed concern that DOE did not adequately consider the effects of releases and remediation on the surrounding communities. Senator Barbara Boxer expressed concern with proposed waste disposal methods and with the intention to leave a substantial amount of radioactive soil in place. The Committee to Bridge the Gap criticized DOE for assuming the site would be suitable in the future for residential development. Local community members were concerned with what DOE proposed as an acceptable rate of increased cancer risk. DOE is now preparing an SSFL Area IV EIS in response to the U.S. District Court of Northern California's May 2, 2007, ruling in the case *Natural Resources Defense Council* v. *Department of Energy* Slip Op. 2007 WL 2349288 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2007), which held that DOE's decision to issue a FONSI and conduct cleanup and closure on the basis of DOE/EA-1345 was in violation of NEPA. The Court ordered DOE to prepare an EIS for SSFL Area IV in accordance with NEPA. The Court further prevented the DOE from transferring ownership or possession, or otherwise relinquishing control over any portion of SSFL Area IV, until DOE completes the EIS and issues a Record of Decision pursuant to NEPA. In response to requests from DTSC and the California Congressional delegation, DOE suspended the physical demolition and removal activities for the remaining facilities at ETEC, except for those activities necessary to maintain the site in a safe and stable configuration. DOE will continue surveillance, maintenance, and environmental monitoring, including soil and groundwater characterization required under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the California Health and Safety Code section 25187, and DOE Orders, while it prepares the EIS. In addition to the investigation and evaluation of individual soils contamination areas under the requirements of RCRA, DOE, Boeing and NASA also are required to investigate and evaluate the groundwater for development of potential cleanup or interim actions. The EIS will address groundwater contamination and contributors to the contamination related to Area IV. All prior and currently planned interim corrective action activities under the DTSC administered Consent Order are located outside of Area IV and will be evaluated to determine if any impact on the groundwater plumes within Area IV exist. In August 2007, DTSC issued a RCRA Consent Order to DOE, NASA, and Boeing (as respondents) pursuant to its authority over hazardous waste under the California Health and Safety Code section 25187. This Order requires the respondents to clean up all chemically-contaminated soils at SSFL by 2017 or earlier, provides the option for DTSC to require additional work to be conducted offsite of SSFL Area IV to assess air, soil, and water contamination and requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). DTSC may use information in the EIS in its preparation of the EIR. DOE issued an Advance Notice of Intent (ANOI), 72 FR 58834 (October 17, 2007), to prepare an EIS for SSFL Area IV and to conduct Public Involvement Activities in order to inform and request early comments and assistance. Informal discussions resulting from publication of the ANOI with both members of the public and other stakeholders aided in the development of this NOI. DOE has conducted interviews with interested parties. The purpose of these interviews was to learn about concerns with the proposed remediation of SSFL Area IV as well as the public's preferences for being involved during the development of the EIS. This broad cross section of individuals includes neighbors of the SSFL, individuals who have been active in previous SSFL actions, former employees, elected and appointed local, state, and Federal officials, representatives of local and national environmental groups, members of local neighborhood associations, organizations, and the business community. This sampling of a wide range of perspectives is enhancing the development of future public involvement activities. The report of these interviews and associated recommendations for improvements in public involvement activities will be posted on the Web site listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SECTION of this NOI. In October 2007, California Senate Bill 990 (SB 990) was signed into law. SB 990 requires the DTSC to certify that the SSFL has been completely remediated so that the cumulative risk of exposure from residual chemical and radiological contamination does not exceed a risk range premised on future land use of either suburban or rural residential. Until this certification is completed, the land at SSFL cannot be transferred or sold. In December 2007, the EPA announced the results of a Hazard Ranking Survey it had conducted at SSFL beginning in Spring 2007. Although EPA could not reveal the final score, EPA indicated that the score exceeded the threshold for listing SSFL on the National Priority List for cleanup under CERCLA. Consequently, EPA sent a letter dated December 6, 2007, to the Governor of California requesting his concurrence in the listing. In response, the California Environmental Protection Agency, in a letter dated January 15, 2008, asked that EPA defer for six months the decision regarding whether to propose listing for this site. EPA Region 9 agreed to defer listing SSFL until July 2008. As part of the FY 2008 appropriations, Congress mandated that DOE shall use a portion of the funding for ETEC to enter into an interagency agreement

(IAG)with EPA to conduct a joint comprehensive radioactive site characterization of Area IV and ensure that all aspects of the cleanup of the radioactive contamination comply fully with CERCLA. DOE and EPA are negotiating the terms of the IAG, and the associated scope of the site characterization. DOE is collecting updated information that it will incorporate into the EIS analysis. A data gap analysis was conducted to evaluate the usability and acceptability of existing data, and to identify any additional data that may be needed to support the EIS. Results of the data gaps analysis will be shared with interested parties in June 2008, and will also be made available on the Web site ( *http://www.etec.energy.gov,* click on Area IV EIS in the toolbar) . A follow-on field analysis and sampling plan will be developed and will also be shared with interested parties in August 2008. Dates, locations and times for these workshops on the draft gap analysis and availability of the subsequent draft sampling and analysis plans will be announced through the site mailing list, the local media, and on the Web site. The draft gap analysis, field analysis, and sampling plans will all be available in the public reading rooms listed above. Printed copies of documents may be obtained from Ms. Jennings at the location listed in the above ADDRESSES section. Purpose and Need for Agency Action DOE needs to complete remediation of SSFL Area IV to comply with applicable requirements and for radiological and hazardous contaminants. Alternatives In the EIS, DOE will describe the statutory and regulatory requirements for each remediation alternative and whether legislation or regulatory modifications may be needed to implement the alternative under consideration. The EIS will present the health and environmental consequences of the alternatives in comparative form to provide a clear basis for informed decision making. In summary, DOE proposes to evaluate the alternatives listed below: • *Alternative 1:* No Action—This alternative involves the cessation of all DOE management and oversight of SSFL Area IV. The buildings would remain and would not be monitored or maintained. Unmitigated natural processes, including erosion, groundwater transport of contamination and concrete degradation, would be assumed to occur. The purposes of evaluating this alternative are to establish the baseline against which the environmental impacts from all other alternatives are compared and to justify the proposed action. NEPA regulations require analysis of a no action alternative. • *Alternative 2:* No further cleanup or disposition of buildings and no remediation of contaminated media at SSFL Area IV—DOE would continue environmental monitoring and maintain security of SSFL Area IV. • *Alternative 3:* Onsite Containment at SSFL Area IV—Containment onsite of buildings, wastes, radiological and chemical contaminants, aligned with potential future land use scenarios including, but not limited to, agricultural, residential, and open space. • *Alternative 4:* Offsite Disposal of SSFL Area IV Materials—Demolition of buildings, removal of contaminated media aligned with potential future land use scenarios including, but not limited to, agricultural, residential, and open space. Transportation of non-radiological wastes to approved disposal or treatment facilities and radiological wastes to an approved out-of-state disposal facility. • *Alternative 5:* Combination On-Site/Off-Site Disposal Alternative for SSFL Area IV—Demolition of buildings, on-site containment of contaminated media aligned with potential future land use scenarios including, but not limited to, agricultural, residential, and open space. Transportation of non-radiological wastes from building demolition to approved disposal or treatment facilities and radiological waste from building demolition to an approved, out-of-state disposal facility. These preliminary alternatives will be refined and further developed as part of the scoping process through public and other stakeholder input. Preliminary Environmental Impacts for Analysis DOE has tentatively identified the following environmental impacts for analysis in the SSFL Area IV EIS. This list is presented to facilitate comment during the public involvement activities on the scope of the EIS. *These impacts include:* • Potential health and safety impacts to the general population, and to workers, and to the environment from radiological and non-radiological releases; • Potential transportation impacts from the shipment of radiological and non-radiological wastes to disposal sites; • Potential impacts from accidents that might occur ( *e.g.* , accidents associated with removal and transportation of contaminated media); • Potential impacts from intentional destructive acts; • Land use impacts; • Socioeconomic impacts; • Impacts to ecological resources (endangered and protected species [Braunton's milk-vetch, Santa Susana tarplant, Southern California black walnut, Mariposa lily, Coast Horned Lizard], floodplain and wetlands); • Cultural, historical and paleontological resources impacts; • Irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources; • Potential disproportionately high and adverse effects on low-income and minority populations (environmental justice); and • Cumulative impacts from radiological and non-radiological contamination both onsite and offsite of SSFL Area IV, and from both radiological and non-radiological contaminants. Preliminary Identification of Issues The following issues have been tentatively identified for consideration in the EIS. This list is not intended to be all-inclusive, but is presented to facilitate public comment during the public scoping period: • Best methods to obtain accurate information on radiological and hazardous contamination; • Compliance with applicable Federal, state and local requirements; • Long-term stewardship and institutional controls; and • Mitigation measures to avoid or mitigate potentially significant environmental impacts. Scoping Process DOE issued an Advance Notice of Intent (ANOI), 72 FR 58834 (October 17, 2007), to prepare an EIS for SSFL Area IV and to conduct public involvement activities in order to inform and request early comments and assistance. Informal discussions resulting from publication of the ANOI with both members of the public and other stakeholders aided in the development of this NOI. DOE is issuing the NOI, pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.7 and 10 CFR 1021.311, in order to inform and request comments and assistance from Federal and state agencies, state and local governments, natural resource trustees, the general public, and other interested parties on the scope of the EIS, environmental issues, alternatives to be analyzed, and the potential environmental impacts related to DOE's potential activities at this site. The NOI is also being issued to notify the public and other stakeholders of the scoping meetings to be held as described. In addition, DOE will provide progress updates to the public and other stakeholders throughout all phases of the EIS process. DOE will consult with appropriate Federal and state agencies regarding the environmental and regulatory issues germane to the proposed remediation alternatives for analysis in the EIS and the environmental issues to be analyzed. DOE invites those agencies with jurisdiction by law or special expertise to be cooperating agencies. Public scoping meetings will be held at the locations and times listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Notice. DOE will designate a presiding officer for the scoping meetings. At the opening of each meeting, the presiding officer will announce procedures necessary for the conduct of the meeting. At the beginning of the scoping meetings, a brief presentation by DOE officials will be given explaining DOE's proposed approach to alternatives, issues to be addressed, and impacts that will be analyzed in the EIS. This presentation will be followed by a question and answer session. Following the question and answer session, the public will be given the opportunity to provide comments orally. This part of the scoping meetings will not be conducted as an evidentiary hearing, and there will be no questioning or cross-examination of the speakers. DOE personnel, however, may ask for clarifications to ensure that they fully understand the comments and suggestions. The presiding officer will establish the order of the speakers, and will ensure that everyone who wishes to speak has a chance to do so. Oral comments will be limited in duration at the discretion of the presiding officer based on the number of commenters and the time available. DOE is especially interested in learning from the public any additional issues or alternatives that should be considered. Comment cards will also be available for those who would prefer to submit written comments. Persons who wish to speak may sign up to speak before each meeting at the reception desk. Oral and written comments will be considered equally in the preparation of the EIS. See the ADDRESSES section of this Notice for the times and locations of these meetings. DOE will make transcripts of the scoping meetings and other environmental and SSFL Area IV related materials available for public review in the reading rooms listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT [section of this Notice]. This information will also be available through the project web site at *http://www.etec.energy.gov,* click on Area IV EIS in the toolbar. Draft EIS Schedule and Availability DOE will provide a public comment period of at least 45 days from the publication of the EPA's Notice of Availability

(NOA)of the Draft EIS in the **Federal Register** and will hold at least one public hearing. DOE will separately announce in the **Federal Register** and local media information on the public hearings schedule and location. DOE expects to issue the Draft EIS in early 2009. Comments on the Draft EIS will be considered and addressed in the Final EIS, which DOE anticipates issuing in the fall 2010. DOE will issue a Record of Decision no sooner than 30 days from EPA's NOA of the Final EIS. Issued in Washington, DC, on May 13, 2008. Ines R. Triay, Acting Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management. [FR Doc. E8-11033 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho National Laboratory AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Idaho National Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the **Federal Register** . DATES: Thursday, May 29, 2008—8 a.m.-5 p.m. Opportunities for public participation will be held Thursday, May 29, from 11:45 a.m. to 12 p.m. and from 3 p.m. to 3:15 p.m. These times are subject to change; please contact the Federal Coordinator (below) for confirmation of times prior to the meeting. ADDRESSES: AmeriTel Inn, 645 Lindsay Boulevard, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert L. Pence, Federal Coordinator, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS-1203, Idaho Falls, ID 83415. Phone

(208)526-6518; Fax

(208)526-8789 or e-mail: *pencerl@id.doe.gov* or visit the Board's Internet home page at: *http://www.inlemcab.org* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Purpose of the Board:* The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the meeting; please contact Robert L. Pence for the most current agenda): • Tour Cleanup Areas/Projects on the Idaho National Laboratory (INL); • Progress to Cleanup; • Accelerated Decontaminating and Decommissioning Plan; • Calcine—Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensing Update; • Integrated Waste Treatment Unit Project; • Savannah River/INL Spent Fuel Transfer. *Public Participation:* The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Robert L. Pence at the address or telephone number listed above. The request must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. *Minutes:* Minutes will be available by writing or calling Robert L. Pence, Federal Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following Web site: *http://www.inlemcab.org/meetings.html* . Issued at Washington, DC on May 12, 2008. Rachel Samuel, Deputy Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E8-11006 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12551-001] Salvatore and Michelle Shifrin; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests May 9, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection. a. *Type of Application:* Exemption From Licensing. b. *Project No.:* P-12551-001. c. *Date Filed:* January 25, 2008. d. *Applicant:* Salvatore and Michelle Shifrin. e. *Name of Project:* Mansfield Hollow Hydro Power Project. f. *Location:* On the Natchaug River in Tolland County, Connecticut. The project would occupy United States land managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, 16 U.S.C. 2705, 2708. h. *Applicant Contact:* Salvatore or Michelle Shifrin, 78 Bricktop Road, Windham, CT 06280,

(860)423-7709. i. *FERC Contact:* Tom Dean,

(202)502-6041. j. *Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests:* 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. The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. Motions to intervene and protests 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. k. This application has been accepted for filing, but is not ready for environmental analysis at this time. l. Description of Project: The Mansfield Hollow Hydro Power Project would consist of:

(1)The existing 80-foot-long, 10-foot-high Kirby Mill Dam;

(2)the existing 1.6-acre reservoir;

(3)the existing headgate structure;

(4)the existing 12-foot-wide, 8-foot-high, 330-foot-long head race channel;

(5)a new powerhouse containing five generating units with a total installed capacity of 500 kilowatts;

(6)the existing 5-foot-wide, 7-foot-high, 100-foot-long conduit and 75-foot-long open tailrace; and

(7)appurtenant facilities. The project would have an average annual generation of about 2,500 megawatt-hours. In addition to a new powerhouse, project reconstruction would consist of:

(1)A new 12-foot-wide, 8-foot-high, 330-foot-long head race channel;

(2)a new 20-foot-wide, 8-foot-high, 20-foot-long box culvert connected to a new 25-foot-wide, 4-foot-high, 153-foot-long open channel tail race; and

(3)a new 275-foot-long transmission line. m. A copy of the application is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at

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

(1)Bear in all capital letters the title “PROTEST” or “MOTION TO INTERVENE;”

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

(3)furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and

(4)otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. o. *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 intents 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. Notice of application ready for environmental analysis: September 2008. Notice of availability of the EA: March 2009. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11026 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2669-061] Bear Swamp Power Company LLC; Notice of Application for Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests May 7, 2008. Take notice that the following application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Application Type:* Amendment of License to Revise the Installed Capacity of the Project. b. *Project No.:* 2669-061. c. *Date Filed:* March 31, 2008. d. *Applicant:* Bear Swamp Power Company LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Bear Swamp Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* On the Deerfield River, in Franklin and Berkshire counties, Massachusetts. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r. h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Paul Bernhardt, P.E., Brookfield Power Company, 225 Greenfield Parkway, Suite 201, Liverpool, NY 13088, *paul.bernhardt@brookfieldpower.com* , telephone:

(315)413-2750. i. *FERC Contact:* Mrs. Anumzziatta Purchiaroni, Telephone

(202)502-6191, and e-mail address: *anumzziatta.purchiaroni@ferc.gov* . j. *Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protest:* June 9, 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. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. k. *Description of Request:* The licensee is proposing non-capacity upgrades for two existing units at the project. The licensee plans to replace the pump turbine runners and rewind both generators. Consequently, the project's total authorized installed capacity would increase from 610 MW to 676 MW, and hydraulic capacity will increase from 5,430 cfs to 6,200 cfs. The licensee explains that all the work will be done within the existing powerhouse, and there are no planned modifications to the upper or lower reservoirs. 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. Information about 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 e-mail 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. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item

(h)above. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. p. *Agency Comments:* Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(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. E8-10954 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 1992-003] Fire Mountain Lodge; 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 7, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection. a. *Type of Application:* Existing Minor License. b. *Project No.:* 1992-003. c. *Date Filed:* April 25, 2008. d. *Applicant:* Ken Willis. e. *Name of Project:* Fire Mountain Lodge. f. *Location:* On Fern Spring in Tehama County, California. The project is located primarily on privately owned land except for a small portion of the dam and reservoir which is located on U.S. Forest Service land. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Ken Willis, Fire Mountain Lodge, 43500 Highway 36, Mill Creek, CA 96060,

(530)258-1952. i. *FERC Contact:* Matt Buhyoff,

(202)502-6824 or *matt.buhyoff@ferc.gov* j. *Cooperating agencies:* We are asking Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies 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 such requests described in item l below. Cooperating agencies should note the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document cannot also intervene. *See* , 94 FERC ¶ 61,076 (2001). 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 24, 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 “e-Filing” link. m. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time. n. The existing Fire Mountain Lodge project consists of:

(1)A 265-foot-long earth and concrete filled dam;

(2)a 0.24-acre reservoir;

(3)a 38 inch intake tower;

(4)a 1540-foot-long penstock;

(7)a powerhouse with an installed capacity of 60-kilowatts; a

(8)a 4000 foot-long transmission line and;

(9)appurtenant facilities. The power generated by the project is utilized for commercial and residential purposes, solely for the owners of Fire Mountain Lodge, a self-provider of electricity. 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 California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), as required by § 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36, CFR, at § 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. Issue Deficiency Letter—June 2008. Issue Acceptance letter—June 2008. Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments—June 2008. Request Additional Information—July 2008. Issue Scoping Document 2—August 2008. Notice of application is ready for environmental analysis—October 2008. Notice of the availability of the draft EA—April 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. E8-10957 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP06-9-001] Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Application To Amend Authorization May 8, 2008. Take notice that on May 2, 2008, Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC (FGT), 5444 Westheimer Road, Houston, Texas 77056, filed in Docket No. CP06-9-001, an application, pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), for an order amending its authorization granted by the Commission in Docket No. CP06-9-000 on May 30, 2006 in order to continue the existing certificate authority for its 18-inch and 24-inch pipelines located in Broward County, Florida and hold in abeyance the abandonment authority for these facilities until newly identified conflicts with planned construction by the Florida Department of Transportation/Florida Turnpike Enterprise are resolved, or for a period not to exceed 36 months, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Michael T. Langston, Senior Vice President of Government and Regulatory Affairs, Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC, 5444 Westheimer Road, Houston, Texas 77056 at

(713)989-7610. 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. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible 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:* May 29, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10965 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 May 1, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings: *Docket Numbers:* EC08-83-000. *Applicants:* Iberdrola Renewables, Inc., PPM Wind Energy LLC, Aeolus Wind Power IV LLC, Klondike Wind Power III LLC. *Description:* Application for Order Under Section 203 of the FPA Authorizing Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities, and Request for Waivers, Confidential Treatment of Transaction Document and 21-Day Comment Period. *Filed Date:* 04/30/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-5245. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 21, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER98-1466-005; ER00-814-006; ER00-2924-006; ER02-1638-005. *Applicants:* Allegheny Power; Allegheny Energy Supply Company; Green Valley Hydro, LLC; Buchanan Generation, LLC. *Description:* Allegheny Power submits a Supplemental Affidavit of Julie R Solomon re their combined triennial market power analysis submitted on 1/14/08. *Filed Date:* 04/21/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-0200. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 6, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER98-4421-008; ER98-4421-009; ER04-543-004; ER04-543-005; ER99-791-006; ER99-791-005; ER99-3677-007; ER99-3677-008; ER01-570-008; ER01-570-009; ER00-2187-003; ER99-806-005; ER99-806-006; ER00-2187-004. *Applicants:* Consumers Energy Company; CMS Energy Resource Management Company; Grayling Generating Station L.P.; CMS Generation Michigan Power, L.L.C.; Dearborn Industrial Generation, L.L.C.; CMS Distributed Power, L.L.C.; Genesee Power Station, LP. Description: Consumers Energy Company et al submit a notice of non-material change in status and Original Sheet 1 *et al* to FERC Electric Tariff, Third Revised Volume 8. *Filed Date:* 04/23/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080429-0073. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 14, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER05-1089-004; ER06-1027-001; EL05-136-002. *Applicants:* Wisconsin Public Service Corporation. *Description:* Algoma Group *et al* submits an amended Stipulation to the Stipulation filed on 9/20/07. *Filed Date:* 04/24/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-0164. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, May 8, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-676-000. *Applicants:* Winnebago Windpower LLC. *Description:* Winnebago Windpower LLC requests to withdraw their application for order accepting initial tariff, providing for shortened comment period, waiving regulations, and granting blanket approvals which was filed on 3/17/08. *Filed Date:* 04/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080429-0207. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 19, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-765-001. *Applicants:* KD Power Marketing Services, LLC. *Description:* KD Power Marketing Services LLC submits an amended application for market-based rate authority. *Filed Date:* 04/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-0035. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 19, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-867-000. *Applicants:* New York Independent System Operator, Inc. *Description:* New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits an Agreement to Amend Joint Operating Agreement Among with PJM Interconnection, LLC etc. *Filed Date:* 04/23/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080428-0114. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 14, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-876-000. *Applicants:* Wisconsin Public Service Corporation. *Description:* Wisconsin Public Service Corporation submits an executed Back-Up Service Agreement with Eagle River Light and Water Commission designated as Rate Schedule FERC 82, effective 4/22/08. *Filed Date:* 04/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-0037. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 19, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-877-000. *Applicants:* Southern California Edison Company. *Description:* Southern California Edison Company submits a Notice of Cancellation of the Firm Transmission Service Agreement with the City of Vernon. *Filed Date:* 04/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-0038. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 19, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-878-000. *Applicants:* Wisconsin Power and Light Company. *Description:* Wisconsin Power and Light Power Company *et al* submits the proposed Balancing Area Operations Coordination Agreement designated as Rate Schedule FERC 500 etc, effective 6/27/08. *Filed Date:* 04/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080430-0036. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 19, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following open access transmission tariff filings: *Docket Numbers:* OA08-112-000. *Applicants:* Idaho Power Company. *Description:* Idaho Power Co submits compliance filing proposing to amend its Open Access Transmission Tariff to include a methodology for distributing penalty revenues associated with Imbalance Penalties, Late Study Penalties etc. *Filed Date:* 04/21/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080424-0125. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 12, 2008. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call

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

(202)502-8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10999 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 4656-020] Boise-Kuna Irrigation District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, New York; Irrigation District, Wilder Irrigation District, and Big Bend Irrigation District; Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment May 9, 2008. An environmental assessment

(EA)is available for public review. The EA was prepared for an application filed by Boise-Kuna Irrigation District, *et al.* (licensee) on August 1, 2007, requesting Commission approval of:

(1)An extension of time for the commencement of project construction to December 13, 2009, pursuant to Public Law 109-383;

(2)changes to dates or time periods specified in license articles relating to actions that would be affected by an amendment; and

(3)amendments to project design. The licensee proposes to install two 7.5-megawatt

(MW)generating units with a total installed capacity of 15 MW, instead of two, 30-MW generating units with a total installed capacity of 60 MW, as authorized in the March 27, 1989 Order Issuing License. The licensee also proposes to decrease the length of the licensed project's transmission line. Finally, the licensee requests deletion or revision of certain license articles that are related to the proposed design changes. The project would be located at the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's (Reclamation) existing Arrowrock Dam on the Boise River, in Elmore and Ada Counties, Idaho. Parts of the project would occupy lands managed by Reclamation, the U.S. Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Forest Service within Boise National Forest. The EA concludes that the proposed amendment, with staff-recommended mitigation measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this notice and should be addressed to Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room, or it may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the e-Library link. Enter the docket number “P-4656” in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call

(202)502-8222 or

(202)502-8659 (for TTY). For further information regarding this notice, please contact B. Peter Yarrington at

(202)502-6129. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11027 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-32-000] Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Herscher-Galesville Expansion Project May 9, 2008. The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment

(EA)for the natural gas pipeline facilities proposed by Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (Natural) in the above-referenced docket. The EA was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)of 1969. The staff concludes that approval of the proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the proposed project. Natural proposes to add new and modify existing natural gas storage field facilities, and add compression to Compressor Station 201, at its existing Herscher-Galesville Gas Storage Field in Kankakee County, just south of the Town of Herscher, Illinois. Specifically, the project would include: • Construction of 15 new water withdrawal wells with pumps; • Construction of 11 new water disposal wells; • Construction of three booster pumps at existing water disposal wells; • Up to four lateral recompletions at existing water disposal wells; • Construction of workover/extensions on five existing gas withdrawal/injection wells; • Construction of a new 8,180 horsepower

(hp)gas-fired engine compressor unit within Compressor Station 201; and • Replacement, looping or extension of 12 waterlines with 8- to 13-inch-diameter plastic pipelines. The purpose of this project is to increase the Herscher-Galesville Gas Storage Field's working gas capacity by 10 billion cubic feet and increase the peak day withdrawal capacity. Natural would achieve this increased capacity by constructing facilities to remove water from the field. Reworking of five existing gas withdrawal/injection wells, and construction of the new compressor unit within its existing adjacent Compressor Station 201, would enable Natural to increase peak day withdrawal capacity. The EA has been placed in the public files of the FERC. A limited number of copies of the EA are available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,

(202)502-8371. Copies of the EA have been mailed to Federal, state and local agencies, public interest groups, interested individuals, newspapers, and parties to this proceeding. Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. To ensure consideration prior to a Commission decision on the proposal, it is important that we receive your comments before the date specified below. Please note that the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of any comments or interventions or protests to this proceeding. See 18 Code of Federal Regulations 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Internet Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the link to “Documents and Filings” and “eFiling.” eFiling is a file attachment process and requires that you prepare your submission in the same manner as you would if filing on paper, and save it to a file on your hard drive. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “Sign up” or “eRegister.” You will be asked to select the type of filing you are making. This filing is considered a “Comment on Filing.” In addition, there is a *“Quick Comment”* option available, which is an easy method for interested persons to submit text only comments on a project. The Quick-Comment User Guide can be viewed at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/quick-comment-guide.pdf* . Quick Comment does not require a FERC eRegistration account; however, you will be asked to provide a valid e-mail address. All comments submitted under either eFiling or the Quick Comment option are placed in the public record for the specified docket or project number(s). If you are filing written comments, please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your comments are received in time and properly recorded: • Send an original and two copies of your comments to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426; • Label one copy of the comments for the attention of the Gas Branch 2, PJ11.2; • Reference Docket No. CP08-032-000; and • Mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before June 11, 2008. Comments will be considered by the Commission but will not serve to make the commentor a party to the proceeding. Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). 1 Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. 1 Interventions may also be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing comments electronically. Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered. Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the FERC Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search” and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings. In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to the documents. Go to *http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm* . Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11028 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [ Project No. 906-006 (VA)] Virginia Electric & Power Company; Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment May 8, 2008. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for a new license for the Cushaw Hydroelectric Project, located on the James River, near the Town of Glasgow, Virginia, and has prepared a Final Environmental Assessment (FEA). In the FEA, Commission staff analyze potential environmental effects of relicensing the project and conclude that issuing a new 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 FEA is on file with the Commission and is available for public inspection. The FEA 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. For further information, contact Kristen Murphy at

(202)502-6236. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10959 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status May 8, 2008. Docket Nos. Wheatfield Wind Power Project LLC EG08-10-000 Capricorn Ridge Wind II, LLC EG08-34-000 Texas Gulf Wind LLC EG08-35-000 Providence Heights Wind, LLC EG08-39-000 Ocotillo Windpower, LP EG08-40-000 Goat Wind, LP EG08-41-000 Starwood Power-Midway, LLC EG08-44-000 Take notice that during the month of April 2008, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations, with the exception of the entity described in Docket No. EG08-10-000, whose Exempt Wholesale Generator status became effective in January 2008. 18 CFR 366.7(a). Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10961 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER08-370-003; EL08-22-000] Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.; Missouri River Energy Services; Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency; Notice of Filing May 9, 2008. Take notice that on May 5, 2008, Missouri River Energy River Services filed a supplement to its April 14, 2008 filing. 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 27, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11022 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER08-695-001] New York Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Filing May 9, 2008. Take notice that on May 6, 2008, New York Independent system Operator, Inc. filed revisions to it Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff, pursuant to the Commission's March 7, 2008 Order. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 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 27, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11025 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER08-527-000; ER08-527-001] Public Service Company of Colorado Notice of Filing May 7, 2008. Take notice that on April 17, 2008, Public Service Company of Colorado

(PSCo)filed an Offer of Settlement and Settlement Agreement resolving all issues between PSCo and Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., Grand Valley Rural Power Lines, Inc., and Yampa Valley Electric Association, Inc., with respect to PSCo's February 1 and February 14 filings in the above-captioned proceeding. On April 25, 2008, PSCo filed an Offer of Settlement and Settlement Agreement resolving all issues between PSCo and the City of Burlington, Colorado, and the Town of Center, Colorado, with respect to PSCo's February 1 and February 14 filings in the above-captioned proceeding. Also on April 25, 2008, PSCo filed an Offer of Settlement and Settlement Agreement resolving all issues between PSCo and Aquila, Inc., with respect to PSCo's February 1 and February 14 filings in the above-captioned proceeding. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest these filings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 16, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10956 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. EL05-25-006; EL05-26-006; EL05-27-006] Southern Company Services, Inc.; Notice of Filing May 9, 2008. Take notice that on May 5, 2008, Southern Company Services, Inc., acting as agent for Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company filed an update on the O&M refund payment to Tenaska and three revised interconnection agreements. 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 27, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11021 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ID-5705-000] Taylor, G. Tom; Notice of Filing May 8, 2008. Take notice that on May 1, 2008, G. Tom Taylor filed an application to hold an interlocking positions pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 825d(b) (2000), Part 45 of the Commission's Regulations, 18 CFR Part 45

(2005)and the Commission's Order No. 664, 112 FERC ¶ 61,298 (2005). Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 22, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10963 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ID-5703-000] Wagoner, Gregory E.; Notice of Filing May 8, 2008. Take notice that on April 30, 2008, Gregory E. Wagoner filed an application to hold an interlocking positions pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 825d(b) (2000), Part 45 of the Commission's Regulations, 18 CFR Part 45

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 21, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10962 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER08-656-000] Shell Energy North America (U.S.), L.P.; Notice of Issuance of Order May 9, 2008. Shell Energy North America (U.S.), L.P. (Shell) filed an application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. Shell also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, Shell requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Shell. On May 8, 2008, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development-West, granted the requests for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Shell, should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). The Commission encourages the electronic submission of protests using the FERC Online link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is June 9, 2008. Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket approvals by the deadline above, Shell is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Shell, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of Shell's issuance of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11024 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER08-636-000; ER08-636-001] Standard Binghamton LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order May 9, 2008. Standard Binghamton LLC (Standard Binghamton) filed an application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. Standard Binghamton also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, Standard Binghamton requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Standard Binghamton. On May 9, 2008, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development-West, granted the requests for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Standard Binghamton, should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). The Commission encourages the electronic submission of protests using the FERC Online link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is June 10, 2008. Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket approvals by the deadline above, Standard Binghamton is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Standard Binghamton, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of Standard Binghamton's issuance of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11023 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [ Docket No. PF08-6-000] Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation; Notice of Limited Scoping for the Ohio Storage Expansion Project May 9, 2008. The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment

(EA)that will discuss the potential environmental impacts of the Ohio Storage Expansion Project, involving construction and operation of natural gas facilities by Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation (Columbia) in Ashland, Fairfield, Hocking, and Holmes Counties, Ohio. The EA will be used by the Commission in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity. On May 1, 2008, Columbia filed a revision to its project that would remove two wells from consideration, thus not affecting two landowners. Further, Columbia would add four additional wells (Well 12491, Well 12492, Well 12578, and Well 12496) affecting two additional landowners. 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 (i.e., PF08-6) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll free at

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

(202)502-8659. Because the two additional landowners were recently added to our environmental mailing list (after the April 7, 2008 close of scoping), they have not had an opportunity to comment on Columbia's planned project. Therefore, we are opening a limited scoping period directed at these landowners to comment on the project and attaching the original *Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues* to this letter. Please note that this limited scoping period will close on June 1, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11019 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-187-000] Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization May 7, 2008. Take notice that on April 24, 2008, Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans), 225 North Shore Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15212, filed in Docket No. CP08-187-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205 and 157.210 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act for authorization to replace approximately 9.71 miles of Line No. H-152, located in Allegheny and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676 or TTY,

(202)502-8659. Specifically, Equitrans proposes to replace approximately 9.71 noncontiguous miles of 16-inch diameter bare steel pipeline, located in Allegheny and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, with 16-inch diameter coated steel pipeline. Equitrans estimates the cost of construction to be $22,362,143. Equitrans states that the replacement project is necessitated by the age and condition of the existing bare steel pipeline. Equitrans asserts that there are nine segments planned for replacement. Any questions regarding the application should be directed to David K. Dewey, Vice President & General Counsel, Equitrans, L.P., 225 North Shore Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15212, at

(412)395-2566 or facsimile at

(412)395-3347. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10955 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-188-000] Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization May 8, 2008. Take notice that on April 25, 2008, Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68124, filed in Docket No. CP08-188-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205 and 157.211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act for authorization to install and operate a new meter station, located in Pine County, Minnesota, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676 or TTY,

(202)502-8659. Specifically, Northern proposes to install and operate a new meter station to accommodate natural gas deliveries to the Corporate Commission of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians d/b/a Grand Casino Hinckley under a throughput service agreement. Northern proposes to install a skid-mounted station, which will include buildings, a heater, regulators, a meter, and associated piping, fittings, and valves. Northern estimates the cost of construction to be $276,558. Northern states that the new meter station will have the capability of delivering up to 980 MMcf per day. Any questions regarding the application should be directed to Michael T. Loeffler, Senior Director, Certificates and External Affairs, or Donna Martens, Senior Regulatory Analyst, Northern Natural Gas Company, 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68124, at

(402)398-7103 or at

(402)398-7138, respectively. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10960 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-164-000] Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization May 7, 2008. Take notice that on April 21, 2008, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee), 1001 Louisiana, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP08-164-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205 and 157.216 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act for authorization to abandon by sale to Sea Robin Pipeline Company (Sea Robin), offshore pipelines designated as Line Nos. 524X-100 and 524X-200 and Tennessee's ownership interest in Line No. 524X-1600, located in offshore Louisiana, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676 or TTY,

(202)502-8659. Specifically, Tennessee proposes to abandon by sale to Sea Robin, Tennessee's remaining portion of Line No. 524X-100, consisting of a sub-sea tap assembly on a Sea Robin pipeline and approximately 120 feet of twelve-inch diameter pipeline; Line No. 524X-200, consisting of approximately 7.3 miles of twelve-inch diameter lateral pipeline with associated appurtenances; and Tennessee's ownership interest, 8.17%, in Line No. 524X-1600. Tennessee states that Sea Robin cooperated in a plan to return Line Nos. 524X-200 and 524X-1600 to service by allowing a new interconnection to its system. Tennessee asserts that because Tennessee provides comprehensive receipt and delivery points for interruptible shippers, contracts between Tennessee and its customers will not be impacted by the sale. Any questions regarding the application should be directed to Jay V. Allen, Senior Counsel, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, 1001 Louisiana, Houston, Texas 77002, at

(713)420-5589 or fax

(713)420-1601 or Juan Eligio, Analyst, Certificates & Regulatory Compliance, at

(713)420-3294 or fax

(713)420-1605. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10958 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-343-000] Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization May 9, 2008. Take notice that on April 30, 2008, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation (Transco), Post Office Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251, filed in Docket No. CP08-343-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205, 157.208, and 157.212 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act for authorization to construct and operate a new receipt point to receive revaporized liquefied natural gas (LNG), located in Evangeline Parish, Louisiana, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676 or TTY,

(202)502-8659. Specifically, Transco proposes to construct and operate a new receipt point on Transco's mainline in Evangeline Parish, Louisiana to receive revaporized LNG from the Cheniere Pass LNG terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana by way of the Kinder Morgan Louisiana Pipeline, LLC (KMLP). The facilities Transco proposes to construct will include a 24-inch tap assembly on Transco's 36-inch Mainline B and a 24-inch tap assembly on Transco's 36-inch Mainline C, flow computer, gas chromatograph with building enclosure, flow/pressure control and overpressure protection facilities, valves, and radio communication facilities at the mainline B and C. Transco estimates the cost of construction to be approximately $1.7 million. Transco states that KMLP will reimburse Transco for all costs associated with such facilities. Transco asserts that the new receipt point will provide Transco with the ability to receive up to 600 MMcf/d of revaporized LNG from KMLP. Any questions regarding the application should be directed to Marg Camardello, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, P. O. Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251, at

(713)215-3380. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 C. 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-11020 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Supplemental Notice Announcing Revised Treatment of Initial Electric Market-Based Rate Authorization Filings That Also Request Blanket Section 204 Authorization May 8, 2008. On April 3, 2008, the Commission issued a notice stating that, effective April 3, 2008, it would issue a separate combined notice of filing for initial electric market-based rate authorization filings. Upon further consideration, and effective upon the date of issuance of this supplemental notice, the Commission instead will include initial electric market-based rate authorization filings along with other filings in a combined notice of filing. However, once it is determined that an initial electric market-based rate authorization filing includes a request for blanket authorization, pursuant 18 CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, it will issue a separate supplemental notice. By this initiative, the Commission seeks to expedite the process for noticing initial electric market-based rate authorization filings, while also providing notice of requests for blanket authorizations for future issuances of securities and assumptions of liabilities. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10964 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Nuclear Security Administration Notice of Availability of the Final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). ACTION: Notice of Availability. SUMMARY: NNSA announces the availability of the *Final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico* (Final SWEIS) (DOE/EIS-0380). The Final SWEIS analyzes the potential environmental impacts of continuing to operate Los Alamos National Laboratory

(LANL)and addresses public comments received on the Draft SWEIS. NNSA's Preferred Alternative for LANL, as identified in the Draft and Final SWEIS, is the Expanded Operations Alternative. The Final SWEIS also evaluates a No Action Alternative and a Reduced Operations Alternative. DATES: NNSA will not issue Records of Decision based on the SWEIS before 30 days have passed from the publication of this notice of availability. ADDRESSES: A copy of the Final SWEIS may be obtained by writing to: U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos Site Office, Attn: NEPA Compliance Officer, Environmental Operations, 528 35th Street, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544. Requests for copies of the document may also be sent by facsimile ((505) 845-4239); or by E-mail ( *LANL_SWEIS@doeal.gov* ) or *LASO.SWEIS@doeal.gov.* The Final SWEIS will also be available on the NNSA Los Alamos Site Office's NEPA Web site at: *http://www.doeal.gov/laso/NEPASWEIS.aspx.* Copies of the Final SWEIS are also available for review at the following locations: The Los Alamos Research Library, West Jemez Road, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico; the Office of the Northern New Mexico Citizens Advisory Board, 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite B, Santa Fe, New Mexico; and, the Zimmerman Library, Central Avenue, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information on NNSA's NEPA process, please contact: Ms. Alice C. Williams, NA-50, NEPA Compliance Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, or telephone 1-202-586-6847. For general information about the DOE NEPA process, please contact: Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585,

(202)586-4600, or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary purpose and need for continued operation of LANL is to provide support for DOE and NNSA core missions as directed by Congress and the President. NNSA's need to continue operating LANL arises from its obligation to ensure a safe and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile. LANL is also needed to support other Federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security. The Final SWEIS analyzed the environmental impacts of operating LANL at different levels. LANL is located in north-central New Mexico and covers an area of about 40 square miles (104 square kilometers). It was established in 1943 as “Project Y” of the Manhattan Project with a single mission—to build the world's first nuclear weapons. After World War II ended, Project Y was designated a permanent research and development laboratory and its work was expanded to incorporate a wide variety of assignments in support of other government and civilian programs. LANL is now a multi-disciplinary, multipurpose institution engaged in theoretical and experimental research and development. DOE issued a Final SWEIS and Record of Decision in 1999 for the continued operation of the laboratory. DOE regulations implementing NEPA require the evaluation of site-wide NEPA analyses every five years to determine their continued applicability; such a five-year evaluation was initiated for the 1999 SWEIS in 2004, and NNSA subsequently decided to prepare a new SWEIS. A new Draft SWEIS was issued in July 2006 for public review and comment over a 75-day period. NNSA considered the comments received on the Draft SWEIS in preparing the Final SWEIS. The alternatives evaluated in the Final SWEIS represent a range of operational levels from the minimal reasonable activity levels (Reduced Operations Alternative) to the highest reasonable activity levels that could be supported by current facilities combined with expansion and construction of new facilities (Expanded Operations Alternative). The No Action Alternative would continue current mission support work at LANL and includes actions, facility construction, and other activities for which NEPA analyses have already been completed. All alternatives assumed that NNSA will continue to operate LANL as a national security laboratory for the foreseeable future. *Subsequent Document Preparation:* NNSA will consider the environmental impact analysis presented in the Final LANL SWEIS, along with other information, in making decisions regarding the continued operation of LANL. NNSA will wait to issue a ROD for at least 30 days following publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of availability. It is anticipated that several RODs may be issued based on the Final SWEIS over the next several years. NNSA will publish all RODs in the **Federal Register** . Signed in Washington, DC, this 4th day of April, 2008. Thomas P. D'Agostino, Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration. [FR Doc. E8-11007 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8567-1, EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0238] Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges From Construction Activities AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of proposed permit issuance. SUMMARY: EPA Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 today are proposing for public comment the issuance of their 2008 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System general permits for stormwater discharges from new dischargers engaged in large and small construction activities. Hereinafter, these NPDES general permits will be referred to as “permit” or “2008 construction general permit” or “2008 CGP.” “New dischargers” are those who did not file a notice of intent (“NOI”) to be covered under the 2003 construction general permit (“2003 CGP”) before it expired. Existing dischargers who properly filed an NOI to be covered under the 2003 CGP continue to be authorized to discharge under that permit according to its terms. This draft 2008 CGP contains the same limits and conditions as the Agency's 2003 CGP with the exception of a few minor modifications which are detailed below. As proposed, EPA is issuing this CGP for a period not to exceed two

(2)years and will make the permit available to new construction activities and unpermitted ongoing activities only. In addition to proposing this draft CGP, EPA is also requesting comments on the criteria to be used by the Agency to incorporate, by reference, “qualifying local program requirements” for erosion and sediment control as provided for in EPA's regulations. Approved qualifying local program requirements can then be incorporated by reference into the Agency's construction general permit. A construction site operator with construction activities within the jurisdiction of the qualifying local program can follow local erosion and sediment control requirements in lieu of complying with comparable erosion and sediment control requirements in EPA's CGP. DATES: Comments on EPA's proposal, including the draft permit, must be postmarked by June 16, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0238, by one of the following methods: • *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail:* *ow-docket@epa.gov* . • *Mail:* Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. • *Hand Delivery:* EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA Headquarters West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* A copy of the draft 2008 CGP and its accompanying fact sheet is available at *www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp* . Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0238. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, *e.g.* , CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is

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

(202)566-2426. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Schaner, Water Permits Division, Office of Wastewater Management (Mail Code: 4203M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., EPA East, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:

(202)564-0721; fax number:

(202)564-6431; e-mail address: *schaner.greg@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does This Action Apply to Me? *The 2008 construction general permit (“2008 CGP”) would potentially apply to the following construction activities:* Category Examples of affected entities North American industry classification system (NAICS) code Industry Construction site operators disturbing 1 or more acres of land, or less than 1 acre but part of a larger common plan of development or sale if the larger common plan will ultimately disturb 1 acre or more, and performing the following activities: Building, Developing and General Contracting 233 Heavy Construction 234 EPA does not intend the preceding table to be exhaustive, but provides it as a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of activities that EPA is now aware of that could potentially be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be affected. To determine whether your facility is affected by this action, you should carefully examine the definition of “construction activity” and “small construction activity” in existing EPA regulations at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(x) and 122.26(b)(15), respectively. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed for technical information in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Eligibility for coverage under the 2008 CGP would be limited to operators of “new projects” or “unpermitted ongoing projects.” A “new project” is one that commences after the effective date of the 2008 CGP. An “unpermitted ongoing project” is one that commenced prior to the effective date of the 2008 CGP, yet never received authorization to discharge under the 2003 CGP or any other NPDES permit covering its construction-related stormwater discharges. This proposal is limited to those areas where EPA is the permitting authority. A list of eligible areas is included in Appendix B of the draft 2008 CGP. B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI.* Do not submit this information to EPA through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for Preparing Your Comments.* When submitting comments, remember to: • Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date, and page number). • Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)part or section number. • Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives, and substitute language for your requested changes. • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. C. Public Hearings EPA has not scheduled any public hearings to receive public comment concerning the proposed permit. All persons will continue to have the right to provide written comments during the public comment period. However, interested persons may request a public hearing pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12 concerning the proposed permit. Requests for a public hearing must be sent or delivered in writing to the same address as provided above for public comments prior to the close of the comment period. Requests for a public hearing must state the nature of the issues proposed to be raised in the hearing. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12, EPA shall hold a public hearing if it finds, on the basis of requests, a significant degree of public interest in a public hearing on the proposed permit. If EPA decides to hold a public hearing, a public notice of the date, time and place of the hearing will be made at least 30 days prior to the hearing. Any person may provide written or oral statements and data pertaining to the proposed permit at the public hearing. D. Finalizing the Permit After the close of the public comment period, EPA will issue a final permit. This permit will not be issued until after all public comments have been considered and appropriate changes made to the permit. EPA's response to public comments received will be included in the docket as part of the final permit decisions. Once the final permit becomes effective, operators of new and unpermitted ongoing construction projects may seek authorization to discharge by filing a NOI to be covered under the new 2008 CGP. Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 122.6, any construction site operator obtaining permit coverage prior to the July 1, 2008 expiration date of the 2003 CGP, automatically remains covered under that permit until the earliest of: • The operator submits a Notice of Termination, or; • EPA issues an individual permit or denies coverage under an individual permit for the site's stormwater discharges, or; • EPA issues a new general permit that establishes procedures for covering these existing dischargers to obtain coverage under the new general permit and the operator obtains coverage consistent with the procedures detailed in that new general permit. E. Who Are the EPA Regional Contacts for This Proposed Permit? For EPA Region 1, contact Thelma Murphy at tel.:

(617)918-1615 or e-mail at *murphy.thelma@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 2, contact Stephen Venezia at tel.:

(212)637-3856 or e-mail at *venezia.stephen@epa.gov,* or for Puerto Rico, contact Sergio Bosques at tel.:

(787)977-5838 or e-mail at *bosques.sergio@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 3, contact Garrison Miller at tel.:

(215)814-5745 or e-mail at *miller.garrison@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 5, contact Brian Bell at tel.:

(312)886-0981 or e-mail at *bell.brianc@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 6, contact Brent Larsen at tel.:

(214)665-7523 or e-mail at: *larsen.brent@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 7, contact Mark Matthews at tel.:

(913)551-7635 or e-mail at: *matthews.mark@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 8, contact Greg Davis at tel.:

(303)312-6314 or e-mail at: *davis.gregory@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 9, contact Eugene Bromley at tel.:

(415)972-3510 or e-mail at *bromley.eugene@epa.gov.* For EPA Region 10, contact Misha Vakoc at tel.:

(206)553-6650 or e-mail at *vakoc.misha@epa.gov.* II. Background of Permit Proposal A. Statutory and Regulatory History The Clean Water Act (“CWA”) establishes a comprehensive program “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.” 33 U.S.C. 1251(a). The CWA also includes the objective of attaining “water quality which provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife.” 33 U.S.C. 1251(a)(2). To achieve these goals, the CWA requires EPA to control the discharges through the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permits. Section 405 of the Water Quality Act of 1987

(WQA)added section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which directed EPA to develop a phased approach to regulate stormwater discharges under the NPDES program. EPA published a final regulation in the **Federal Register** on the first phase of this program on November 16, 1990, establishing permit application requirements for “storm water discharges associated with industrial activity.” See 55 FR 47990. EPA defined the term “storm water discharge associated with industrial activity” in a comprehensive manner to cover a wide variety of facilities. Construction activities, including activities that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, that ultimately disturb at least five acres of land and have point source discharges to waters of the U.S. were included in the definition of “industrial activity” pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(x). Phase II of the stormwater program was published in the **Federal Register** on December 8, 1999, and required NPDES permits for discharges from construction sites disturbing at least one acre, but less than five acres, including sites that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale that will ultimately disturb at least one acre but less than five acres, pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(15)(i). See 64 FR 68722. NPDES permits issued for construction stormwater discharges are required under Section 402(a)(1) of the CWA to include conditions for meeting technology-based effluent limits established under Section 301 and, where applicable, Section 306. Once an effluent limitations guideline or new source performance standard is promulgated in accordance with these sections, NPDES permits are required to incorporate limits based on such limitations and standards. See 40 CFR 122.44(a)(1). Prior to the promulgation of national effluent limitations and standards, permitting authorities incorporate technology-based effluent limitations on a best professional judgment basis. CWA section 402(a)(1)(B); 40 CFR 125.3(a)(2)(ii)(B). The NPDES regulations, at 40 CFR 122.44(s), authorize EPA to recognize local erosion and sediment control requirements that meet or exceed the requirements in that section as a “qualifying local program” (“QLP”). EPA can incorporate any such QLP requirements meeting or exceeding regulatory criteria into the CGP consistent with procedures for permit modifications established at 40 CFR 124.5. Following final incorporation of any QLP into the CGP, construction site operators that are subject to the requirements of the CGP and who are operating within the jurisdiction of a QLP, would then be directed (in the CGP) to follow those qualified local erosion and sediment control requirements in lieu of otherwise applicable erosion and sediment control requirements detailed in the CGP. Other CGP requirements, such as meeting eligibility criteria and standard NPDES permit conditions would still apply to that construction site operator. EPA has not incorporated QLPs into any of its previously issued construction general permits. However, in the interest of implementing this regulation, consistent with the Office of Water's May 8, 2006 memorandum entitled “Qualifying Local Programs for Construction Site Stormwater Runoff” (available at *www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater* ), EPA is today proposing draft criteria for incorporating QLPs into this or any future CGPs. B. Summary of Permit Proposal EPA proposes to issue the 2008 CGP for a period of not to exceed two years. As proposed, the 2008 CGP will include conditions and limits that would be identical to the 2003 CGP, with the exception that the 2008 CGP only applies to new and unpermitted ongoing construction projects. Discharges from ongoing projects (or “existing dischargers”) would continue to be covered under the existing 2003 CGP. (However, EPA clarifies that if an operator of a permitted ongoing project transfers ownership of the project, or a portion thereof, to a different operator, that subsequent operator will be required to submit a complete and accurate NOI for a new project under the 2008 CGP.) Although the existing permit expires on July 1, 2008, dischargers who filed notices of intent

(NOIs)to be authorized under that permit prior to the expiration date will continue to be authorized to discharge in accordance with EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 122.6. The draft permit proposed here will only apply to dischargers who were not authorized under the 2003 CGP, which includes both “new projects” and “unpermitted ongoing projects.” Operators of new projects or unpermitted ongoing projects seeking coverage under the 2008 CGP would be expected to use the same electronic Notice of Intent

(eNOI)system that is currently in place for the 2003 CGP. As stated, EPA proposes to issue the 2008 CGP for a period not to exceed two years. As a result of recent litigation brought against EPA concerning the promulgation of effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the construction and development (“C&D”) industry, EPA is required by court order to propose effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance standards (hereinafter, “effluent guidelines”) for the C&D industry by December 2008, and promulgate those effluent guidelines by December 2009. See *Natural Resources Defense Council, et al.* v. *U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,* No CV—0408307-GH (C.D. Cal.)(Permanent Injunction and Judgment, December 5, 2006). EPA projects that the Agency may publish a proposed rule ahead of the court-ordered deadlines. If EPA publishes the proposed rule ahead of schedule, this may allow the Agency to promulgate a final rule ahead of schedule as well. The Agency currently hopes to promulgate a final rule as early as the end of this calendar year. However, completion of the tasks necessary to do so is dependent on the timing of numerous future activities and factors associated with the effluent guidelines rulemaking process. EPA believes it is appropriate to propose a revised CGP once EPA has issued C&D effluent guidelines, and therefore proposes a maximum two-year duration for this permit to coincide with the court-ordered deadlines for the C&D rule. EPA intends to propose and finalize a new, revised CGP sooner, if the C&D rule is promulgated earlier than the date directed by the court. EPA solicits comments on the proposed 2-year duration of this permit. C. What Is EPA's Rationale for This Permit Proposal? Since the 2003 CGP expires on July 1, 2008, it is incumbent upon EPA to make available a similar general permit that provides coverage for the estimated 4,000 new dischargers per year commencing construction in the areas where EPA is the permitting authority. Without such a permit vehicle, the only other available option for construction site operators is to obtain coverage under an individual permit. As has been described in the past, issuance of individual permits for every construction activity disturbing one acre or more is infeasible given the resources required for the Agency to issue individual permits. EPA is proposing to issue a CGP that adopts the same limits and conditions of the previous permit (the 2003 CGP) for a limited period of time. This action is appropriate for several reasons. First, as discussed above, EPA is working on the development of a new effluent guideline that will address stormwater discharges from the same industrial activities ( *i.e.* , construction activities disturbing one or more acres) as the CGP. Because the development of the C&D rule and the issuance of the CGP are on relatively similar schedules, and the C&D rule will establish national technology-based effluent limitations and standards for construction activities, EPA believes that it is more appropriate to proceed along two tracks to permit construction discharges. The first track entails issuing a CGP for a limited period of time, not to exceed 2 years, that contains the 2003 CGP limits and conditions, but for only operators of new and unpermitted ongoing projects, so that such entities can obtain valid permit coverage for their discharges. The second track involves proposing and issuing a revised 5-year CGP that incorporates the requirements of the new C&D rule shortly after the rule is promulgated. Second, EPA believes that issuing a substantially revised CGP by July 1, 2008, would be impracticable given the number of unknowns concerning the outcome of the C&D rule. EPA does not believe that it would be appropriate to issue a permit containing technology-based limitations that would be outdated so quickly, given the fact that the C&D rule may be promulgated only a few months after permit issuance. For similar reasons, if EPA had attempted to approximate the requirements of the new C&D rule and incorporate such limits into a new CGP, such a permit would presuppose the outcome of the C&D rule and potentially conflict with the scope and content of the effluent limitation guideline prior to full consideration of public comments. Instead, the Agency believes it is a much better use of Agency resources to wait the short time until after the C&D rule promulgation to issue a revised CGP that is fully reflective of the new effluent limitation guideline. In the meantime, during this relatively short period of time prior to the C&D rule's promulgation and prior to the issuance of the revised CGP that incorporates those standards, EPA is proposing to use the permit limits and conditions in the 2003 CGP as an effective vehicle to control new discharges. EPA notes that it has minimized the amount of time during which the 2008 CGP will remain effective in order to underscore the Agency's intention to issue a revised CGP once the C&D rule is finalized. Third, EPA found the alternative of allowing the 2003 CGP to expire without a replacement, relying instead on an enforcement discretion approach prior to the issuance of the next permit (similar to the practice used for the NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit

(MSGP)for stormwater discharges from industrial activities), to be an unacceptable option for stormwater discharges from construction activities. The CGP potentially has an estimated 4,000 new dischargers per year that seek coverage. EPA has made progress with the regulated community in terms of compliance assistance that would be compromised if a permit is not in place during the interim period prior to the promulgation of the C&D rule. For instance, EPA Regional offices have led substantial efforts to boost compliance with the CGP, resulting in an increased rate of compliance among construction operators. If no permit is made available by July 1, 2008, EPA anticipates that such efforts will be undermined, and the compliance rate may decline. Additionally, the enforcement discretion approach would leave construction operators without a reasonable way to obtain authorization to discharge and would expose them to liability from third party lawsuits for violating the Clean Water Act for unpermitted discharges. A short-term permit that mirrors the existing 2003 CGP addresses these concerns by providing a Federal permit with provisions that have already been reviewed in the previous permit issuance process, and by avoiding any period of time during which dischargers are not able to obtain permit coverage. D. Significant Changes From 2003 CGP As discussed above, EPA is proposing to issue the 2008 CGP for a period not to exceed two years. This permit would include the same limits and conditions as the 2003 CGP with the following noteworthy differences: 1. Clarification that eligibility for coverage under the 2008 CGP is limited to operators of new and unpermitted ongoing construction projects. 2. Clarification that operators of ongoing permitted construction projects are not eligible for coverage under the 2008 CGP. 3. Removal of eligibility for operators in Tribal Lands in Maine from the list of areas in Appendix B where this permit is effective. E. Geographic Coverage EPA is only authorized to provide permit coverage for classes of discharges that are outside the scope of a State's NPDES program authorization. EPA Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are proposing to issue the 2008 CGP to replace the expiring 2003 CGP for operators of new and unpermitted ongoing construction projects. The geographic coverage and scope of the 2008 CGP are listed in Appendix B of the draft permit. The only change from the scope of coverage in the 2003 CGP is that the State of Maine is now the permitting authority for all discharges in the State, including operators in Tribal Lands, and as such, discharges in the State of Maine are no longer eligible for coverage under EPA's CGP. III. Proposed QLP Approval Criteria EPA is requesting public comment on a set of criteria for use in approving QLPs. EPA developed the criteria based on the QLP regulatory elements identified in 40 CFR 122.44(s). *These regulatory elements include the following:*

(i)Requirements for construction site operators to implement appropriate erosion and sediment control best management practices;

(ii)Requirements for construction site operators to control waste such as discarded building materials, concrete truck washout, chemicals, litter, and sanitary waste at the construction site that may cause adverse impacts to water quality;

(iii)Requirements for construction site operators to develop and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan. (A stormwater pollution prevention plan includes site descriptions, descriptions of appropriate control measures, copies of approved State, Tribal or local requirements, maintenance procedures, inspection procedures, and identification of non-stormwater discharges);

(iv)Requirements to submit a site plan for review that incorporates consideration of potential water quality impacts; and

(v)For large construction activities only, any additional requirements necessary to achieve the applicable technology-based standards of “best available technology” and “best conventional technology” based on the best professional judgment of the permit writer. Using these regulatory elements, EPA has developed a draft set of criteria to review local erosion and sediment control requirements in an objective and systematic manner. EPA is proposing to use the following list of criteria to determine whether local programs meet the basic elements in 122.44(s). EPA notes that these criteria are presented in a summary format. During the actual evaluation of candidate local programs, EPA will need to assess in greater detail whether the local requirements meet or exceed the requirements in the applicable section of the CGP that is in effect at the time of the evaluation. I. *Erosion and Sediment Control* a. Sediment controls ( *e.g.* , perimeter controls, protection of storm drain inlets, location of stockpiles away from storm drainage conveyance), collection of sediment on paved areas to prevent it from entering storm drains. b. Off-site, vehicle tracking of sediments ( *e.g.* , establish site entrances and exits). c. Sediment pond, or similar level of control, for sites greater than 10 acres. d. Erosion controls ( *e.g.* , minimize disturbed areas, phase construction activity, blankets, mulches, divert stormwater flowing onto and through property away from disturbed areas). e. Temporary stabilization ( *e.g.* , stabilize areas of exposed soil where construction activity has temporarily ceased). f. Final stabilization. II. *Control of Other Wastes* —To prevent contamination of construction stormwater, the following wastes must be controlled: g. Solid waste management ( *e.g.* , trash cans, dumpsters, material handling. and storage areas). h. Concrete truck washout ( *e.g.* , designate concrete controlled washout areas). i. Sanitary waste ( *e.g.* , portable toilets). j. Spill prevention and response procedures ( *e.g.* , for petroleum products, chemicals, etc.). III. *Develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan* k. Project description ( *e.g.* , nature of construction, dates and sequence of construction, site operator information, identification of potential pollutant sources). l. Site map(s). m. Description of all erosion, sediment, other waste controls. n. Operation and maintenance procedures for erosion and sediment controls. o. Routine self-inspections. p. Train employees and subcontractors on the implementation of controls. *IV. Submit Site Plan for Review* q. Submit site plan or entire SWPPP to the qualified local program for review. EPA anticipates that although a program may not meet all of the criteria listed above, it still may be approved as a QLP for those parts of the program that do meet the criteria. In such a situation, the CGP would specify which requirements would be included in the QLP requirements and which ones would be subject to the CGP requirements. EPA invites comments on the draft criteria for approving QLPs. EPA specifically encourages commenters to suggest modifications to the wording of the criteria, where necessary, and/or to recommend other criteria that EPA should use. In addition, EPA invites the public to suggest candidate local programs that could be considered as a QLP. EPA also asks for recommendations on how the process for identifying, approving, and implementing QLPs can work effectively. IV. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act A. EPA's Approach to Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act for General Permits The Regulatory Flexibility Act

(RFA)generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. The legal question of whether a general permit (as opposed to an individual permit) qualifies as a “rule” or as an “adjudication” under the Administrative Procedure Act

(APA)has been the subject of periodic litigation. In a recent case, the court held that the CWA Section 404 Nationwide general permit before the court did qualify as a “rule” and therefore that the issuance of that general permit needed to comply with the applicable legal requirements for the issuance of a “rule.” *National Ass'n of Home Builders* v. *U.S. Army Corps of Engineers* , 417 F.3d 1272, 1284-85 (DC Cir. 2005) (Army Corps general permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are rules under the APA and the Regulatory Flexibility Act; “Each NWP [nationwide permit] easily fits within the APA's definition “rule.* * * As such, each NWP constitutes a rule * * *”). As EPA stated in 1998, “the Agency recognizes that the question of the applicability of the APA, and thus the RFA, to the issuance of a general permit is a difficult one, given the fact that a large number of dischargers may choose to use the general permit.” 63 FR 36489, 36497 (July 6, 1998). At that time, EPA “reviewed its previous NPDES general permitting actions and related statements in the **Federal Register** or elsewhere,” and stated that “[t]his review suggests that the Agency has generally treated NPDES general permits effectively as rules, though at times it has given contrary indications as to whether these actions are rules or permits.” *Id.* at 36496. Based on EPA's further legal analysis of the issue, the Agency “concluded, as set forth in the proposal, that NPDES general permits are permits [ *i.e.* , adjudications] under the APA and thus not subject to APA rulemaking requirements or the RFA.” *Id.* Accordingly, the Agency stated that “the APA's rulemaking requirements are inapplicable to issuance of such permits,” and thus “NPDES permitting is not subject to the requirement to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking under the APA or any other law * * * [and] it is not subject to the RFA.” *Id.* at 36497. However, the Agency went on to explain that, even though EPA had concluded that it was not legally required to do so, the Agency would voluntarily perform the RFA's small-entity impact analysis. *Id.* EPA explained the strong public interest in the Agency following the RFA's requirements on a voluntary basis: “[The notice and comment] process also provides an opportunity for EPA to consider the potential impact of general permit terms on small entities and how to craft the permit to avoid any undue burden on small entities.” *Id.* Accordingly, with respect to the NPDES permit that EPA was addressing in that **Federal Register** notice, EPA stated that “the Agency has considered and addressed the potential impact of the general permit on small entities in a manner that would meet the requirements of the RFA if it applied.” *Id.* Subsequent to EPA's conclusion in 1998 that general permits are adjudications rather than rules, as noted above, the DC Circuit recently held that Nationwide general permits under section 404 are “rules” rather than “adjudications.” Thus, this legal question remains “a difficult one” ( *supra* ). However, EPA continues to believe that there is a strong public policy interest in EPA applying the RFA's framework and requirements to the Agency's evaluation and consideration of the nature and extent of any economic impacts that a CWA general permit could have on small entities ( *e.g.,* small businesses). In this regard, EPA believes that the Agency's evaluation of the potential economic impact that a general permit would have on small entities, consistent with the RFA framework discussed below, is relevant to, and an essential component of, the Agency's assessment of whether a CWA general permit would place requirements on dischargers that are appropriate and reasonable. Furthermore, EPA believes that the RFA's framework and requirements provide the Agency with the best approach for the Agency's evaluation of the economic impact of general permits on small entities. While using the RFA framework to inform its assessment of whether permit requirements are appropriate and reasonable, EPA will also continue to ensure that all permits satisfy the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Accordingly, EPA has committed to operating in accordance with the RFA's framework and requirements during the Agency's issuance of CWA general permits (in other words, the Agency has committed that it will apply the RFA in its issuance of general permits as if those permits do qualify as “rules” that are subject to the RFA). B. Application of RFA Framework to Proposed Issuance of CGP EPA has concluded, consistent with the discussion in Section IV.A above, that the proposed issuance of the 2008 CGP could affect a substantial number of small entities. In the areas where the CGP is effective (see Section II.E), (those areas where EPA is the permit authority), an estimated 4,000 construction projects per year were authorized under the 2003 CGP, a substantial number of which could be operated by small entities. However, EPA has concluded that the proposed issuance of the 2008 CGP is unlikely to have an adverse economic impact on small entities. The draft 2008 CGP includes the same requirements as those of the 2003 CGP. Additionally, an operator's use of the CGP is volitional ( *i.e.* , a discharger could apply for an individual permit rather than for coverage under this general permit) and is less burdensome than an individual NPDES permit. EPA intends to include an updated economic screening analysis with the issuance of the next CGP. Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 *et seq.* Dated: May 7, 2008. Ira Leighton, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. Dated: May 8, 2008. Walter Mugden, Director, Division of Environmental Planning & Protection, EPA Region 2. Dated: May 6, 2008. Carl-Axel P. Soderberg, Division Director, Caribbean Environmental Protection Division, EPA Region 2. Dated: May 7, 2008. Jon M. Capacasa, Director, Water Protection Division, EPA Region 3. Dated: May 7, 2008. Tinka Hyde, Acting Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5. Dated: May 8, 2008. William H. Honker, Acting Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6. Dated: May 8, 2008. William A. Spratlin, Director, Water, Wetlands and Pesticides Division, EPA Region 7. Dated: May 8, 2008. Debra H. Thomas, Deputy Assistant Regional Administrator, Office of Partnerships & Regulatory Assistance, EPA Region 8. Dated: May 6, 2008. Alexis Strauss, Director, Water Division, EPA Region 9. Dated: May 7, 2008. Michael Gearheard, Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, EPA Region 10. [FR Doc. E8-10997 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6698-9] 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. 20070344, ERP No. D-FHW-B40172-VT,* Circ-Williston Transportation Project, Improvements between I-89 and the Towns Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction, City of Burlington, Chittenden County, VT. *Summary:* EPA has environmental objections to the proposed Circ A-B alternatives based on environmental impacts to wetlands, water resources and storm water, air quality, indirect and cumulative impacts and hydrologic impacts. EPA also noted that the VT 2A alternatives appear to include the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative. Rating EO2. *EIS No. 20080010, ERP No. D-FHW-E40819-00,* US-231/I-10 Connector Project HPP-1602-(507), Proposal to Build Limited Access Facility from US 231 North of Dothan to the Alabama/Florida State Line, Dale, Houston, Geneva Counties, AL. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts related to noise, aquatic resources and community impacts, as well as to the 100-year floodplains. Rating EC2. *EIS No. 20080038, ERP No. D-BLM-J65507-WY,* West Antelope Coal Lease Application (Federal Coal Lease Application WYW163340), Implementation, Converse and Campbell Counties, WY. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to air quality based on monitored data, wildlife habitat and wetlands. The final EIS should address these issues, and include mitigation for air quality and wetlands where applicable. Rating EC2. *EIS No. 20080043, ERP No. D-FTA-K39111-HI,* Lahaina Small Boat Harbor Ferry Pier Project, To Build a New Inter-island Ferry Pier, Maui, Hawaii. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about the proposed project related to dredging, water quality, habitat, and cumulative impacts. In particular, EPA is concerned that the document does not discuss how the dredging and construction associated with the project will be performed and the impacts of those methods. Rating EC2. *EIS No. 20080091, ERP No. D-AFS-J65513-WY,* Winter Elk Management Programs, Long-Term Special Use Authorization for Wyoming Game and Fish Commission to use National Forest System Land within the Bridger-Teton National Forest at Alkali Creek, Dog Creek, Fall Creek, Fish Creek, Muddy Creek, Patrol Cabin, and Upper Green River, Jackson and Sublette, WY. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential impacts to water quality resulting from stream bank damage, erosion, and sedimentation. EPA requested that the Final EIS provide additional information on existing water quality conditions and consider additional mitigation to reduce potential impacts. Rating EC2. *EIS No. 20080111, ERP No. D-COE-E09811-00,* WITHDRAWN-PROGRAMMATIC—Hydropower Rehabilitations, Dissolved Oxygen and Minimum Flow Regimes at Wolf Creek Dam, Kentucky and Center Hill and Dale Hollow Dams, Tennessee, Implementation. *Summary:* Officially withdrawn by the preparing agency. Rating NW. *EIS No. 20080129, ERP No. D-FHW-J40182-UT,* Layton Interchange Project, Improvements on I-15 (Exit-330) to Provide Unrestricted Access Across the Unicon Pacific Railroad and to Address Traffic Congestion on Gentile St. in West Layton, Layton City, UT. *Summary:* While EPA has no objections to the proposed action, EPA did request clarification of the air quality analysis. Rating LO. Final EISs *EIS No. 20070458, ERP No. F-FHW-B40086-CT,* CT 82/85/11 Corridor Transportation Improvements, Selected Preferred Alternative, is a Modification of Alternative 4(E), Funding and COE Section 404 Permit, In the Towns of Salem, Montville, East Lyme and Waterford, CT. *Summary:* EPA has environmental objections to the proposed project about the evaluation of alternatives, the significance of impacts on the aquatic ecosystem, and compensatory mitigation issues. *EIS No. 20080099, ERP No. F-FHW-E40778-NC* , US 74 Shelby Bypass Transportation Improvements, Preferred Alternative is 21, Construction, Funding and COE Section 404 Permit, Cleveland County, NC. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about the impacts to streams, potential prime farmland impacts, potential impacts to the protection of surface water quality within a protected water supply watershed and indirect and cumulative impacts. EPA is also concerned that impacts from mobile source air toxics were not addressed. *EIS No. 20080102, ERP No. F-BLM-K65323-00* , Yuma Field Office

(YFO)Resource Management Plan, Provide Direction Managing Public Lands, Implementation, Yuma, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, AZ and Imperial and Riverside Counties, CA. *Summary:* The final EIS addressed EPA's comments; therefore, EPA does not object to the project. *EIS No. 20080131, ERP No. F-AFS-K65332-CA* , Eldorado National Forest Public Wheeled Motorized Travel Management Project, Proposes to Regulate Unmanaged Public Wheeled Motor Vehicle, Implementation, Alphine, Amador, El Dorado, and Placer Counties, CA. *Summary:* EPA continues to have environmental concerns about the potential adverse impacts on water quality and sensitive resources. As the plan is implemented we continue to recommend eliminating routes in sensitive and easily damaged, high elevation habitat. *EIS No. 20080094, ERP No. FS-AFS-L65453-ID* , North Sheep Allotments—Sheep and Goat Allotment Management Plans, Additional Information on Analyses Concerning Management Indicator Species, Capable and Suitable Grazing Lands, and Adaptive Management Strategies, Authorization of Continued Sheep Grazing for Fisher Creek, Smiley Creek, North Fork-Boulder and Baker Creek Sheep and Goat Grazing Allotments, Sawtooth National Forest, Ketchum Ranger District, Sawtooth National Recreation Area, Blaine and Custer Counties, ID. *Summary:* While EPA supports adaptive management we have concerns that the monitoring necessary to implement adaptive management may not be implemented. Providing an indication that funding will be available for the adaptive management is recommended. *EIS No. 20080127, ERP No. FS-FHW-J40135-MT* , US 93 Highway Ninepipe/Ronan Improvement Project, from Dublin Gulch Road/Red Horn Road, Funding, Special-Use Permit, NPDES Permit and U.S. Army COE Section 404 Permit, Lake County, MT. *Summary:* EPA has environmental concerns with the proposed project regarding impacts to wetlands and aquatic habitat, as well as impacts to wildlife and wildlife movement. Additional information is needed to fully assess and mitigate all potential impacts of the management actions. Dated: May 13, 2008. Ken Mittelholtz, Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E8-11069 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6698-8] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information

(202)564-7167 or *http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/* . Weekly Receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed May 5, 2008 Through May 9, 2008 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. *EIS No. 20080181, Draft EIS, FAA, OH,* Port Columbus International Airport

(CMH)Project, Replacement of Runway 10R/28L, Development of a New Passenger Terminal and other Associated Airport Projects, Funding, City of Columbus, OH, Comment Period Ends: 07/11/2008, Contact: Katherine Jones 734-229-2958. *EIS No. 20080182, Final EIS, AFS, NM* Perk-Grindstone Fuel Reduction Project, To Protect Life, Property, and Natural Resources, Village of Ruidoso, Lincoln National Forest, Lincoln County, New Mexico, Wait Period Ends: 06/16/2008, Contact: Ron Hannan 575-434-7245. *EIS No. 20080183, Final EIS, FHW, 00,* US-131 Improvement Study, from the Indiana Toll Road (I-80/90) to a Point One Mile North of Cowling Road, U.S. Army COE Section 404 Permit, St. Joseph County, MI and Elkhart County, IN, Wait Period Ends: 06/16/2008, Contact: David T. Williams 517-702-1820. *EIS No. 20080184, Draft EIS, FHW, IA,* I-29 Improvements in Sioux City, Construction from Burlington Northern Santa Fe Rail Road

(BNSF)Bridge over the Missouri River to Existing Hamilton Boulevard Interchange, Woodbury County, IA, Comment Period Ends: 06/30/2008, Contact: Philip Barnes 515-233-7300. *EIS No. 20080185, Draft Supplement, FSA, 00,* Programmatic—Expansion of the Emergency Conservation Program, To Restore Farmland (Cropland, Hayland and Pastureland) to a Normal Productive State after a Natural Disaster, Comment Period Ends: 06/30/2008, Contact: Matthew Ponish 202-720-6853. *EIS No. 20080186, Draft EIS, FAA, NV,* City of Mesquite, Proposed Replacement General Aviation Airport, Implementation, Clark County, NV, Comment Period Ends: 07/03/2008, Contact: Barry Franklin 650-876-2778. *EIS No. 20080187, Final EIS, AFS, MT,* Marten Creek Project, Proposed Timber Harvest, Prescribed Fire Burning, Watershed Restoration, and Associated Activities, Cabinet Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest, Sanders County, MT, Wait Period Ends: 06/16/2008, Contact: John Head 406-827-3533. *EIS No. 20080188, Final EIS, IBW, CA,* Programmatic—Tijuana River Flood Control Project, Proposing a Range of Alternatives for Maintenance Activities and Future Improvements, San Diego County, CA, Wait Period Ends: 06/16/2008, Contact: Daniel Borunda 915-832-4767. *EIS No. 20080189, Final EIS, NSA, NM,* Continued Operations of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Proposal to Expand Overall Operational Levels, (DOE/EIS-0380), Site Wide, Los Alamos County, NM, Wait Period Ends: 06/16/2008, Contact: Elizabeth Withers 505-665-0308. *EIS No. 20080190, Draft Supplement, USA, 00,* Programmatic—Army Growth and Force Structure Realignment, Evaluation of Alternatives for Supporting the Growth, Realignment, and Transformation of the Army to Support Operations in the Pacific Theater, Implementation, Nationwide and the Pacific Region of AK, HI, Comment Period Ends: 06/30/2008, Contact: Mike Ackerman 410-436-2522. *EIS No. 20080191, Final Supplement, AFS, MT,* Fishtrap Project, Updated Information on Past Maintenance/Restorative Treatments within Old Growth Stands, Timber Harvest, Prescribed Burning, Road Construction and Other Restoration Activities, Lolo National Forest, Plains/Thompson Falls Ranger District, Sanders County, MT, Wait Period Ends: 06/30/2008, Contact: Randy Hojem 406-826-4308. *EIS No. 20080192, Draft EIS, AFS, MT,* Sheppard Creek Post-Fire Project, Timber Salvage, Implementation, Flathead National Forest, Flathead and Lincoln Counties, MT, Comment Period Ends: 07/01/2008, Contact: Bryan Donner 406-758-3508. Amended Notices EIS No. 20080106, *Draft EIS, AFS, CO,* Long Draw Reservoir Project, Re-Issue a Special-Use-Authorization to Water Supply and Storage to Allow the Continued Use of Long Draw Reservoir and Dam, Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National Grassland, Grand and Larimer Counties, CO, Comment Period Ends: 06/11/2008, Contact: Ken Tu 970-295-6623. Revision of FR Notice Published 03/28/2008: Extending Comment Period from 05/12/2008 to 06/11/2008. *EIS No. 20080163, Draft EIS, AFS, AK,* Withdrawn—Spencer Mineral Materials Project, Proposal to Develop and Extract Quarry Rock and Gravel from a Site near Spencer Glacier, Chugach National Forest, Kenal Borough, AK, Comment Period Ends: 06/16/2008, Contact: Alice Allen 605-673-4853. Revision to FR Notice Published 05/02/2008: Officially Withdrawn by the Preparing Agency. *EIS No. 20080171, Draft EIS, NOA, WA,* Proposed Authorization of the Makah Indian Tribe's Request to Hunt Gray Whales in the Tribe's Usual and Accustomed Fishing Grounds off the Coast of Washington, Comment Period Ends: 07/08/2008, Contact: Donna Darm 206-526-6150. Revision to FR Notice Published 05/09/2008: Correction to Title and Comment Period from 07/07/2008 to 07/08/2008. Dated: May 13, 2008. Ken Mittelholtz, Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E8-11009 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0046; FRL-8361-6] Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petitions for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide petitions proposing the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities. DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 16, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0046 and the pesticide petition number

(PP)of interest, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : * http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Delivery* : OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0046 the assigned docket ID number and the pesticide petition number of interest. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Advanced Search,” then “Docket Search.” Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the “Submit” button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access available documents. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The person listed at the end of the pesticide petition summary of interest. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition summary of interest. B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)part or section number. iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest alternatives. vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Docket ID Numbers When submitting comments, please use the docket ID number and the pesticide petition number of interest, as shown in the table. PP Number Docket ID Number PP 7E7258 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0049 PP 7E7337 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0270 PP 8E7314 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0258 PP 8E7324 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0271 PP 8E7340 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0272 PP 1F6299 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0276 PP 7F7200 EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0337 PP 7F7263 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0261 PP 7F7274 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0262 PP 8E7340 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0272 PP 8E7315 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0254 PP 5F6945 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0275 III. What Action is the Agency Taking? EPA is printing notice of the filing of pesticide petitions received under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or modification of regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food commodities. EPA has determined that the pesticide petitions described in this notice contain data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide petitions. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on these pesticide petitions. Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions included in this notice, prepared by the petitioner, is included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket for each of the petitions is available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* . New Tolerance 1. *PP 7E7258* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0049). Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Rd., East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the fungicide triflumizole, 1-[1-((4-chloro-2-(trifluoromethyl) phenyl)imino)-2 propoxyethyl]-1H-imidazole, and its metabolites containing the 4-chloro-2-trifluoromethylaniline moiety in or on the food commodities leafy greens subgroup 4A, except spinach and cilantro at 35 parts per million (ppm); turnip, greens at 40 ppm; swiss chard at 18 ppm; pineapple at 4.0 ppm; papaya; sapote, black; canistel; sapote, mamey; mango; sapodilla; star apple at 2.5 ppm; and hop, dried cones at 50.0 ppm. The analytical method is suitable for analyzing crops for residues of triflumizole and its aniline containing metabolites at the proposed tolerance levels and has been independently validated. Residue levels of triflumizole are converted to FA-1-1 by acidic and alkaline reflux, followed by distillation. Residues are then extracted and subjected to SPE purification. Detection and quantitation are conducted by gas chromatograph equipped with nitrogen phosphorus detector, electron capture detector or mass spectrometry detection. The limit of quantitation of the method has been determined in the range of 0.01 ppm to 0.05 ppm for the combined residues of triflumizole and FA-1-1. The enforcement methodology has been submitted to the Food and Drug Administration for publication in the Pesticide Analytical Manual, Vol. II (PAM II). Contact: Susan Stanton,

(703)305-5218, *stanton.susan@epa.gov* . 2. *PP 7E7337* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0270). Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the fungicide (plant activator), acibenzolar S-methyl in or on the food commodity onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 0.07 ppm. Syngenta Analytical Method AG-671A is a practical and valid method for the determination and confirmation of acibenzolar S-methyl (CGA245704) in raw agricultural commodities

(RAC)and processing substrates from the tobacco, leafy (including brassica) and fruiting vegetable crop groups at a limit of quantitation

(LOQ)of 0.02 ppm. Based on recoveries of dry bulb onion samples fortified at the lower limit of method validation, the limit of detection and LOQ were calculated as 0.013 and 0.040 ppm, respectively. The method involves extraction, solid phase cleanup of samples with analysis by high performance liquid chromatography

(HPLC)with ultraviolet

(UV)detection or confirmatory liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS). The validity is demonstrated by the acceptable accuracy and precision obtained on numerous procedural recovery samples (radiovalidation and field trial sample sets), and by the extractability and accountability obtained by the analysis of weathered radioactive substrates using Analytical Method AG-671A. Contact: Susan Stanton,

(703)305-5218, *stanton.susan@epa.gov* . 3. *PP 8E7324* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0271). Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide indoxacarb, (S)-methyl 7-chloro- 2,5-dihydro-2-[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl] amino]carbonyl] indeno[1,2e] [1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate, and its R-enantiomer [(R)-methyl 7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2-[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethoxy) phenyl]amino]carbonyl]indeno [1,2-e] [1,3,4] oxadiazine-4a(3H)- carboxylate in a 75:25 mixture (DPX-MP062), respectively, in or on the food commodities Bushberry subgroup 13-07B at 1.5 ppm; beet, garden, roots at 0.3 ppm; and beet, garden, tops at 6.0 ppm. The plant residue enforcement method detects and quantitates indoxacarb in various matrices including sweet corn, lettuce, tomato, broccoli, apple, grape, cottonseed, peanut, and soybean commodity samples by HPLC with UV detection. The limit of quantitation in the method allows monitoring of crops with indoxacarb residues at or above the levels proposed in these tolerances. Contact: Susan Stanton,

(703)305-5218, *stanton.susan@epa.gov* . 4. *PP 8E7314* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0258). Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the fungicide dimethomorph, (E,Z)4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-propenyl]-morpholine in or on the food commodities bean, lima at 0.6 ppm; ginseng at 0.85 ppm; grape at 3.5 ppm; grape, raisin at 6.0 ppm; and turnip, greens at 20 ppm. A reliable method for the determination of dimethomorph residues in bean, lima; ginseng; grape; grape, raisin; and turnip, greens exists; this method is the FDA Multi-Residue Method, Protocol D, as published in the Pesticide Analytical Manual I. Contact: Sidney Jackson,

(703)305-7610, *jackson.sidney@epa.gov* . 5. *PP 8E7340* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0272). Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for the combined residues of the insecticide spiromesifen, 2-oxo-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-4-yl 3, 3-dimethylbutanoate and its enol metabolite 4-hydroxy-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-2-one, calculated as the parent compound equivalents in or on the food commodities: Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.02 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 6.0 ppm; corn, sweet, stover at 7.0 ppm; and berry and small fruit, low growing berry, subgroup 13-07G at 2.0 ppm. Adequate analytical methodology using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry detection is available for enforcement purposes. Contact: Sidney Jackson,

(703)305-7610, *jackson.sidney@epa.gov* . 6. *PP 1F6299* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0276). Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the herbicide iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium, methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-ureidosulfonyl]benzoate, sodium salt in or on the food commodities wheat, grain at 0.02 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.06 ppm; wheat, straw at 0.05 ppm; and wheat, hay at 0.05 ppm. An enforcement procedure is available whereby extractable residues of iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium and AE F075736 are removed from crops by blending with acetonitrile. After blending, the extract is filtered, reduced in volume and partitioned with hexane to remove oils. The partially cleaned up extract is evaporated to dryness under reduced pressure; dissolved in dichloromethane and further cleaned-up on a series of solid phase extraction columns, first, silica gel, then Bond Elut(tm) ENV, and finally on polyamide 6S. The extract is again concentrated to dryness and reconstituted in either 70/30 deionized water/acetonitrile for analysis by high performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS), or in 50/50 deionized water/acetonitrile for analysis by HPLC/Ultraviolet (HPLC/UV). Contact: Hope Johnson,

(703)305-5410, *johnson.hope@epa.gov* . 7. *PP 7F7200* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0337). Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, proposes to revise tolerances for residues of the insecticide cyfluthrin; cyano(4-fluoro-3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl-3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethyl-cyclopropanecarboxylate in or on the food commodities barley, grain; buckwheat, grain; millet, grain; oats, grain; rye, grain; triticale, grain; and wheat, grain at 0.15 ppm; corn, field, grain; corn, pop, grain; teosinte, grain; and corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.05 ppm; sorghum, grain at 3.5 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, group 16 (except rice) at 25.0 ppm; grain, cereal, stover, group 16 (except rice) at 30.0 ppm; grain, cereal, hay, group 16 (except rice) at 6.0 ppm; and grain, cereal, straw, group 16 (except rice) at 7.0 ppm; and beta-cyfluthrin; cyano(4-fluoro-3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl-3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethyl-cyclopropanecarboxylate [mixture comprising the enantiomeric pair (R)-α-cyano-4-fluoro-3-phenoxybenzyl (1S,3S)-3-(2,2-dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and (S)-α-cyano-4-fluoro-3-phenoxybenzyl (1R,3R)-3-(2,2-dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate with the enantiomeric pair (R)-α-cyano-4-fluoro-3-phenoxybenzyl (1S,3R)-3-(2,2-dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and (S)-α-cyano-4-fluoro-3-phenoxybenzyl (1R,3S)-3-(2,2-dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate] in or on the food commodities: Alfalfa, forage at 5.0 ppm; alfalfa, hay at 13 ppm; barley, bran at 0.5 ppm; barley, grain at 0.15 ppm; beet, sugar, dried pulp at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar, roots at 0.10 ppm; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 2 5 ppm; buckwheat, grain at 0.15 ppm; carrot, roots at 0.20 ppm; cattle, fat at 2.0 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.10 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts at 0.10 ppm; citrus, dried pulp at 0.3 ppm; citrus, oil at 0.3 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.05 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.05 ppm; cotton, hulls at 2.0 parts ppm; cotton, refined oil at 2.0 ppm; cotton, seed at 1.0 ppm; egg at 0.01 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10 at 0.2 ppm; goat, fat at 2.0 ppm; goat, meat at 0.05 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and hay, group 16, forage, except rice at 25 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and hay, group 16, hay except rice at 6.0 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and hay, group 16, stover, except rice at 30 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and hay, group 16, straw, except rice at 7.0 ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17, forage at 12 ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17, hay at 50 ppm; hog, fat at 0.5 ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; hop, dried cones at 20.0 ppm; hop, vine at 4.0 ppm; horse, fat at 2.0 ppm; horse, meat at 0.05 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; lettuce, head at 2.0 ppm; lettuce, leaf at 3.0 ppm; milk at 0.2 ppm; milk, fat at 5.0 ppm; millet, grain at 0.15 ppm; mustard greens at 7.0 ppm; oat, bran at 0.5 ppm; oat, grain at 0.15 ppm; pea, dry, seed at 0.15 ppm; pea, southern, succulent at 0.25 ppm; pepper at 0.50 ppm; potato at 0.01 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.01 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.01 ppm; poultry, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; radish, roots at 1.0 ppm; rye, bran at 0.5 ppm; rye, grain at 0.15 ppm; sheep, fat at 2.0 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.05 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; sorghum, grain, at 3.5 ppm; soybean, forage at 8.0 ppm; soybean, hay at 4.0 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.03 ppm; sugarcane, cane at 0.05 ppm; sugarcane, molasses at 0.20 ppm; sunflower, forage at 5.0 ppm; sunflower, seed at 0.02 ppm; teosinte, grain at 0.05 ppm; tomato at 0.20 ppm; tomato, paste at 0.5 ppm; tomato, pomace at 5.0 ppm; triticale, grain at 0.15 ppm; wheat, bran at 0.5 ppm; wheat milled by product, except flour at 5.0 ppm; and wheat, grain at 0.15 ppm. Adequate analytical methodology using gas chromatography/electron capture (GC/EC) detection is available for enforcement purposes. Contact: Olga Odiott,

(703)308-9369, *odiott.olga@epa.gov* . 8. *PP 7F7263* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0261). Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. P.O. Box 18300; Greensboro, NC 27419-8300, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide emamectin benzoate, 4'-epi-methylamino- 4'-deoxyavermectin B 1 benzoate (a mixture of a minimum of 90% 4'-epi-methylamino-4'- deoxyavermectin B 1a and a maximum of 10% 4'-epi-methlyamino-4'deoxyavermectin B 1b benzoate), and its metabolites 8,9 isomer of the B 1a and B 1b component of the parent insecticide in or on the food commodities tree nuts (Crop Group 14) and pistachios at 0.02 ppm; and almond hulls at 0.25 ppm. Adequate analytical methods (HPLC-fluorescence methods) are available for enforcement purposes. Contact: Thomas Harris,

(703)308-9423, *harris.thomas@epa.gov* . 9. *PP 7F7274* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0262). Bayer CropScience, P. O. Box 12014, 2 T. W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide spiromesifen, (2-oxo-3-2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-4-yl 3,3-dimethylbutanoate and its enol metabolite 4-hydroxy-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-2-one, calculated as parent compound in or on the food commodity corn, field forage at 6.0 ppm. Adequate analytical methodology using LC/MS/MS detection is available for enforcement purposes. Contact: Amer Al-Mudallal,

(703)605-0566, *al-mudallal.amer@epa.gov* . Amendment to Existing Tolerance *PP 8E7340* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0272). Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to delete the existing tolerance in 40 CFR 180.607 for the combined residues of the insecticide spiromesifen, 2-oxo-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-4-yl 3, 3-dimethylbutanoate and its enol metabolite; 4-hydroxy-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-2-one, calculated as the parent compound equivalents in or on the food commodity strawberry at 2.0 ppm since residues of spiromesifen on strawberry will be covered by the new tolerance proposed for berry and small fruit, low growing berry, subgroup 13-07G elsewhere in this document. Contact: Sidney Jackson,

(703)305-7610, *jackson.sidney@epa.gov* . New Exemption from Tolerance 1. *PP 8E7315* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0254). Rhodia, Inc. c/o SciReg, Inc., 12733 Director's Loop, Woodbridge, VA 22192, proposes to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the oxirane, 2-methyl-, polymer with oxirane, mono [2-[2-(2-butoxymethylethoxy)methylethoxy] methylethyl] ether (CAS Reg. No. 926031-36-9), under 40 CFR 180.960 when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations. Because this petition is a request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, no analytical method is required. Contact: Karen Samek, 703-347-8825, *samek.karen@epa.gov* 2. *PP 5F6945* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0275). Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, proposes to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the herbicide iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-ureidosulfonyl]benzoate, sodium salt, in or on the food commodity soybean. As shown in the confined rotational crop study, no residues of iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium or its degradates are taken up by soybeans planted 7 days after application; thus no residues would be expected in soybeans planted several months after application. As this petition is a request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance analytical methods are not required. Contact: Hope Johnson,

(703)305-5410, *johnson.hope@epa.gov* . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: April 16, 2008. Daniel Kenny, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E8-10915 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA—New England Region I—EPA-R01-OW-2008-20215; FRL-8566-8] Massachusetts Marine Sanitation Device Standard—Receipt of Petition AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice—receipt of petition. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a petition has been received from the state of Massachusetts requesting a determination by the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the waters of Salem Sound in the towns of Manchester-by-the-Sea, Beverly, Danvers, Salem, and Marblehead. DATES: May 16, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OW-2008-0215 by one of the following methods: *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail:* *rodney.ann@epa.gov.* • *Fax:*

(617)918-0538. *Mail and hand delivery:* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—New England Region, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, COP, Boston, MA 02114-2023. Deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation (8 a.m.-5 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays), and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OW-2008-0212. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *http://www.regulations.gov,* or e-mail. The *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *http://www.regulations.gov* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—New England Region, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, COP, Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office is open from 8 a.m.-5 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number is

(617)918-1538. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Rodney, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—New England Region, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, COP, Boston, MA 02114-2023. Telephone:

(617)918-1538, Fax number:

(617)918-0538; e-mail address: *rodney.ann@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that a petition has been received from the state of Massachusetts requesting a determination by the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law 92-500 as amended by Public Law 95-217 and Public Law 100-4, that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the area within the following boundaries: Waterbody/General area Latitude Longitude Southern Landward boundary—Marblehead town line 42°28′43″ N 70°52′45″ W Southern Seaward boundary 42°26′33″ N 70°49′05″ W Eastern boundary—Halfway Rock 42°30′10″ N 70°46′30″ W Northern Seaward boundary—3 miles off Eastern Point 42°33′03″ N 70°36′06″ W Northern Landward boundary—Manchester town line 42°34′20″ N 70°42′52″ W The proposed NDA boundary includes the municipal waters of Manchester-by-the-Sea, Beverly, Danvers, Salem, and Marblehead and extends to the boundary between state and federal waters. This area includes the islands of Bakers Island, Crowninshield Island, Cat Island, Children's Island, Great and Little Misery Islands, and House Island. There are approximately 19 marinas, 14 yacht clubs and five public landings/piers in the proposed area. Massachusetts has certified that there are eight pumpout facilities within the proposed area available to the boating public and two additional facilities pending. In addition, there will be a pumpout facility on the Beverly Pier once the area has been redeveloped. The majority of facilities are connected directly into the local wastewater treatment system. A list of the facilities, phone numbers, locations, and hours of operation is provided at the end of this petition. Massachusetts has provided documentation indicating that the total vessel population is estimated to be 7,000 in the proposed area. It is estimated that 3,590 of the total vessel population may have a Marine Sanitation Device

(MSD)of some type. The Trustees of Reservations manages three conservation properties within the area, Crowninshield Island, Misery Islands, and the Coolidge Reservation. The Salem Maritime National Historical Site is located within the area. There are forty-two beaches located within the proposed No Discharge Area. The proposed area has a variety of rich natural habitats, and supports a wide diversity of species. Both recreational and commercial fishermen use the area for fisheries for mackerel, striped bass, blue fish and flounder. Pumpout Facilities Within Proposed No Discharge Area Name Location Contact Info. Hours Mean low water depth Manchester Marine Manchester

(978)526-7911 VHF 72 Mon-Thurs—7 a.m.-6 p.m. Fri-Sun (+holidays) 7 a.m.-8 p.m 6 ft Manchester Marine Manchester

(978)526-7911 VHF 72 Mon-Thurs—7 a.m.-6 p.m. Fri-Sun (+holidays) 7 a.m.-8 p.m N/A Boat service Ferry Way Public Landing Beverly

(978)921-6059 VHF 9 Fri-Sun (+holidays) 8 a.m.-4 p.m 10 ft Danversport Yacht Club Danvers (2 facilities)

(978)774-8644 Mon-Thurs—8 a.m.-5 p.m. Fri-Sat—8 a.m.-6 p.m. Sun—8 a.m.-4 p.m 6 ft Salem Waterfront (Winter Island) Salem

(978)741-0098 VHF 9 Sat-Sun (+holidays) 9 a.m.-5 p.m N/A Boat service Congress St. Landing Salem

(978)741-0098 VHF 9 24 hours/7 days a week 3 ft Ferry Lane—Harbormaster's office Marblehead

(781)631-2386 VHF 16 Mon-Fri—9 a.m.-3 p.m. N/A Boat service Cliff Street Boatyard Marblehead

(781)631-2386 VHF 16 24 hours/7 days a week 9 ft Pending ** Danvers Danvers TBD TBD N/A Boat service ** Salem Salem TBD TBD N/A Boat service ** Beverly Pier Beverly TBD TBD TBD ** = Pending facilities. Dated: May 9, 2008. Robert W. Varney, Regional Administrator, New England Region. [FR Doc. E8-10998 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0344; FRL-8363-1] Pesticide Products; Registration Applications AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of applications to register pesticide products containing new active ingredients not included in any currently registered products pursuant to the provisions of section 3(c)(4) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 16, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0344, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0344. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Advanced Search,” then “Docket Search.” Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the “Submit” button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access available documents. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Pfeifer, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-0031; e-mail address: *pfeifer.chris@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for Preparing Your Comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(MUP)registration. In the December 19, 2007 notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order implementing the cancellation, unless the Agency received substantive comments within the 30-day comment period that would merit its further review of these requests, or unless the registrant withdrew their request within this period. The Agency did not receive any comments on the notice. Further, the registrant did not withdraw their request. Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this notice a cancellation order granting the requested cancellation. This cancellation order does not cancel the remaining end-use sulfluramid products currently registered for use in the United States. Any distribution, sale, or use of the sulfluramid products subject to this cancellation order is permitted only in accordance with the terms of this order, including any existing stocks provisions. DATES: The cancellations are effective May 16, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosanna Louie, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-0037; fax number:

(703)308-8005; e-mail address: *louie.rosanna@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. *Docket* . EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1082. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. 2. *Electronic access* . You may access this **Federal Register** document electronically through the EPA Internet under the **Federal Register** listings at *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr* . II. What Action is the Agency Taking? This notice announces the cancellation, as requested by the sole technical registrant, of the last registered sulfluramid manufacturing-use product

(MUP)registered under section 3 of FIFRA. Table 1 in this unit describes the registration information of the affected product. **Table 1.—Sulfluramid Product Cancellation** EPA Registration Number Product Name 352-710 Finitron Brand Sulfluramid Termite MUP Table 2 of this unit includes the name and address of record for the registrant of the product in Table 1 of this unit by EPA company number. **Table 2.—Registrant of the Canceled Sulfluramid Product** EPA Company Number Company Name and Address 352 DuPont Crop Protection, P.O. Box 30, Newark, DE 19714-0030 III. Summary of Public Comments Received and Agency Response to Comments During the public comment period provided, EPA received no comments in response to the December 19, 2007 **Federal Register** notice announcing the Agency's receipt of the request for voluntary cancellation of sulfluramid. IV. Cancellation Order Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(f), EPA hereby approves the requested cancellation of sulfluramid registration identified in Table 1 of Unit II. Accordingly, the Agency orders that the sulfluramid product registration identified in Table 1 of Unit II. is hereby canceled. Any distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks of the products identified in Table 1 of Unit II. in a manner inconsistent with any of the Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks set forth in Unit VI. will be considered a violation of FIFRA. V. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the **Federal Register** . Thereafter, following the public comment period, the Administrator may approve such a request. VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products which are currently in the United States and which were packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation action. The cancellation order issued in this notice includes the following existing stocks provisions. This notice announces EPA's order to cancel the final sulfluramid MUP registration, which is identified in Table 1 of this notice. Since DuPont (the only seller) has no existing stocks, EPA is not allowing any further sale or distribution of the MUP. However, this request does not cancel the remaining end-use sulfluramid products (the remaining registered use is for termite control) currently registered in the U.S. End-use registrants may continue to reformulate any existing stocks of the MUP currently in their possession until December 31, 2012. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests. Dated: May 7, 2008. Steven Bradbury, Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E8-10919 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [Document Identifier: OS-0990-New; 30-day notice] Agency Information Collection Request. 30-Day Public Comment Request AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection 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 functions;

(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. To obtain copies of the supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed paperwork collections referenced above, e-mail your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and OS document identifier, to *Sherette.funncoleman@hhs.gov* , or call the Reports Clearance Office on

(202)690-5683. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collections must be received within 30 days of this notice directly to the OS OMB Desk Officer all comments must be faxed to OMB at 202-395-6974. *Proposed Project:* Evaluation of Healthy People 2010 Users—New—Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE)). *Abstract:* Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP) is seeking OMB approval to conduct a short survey using a self-administered questionnaire of state, local, and tribal health organizations. The survey will be administered through mail and respondents will have the option to complete the survey as a web-based electronic survey. *Healthy People 2010 (HP2010)* is an important Federal initiative that establishes national health promotion and disease prevention goals. *HP2010* represents the third of a series of publications by HHS that specifies ten-year health objectives for the nation. Its overarching goals are to increase the quality and years of healthy life and eliminate health disparities. *HP2010* consists of 28 primary focus areas and 467 measurable health objectives designed to identify the most significant preventable threats to health and to establish public health priorities. The central theme of *HP2010* focuses on the role of communities and community partnerships in promoting healthy living in the U.S. *HP2010* is a powerful force in the effort to promote health and prevent disease in the U.S. The agenda reflects extensive consultation with over 350 national organizations, 250 state agencies, health experts, and the public. HHS is eager to document the utilization of *HP2010* , and to seek input from key users on how the next iteration of the initiative, *Healthy People 2020* , could be improved to encourage greater involvement. This study will identify examples of effective strategies and approaches to using *HP2010* , and, where possible, the short-term results of those efforts. Estimated Annualized Burden Table Type of respondent Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Average burden per response (in hrs) Total burden hours State Healthy People Coordinators (Frame A) 51 1 15/60 13 State Chronic Disease Program Directors (Frame A) 51 1 15/60 13 Local Health Organizations (Frame B) 300 1 15/60 75 Tribal Health Organizations (Frame C) 100 1 15/60 25 Total 126 Terry Nicolosi, Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E8-11031 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-32-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [Document Identifier: OS-0990-0281] Agency Information Collection Request; 60-Day Public Comment Request AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed information collection request 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 functions;

(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden;

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

(202)690-6162. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collections must be directed to the OS Paperwork Clearance Officer at the above e-mail address within 60 days. *Proposed Project:* Prevention Communication Formative Research—Revision—OMB No. 0990-0281—Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. *Abstract:* The information collected will be used as formative research to develop messages and materials, in support of development of disease prevention and health promotion information, including the Physical Activity and Dietary Guidelines for Americans. It is necessary to obtain consumer input to better understand the informative needs, attitudes, and beliefs of the audience in order to tailor messages, as well as to assist with clarity, understandability, and acceptance of prototyped messages, materials, and online tools. This generic clearance request describes data collection activities involving a limited set of consumer interviews, focus groups, Web concept testing, message testing, and usability testing. Frequency, reporting and on occasion. The program is requesting a three year clearance. Estimated Annualized Burden Table Data collection task Instrument/form name Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Average burden per response (in hours) Total response burden In depth interviews (Limited Literacy Consumers) Screener 133 1 10/60 22 Interview 33 1 1.5 50 Confidentiality Agreement 33 1 5/60 3 In depth Interviews (Health Intermediaries) Screener 75 1 10/60 13 Interview 25 1 1.5 38 Confidentiality Agreement 25 1 5/60 2 In depth Interviews (Public Health Professionals) Screener 50 1 10/60 8 Interview 25 1 1.5 38 Confidentiality Agreement 25 1 5/60 2 In person Focus Groups (35)—Limited Literacy Consumers Screener 372 1 10/60 62 Focus Group 93 1 2 186 Confidentiality Agreement 93 1 5/60 8 In Person Focus Groups (20)— Health Intermediaries Screener 159 1 10/60 27 Focus Group 53 1 2 106 Confidentiality Agreement 53 1 5/60 4 In person Focus Groups (15)—Public Health Professionals Screener 80 1 10/60 13 Focus Group 40 1 2 80 Confidentiality Agreement 40 1 5/60 3 Usability and other testing of prototype materials (print and Web) Screener 400 1 10/60 68 Usability Test 100 1 1.5 150 Confidentiality Agreement 100 1 5/60 8 Web-based concept and prototype testing Screener 0 1 0 0 Web-test 167 1 1 167 Confidentiality Agreement 167 1 5/60 14 In person message testing Screener 200 1 10/60 33 Message Test 50 1 1 50 Confidentiality Agreement 50 1 5/60 4 Telephone-based message testing Screener 268 1 10/60 45 Telephone Test 67 1 1 67 Confidentiality Agreement 67 1 5/60 6 Web-based message testing Screener 0 1 10/60 0 Web-test 115 1 1 115 Confidentiality Agreement 115 1 5/60 10 TOTAL 1,402 Terry Nicolosi, Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E8-11032 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-32-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [Document Identifier: OS-0990-New; 30-day notice] Agency Information Collection Request. 30-Day Public Comment Request AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection 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 functions;

(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden;

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

(OD)oversees the implementation and coordination of disability programs, policies, and special initiatives pertaining to the over 54 million persons with disabilities in the United States. As part of these efforts, the OD encourages youth with physical and cognitive disabilities to adopt a healthier life style that includes good nutrition and increased physical activity. “I Can Do it, You Can Do It” is a health promotion intervention program for children and youth between the ages of 10 and 21 with disabilities that employs a one-on-one mentoring approach to change health behaviors. The program is implemented by sponsoring organizations who work with children and youth with disabilities. The OD will evaluate the effectiveness of the program. The evaluation will be completed over a two-year period. Respondents will be children and youth with disabilities who are participating in the program. Mentors who work with the participants/mentees will complete a post-program survey. Coordinators from the sponsoring organizations will complete a process evaluation survey. Results will be used to determine if the program has been successful, to report progress, and to make revisions for future administration of the program. There are no costs to respondents except their time to participate in the surveys. Estimated Annualized Burden Table Forms Type of respondent Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Average burden hours per response (in hours) Total burden hours Registration Form Program Participant/Mentee 660 1 8/60 88 Goal Setting Worksheet Program Participant/Mentee 610 1 7/60 71 Mentor Registration Form Mentor 450 1 10/60 75 Pre-Test Survey Program Participant/Mentee 560 1 19/60 177 Weekly Check-In Form Program Participant/Mentee 560 8 7/60 522 First Post-Test Survey Program Participant/Mentee 510 1 18/60 153 Second Post-Test Survey Program Participant/Mentee 460 1 18/60 138 Mentor Post Assessment Mentor 450 1 15/60 112 Agency Coordinator Survey Agency Coordinators 6 1 45/60 4.5 Total 1340.5 Terry Nicolosi, Office of the Secretary, Director, Office of Resources Management . [FR Doc. E8-11045 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-39-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Hospital Preparedness Program

(HPP)AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, ASPR (HHS). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the Secretary's proposal to require Hospital Preparedness Program

(HPP)cooperative agreement recipients to contribute non-federal matching funds starting with the FY 2009 funding cycle and each year thereafter. The amount of the cost sharing requirement in FY 2009 will be five percent of the award amount and in FY 2010 and each year thereafter the amount of match will be ten percent of the award amount. DATES: To be considered, comments on this notice must be submitted by June 16, 2008. Subject to consideration of the comments submitted, the Department intends to publish a final notice of any cost sharing requirement. ADDRESSES: See Supplementary Information, Request for Comments section for addresses for submitting all comments concerning this proposal. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR Melissa Sanders, Team Leader, Healthcare Systems Preparedness Program, 202-245-0763 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authorized by section 319C-2 of the Public Health Service

(PHS)Act, as amended by the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA) (Pub. L. 109-417), the HPP is a cooperative agreement program funded and administered by the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR). Its purpose is to improve surge capacity and enhance community and hospital preparedness for public health emergencies. Currently there are 62 awardees comprised of the 50 States; the District of Columbia; the three metropolitan areas of New York City, Los Angeles County and Chicago; the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands; the territories of American Samoa, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands; the Federated States of Micronesia; and the Republics of Palau and the Marshall Islands. Since the inception of the program in 2002 awardees have received funding through a statutory formula that employs a base allocation with an adjustment for population. PAHPA amended section 319C-1 and 319C-2 of the PHS Act to add certain accountability provisions. Consistent with those accountability provisions, this notice proposes to introduce a cost sharing requirement for the HPP program as a concrete way of solidifying collaboration between States and the Federal government in assuring this program will achieve enhanced sustainability in healthcare system preparedness during and after the project period has ended. ASPR proposes that awardees will make available, either directly or through donations from public or private entities non-Federal contributions in an amount equal to five percent of the award amount in FY 2009 and ten percent of the award amount in FY 2010 and each successive year for the duration of the program. Non-Federal contributions would be provided directly or through donations from public or private entities and may be in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, equipment or services. Amounts provided by the Federal government, or services assisted or subsidized to any significant extent by the Federal government, would not be included in determining the amount of such non-Federal contributions. The cost sharing requirement would apply to the entire award amount received by the State from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services through the HPP. The cost sharing requirement would be implemented as a term and condition of the HPP award. *Request for Comments:* The ASPR invites public comment on this notice to add a cost sharing requirement to the HPP. You may submit comments in one of three ways (please choose only one of the ways listed): • *E-mail* : CDR Melissa Sanders, *melissa.sanders@hhs.gov.* • *Mail* : CDR Melissa Sanders, Team Leader, Healthcare Systems Preparedness Programs, HSS/OS/ASPR, 395 E Street, SW., 10th Floor, Suite 1075, Washington, DC 20201 • *Hand Delivery/Courier* : CDR Melissa Sanders, Team Leader, Healthcare Systems Preparedness Programs, HSS/OS/ASPR, 395 E Street., SW., 10th Floor, Suite 1075, Washington, DC 20201 Dated: May 9, 2008. RADM W. Craig Vanderwagon, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services. [FR Doc. E8-10970 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-45-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Program Reporting and Accountability Changes to the Hospital Preparedness Program

(HPP)AGENCY: Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, ASPR (HHS). ACTION: Notification of intent to fund and information on:

(1)Maintenance of Funding (MOF);

(2)Evidenced-Based Benchmarks and Objective Standards;

(3)Reporting;

(4)Funding Formula;

(5)Withholding; and

(6)Maximum Carryover Amount. The final FY 2008 Funding Opportunity Announcement

(FOA)for the Hospital Preparedness Program

(HPP)will be available in the coming weeks at *http://www.grants.gov* . SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or the Department) is issuing in the third quarter of FY 2008 a Funding Opportunity Announcement

(FOA)for the HPP, authorized under section 319C-2 of the Public Health Service

(PHS)Act, as amended by the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA) (Pub. L. 109-417). The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, provides funding for these awards (Pub. L. 110-161). This **Federal Register** notice provides information concerning critical aspects of this program including: • Program Background; • Program Requirements: ○ Maintenance of Funding; ○ Evidenced Based Benchmarks and Objective Standards; ○ Reporting; ○ Funding Formula; ○ Withholding; ○ Maximum Carryover Amount; • Important Dates. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR Melissa Sanders at

(202)245-0763, or *melissa.sanders@hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Program Background Building on the lessons learned from the attacks of September 11th, 2001, and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, PAHPA was enacted in December 2006 to improve the Nation's public health and medical preparedness and response capabilities for emergencies, whether deliberate, accidental, or natural. PAHPA amended and added new sections to the PHS Act. Examples of these changes include: identifying the Secretary of Health and Human Services as the lead official for all Federal public health and medical responses to public health emergencies and other incidents covered by the National Response Framework; establishing the position of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), who will lead and coordinate HHS preparedness and response activities, advise the Secretary of HHS during an emergency, and lead the coordination of emergency preparedness and response efforts between HHS and other Federal agencies; consolidating Federal public health and medical response programs under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR); requiring the development and implementation of the National Health Security Strategy; and reauthorizing the Public Health and Emergency Preparedness

(PHEP)cooperative agreements administered by the CDC and the HPP grants administered by the ASPR. In addition to reauthorizing these two cooperative agreement programs, PAHPA amended these grant programs to add certain new requirements that awardees must meet. The purpose of this notice is to notify HPP awardees about critical aspects and requirements of the HPP as amended by PAHPA. *Purpose:* The purpose of the Hospital Preparedness Program

(HPP)is to provide funding to improve surge capacity and realize the following preparedness goals: • Integration: Ensuring the integration of public and private medical capabilities with public health and other first responder systems, including— 1. Periodically evaluating preparedness and response capabilities through drills and exercises; and 2. Integrating public and private sector public health and medical donations and volunteers. • Medical: Increasing the preparedness, response capabilities, and surge capacity of hospitals, other health care facilities (including mental health facilities), and trauma care and emergency medical service systems, with respect to public health emergencies. This shall include developing plans for the following: 1. Strengthening public health emergency medical management and treatment capabilities. 2. Improving medical evacuation and fatality management capabilities. 3. Rapidly distributing and administering medical countermeasures, specifically to hospital based health care workers and their family members or partnership entities. 4. Utilizing effectively any available public and private mobile medical assets and integration of other Federal assets. 5. Protecting health care workers and health care first responders from workplace exposures during a public health emergency. • At-Risk Individuals: Preparing for the medical needs of at-risk individuals in their community in the event of a public health emergency. Medical needs include behavioral health consisting of both mental health and substance abuse considerations. The term “at-risk individuals” means children, pregnant women, senior citizens and other individuals who have special needs in the event of a public health emergency. Before, during and after an incident, members of at-risk populations may have additional needs in one or more of the following functional areas: maintaining independence, communications, transportation, supervision and medical care. In addition to those individuals specifically identified as at-risk in the above definition, individuals who may need additional response assistance should include those who: 1. Have disabilities; 2. Live in institutionalized settings; 3. Are from diverse cultures; 4. Have limited English proficiency or are non-English speaking; 5. Are transportation disadvantaged; 6. Have chronic medical disorders; and 7. Have pharmacologic dependency. • Coordination: Minimizing duplication of, and ensuring coordination between, Federal, State, local, and tribal planning, preparedness, response and recovery activities (including the State Emergency Management Assistance Compact). • Continuity of Operations: Maintaining vital public health and medical services to allow for optimal Federal, State, local, and tribal operations in the event of a public health emergency. *Eligibility:* The following are eligible entities: • A State; • A political subdivision determined to be eligible for an award under section 319C-1 of the PHS Act; or • A consortium of States. Program Requirements 1. Maintenance of Funding

(MOF)Award recipients must maintain their health care preparedness expenditures at a level that is not less than the average of expenditures made during the preceding two year period (i.e., federal FY 2006 and FY 2007). The MOF requirement refers to the awardee's expenditures (i.e., state (or political subdivision) contributions for health care preparedness, not Federal dollars) and may include expenditures for surge capacity investments such as: a. Beds; b. Isolation; c. Decontamination; d. Personal Protective Equipment; e. Pharmaceuticals; f. Mobile Medical Assets; g. Interoperable communications equipment; h. Laboratory equipment and trainings. 2. Evidence-Based Benchmarks and Objective Standards In accordance with section 319C-1(g) of the PHS Act, ASPR has established evidence-based benchmarks and targets to be achieved at the mid-year and end-of-year reporting times. Please see the FY08 HPP FOA for the specific benchmarks that awardees must achieve. As noted in more detail below, HPP awardees will have funds withheld from their FY 2009 awards if, when expending their FY 2008 HPP awards, they fail substantially to meet the benchmarks described in the FY 2008 HPP FOA. 3. Reporting In order to ensure all awardees are able to demonstrate compliance with newly established benchmarks and other reporting requirements, HHS will require semi-annual reporting information. Please see the FY08 HPP FOA for actual reporting targets to be met. 4. Funding Formula Per section 319C-2(j) of the PHS Act, funding for this mandatory cooperative agreement is determined in the same manner as amounts are determined for PHEP awardees under section 319C-1(i) of the PHS Act, via a statutory formula that employs a base allocation with an adjustment for population. 5. Withholding The Secretary of HHS is required under section 319C-1(g) of the PHS Act to develop and require application of measurable benchmarks and objective standards that measure levels of preparedness with respect to HPP activities. The Secretary shall withhold funds beginning in FY 2009 from HPP awardees who fail substantially to meet the applicable benchmarks for the immediate preceding fiscal year and/or who fail to submit a Pandemic Influenza Plan. Thus, HPP awardees will have funds withheld from their FY 2009 awards if, when expending their FY 2008 HPP awards, they fail substantially to meet the benchmarks described in the FY 2008 FOA or to submit a Pandemic Influenza Plan. The amounts to be withheld are as follows:

(i)For the fiscal year immediately following a fiscal year in which an entity experienced a failure, an amount equal to 10 percent of the amount the entity was eligible to receive;

(ii)For the fiscal year immediately following two consecutive fiscal years in which an entity experienced a failure, an amount equal to 15 percent of the amount the entity was eligible to receive, taking into account the withholding of funds for the immediately preceding fiscal year;

(iii)For the fiscal year immediately following three consecutive fiscal years in which an entity experienced such a failure, an amount equal to 20 percent of the amount the entity was eligible to receive, taking into account the withholding of funds for the immediately preceding two fiscal years;

(iv)For the fiscal year immediately following four consecutive fiscal years in which an entity experienced such a failure, an amount equal to 25 percent of the amount the entity was eligible to receive, taking into account the withholding of funds for the three preceding fiscal years. Each failure to meet the benchmarks for the immediately preceding fiscal year or to submit a Pandemic Influenza Plan will be treated as a separate failure for purposes of calculating amounts withheld. The Secretary is required to develop and implement a process to notify entities who have failed substantially to meet the evidence-based benchmarks or who have failed to submit a Pandemic Influenza Plan. HHS will notify awardees during the mid- year reporting period that are determined to have failed to meet the benchmark targets that are described in the FOA. Awardees will have the opportunity to seek intensive technical assistance from project officers and be involved in the development of such technical assistance. Should awardees fail to correct their failures, they shall be subject to the withholding amounts described previously. 6. Maximum Carryover Amount Per section 319C-1(j)(3) of the PHS Act the Secretary shall determine, for each fiscal year, the maximum percentage of unobligated funds that may be carried over to the succeeding fiscal year. If the percentage of unobligated funds exceeds the maximum percentage permitted, the awardee shall return that portion of the unobligated funds that exceeds the maximum amount permitted. Awardees may apply to the Secretary for a waiver of the maximum percentage amount by including an explanation why the requirement should not apply to the awardee and the steps the awardee will take to ensure that all funds will be expended appropriately. Further, the Secretary may waive or reduce the amount of carryover determined for a single entity or for all entities in a fiscal year, if the Secretary determines that mitigating conditions exist that justify the waiver or reduction. An awardee may not have more than 15% of the award available as unobligated funds at the time a carryover request is made, approximately 10 months into the budget cycle. Amounts in excess of 15% may result in repayment. 7. Important Dates Anticipated Application Due Date: June 11, 2008. Anticipated Award Date: August 1, 2008 Dated: May 9, 2008. RADM W. Craig Vanderwagon, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services. ASPR Hospital Preparedness Program

(HPP)Cooperative Agreement Enforcement Actions and Disputes I. Purpose Sections 319C-1 and C-2 of the Public Health Service (PHS), as amended by the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA), include certain accountability and compliance requirements that grantees must meet, including achievement of evidence-based benchmarks, audit requirements, and maximum carryover amounts. This document provides information about enforcement actions associated with these requirements, and appeal processes in the event there is a dispute. This document addresses requirements and enforcement actions specifically outlined in section 319C-1 and C-2 of the PHS. It is not intended to cover all requirements that grantees must meet pursuant to grant laws, regulations, Departmental grants policy, and terms and conditions of the award. Grant laws, regulations, and Departmental grants policies apply to these grants to the extent they are consistent with section 319C-1 and C-2 of the PHS Act. II. Abbreviations, Acronyms and Definitions A. For the purpose of this document, the following abbreviations and acronyms apply: 1. ARC—Agency Review Committee. 2. ASPR—Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. 3. CGMO—Chief Grants Management Officer. 4. DAB—Departmental Appeals Board. 5. GMO—Grants Management Officer. 6. GMS—Grants Management Specialist. 7. HHS—Department of Health and Human Services. 8. HPP—Hospital Preparedness Program. 9. IDDA—Intra-Departmental Delegation of Authority (IDDA). 10. NoA—Notice of Award. 11. OPHS—Office of Public Health and Science. 12. PHEP—Public Health Emergency Preparedness. 13. PO—Project Officer. B. For the purpose of this document, the following definitions apply: 1. HHS Department Appeals Board (DAB)—The administrative board responsible for resolving certain disputes arising under HHS assistance programs. The DAB provides an impartial adjudicatory hearing process for appealing certain final written decisions by GMOs. The DAB's jurisdiction is specified in 45 CFR Part 16, “Procedures for HHS Grant Appeals Board.” 2. Agency Review Committee (ARC)—Committee comprised of awarding agency members who review awardee appeals to adverse determinations made by grant officials. A minimum of three appointed core members, one of whom will be designated a chairperson by the ASPR. Others may be designated as determined by the chairperson. Members of the ARC may not be from the branch or program whose adverse determination is being appealed. 3. Recipient—The organization that receives a grant or cooperative agreement award from an awarding agency, and is responsible and accountable for using the funds provided, and for the performance of the grant-supported project or activity. The recipient is the entire legal entity, even if a particular component is designated in the NoA. The term includes “awardee/grantee.” 4. Corrective action—Action taken by the awardee that corrects identified deficiencies or produces recommended improvements. 5. Enforcement—Actions taken to compel the observance of policies, regulations, and laws governing the administration of an assistance program. Such actions are generally the result of a recipient's failure to comply with the terms and conditions of an award. These failures may cause an awarding agency to take one or more actions, depending on the severity and duration of the non-compliance. The awarding agency generally will afford the recipient an opportunity to correct the deficiencies before taking enforcement action, unless public health or welfare concerns require immediate action. However, even if an awardee is taking corrective action, the awarding agency may take proactive steps to protect the Federal government's interests, including placing special conditions on awards, or may take action designed to prevent future non-compliance, such as closer monitoring. 6. Termination—The permanent withdrawal by the awarding agency of an awardee's authority to obligate previously awarded grant funds before that authority would otherwise expire, including the voluntary relinquishment of that authority by the recipient. 7. Disallowance—A determination denying payment of an amount claimed under an award, or requiring return of funds or off-set of funds already received. 8. Void—A determination that an award is invalid because the award was not authorized by statute or regulation, or because it was fraudulently obtained. 9. Withholding of funds—An action taken by an awarding agency to withhold or reduce support within a previously approved or subsequent budget period. Withholding may occur for the following justifiable reasons:

(1)An awardee is delinquent in submitting required reports;

(2)adequate Federal funds are not available to support the project;

(3)an awardee fails to show satisfactory progress in achieving the objectives of the project, e.g., performance measures/benchmarks and/or excessive carryover;

(4)an awardee fails to meet the terms of a previous award;

(5)an awardee's management practices fail to provide adequate stewardship of Federal funds;

(6)any reason which would indicate that continued funding would not be in the best interests of the Government. 10. Offset—The withholding of funds from an award recipient in order to compensate for costs owed the awarding agency. 11. Repayment of funds—Funds for payment of a debt determined to be owed to the Federal Government. Repayment of funds cannot come from other Federally-sponsored programs. 12. Terms and conditions of award—All requirements imposed on a recipient by the Federal awarding agency, whether by statute, regulation, or within the grant award document itself. The terms of award may include both standard and special provisions, appearing on each NoA that are considered necessary to attain the objectives of the grant; facilitate post award administration of the grant, conserve grant funds, or otherwise protect the Federal government's interests. 13. Performance measures/benchmarks—The use of statistical evidence to determine progress toward specific defined objectives. These are leading indicators that will allow a national “snapshot” to show how preparedness and response activities, and the associated resources, aid in improving the public health system. 14. Excessive Carryover—Unobligated funds of a recipient that exceed the established maximum percentage of 15% of the award, as reported on a Financial Status Report (SF-269) at the time a carryover request is made, approximately 10 months into the 12 month budget cycle. The threshold amount includes direct and indirect costs. 15. Outlays or Expenditures—The charges made to the Federally-sponsored project or program. They may be reported on a cash or accrual basis. For reports prepared on a cash basis, outlays are the sum of cash disbursements for direct charges for goods and services, the amount of indirect expense charged, the value of third party in-kind contributions applied and the amount of cash advances and payments made to sub-awardees. For reports prepared on an accrual basis, outlays are the sum of cash reimbursements for direct charges for goods and services, the amount of indirect expense incurred, the value of in-kind contributions applied, and the net increase (or decrease) in the amounts owed by the recipient for goods and other property received, for services performed by employees, contractors, sub-awardees and other payees and other amounts becoming owed under programs for which no current services or performance are required. 16. Audits—A systematic review or appraisal made to determine whether internal accounting and other control systems provide reasonable assurance of financial operations are properly conducted; financial reports are timely, fair, and accurate; the entity has complied with applicable laws, regulations, and terms and conditions of award; resources are managed and used economically and efficiently; desired results and objectives are being achieved effectively. 17. Failure—Noncompliance with any or all of the provisions of the NoA which include but not limited to various laws, regulations, assurances, terms, or conditions applicable to the grant or cooperative agreement. 18. Matching or Cost Sharing—The value of third-party in-kind contributions and the portion of the costs of a federally assisted project or program not borne by the Federal Government. Costs used to satisfy matching or cost-sharing requirements are subject to the same policies governing allowability as other costs under the approved budget. III. Background PAHPA amended section 319C-2 of the PHS Act, and authorizes the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response

(ASPR)to award cooperative agreements to eligible entities to enable such entities to improve surge capacity and enhance community and hospital preparedness for public health emergencies. Funding for these awards is provided by the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-161). Grantees must meet certain statutory accountability and compliance requirements. Sections 319C-1 and C-2 of the PHS Act require the Department to take certain enforcement actions if grantees fail to meet these requirements. More specifically, this document addresses the following enforcement actions required by the statute:

(1)Beginning in fiscal year 2009, withholding a statutorily-mandated percentage of the award if an awardee fails substantially to meet established benchmarks and performance measures for the immediately preceeding fiscal year or fails to submit a satisfactory pandemic flu plan to the Department;

(2)repayment of any funds that exceed the maximum percentage of an award that an entity may carryover to the succeeding fiscal year; and

(3)repayment or future withholding or offset as a result of a disallowance decision if an audit shows that funds have not been spent in accordance with section 319C-2 of the PHS Act . IV. Enforcement Actions and Disputes A. Withholding for Failure To Meet Established Benchmarks and Performance Measures or To Submit a Satisfactory Pandemic Influenza Plan 1. Beginning with the distribution of FY 2009 funding, awardees that fail substantially to meet performance measures/benchmarks for the immediately preceding fiscal year and/or who fail to submit a pandemic influenza plan to CDC as part of their application for PHEP funds, may have funds withheld from their FY 2009 and subsequent award amounts. An awardee that fails to correct such noncompliance shall be subject to withholding in the following amounts: • For the fiscal year immediately following a fiscal year in which the awardee has failed substantially to meet performance measures/benchmarks or who has failed to submit a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan; an amount equal to 10 percent of funding the awardee was eligible to receive. • For the fiscal year immediately following two consecutive fiscal years in which an awardee experienced such a failure, an amount equal to 15 percent of funding the awardee was eligible to receive, taking into account the withholding of funds for the immediately preceding fiscal year. • For the fiscal year immediately following three consecutive fiscal years in which an awardee experienced such a failure, an amount equal to 20 percent of funding the awardee was eligible to receive, taking into account the withholding of funds for the immediately preceding fiscal years. • For the fiscal year immediately following four consecutive fiscal years in which an entity experienced such a failure, an amount equal to 25 percent of funding the awardee was eligible to receive for such a fiscal year, taking into account the withholding of funds for the immediately preceding fiscal year. Please note that HHS is required to treat each failure to substantially meet all the benchmarks and each failure to submit a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan as a separate withholding action. For example, an awardee failing substantially to meet benchmarks/performance measures and who fails to submit a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan could have 10% withheld for each failure for a total of 20% for the first year this happens. If this situation remained unchanged, HHS would then be required to assess 15% for each failure for a total of 30% for the second year this happens. Alternatively, if one of the two failures are corrected in the second year but one remained, HHS is required to withhold 15% of the second year funding. 2. Technical Assistance and Notification of Failures ASPR may, in coordination with the CGMO and in accordance with established Departmental grants policy, provide to an awardee, upon request, technical assistance in meeting benchmarks/performance measures and submitting a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan. In addition, as described below, ASPR will notify awardees that are determined to have failed substantially to meet benchmarks/performance measures and/or who have failed to submit a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan and give them an opportunity to correct such noncompliance. Entities who fail to correct such noncompliance will be subject to withholding as described in the paragraph above. The awardee shall submit the required progress report on or before the specified due date according to the terms and conditions of the NoA. The Project Officer shall, within 15 days of receipt of the required progress report, assess performance, provide technical assistance to the awardee as required, and issue a written letter acknowledging completion of assessment and that the assessment has been forwarded to the GMO. Upon determination that the awardee has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of a grant or cooperative agreement, the Project Officer

(PO)shall issue a written recommendation and provide a complete documentation package to the Grants Management Officer

(GMO)based on the review and monitoring of the awardee. Within 15 days of receipt of the recommendation from the PO, the GMO shall issue an initial failure notification to the awardee in writing. This document will provide compliance requirements as submitted by the PO and will include the total amount of Federal funds which will be withheld or reduced in the subsequent fiscal year due to noncompliance, absent corrective action by the awardee that is satisfactory to the GMO. The document will specify that the GMO will take such other remedies as may be legally available and appropriate in the circumstances, such as withholding of Federal funds. The awardee must provide a proposed Corrective Action Plan

(CAP)in writing to the GMO, within 15 days of receipt of the initial failure notification.. The GMO will forward a copy to the PO. The awardee may request technical assistance at this time. Within 15 days of receipt of the proposed CAP, the PO will assess the remedies and provide a recommendation to the GMO. If the GMO finds the corrective action measures satisfactory, the GMO shall, within 15 days of receipt of the PO's assessment, provide notification to the awardee of the awarding agency's intent to rescind the initial failure notification. If in the GMO's judgment the awardee has still failed to comply with the terms and conditions of a grant or cooperative agreement, the GMO shall issue a final failure notification and provide information about the appeal process to include applicable timelines in writing. The GMO will concurrently issue his/her decision to the awardee and the Agency Review Committee (ARC). 3. Dispute Process The ASPR has established an ARC for the purpose of providing awardees a fair and flexible process to appeal certain enforcement actions such as a final decision to withhold funds due to a failure to meet benchmarks/performance measures and/or to submit a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan. The ARC consists of three regular members: ASPR Principal Deputy (Director); OPEO (Director); and Resource Planning and Evaluation (Director). The ASPR Principal Deputy, Director, or designee, shall be the chairperson for the ARC. The ARC may consult with subject matter experts within the Department as necessary (i.e., attorneys, Branch Chiefs, Team Leaders, Project Officer/Public Health Advisors, etc.) Members of the ARC may not be from the branch or program whose adverse determination is being appealed. If the awardee chooses to appeal the GMO decision, the awardee must do so directly to the ARC within ten days of receipt of the GMO's final failure notification. The Notice of Appeal shall include:

(1)a detailed description of the reason for appeal including supporting documentation and

(2)a description of how the enforcement action impacts the affected organization. The awardee should be aware that they bear the burden of proof to the extent of the type of modification or reversal of the GMO's decision they seek and the necessity for modification or reversal. Within ten days of receipt of the awardee's notice of appeal, the GMO will

(1)Brief the ARC on the issues of the case,

(2)submit any relevant documentation supporting the decision, and

(3)provide a written statement responding to the notice of appeal. Within ten days of receipt of the brief and documentation submitted by the GMO, the ARC will acknowledge, in writing, the notice of appeal to the awardee and the GMO. The ARC will review the relevant information, within seven days of providing written notification to awardee and GMO, and use one or a combination of the following methods for dispute resolution:

(a)Documentation Review—an independent evaluation of documents to verify compliance with laws, regulations, or policies;

(b)Conference—allow parties an opportunity to make an oral presentation to clarify issues, question both parties to obtain a clear understanding of the facts, and provide recommendations for resolution. Telephone conferences are acceptable. Based on the outcome of the review or conference, the ARC will decide on the resolution of an issue within seven days. The ARC may decide that the Department should waive or reduce the withholding as described above for a single entity or for all entities in a fiscal year, if the ARC reviews and determines that mitigating conditions exist that justify the waiver or reduction. The ARC will notify the GMO, PO, and the awardee, in writing, of their final decision that the Department should waive or withhold federal funds. If the ARC's final decision is to for the Department to waive the federal funds to be withheld or withhold Federal funds for the subsequent fiscal year, the GMO shall issue, in writing, a final decision to the awardee within ten days from the receipt of the ARC's final decision. Funds that are withheld for failure to substantially meet benchmarks/performance measures and/or to submit a satisfactory pandemic influenza plan will be reallocated so that the Secretary may make awards under section 319C-2 to entities described in subsection (b)(1) of that section (i.e., Healthcare Facility Partnership grants). 4. Responsibilities A. PO/Public Health Advisor shall: 1. During the corrective action phase, provide technical assistance to the awardee to meet the requirement. 2. If determined the awardee will not meet the requirement, the PO shall issue a written recommendation to the GMO based on the review and monitoring of awardee progress. 3. Provide a timely documentation package to the GMO regarding a decision to withhold or reduce cooperative agreement funds. B. GMO shall: 1. Rescind initial failure notification or issue a final failure notification and provide the awarding agency's process for appeal to include applicable timelines, in writing, to the awardee and provide a copy to ARC. 2. Brief ARC on issues pertaining to disputes. 3. Prepare and submit a complete documentation package to the ARC regarding a decision to withhold or reduce cooperative agreement funds. C. ARC shall: 1. Establish regular committee members and consult with subject matter experts in the Department as necessary. 2. Receive initial Notice of Appeal. 3. Send acknowledgements to the awardee and GMO. 4. Review disputes by documentation or conference. 5. Provide recommendations and facilitate disputes to preclude further action. 6. Provide the ARC decisions on appeals. D. Awardee or Complainant shall: 1. Remedy non-compliance issues during the corrective action phase. If the GMO determines that corrective actions have not been adequate, the awardee may submit a written request for review. 2. If awardee disputes the GMO's final decision, submit dispute to ARC after Failure Notification is received from the agency awarding office. The dispute must contain the following: A. A detailed description of the reason for dispute including supporting documentation and B. A description of how the enforcement action impacts the affected organization. B. Repayment of Any Funds That Exceed the Maximum Percentage of an Award That an Entity May Carry Over to the Succeeding Fiscal Year 1. For each fiscal year, ASPR, in consultation with the States and political subdivisions, will determine the maximum percentage amount of an award that an awardee may carry over to the succeeding fiscal year. This percentage amount will be listed in the funding opportunity announcement (FOA). For fiscal year 2008 awards, this maximum percentage amount that an awardee may carry over is 15%. For each fiscal year, if the percentage amount of an award unobligated by an awardee exceeds the maximum percentage permitted (i.e., 15% for FY 2008 awards), the awardee shall repay the portion of the unobligated amount that exceeds the maximum amount permitted to be carried over to the succeeding fiscal year. 2. Notification of Failure Upon determination that the awardee has exceeded the maximum percentage permitted, the GMO shall issue an initial failure notification to the awardee in writing. Such documentation will specify that the GMO will take such remedies as may be legally available and appropriate in the circumstances, such as requiring repayment of the portion of the unobligated amount that exceeds the maximum amount permitted to be carried over to the succeeding fiscal year. The awardee must provide a proposed Corrective Action Plan

(CAP)in writing to the GMO, within 15 days of receipt of the initial failure notification.. The GMO will provide a copy to the PO. The awardee may request technical assistance at this time. Within 15 days of receipt of the proposed CAP, the PO will assess the remedies and provide a recommendation to the GMO. The GMO shall, within 15 days of receipt of the PO's assessment, provide notification to the awardee of the awarding agency's intent to rescind the initial failure notification. If the awardee has still failed to comply with the terms and conditions of a grant or cooperative agreement, the GMO shall issue a final failure notification in writing and provide information about the appeal process and application for waiver of repayment to include applicable timelines. The GMO will concurrently issue his/her decision to the awardee and the Agency Review Committee (ARC). 3. Dispute Process If the awardee chooses to appeal the GMO decision, the awardee must do so directly to the ARC within ten days of receipt of the GMO's final failure notification. The Notice of Appeal shall include:

(1)A detailed description of the reason for appeal including supporting documentation;

(2)a description of how the enforcement action impacts the affected organization; and

(3)request for a waiver of repayment that includes an explanation why such requirement (for maximum percentage of carryover amount) should not apply to the awardee and the steps taken by the awardee to ensure that all HPP funds will be expended appropriately. The awardee should be aware that they bear the burden of proof to the extent of the type of modification or reversal of the GMO's decision they seek and the modification or reversal. Within ten days of receipt of the awardee's notice of appeal, the GMO will

(1)Brief the ARC on the issues of the case,

(2)submit any relevant documentation supporting the decision, and

(3)provide a written statement responding to the notice of appeal. Within ten days of receipt of the brief and documentation submitted by the GMO, the ARC will acknowledge, in writing, the notice of appeal to the awardee and the GMO. The ARC will review the relevant information, within seven days, and use one or a combination of the following methods for dispute resolution:

(a)Documentation Review—an independent evaluation of documents to verify compliance with laws, regulations, or policies;

(b)Conference—allow parties an opportunity to make an oral presentation to clarify issues, question both parties to obtain a clear understanding of the facts, and provide recommendations for resolution. Telephone conferences are acceptable. The ARC may decide that the Department should waive or reduce the amount to be repaid for a single entity or for all entities in a fiscal year, if the ARC reviews and determines that mitigating conditions exist that justify the waiver or reduction. The ARC will notify the GMO, PO, and the awardee, in writing, of their final decision that the Department should waive or require repayment of the portion of the unobligated amount of HPP funds that exceeds the maximum amount permitted to be carried over to the succeeding fiscal year. If the ARC's final decision is to waive or to require repayment of the portion of the unobligated amount of HPP funds that exceeds the maximum amount permitted to be carried over to the succeeding fiscal year, the GMO shall issue a final decision in writing to the awardee within ten days from the receipt of the ARC's final decision. Funds that are repaid to ASPR will be reallocated so that the Secretary may make awards under section 319C-2 to entities described in subsection (b)(1) of that section (i.e., Healthcare Facility Partnership grants). 4. Responsibilities A. PO/Public Health Advisor shall: 1. If determined the awardee has exceeded the maximum carryover percentage, the PO shall issue a written recommendation to the GMO based on the review and monitoring of awardee progress. 2. Provide a timely documentation package to the GMO regarding a decision to repay unobligated HPP funds that exceed the maximum carryover percentage. B. GMO shall: 1. Rescind initial failure notification or issue a final failure notification and provide the awarding agency's process for appeal to include applicable timelines, in writing, to the awardee and provide a copy to ARC. 2. Brief ARC on issues pertaining to disputes. 3. Prepare and submit a complete documentation package to the ARC regarding a decision to repay. C. ARC shall: 1. Establish regular committee members and consult with subject matter experts in the Department, as necessary. 2. Receive initial Notice of Appeals. 3. Send acknowledgements to the awardee and GMO. 4. Review disputes by documentation or conference. 5. Provide recommendations and facilitate disputes to preclude further action. 6. Provide the ARC decisions on appeals. D. Awardee or Complainant shall: 1. Remedy non-compliance issues during the corrective action phase. If the GMO determines that corrective actions have not been adequate, the awardee may submit a written request for review. 2. If awardee disputes the GMO's final decisions, submit dispute to ARC after Failure Notification is received from the agency awarding office as described in the NoA. The dispute must contain the following: A. A detailed description of the reason for dispute including supporting documentation; B. A description of how the enforcement action impacts the affected organization; and C. Request for a waiver of repayment that includes an explanation why such requirement (for maximum percentage of carryover amount) should not apply to the awardee and the steps taken by the awardee to ensure that all HPP funds will be expended appropriately. C. Repayment or Future Withholding or Offset as a Result of a Disallowance Decision if an Audit Shows That Funds Have Not Been Spent in Accordance With Section 319C-2 of the PHS Act 1. Awardees shall, not less often than once every 2 years, audit their expenditures from HPP funds received. Such audits shall be conducted by an entity independent of the agency administering the HPP program in accordance with the Comptroller General's standards for auditing governmental organizations, programs, activities, and functions and generally accepted auditing standards. Within 30 days following completion of each audit report, awardees should submit a copy of that audit report to ASPR. Awardees shall repay to the United States amounts found not to have been expended in accordance with section 319C-2 of the PHS Act. If such repayment is not made, ASPR may offset such amounts against the amount of any allotment to which the awardee is or may become entitled under section 319C-2 or may otherwise recover such amount. ASPR may withhold payment of funds to any awardee which is not using its allotment under section 319C-2 in accordance with such section. ASPR may withhold such funds until it finds that the reason for the withholding has been removed and there is reasonable assurance that it will not recur. 2. Disallowance notification Upon determination as a result of audit findings that the awardee has not expended funds in accordance with section 319C-2, the GMO shall issue a disallowance notification to the awardee for the portion of funds not expended in accordance with section 319C-2 and require repayment of those funds to the United States. 3. Dispute process HHS has established a DAB for the purpose of providing awardees a fair and flexible process to appeal certain written final decisions involving grant and cooperative agreement programs administered by agencies of HHS. This document notifies HPP awardees that an opportunity exists to appeal a disallowance enforcement action to the DAB. If the awardee chooses to appeal a final disallowance decision by the GMO, the awardee must do so directly to the DAB within thirty days of receipt of the GMO's final disallowance notification. The Notice of Appeal shall include:

(1)A copy of the final decision,

(2)a statement of the amount in dispute in the appeal, and

(3)a brief statement of why the decision is wrong. More details about the DAB's procedures may be found at 45 CFR part 16. V. References A. Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)• 45 CFR Part 16 and Appendix A, Procedures of the Departmental Grants Appeal Board. • 45 CFR Part 74 and Appendix E, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Awards and Sub-awards to Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, Other Nonprofit organizations, and commercial organizations. • 45 CFR Part 92, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State, Local, and Tribal Governments. B. OMB Circulars • A-87, Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments. • A-102, Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments. • A-110, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations. • A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations Requirements. C. HHS Grants Policy Statement, January 1, 2007 [FR Doc. E8-11015 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-37-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60 Day-08-08BD] Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC)will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, call 404-639-5960 and send comments to Maryam I. Daneshvar, CDC Acting Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, MS-D74, Atlanta, GA 30333 or send an e-mail to *omb@cdc.gov* . Comments are invited on:

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

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice. Proposed Project National Survey of HIV Testing in Hospitals—New—National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Background and Brief Description Early identification of HIV infection has significant benefits to the infected individual and society. In light of recent advancements in HIV testing and treatment, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC)released its prevention initiative, Advancing HIV Prevention: New Strategies for a Changing Epidemic. A key component of this strategy focuses upon increased HIV testing in healthcare settings to increase the number of persons with HIV who are aware of their infection and are successfully referred to treatment and prevention services. In September 2006, CDC released revised recommendations for routine HIV testing of adults, adolescents, and pregnant women in healthcare settings as a measure to address the high number of individuals who are unaware of their HIV infection. Routine HIV testing programs in hospital settings, including emergency departments

(EDs)and urgent care centers (UCCs), have great potential to identify a large number of previously undiagnosed individuals. Prior to the release of the revised recommendations, few such hospital-based testing programs had existed in the United States. CDC is committed to increasing the number of such programs in the U.S., and is currently working with partners to achieve these goals. This project proposes a survey to assess HIV testing policies and practices in hospitals nationwide and to describe the up-take of the revised HIV testing recommendations for hospital settings. The objectives of this project are:

(1)To determine the extent to which HIV testing is being conducted in U.S. hospitals;

(2)to describe the characteristics of hospitals with and without HIV testing programs; and

(3)to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementing HIV testing programs in these settings. This data will assist CDC in monitoring the uptake of recommendations for HIV testing in healthcare settings. CDC is requesting approval for a 2-year clearance for data collection. This project will collect data from hospitals on a one-time voluntary basis using a brief survey. Surveys will be completed by the hospital administrators at each site who are most knowledgeable on HIV testing practices, infection control, and laboratory procedures for their site, in consultation with other hospital staff, as necessary. Collection of data will provide information on current HIV testing practices and policies for the hospital; use of point-of-care and conventional HIV tests; and barriers and facilitators of hospital-based HIV testing. Data will be requested from a representative sample of 4,927 U.S. community hospitals. Surveys will be sent to approximately 1,000 hospital sites with an estimated 70% response rate, based upon estimates from response rates from prior similar surveys among U.S. hospitals. This will result in approximately 700 participating hospital sites, representing approximately 15% of U.S. community hospitals. The average duration of the survey, including time required to collect the requested data, is estimated to be 4 hours per hospital site. There is no cost to the participating hospitals other than their time. Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of form Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Average burden per response in hours Total burden in hours Hospital Survey 700 1 4 2,800 Total 2,800 Dated: May 8, 2008. Maryam I. Daneshvar, Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E8-10935 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Council for the Elimination of Tuberculosis In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC)announces the following council meeting. *Name:* Advisory Council for the Elimination of Tuberculosis *Times and Dates:* 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., June 17, 2008. 8:30 a.m.-2 p.m., June 18, 2008. *Place:* Corporate Square, Building 8, 1st Floor Conference Room, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone

(404)639-8317. *Status:* Open to the public, limited only by the space available. The meeting room accommodates approximately 100 people. *Purpose:* This council advises and makes recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Assistant Secretary for Health, and the Director, CDC, regarding the elimination of tuberculosis. Specifically, the Council makes recommendations regarding policies, strategies, objectives, and priorities; addresses the development and application of new technologies; and reviews the extent to which progress has been made toward eliminating tuberculosis. *Matters to be Discussed:* Agenda items include issues pertaining to the Findings from the Philippine Technical Instruction Program Review; Division of Tuberculosis Training, Informatics, Surveillance and Research Issues; and Discussion on the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)and Genomics, and other related Tuberculosis Issues. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate. *Contact Person for More Information:* Margie Scott-Cseh, Coordinating Center for Infectious Diseases, Strategic Business Unit, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., M/S E-07, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone

(404)639-8317. The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign **Federal Register** Notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Dated: May 9, 2008. Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E8-10993 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Preparedness and Emergency Response Research Centers: A Public Health System Approach, Program Announcement Number

(PA)TP 08-001 In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC)announces the aforementioned meeting. *Times and Dates:* 7 p.m.-9:30 p.m., July 7, 2008 (Closed). 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., July 8, 2008 (Closed). 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., July 9, 2008 (Closed). 7 p.m.-9:30 p.m., July 9, 2008 (Closed). 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., July 10, 2008 (Closed). 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., July 11, 2008 (Closed). *Place:* Spring Hill Suites Marriott, 3459 Buckhead Loop, Atlanta, GA 30326, Telephone

(404)844-4800. *Status:* The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)

(4)and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. *Matters to be Discussed:* The meeting will include the review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to “Preparedness and Emergency Response Research Centers: A Public Health System Approach,” PA TP 08-001. *Contact Person for More Information:* Charles Rafferty, Ph.D., Senior Scientific Review Officer, Office of Science and Public Health Practice, Coordinating Office for Terrorism Preparedness and Emergency Response, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop D44, Atlanta, GA 30333, Telephone

(404)639-7495. The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign **Federal Register** notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Dated: May 9, 2008. Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E8-10974 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee In accordance with section 10(a)

(2)of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC)announces the following meeting for the aforementioned committee: *Name:* Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). *Times and Dates:* 9 a.m.-5 p.m., June 12, 2008. 9 a.m.-1 p.m., June 13, 2008. *Place:* Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, Global Communications Center, Building 19, Auditorium B3, Atlanta, Georgia 30333. *Status:* Open to the public, limited only by the space available. *Purpose:* The Committee is charged with providing advice and guidance to the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Health, the Director, CDC, and the Director, National Center for Preparedness, Detection, and Control of Infectious Diseases (NCPDCID), regarding

(1)the practice of hospital infection control;

(2)strategies for surveillance, prevention, and control of infections (e.g., nosocomial infections), antimicrobial resistance, and related events in settings where healthcare is provided; and

(3)periodic updating of guidelines and other policy statements regarding prevention of healthcare-associated infections and healthcare-related conditions. *Matters to be Discussed:* Guidelines and progress including prevention of UTI and Norovirus transmission, HICPAC prioritization of recommendations for implementation. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate. *Contact Person for More Information:* Wendy Vance, HICPAC, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCPDCID, CDC, l600 Clifton Road, NE., Mailstop D-10, Atlanta, Georgia 30333. Telephone

(404)639-2891. The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign **Federal Register** notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Dated: May 9, 2008. Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E8-10991 Filed 5-15-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority Part C (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) of the Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority of the Department of Health and Human Services (45 FR 67772-76, dated October 14, 1980, and corrected at 45 FR 69296, October 20, 1980, as amended most recently at 73 FR 20297-304, dated April 15, 2008) is amended to reflect the reorganization of the Financial Management Office within the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Section C-B, Organization and Functions, is hereby amended as follows: Delete in their entirety the titles and functional statements for the Financial Management Office (CAJE), and insert the following: *Financial Management Office (CAJE).*

(1)Provides leadership and coordination in the development and administration of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's

(CDC)financial management policies;

(2)develops budget submissions for the CDC;

(3)collaborates with the CDC Office of the Director

(OD)in the development and implementation of long-range program and financial plans;

(4)participates in budget reviews and hearings;

(5)manages CDC's system of internal budgetary planning and control of funds;

(6)develops and implements CDC-wide budgetary, accounting, and fiscal systems and procedures;

(7)conducts CDC-wide manpower management (including productivity measurement) activities;

(8)prepares financial reports;

(9)serves as the focal point for domestic and international travel policy, procedures and interpretation;

(10)provides legislation reference services;

(11)plans, directs and conducts internal quality assurance reviews;

(12)analyzes data and makes recommendations to assure effective safeguards are in place to prevent fraud, waste and abuse;

(13)assists in identifying or conducting special financial management training programs; and

(14)maintains liaison with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Office of Management and Budget (0MB), Congress, and other government organizations on financial management matters. *Office of the Director (CAJE1).*

(1)Provides leadership, guidance, direction, and oversight necessary to fully manage the performance of CDC's Financial Management Office (FMO);

(2)establishes FMO's vision and long-term strategy;

(3)leads the overall budgetary and human resource management strategy for FMO;

(4)develops customer service strategy and actively engages the Agency around financial management effectiveness and improvement;

(5)provides financial guidance and strategic support for the Agency and the Chief Operating Officer;

(6)advocates and supports policy and appropriations law compliance;

(7)serves as CDC witness in budget hearings before Committees of Congress, OMB, and DHHS;

(8)participates with senior program and Agency management in program planning and policy determinations, evaluations, conferences, and decisions concerning financial resources;

(9)provides a centralized source for current information on financial management legal and regulatory requirements governing the prevention and control of diseases; and

(10)provides consultation and assistance in financial management to state and local health departments when requested by CDC officials. *Travel Management Activity (CAJE12).*

(1)Provides expertise, guidance, oversight, and interpretation of policies, laws, rules and regulations for all aspects of travel procedures and policies at CDC, including the use of the automated travel system, local travel, domestic and foreign temporary duty travel, and change of station travel for civil service employees, foreign service employees, commissioned officers, CDC fellows, etc.;

(2)communicates and implements Departmental travel policies;

(3)manages the administrative aspects of travel for the agency, including enforcement of travel card policy, delegation of authority, distribution of cash purchase memos, and approval of First-Class memos;

(4)serves as liaison with travel provider for travel contract matters;

(5)provides the Director's Emergency Operations Center travel support; and

(6)develops CDC Conference Travel planning and reporting for DHHS and Congress. *Office of Organizational Excellence (CAJE13).*

(1)Provides direction, strategy, and advice necessary to support the management and continuous improvement of FMO and financial processes;

(2)coordinates creation and implementation of operating standards/procedures and processes, and monitors compliance;

(3)provides leading practices in government financial management practices to FMO;

(4)coordinates continuous improvement and special project initiatives and advises on performance improvement opportunities;

(5)manages FMO Service Desk;

(6)develops, implements, and manages recruiting, hiring, retention, and succession strategies;

(7)manages all aspects of human resources for FMO, including application of Federal programs and staffing administration;

(8)develops, implements, and manages professional development strategy and plan for FMO;

(9)develops and implements FMO's communication strategy and plan; and

(10)manages the development and communication of financial management policies. *Office of Formulation, Evaluation, and Analysis (CAJE14).*

(1)Develops CDC's budget in accordance with DHHS, OMB, and Congressional requirements, policies, procedures, and regulations;

(2)provides leadership and advice on matters of budget formulation, public health policy development, budget and performance integration, and Congressional appropriations for CDC/ATSDR;

(3)participates in budget reviews and hearings before DHHS, OMB, and Congress;

(4)provides direction and guidance for appropriations strategy and program support;

(5)manages budget submissions and OMB Performance Assessment and Rating Tool

(PART)content;

(6)provides leadership and advice in implementing performance systems, including the PART assessments, key performance indicators, and CDC's Government Performance Results Act

(GPRA)program;

(7)serves as a liaison with the Office of the Secretary, OMB, Government Accountability Office, other government organizations, and Congress on financial management matters;

(8)manages appropriations analysis and reporting process, submissions, and summary information; and

(9)manages appropriations communication and issues management both internally and externally, and interacts with BBS, OMB, Congress, and partners. *Accounting Branch (CAJEB).*

(1)Oversees and provides approach to accounting for the Agency;

(2)manages accounting treatment for CDC on all business systems implementations and upgrades to current business systems;

(3)manages all financial audit reviews for FMO and conducts risk assessment on internal controls;

(4)prepares SF 133 Report on Budget Execution for CDC Appropriation and IDDAs, FACTS I and II Report and Year-End Closing Statement (2108 Report), and SF 224;

(5)prepares, analyzes fluctuations, and coordinates explanation on differences for financial statements and notes, including Statement of Changes in Net Position, Statement of Budgetary Resources, Balance Sheet, Statement of Net Cost, and Statement of Financing;

(6)performs GPRA reporting analysis for compliance;

(7)ensures compliance of Federal and Department reporting requirements;

(8)coordinates accounting policy issues with the DHHS Office of Financial Policy and FMO's Office of Organization Excellence;

(9)manages Fund Balance with Treasury, including authority, disbursements (payroll and non-payroll), collections, deposit funds and budget clearing accounts;

(10)prepares manual and ADI journal vouchers for corrections to the general ledger; and

(11)performs monthly, quarterly, and year-end closeout process of the general ledger. *Financial Systems Branch (CAJED).*

(1)Provides management and coordination necessary for FMO to have access to systems, data, and reporting capability;

(2)develops, implements, and manages long-term systems strategy for FMO;

(3)provides systems analysis, design, programming, implementation, enhancement and documentation of FMO related systems;

(4)provides technical support and assistance for data error analysis and resolution, coordination of system initiatives, management of IT resources, and the access and interpretation of financial system data;

(5)serves as a liaison to UFMS Operations and Maintenance and other internal and external groups as needed;

(6)manages all aspects of FMO's systems security and administration;

(7)performs certification and accreditation of FMO systems;

(8)performs CAN realignment coordination; and

(9)manages FMO hardware and equipment, and serves as the custodial officer. *Financial Services Branch (CAJEE).*

(1)Manages all activities, policies, quality control, and audit support for accounts payable and disbursement functions for the Agency;

(2)serves as the CDC subject matter expert on all financial matters dealing with all travel, assignments and payments;

(3)ensures all payments are made in accordance with applicable Federal and international laws and standards, such as Appropriations Law;

(4)serves as liaison with the Department of Treasury (DOT), the CC/COs, NCs, Divisions, and/or Offices, as well as outside customers, to provide financial information and reconcile payment issues;

(5)compiles and submits a variety of cash management and travel reports required by the DOT and various other outside agencies;

(6)provides training and advice on payment, travel and disbursement issues;

(7)manages the transactions related to accounts payable, such as processing cables, reimbursements, IPAC disbursements, and payments for Foreign internationals and Visiting Fellows;

(8)completes all reconciliations of sub-legers to General Ledger;

(9)responds to traveler inquiries for vouchers and certifies funds availability; and

(10)manages change of station payment processing. *Budget Operations Branch (CAJEH).*

(1)Provides agency-level budget execution functions, financial data analysis, and reporting;

(2)provides budgetary information for business decision making support surrounding public health;

(3)develops high-level plans to execute Agency level budget;

(4)ensures changes and plans are in compliance with decisions and Agency direction;

(5)reports compliance of laws, regulations, and decisions to FMO Deputy Director for Budget;

(6)provides agency-wide budget planning, analysis, and reporting for agency budget execution and public health goals strategy;

(7)provides Agency spend plan validation, remediation, and analysis;

(8)provides funds control management for the Agency level budget;

(9)assists in the review of Congressional bill language to identify and properly account for earmarks and other directed programs;

(10)provides Departmental and OMB reporting; and

(11)provides budget execution for Centralized Mandatory Services. *Debt Management Branch (CAJEJ).*

(1)Oversees and provides approach to invoicing, billing, collections, reconciliations and reporting for the Agency;

(2)serves as the central point of contact for the Agency on all debt management issues, including training and issue resolution;

(3)develops strategy and analysis for reimbursable agreements in accordance with the CC/CO, NC, Division, and/or Office;

(4)manages all aspects of accounts receivable transactions in UFMS, prepares invoices, and processes billing;

(5)works with programs, the Chief Financial Officer, and FMO to resolve all posting errors, such as the resolution for over-obligated and unsigned agreements, DC calculations, and uncollectible debt;

(6)analyzes the intra- and inter-governmental eliminations process for compliance with financial statements;

(7)prepares and submits Agency level fmancial reports to HHS/OS; and

(8)prepares and submits the year end certification and verification of the Treasury Report on receivables. *Grants and Asset Management Branch (CAJEK).*

(1)Oversees and provides approach to grants management;

(2)serves as liaison with the Procurements and Grants Office, Buildings and Facilities Offices, Program offices, and Budget Execution Services on capital asset procedures;

(3)manages financial accounting for all assets for CDC, including real and personal property, equipment, land, leases, software, personal property, and stockpiles;

(4)conducts financial and inventory reconciliations for all applicable assets, including inventory such as Vaccine for Children and Strategic National Stockpile, real and personal property, equipment, leases, leasehold improvements, land, and others as needed;

(5)provides training and assistance to CDC project officers and grants management officials around financial grants management;

(6)serves as liaison with grantees and other operating divisions for financial questions/inquiries related to grants;

(7)manages the process to perform grant processing for commitments, obligations, advances, disbursements, and accruals;

(8)manages grants transactions, such as vendor set-up, establishing sub-accounts, CAN set-up within PMS, reconciling sycnfile to PMS, and posting files from PMS; and

(9)conducts grant reviews, monitors burn rates, and supports Program in grant execution. *Budget Execution Services Branch 1 (CAJEL).* This branch supports the National Center for Zoonotic, Vector-Borne, and Enteric Diseases and the National Center for Preparedness, Detection, and Control of Infectious Diseases by performing the following:

(1)Provides the legal and regulatory expertise and support to execute CDC's budget within the framework of DHHS, OMB, and Congressional regulations, and policies of CDC OD;

(2)manages to the expectations agreed upon in the Budget Execution Services Service Level Agreement;

(3)promotes structured, ongoing partnerships with the Coordinating Centers/Coordinating Offices (CC/CO), National Centers (NC), Divisions, and Offices;

(4)manages and supports Program in all aspects of funds management;

(5)provides the leadership and guidance for spend plan creation and administration, in compliance with all Federal guidelines and policies, such as the Anti-Deficiency Act;

(6)provides the overall analysis and reconciliation of spend plans to advise Program on future spending decisions;

(7)assists Program Officials in developing sub-allocation of CC/CO, NC, and Division ceilings;

(8)communicates and shares knowledge with Program, FMO Central, and CDC's FMO Budget Analyst Community; and

(9)performs cost-benefit analysis to review financial requests and makes recommendations for future year budget. *Budget Execution Services Branch 2 (CAJEM).* This branch supports the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, the National Center for HP//AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, and the Office of the Director for Coordinating Center for Infectious Diseases by performing the following:

(1)Provides the legal and regulatory expertise and support to execute CDC's budget within the framework of DHHS, OMB, and Congressional regulations, and policies of CDC OD;

(2)manages to the expectations agreed upon in the Budget Execution Services Service Level Agreement;

(3)promotes structured, ongoing partnerships with the CC/COs, NCs, Divisions, and Offices;

(4)manages and supports Program in all aspects of funds management;

(5)provides the leadership and guidance for spend plan creation and administration, in compliance with all Federal guidelines and policies, such as the Anti Deficiency Act;

(6)provides the overall analysis and reconciliation of spend plans to advise Program on future spending decisions;

(7)assists Program Officials in developing sub-allocation of CCICO, NC, and Division ceilings;

(8)communicates and shares knowledge with Program, FMO Central, and CDC's FMO Budget Analyst Community; and

(9)performs cost-benefit analysis to review financial requests and makes recommendations for future-year budget. *Budget Execution Services Branch 3 (CAJEN).* This branch supports the Coordinating Center for Environmental Health and Injury Prevention and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health by performing the following: