Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2008-06-10 · Federal Communications Commission · BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Radio Broadcasting Services; AM or FM Proposals to Change the Community of License AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice. S · Rules and Regulations

Rules and Regulations. Notice

39,874 words·~181 min read·/register/2008/06/10/08-1339

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

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Radio Broadcasting Services; AM or FM Proposals to Change the Community of License AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The following applicants filed AM or FM proposals to change the community of license: CALVARY CHAPEL OF TWIN FALLS, INC., Station KJCF, Facility ID 106475, BMPED-20080507ABB, From CLARKSTON, WA, To ASOTIN, WA; CAPSTAR TX LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Station WIBA-FM, Facility ID 17385, BPH-20080508ABO, From MADISON, WI, To SAUK CITY, WI;
CAPSTAR TX LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Station WMAD, Facility ID 50055, BPH-20080508ABQ, From SAUK CITY, WI, To CROSS PLAINS, WI; GAP BROADCASTING POCATELLO LICENSE, LLC, Station KLLP, Facility ID 8413, BPH-20080429AAD, From CHUBBUCK, ID, To FILER, ID; HORIZON CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP, Station KWDU, Facility ID 166061, BMPH-20080506AAP, From UPTON, WY, To ANTELOPE VALLEY-CRES, WY; KZLZ, LLC, Station KZLZ, Facility ID 36022, BPH-20080423AES, From KEARNY, AZ, To CASAS ADOBES, AZ; MAGNUS, EDWARD F, Station NEW, Facility ID 165991, BMPH-20080519ABU, From WISHEK, ND, To LINTON, ND;
PROVIDENCE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION, INC., Station NEW, Facility ID 171892, BMPED-20080428AAI, From AMITE, LA, To KENTWOOD, LA; SKYWEST MEDIA L.L.C., Station KXML, Facility ID 164259, BMPH-20080411AHN, From SALMON, ID, To BELLEVUE, ID; TALLGRASS BROADCASTING, LLC, Station NEW, Facility ID 171002, BMPH-20080409ACF, From PAWHUSKA, OK, To ELK CITY, KS; THE CROMWELL GROUP, INC. OF ILLINOIS, Station WEJT, Facility ID 65570, BPH-20080425AAU, From SHELBYVILLE, IL, To DALTON CITY, IL. DATES:
Comments may be filed through August 11, 2008. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tung Bui, 202-418-2700. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The full text of these applications is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the Commission's Reference Center, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554 or electronically via the Media Bureau's Consolidated Data Base System, *http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/cdbs_pa.htm* .
A copy of this application may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* Federal Communications Commission. James D. Bradshaw, Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E8-13009 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank Holding Companies The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company.
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than June 25, 2008. **A.
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago** (Burl Thornton, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414: *1. John B. Scheumann* , Lafayette, Indiana, individually and as trustee of the John B. Scheumann Grantor Retained Annuity Trust dated April 20, 2004, and the John B. Scheumann Grantor Retained Annuity Trust dated April 20, 2004, and together with the John B. Scheumann Trust dated December 27, 2002, and June M. Scheumann, Lafayette, Indiana, as trustee of the John B.
Scheumann Trust dated December 27, 2002, as a group acting in concert to acquire voting shares of Lafayette Community Bancorp, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Lafayette Community Bank, both of Lafayette, Indiana. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 5, 2008. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E8-12966 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank Holding Companies The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company.
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than June 24, 2008. **A.
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis** (Glenda Wilson, Community Affairs Officer) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034: *1. Carol S. Alderton* , Kahoka, Missouri, to acquire voting shares of Memphis Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Community Bank of Memphis, both of Memphis, Missouri. *2. David F. Alderton, Jr.* , Gorin, Missouri, and Brian W. Alderton, Kahoka, Missouri, to individually and collectively acquire voting shares of Clark County Bancshares, Inc., Wyaconda, Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Peoples Bank of Wyaconda, Kahoka, Missouri. **B.
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco** (Kenneth Binning, Director, Regional and Community Bank Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579: *1. Craig Allen White and Julie White* , both of Beaver, Utah; Brent R. White and Julie H. White, both of Elsinore, Utah; the Robert B. White Jr. Family Trust, and the Elinor B. White Family Trust, Susan Williams, all of Redlands, California; Eric White, Glendale, California; and Cheryl W. Newton and George F. Newton, both of Morgan, Utah, a family group, to retain voting shares of Utah Independent Bank, Salina, Utah; and Craig Allen White, individually to acquire additional voting shares of Utah Independent Bank, Salina, Utah.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 4, 2008. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E8-12883 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.* ) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.
The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843).
Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than July 3, 2008. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago** (Burl Thornton, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414: *1.
Prairieland Bancorp Employee Stock Ownership Plan and Trust* , to increase its ownership of Prairieland Bancorp, Inc., for a total of 47.13 percent, and thereby indirectly increase its ownership of Farmers and Merchants State Bank of Bushnell, all of Bushnell, Illinois. **B. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis** (Jacqueline G. King, Community Affairs Officer) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291: *1. CBT Corporation, Inc.* , Big Timber, Montana, to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of The Continental National Bank of Harlowton, Harlowton, Montana. **C.
Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City** (Todd Offenbacker, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001: *1. Pinnacle Bancorp, Inc.* , Central City, Nebraska, to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of First Azle Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of First Bank, both of Azle, Texas. **D. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco** (Kenneth Binning, Director, Regional and Community Bank Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579: *1.
Coeur d'Alene Bancorp* , to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Bankcda, both of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 4, 2008. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E8-12885 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Bulletin FMR 2008-B6] POW/MIA Flag Display AGENCY: General Services Administration ACTION: Notice SUMMARY: This bulletin cancels GSA Bulletin FPMR D-248, POW/MIA Flag Display, published in the **Federal Register** on March 26, 1998, notifying Federal agencies of the implementation guidelines of section 1082, Display of POW/MIA Flag, of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Pub. L. 105-85, Nov. 18, 1997), now codified at 36 U.S.C. § 902.
This bulletin clarifies that National POW/MIA Recognition Day is designated annually by Presidential Proclamation and provides guidance on the protocol for flying the POW/MIA flag and information on how to obtain POW/MIA flags. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 10, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT For further clarification of content, contact Stanley C. Langfeld, Director, Regulations Management Division (MPR), General Services Administration, Washington, DC 20405; or *stanley.langfeld@gsa.gov* .
Dated: May 27, 2008. Kevin Messner, Acting Associate Administrator, Office of Governmentwide Policy. General Services Administration **[Bulletin FMR 2008-B6]** Real Property TO: Heads of Federal Agencies SUBJECT: POW/MIA Flag Display 1. **Purpose:** This bulletin cancels GSA Bulletin FPMR D-248, POW/MIA Flag Display, and notifies Federal agencies of revised implementation guidelines of section 1082, Display of POW/MIA Flag, of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Pub. L. 105-85, Nov. 18, 1997), now codified at 36 U.S.C. § 902 (the Act). 2. **Expiration Date** :
This bulletin does not expire unless the Act is amended, superseded or cancelled. 3. **Applicability** : Federal establishments with responsibility for the following locations: a) The Capitol; b) The White House; c) The World War II Memorial, the Korean War Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial; d) Each national cemetery; e) The buildings containing the official offices of: 1) the Secretary of State; 2) the Secretary of Defense; 3) the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; and 4) the Director of Selective Service System; f) Each major military installation, as designated by the Secretary of Defense; g) Each medical center of the Department of Veterans Affairs; and h) Each United States Postal Service post office. 4. **What action must I take?** If this bulletin applies to your Federal establishment, the Act required the head of your department, agency or other establishment to prescribe such regulations as necessary to implement the provisions of section 1082 no later than May 17, 1998.
If you are responsible for the Capitol, then this action is not needed. The implementation regulations must be consistent with the general guidelines established by the Act as outlined in this bulletin. The Federal establishments affected by the Act may prescribe additional implementation regulations, as necessary. a) **When do we display the POW/MIA flag?** You fly the flag on the following six days: 1) Armed Forces Day, the third Saturday in May; 2) Memorial Day, the last Monday in May; 3) Flag Day, June 14; 4) Independence Day, July 4; 5) National POW/MIA Recognition Day (designated by Presidential Proclamation; historically, the third Friday of September); and 6) Veterans Day, November 11. b) **What other days do we display the flag?** In addition to the days enumerated in the immediately preceding paragraph, POW/MIA flag display days include the following: 1) In the case of display at medical centers of the Department of Veterans Affairs, any day on which the flag of the United States is displayed; 2) In the case of display at United States Postal Service post offices that are not open for business on any of the six days listed in the previous paragraph, the last business day before any day specified in the immediately preceding paragraph; and 3) In the case of display at the World War II Memorial, the Korean War Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, any day on which the flag of the United States is displayed. c) **How do I display the POW/MIA flag?** The flag is to be displayed in a manner designed to be visible to the public.
The Act shall not be construed or applied so as to require any employee to report to work solely for the purpose of providing for the display of the POW/MIA flag. If you are responsible for the Capitol building, the display of the POW/MIA flag pursuant to the Act is in addition to the display of the POW/MIA flag in the Rotunda of the Capitol as required by Senate Concurrent Resolution 5 of the 101 st Congress, agreed to on February 22, 1989 (103 Stat. 2533). d) **Why display the POW/MIA flag?** Display of the POW/MIA flag serves as the symbol of our Nation's concern and commitment to achieving the fullest possible accounting of all Americans who still remain, or in the future may become, unaccounted for as prisoners of war, missing in action or otherwise unaccounted for as a result of hostile action. e) **What flag is the official POW/MIA flag?** The official POW/MIA flag is the National League of Families POW/MIA flag, as designated by 36 U.S.C. § 902. f) **What is the official protocol for displaying the POW/MIA flag?** When displayed from a single flag pole, the POW/MIA flag should fly directly below, and be no larger than, the flag of the United States.
If on separate poles, the flag of the United States always should be placed to the right of other flags. On the six national observances for which Congress has ordered display of the POW/MIA flag, it is generally flown immediately below or adjacent to the flag of the United States as second in order of precedence. 5. **Who distributes official POW/MIA flags?** GSA distributes the official POW/MIA flag. You can obtain flags through GSA's Federal Acquisition Service by your usual ordering procedures.
Ordering options include GSA *Advantage!* TM , GSA's on-line shopping service, at *http://www.gsaadvantage.gov* , FEDSTRIP, MILSTRIP, or Customer Supply Centers. For assistance, contact GSA's National Customer Service Center at 1-800-525-8027 or DSN 465-1416. [FR Doc. E8-12996 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-RH-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the intention of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
(AHRQ)to request the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)to allow the proposed information collection project: “Overcoming Barriers to Expanded Health Information Exchange
(HIE)Participation in Indiana.” In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), AHRQ invites the public to comment on this proposed information collection. DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by August 11, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Doris Leflcowitz, Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by e-mail at *doris.lefkowitz@ahrq.hhs.gov.* Copies of the proposed collection plans, data collection instruments, and specific details on the estimated burden can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer,
(301)427-1477, or by e-mail at *doris.lefkowitz@ahrq.hhs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Project “Overcoming Barriers to Expanded Health Information Exchange
(HIE)Participation in Indiana” AHRQ, through its contractor, the Regenstrief Institute at Indiana University, proposes to assess the barriers to participation in health information exchange
(HIE)in Indiana. The Regenstrief Institute will use its experience to date working with a variety of organizations to establish specific barriers to engagement in HIE cited by stakeholders, defme the barriers and evaluate them. The Regenstrief Institute will develop and implement a questionnaire and survey process to identify barriers that may exist throughout the State of Indiana to participation in the Indiana Network of Patient Care (INPC). The INPC is a local health information infrastructure that includes information from five major hospital systems (fifteen separate hospitals), the county and State public health departments, and Indiana Medicaid and RxHub. The INPC began operation seven years ago and is one of the first examples of a local health information infrastructure. This research will elicit and aggregate feedback from large and small physician groups, as well as hospitals, throughout the State of Indiana. The goal is to identify the gaps in understanding, barriers and disconnects that may exist with providers' adoption of, and membership in, the INPC. The relationship between the stakeholders involved in the Indiana HIE is governed by a contract between the participants. The Regenstrief Institute, acting on behalf of the participants, created and operates the exchange, including serving as the custodian of the data. The Regenstrief Institute will survey three key stakeholder groups in the State of Indiana: small hospitals, small physician practices (less than 5 providers) and large physician practices (greater than 20 providers) to identify barriers for each of these groups to participate in a HIE in general, and specifically the INPC. It is difficult to predict the barriers that will be identified, but based on their experience to date, anecdotal evidence suggests that the cost of interfaces and the management attention needed to participate will be the two major barriers. The findings will be used to create approaches to engage specific entities to participate in their statewide HIE. This project is being conducted pursuant to AHRQ's statutory mandates to conduct and support research, evaluations and initiatives to advance information systems for health care improvement (42 U.S.C. 299b-3) and to promote innovations in evidence-based health care practices and technologies by conducting and supporting research on the development, diffusion, and use of health care technology (42 U.S.C. 299b-5(a)(1)). This project is also being conducted pursuant to a modification to an earlier AHRQ request for proposals entitled “State and Regional Demonstrations in Health Information Technology” (issued under Contract 290-04-0015). Method of Collection To ease the burden on the participating health care providers a Web-based questionnaire will be used. An initial screener interview will be conducted by telephone to describe the purpose of the survey and the survey process and to request the hospital's or physician practice's participation in the survey. After a hospital or practice agrees to participate, a communication packet will be sent by email to the contact person identified during the telephone screening. The communication packet includes:
(a)A HIE description and definition;
(b)description of the INPC, its organization mission, overall direction, and other relevant background information; and
(c)purpose for the contact, estimated time required to complete the Web-based questionnaire and a link to the questionnaire. Responses to the survey are expected from about 20 hospitals and 40 physician practices of each size. Two to three individuals from each hospital will be asked to respond to the questionnaire. For physician practices, one person from each practice will be asked to respond: a practice manager, director of technology, or person occupying a similar role. Following the completion of the Web-based questionnaire, respondents will be re-contacted by telephone for a follow-up interview. The purpose of the follow-up interview is to determine the steps necessary to overcome the barriers to HIE identified in the Web-based questionnaire. A structured interview guide has been developed with standard questions for the telephone follow-up. The data will be aggregated, analyzed and a final report will be prepared that focuses on the following major topic areas: a. General perceptions on electronic sharing of health information; b. The extent to which electronic health information sharing exists in the contact's current environment; c. Barriers to the adoption and implementation of electronic health information sharing and, specifically, INPC; and d. Recommendations for addressing and resolving issues preventing the adoption of HIE (general as well as entity-specific recommendations). This information will assist AHRQ's mission to advance “the creation of effective linkages between various sources of health information, including the development of information networks.” 42 U.S.C. 299b-3(a)(3). A seventy percent (70%) response rate is anticipated. Estimated Annual Respondent Burden Exhibit 1 shows the estimated annualized burden hours for the respondents' time to participate in this research. A screener interview will be completed once by each of the 20 hospitals and 80 physician practices and is expected to require about 5 minutes to complete. The Web-based questionnaire will be completed by an average of 3 persons from each of the 20 hospitals and by one person from each of the 80 physician practices and will take about 10 minutes to complete. The telephone follow-up interview will be conducted with each person that completed the web based questionnaire and is expected to last about 15 minutes. The total burden hours for the participating health care providers is estimated to be 66 hours. Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annualized cost burden to the responding health care providers based on their time to participate in this research. The total cost burden is estimated to be $3,074. Exhibit 1.—Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Hours per responses Total burden hours Screener 100 1 5/60 8 Web-based Questionnaire 100 1.4 10/60 23 Telephone Follow-up Interview 100 1.4 15/60 35 Total 300 na na 66 Exhibit 2.—Estimated Annualized Cost Burden Form name Number of respondents Total burden hours Average hourly wage rate * Total cost burden Screener 100 8 $46.58 $373 Web-based Questionnaire 100 23 46.58 1,071 Telephone Follow-up Interview 100 35 46.58 1,630 Total 300 66 na 3,074 * Based upon the average of the “Wage estimates, mean hourly” for the following occupation codes and titles: 11-101/Chief executives; 13-0000/Business and financial operations occupations; 15-1071/Network and computer systems administrators; 29-1062/Family and general practitioners; 11-9111/Medical and health services managers, from the “May 2007 State Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Indiana; Occupational Employment Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, *http://www.bis.gov/oes/current/oes_in.htm* .” Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal Government This project will last for one year and is estimated to cost the government $120,000. The scope of work includes the development of the survey instruments and data collection ($90,000), and data analysis ($10,000) to establish specific barriers to HIE participation cited by stakeholders and to define and evaluate them ($20,000). Request for Comments In accordance with the above cited Paperwork Reduction Act legislation, comments on AHRQ's information collection are requested with regard to any of the following:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of AHRQ health care research and health care information dissemination functions, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of AHRQ's estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed collection(s) of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity on the information to be collected; and
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of public record. Dated: May 30, 2008. Carolyn M. Clancy, Director. [FR Doc. E8-12765 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-90-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Department of Health and Human Services. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the intention of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
(AHRQ)to request that the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)allow the proposed information collection project, “Reducing Healthcare Associated Infections (HAI): Improving patient safety through implementing multidisciplinary training.” In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), AHRQ invites the public to comment on this proposed information collection. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** on April 3rd, 2008 and allowed 60 days for public comment. No comments were received. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment. DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: AHRQ's OMB Desk Officer by fax at
(202)395-6974 (attention: AHRQ's desk officer) or by e-mail at *OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov* (attention: AHRQ's desk officer). Copies of the proposed collection plans, data collection instruments, and specific details on the estimated burden can be obtained from AHRQ's Reports Clearance Officer. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer,
(301)427-1477, or by e-mail at *doris.lefkowitz@ahrq.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Project “Reducing Healthcare Associated Infections (HAI): Improving patient safety through implementing multi-disciplinary training” The goal of the HAI project is to identify factors associated with the implementation of training that can assist hospitals in successfully reducing and sustaining the reduction of infections associated with the process of care. The project is being carried out pursuant to AHRQ's statutory mandates under 42 U.S.C. 299b(b) and 299(b)(1)(G) to disseminate research findings to community settings for practice improvement and to support research on determinants of practitioner use and development of best practices. The findings from the HAI project will be shared publicly to assist other healthcare organizations in their efforts to improve infection safety. For the HAI project, AHRQ will use the Accelerating Change and Transformation in Organizations and Networks (ACTION) which is a program of task order contracts to support field-based partnerships for conducting applied research. In order to understand the challenges of infection prevention and patient safety at the point of care, AHRQ has funded five ACTION partnerships, each of which has experience with implementing interventions and tools to improve the processes of care and the safety and quality of healthcare delivery. These ACTION partnerships will be working collaboratively with 34 hospitals, ranging from large academic teaching hospitals to community hospitals, in 11 states. At each of these hospitals, multi-disciplinary teams will implement clinician training that uses AHRQ-supported evidence-based tools to improve infection safety. Through the HAI project, these hospitals will focus on barriers and challenges to implementing infection prevention training and how to sustain lessons learned in order to help other hospitals achieve success. The project involves six activities:
(1)Implement training focused on mitigating infections, particularly with respect to blood stream infections (BSI), central line insertions, ventilator associated pneumonia
(VAP)and chest tube insertions;
(2)catalogue infection rates before and after the training;
(3)analyze the opinions of hospital staff about their hospital's infection prevention and patient safety activities;
(4)analyze the trainees' evaluation of the infection prevention and patient safety training and materials;
(5)determine the impact of the implementation of infection prevention training and the hospitals' participation in the HAI project on their ability to mitigate and sustain infection safety improvements; and,
(6)make publicly available case studies focusing on the hospitals' experiences of the training and their success with infection reduction and sustainability. In order to support the healthcare organizations and hospitals, AHRQ will be issuing a contract to coordinate the assessment aspects of the HAI program. The objective of the HAI assessment contract is to facilitate the collection of infection information across the HAI project hospitals including providing technical assistance and support for the administration of the common data collection instruments. In addition, the assessment contractor will assist AHRQ in sharing the lessons learned about the successes, barriers, and challenges in implementing and sustaining infection safety interventions and tools. Each of the 34 participating hospitals will be responsible for securing clearance from their own Institutional Review Boards for their activities as part of the HAI project, including administration of the proposed data collection instruments. The data collection will be conducted in accordance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule, 45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, and with the Protection of Human Subjects regulations, 45 CFR Part 46. Identifiable data for provider organizations and individuals will only be used for the above-stated purposes and will be kept confidential. Methods of Collection The infection prevention training will be implemented at 34 hospitals over a 6 month period at the end of 2008 through 2009. The data collection instruments will be administered at each hospital before, during and after the training. Respondents include both medical and administrative personnel. These instruments will be a key input to AHRQ understanding the challenges and barriers to implementing training and improving infection safety. The proposed paper-based data collection instruments are: Pre-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment; Post-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment; Baseline Infection Rates Summary; Follow-up Infection Rates Summary; Infection Prevention and Patient Safety Activities Catalogue; Training Evaluation. In addition to the 34 hospitals which will implement the training and fully participate in the HAI project, there will be a control group consisting of 102 rural hospitals. At each of the control group hospitals, an infection prevention staff member will complete the Post-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment, Follow-up Infection Rate Summary, and the Infection Prevention and Patient Safety Activities Catalogue. In addition to providing a baseline measure, the control group hospitals will provide additional insights on the challenges of and barriers to infection prevention and patient safety at rural hospitals. Estimated Annual Respondent Burden Exhibit 1 shows the estimated burden hours to the respondents for providing all of the data needed to meet the study's objectives. For both the Pre-Training and Post-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment instruments, the number of respondents is based on an estimate of 20 respondents at each of the 34 implementation hospitals. In addition, one respondent at each of the 102 hospitals in the control group will complete the Post-Training instrument. For both the Baseline and Follow-up Infection Rate Summary instrument, the number of respondents is based on an estimate of one respondent at each of the 34 implementation hospitals. In addition, one respondent at each of the 102 control group hospitals will complete the Follow-Up instrument. For the Infection Prevention and Patient Safety Activity Catalogue, the number of respondents is based on an estimate of 1 respondent at each of the 34 implementation hospitals and the 102 control group hospitals. Finally, the number of respondents for the Training Evaluation instrument is based on an estimate of 25 respondents at each of the 34 implementation hospitals. Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annualized cost burden for the respondents' time to participate in this project. There will be no cost burden to the respondent other than that associated with their time to provide the required data. There will be no additional costs for capital equipment, software, computer services, etc. Exhibit 1.—Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Data collection instrument Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Hours per response Total burden hours Pre-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment 34 20 30/60 340 Post-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment 136 5.75 45/60 587 Baseline Infection Rate Summary 34 1 30/60 17 Follow-up Infection Rate Summary 136 1 40/60 91 Infection Prevention and Patient Safety Activity Catalogue 136 1 1.00 136 Training Evaluation 34 25 10/60 141 Total 136 na na 1,312 Exhibit 2.—Estimated Annualized Cost Burden Data collection instrument Number of respondents (hours) Total burden rate * Average hourly wage burden Total cost Pre-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment 34 340 $41.75 $14,195 Post-Training Infection Prevention and Safety Assessment 136 587 41.75 24,507 Baseline Infection Rate Summary 34 17 28.99 493 Follow-up Infection Rate Summary 136 91 28.99 2,638 Infection Prevention and Patient Safety Activity Catalogue 136 136 39.02 5,307 Training Evaluation 34 141 49.04 6,915 Total 136 1,312 na 54,055 * Based on the planned respondents, the average hourly rates are the average of the mean hourly wage estimates for the following occupational groups: epidemiologists, healthcare support aides, medical and health services managers, pharmacists, physicians, physician assistants, registered nurses, and respiratory therapists. The wage estimates are derived from the National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2006. Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal Government This data collection effort is one aspect of a larger effort focused on reducing healthcare associated infections, The cost of developing the data collection instruments by a one-time statistical support task order is $25,000. The costs of implementing the data collection instruments and analyzing and publishing the results are $108,650 annually. Finally, the estimated costs for federal staff time for supporting the common data collection efforts are $24,000 annually. Thus, the estimated annual cost to the federal government is $145,150. Request for Comments In accordance with the above-cited Paperwork Reduction Act legislation, comments on AHRQ's information collection are requested with regard to any of the following:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of AHRQ health care research, quality improvement and information dissemination functions, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of AHRQ's estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed collection(s) 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 upon the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of public record. Dated: May 30, 2008. Carolyn M. Clancy, Director. [FR Doc. E8-12768 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-90-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel: Establishment of a Community-Clinical Project 2008-R-09 *Correction:* This notice was published in the **Federal Register** on April 21, 2008, Volume 73, Number 77, page 21355. The aforementioned meeting has been rescheduled to the following: *Time and Date:* 1 p.m.—3 p.m., June 10, 2008 (Closed). *Contact Person for More Information:* Linda Shelton, Program Specialist, Coordinating Center for Health and Information Service, Office of the Director, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop E21, Atlanta, GA 30333. Telephone
(404)498-1194. 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: June 3, 2008. Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E8-12958 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Ethics Subcommittee, Advisory Committee to the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC)In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), CDC, announces the following meeting for the aforementioned Subcommittee: *Times and Dates:* 1 p.m.-6 p.m., June 26, 2008. 8 a.m.-12 p.m., June 27, 2008. *Place:* CDC, Thomas R. Harkin Global Communication Center, 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA 30333. *Status:* Open to the public, limited only by the space available. The meeting room accommodates approximately 70 people. To accommodate public participation in the meeting, a conference telephone line will be available. The public is welcome to participate during the public comment periods by calling
(866)919-3560 and entering code 4168828. The public comment periods are tentatively scheduled for 5:30 p.m.-5:45 p.m. on June 26, and from 11:15 a.m.-11:30 a.m. on June 27. For security reasons, members of the public interested in attending the meeting should contact the person below. The deadline for notification of attendance is June 20, 2007. *Purpose:* The Ethics Subcommittee will provide counsel to the ACD, CDC, regarding a broad range of public health ethics questions and issues arising from programs, scientists and practitioners. *Matters to Be Discussed:* Agenda items will include the following topics: priorities of the Advisory Committee to the Director, ethical guidance for ventilator distribution, ethical guidance for use of traveler restrictions, ethical guidance for public health emergency preparedness and response, and updates on activities relating to CDC partnerships, genomics, and shared responsibility for stockpiling antiviral medications. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate. *For Further Information Contact:* Drue Barrett, PhD, Designated Federal Official, Ethics Subcommittee, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., M/S D-50, Atlanta, Georgia 30333. Telephone (404)639-4690. E-mail: *dbarrett@cdc.gov.* 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 CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Dated: May 30, 2008. Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E8-12960 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration Food Protection Task Force Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is announcing the availability of conference grant funding for meetings of State Food Protection Task Forces. The original announcement of availability of funding for State Food Safety Task Force Meetings, published in the **Federal Register** June 25, 2004 (69 FR 35651) and February 4, 2005 (70 FR 6015) as revised on May 3, 2005 (70 FR 22889). This revised announcement provides for a change in the name of the grant program to align with the FDA Food Protection Plan and new policies that apply to the State Food Protection Task Force Meetings conference Grant Program. FDA anticipates providing approximately $160,000 in direct costs only in support of this program in fiscal year
(FY)2008. It is anticipated that 32 awards will be made for up to $5,000 per award. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regarding the administrative and financial management aspects of this notice: Gladys M. Bohler, Grants Management Specialist at 301-827-7168 or by e-mail at *gladys.melendez-bohler@fda.hhs.gov* Regarding the programmatic aspects of this notice: Jennifer Gabb, (DFSR), Office of Regulatory Affairs, FDA at 301-827-2899, e-mail: *jennifer.gabb@fda.hhs.gov* or access the Internet at: *http://www.fda.gov/ora/fedlstate/default.htm* . Announcement Type: New limited competition Request for Applications
(R13)Request for Application Number: RFA-FD-08-06 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s): 93.103 Dates: The application receipt date is July 15, 2008. Paper Applications will not be accepted. Applications may be submitted on or after the opening date and must be successfully received by *Grants.gov* no later than 5 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization) on the application submission/receipt date(s). If an application is not submitted by the receipt date(s) and time, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed. The required application, SF 424
(5161)can be completed and submitted online. The package should be labeled, “Response to RFA FD-08-006.” If you experience technical difficulties with your online submission you should contact Gladys M. Bohler by telephone at 301-827-7168 or by e-mail at *gladys.melendez-bohler@fda.hhs.gov.* Please visit *Grants.gov* to view the full version of this Request for Applications. A full version of the RFA can also be found on the Grants.gov Web site along with the application package. FDA urges applicants to read the full version RFA in its entirety prior to submitting application packets. A publishing of this announcement in the **Federal Register** a copy of the full version RFA can also be requested from the ORA and Grants Management contacts listed in the following paragraphs. **Funding Opportunity Description** I. Background The FDA's Office of Regulatory Affairs
(ORA)is the inspection component of the FDA and has 1,000 investigators and inspectors who cover the approximately 95,000 FDA regulated businesses in the United States and inspect more than 15,000 facilities a year. In addition to the standard inspection program, FDA's investigators and inspectors conduct special investigations, food inspection recall audits, and perform consumer complaint inspections and sample collections. In the past, FDA has relied on the States in assisting with the previous duties through formal contracts, partnership agreements, and other informal arrangements. The inspection demands on both the Agency and the States are expected to increase. Accordingly, procedures need to be reviewed and innovative changes made that will increase effectiveness, efficiency, and conserve resources. Examples of support include providing effective and efficient compliance of regulated products and, providing high quality, science based work that maximizes consumer protection. II. Research Objectives FDA views State based Food Protection Task Forces as an important mechanism for providing food safety and food defense program coordination, and information exchange within each State (“Food” includes human food and animal feed and is defined in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321 (f))). This grant announcement is intended to encourage the development of a Task Force within each State and to provide funding for Task Force meetings. Conference grant funding is available to States that have an existing Food Safety and Food Defense Task Force, as well as to States that are in the process of developing a new Food Protection Task Force. State Food Protection Task Force meetings should foster communication and cooperation among State, local, and tribal food protection public health, agriculture, and regulatory agencies. Before submission of an application, the State shall designate one public health or food safety agency to lead, coordinate, and host the Food Protection and Food Security Task Force and its meetings. The formation of Food Protection and Food Security Task Force meetings shall not interfere with existing Federal-state advisory mechanisms. III. Project Goals The purpose of the Food Protection Task Force meetings is to foster communication and cooperation and collaboration within the States among State local and tribal food protection public health, agriculture and regulatory agencies. (For the purposes of this document and to be consistent with the FDA Food Protection Plan: Food means human food and animal feeds as defined in 21 U.S.C. 321(f). The meetings should:
(1)Provide a forum for all the stakeholders of the food protection system—regulatory agencies, academia, industry, consumers, State legislators, Boards of Health and Agriculture and other interested parties;
(2)assist in adopting or implementing the Food Code and other food protection regulations; and
(3)promote the integration of an efficient statewide food protection/defense system that maximizes the protection of the public health through prevention, intervention and response including the early detection and containment of foodborne illness. Each Task Force shall develop its own guidelines for work, consensus decision making, size and format, at its initial meeting. FDA's Division of Federal State Relations
(DFSR)will provide meeting guidelines and organization documents as requested. Conference grant funds will be awarded only for the direct costs. Each Task Force shall develop its own guidelines for work, consensus decision making, size, and format at its initial meeting. Federal agency representatives may be invited to be nonmember liaisons or advisors to the task force and its meetings. Conference grant funds may not be used for Federal employees to travel to or participate in these meetings. The following are the allowable and unallowable costs: Allowable costs include but are not limited to:
(1)Salary (in proportion to the time or effort spent directly on the conference/meeting);
(2)facility and necessary equipment rental;
(3)in-state travel and per diem or subsistence allowances;
(4)supplies needed for conduct of the meeting (only if received for use during the budget period);
(5)conference services;
(6)publication costs;
(7)registration fees; and
(8)speakers' fees. Non-allowable costs include but are not limited to:
(1)Travel or expenses other than local mileage for local participants;
(2)organization dues;
(3)travel or per diem costs for Federal employees;
(4)purchase of equipment;
(5)transportation costs exceeding U.S. carrier coach class fares;
(6)visas;
(7)passports;
(8)entertainment;
(9)tips;
(10)bar charges;
(11)personal telephone calls;
(12)laundry charges;
(13)honoraria or other payments for the purpose of conferring distinction or communicating respect, esteem or admiration;
(14)patient care;
(15)alterations or renovations; and
(16)facilities and administrative costs/indirect costs. Please also refer to the DHHS Grants Policy Statement for additional information regarding costs *http://www.hhs.gov/grantsnet/adminis/gpd/index.htm* . IV. Reporting Requirements A Financial Status Report
(FSR)and Mid-Year Progress Reports are required no later than 90 days after the end of a budget period. The Mid-Year Progress Report should contain a description of a specific plan for the next meeting, as well as all criteria listed in the previous paragraph. Program monitoring of recipients will be conducted on an ongoing basis and written reports will be reviewed and evaluated at least semi-annually by the project officer. Project monitoring may also be in the form of telephone conversations between the project officer/grants management specialist and the principal investigator. When multiple years are awarded, awardees will be required to submit the PHS Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually ( *http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm* ). The PHS 2590 must be submitted at least 2 months prior to the next budget period start date and should include a report of the previous meeting supported by the current grant, as well as a full description of the next planned meeting. A final Progress Report of the meeting(s) (or Conference Proceedings), and FSR SF-269 are required within 90 days of the expiration date of the project period. An original and two copies of each report shall be submitted to FDA's Grants Management staff contact. The report of the meeting should include:
(1)The grant number;
(2)the title, date and place of time of the meeting;
(3)the name of the person shown on the application as the conference director, principal investigator, or program director;
(4)the name of the organization that conducted the meeting;
(5)a list of individuals and their institutional affiliations who participated as speakers or facilitators in the formally planed sessions of the meeting; and,
(6)a summary of topics discussed, next steps and conclusions. V. Mechanism of Support A. Award Instrument This funding opportunity will use the Conference/Scientific Meeting
(R13)grant award mechanism. Under the R13 mechanism, the applicant will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project. Multiple year awards may be awarded to one permanently sponsoring organization for conferences held annually or biennially on a recurring topic. The total project period for an application requesting support may not exceed 5 years. This funding opportunity uses just-in-time budget concepts. It also uses the non-modular budget format. Applicants must complete and submit a detailed categorical budget in the SF424 application. Meetings covered by this notice will be supported under section 1701-1706 of the Public Service
(PHS)Act (42 U.S.C. 300u-300u-5). FDA's Task Force Conference Grant program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 93-103. These grants will be subject to all policies and requirements that govern the Conference Grant Programs of the PHS, including the provisions of 42 CFR part 52 and 45 CFR parts 74 and 92. The regulations issued under Executive Order 12372 also apply to this program and are implemented through the Department of Health and Human Service's regulations at 45 CFR part 100. Executive Order 12372 sets up a system for State and local government review of applications for Federal financial assistance. B. Eligibility These grants are available to State public health, agriculture and food protection agencies that have an existing Food Safety and Food Defense Task Force, as well as to States that are in the process of developing a new Food Protection Task Force. Only one grant will be awarded per State per year. States are urged to collaborate between agencies to submit a single application. C. Length of Support It is anticipated that FDA will fund these grants at a level requested but not exceeding $5,000 total direct costs only for the first year. An additional 4 years of support, up to $5,000 (direct costs only) each year may be available, depending upon fiscal year appropriations and successful performance of the conference. D. Funding Plan Continued funding for future year, noncompetitive segments, will be contingent upon satisfactory progress as determined annually by the FDA, the receipt of a PHS 2590 application, the approval of yearly task force reports, and the availability of Federal funds. An estimated amount of $160,000 is available in FY 2008. The number of grants funded will depend on the quality of the applications received, their relevance to FDA's mission, priorities, and the availability of funds. VI. Review Procedure and Criteria All applications submitted in response to this request for applications
(RFA)will first be reviewed for responsiveness by grants management and program staff. Responsiveness is defined as submission of a complete on or before the required submission date as listed in the previous paragraphs. If applications are found to be nonresponsive, they will be returned to the applicant without further consideration. Responsive applications will be reviewed and evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an ad hoc panel of experts. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
(1)Scientific merit of the proposed conference/scientific meeting as determined by the evaluation process;
(2)availability of funds; and
(3)relevance of program priorities. Final funding decisions will be made by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs or his or her designee. Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact FDA Program staff to resolve any questions regarding criteria before the submission of their application. VII. Submission Requirements FDA is accepting new applications for this program electronically via *www.grants.gov* . To download the SF424
(5161)Application forms for this Funding Opportunity Announcement
(FOA)link to *http://www.grants.gov/Apply* and follow the directions provided on that site. A one-time registration is required for institutions at: Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov/GetStarted* ). The application receipt date is July 15, 2008. Your organization will need to obtain a Data Universal Number System
(DUNS)number as part of the Grants.gov registration process. The DUNS number is a 9-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. The D&B number can be obtained by calling 866-705-5711 or through the Web site at *http://www.dnb.com/us.* The applicant must also register in the Central Contractor Registration
(CCR)database in order to be able to submit the application. Information about the CCR is available at *http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp.* VIII. Method of Application A. Submission Instructions The SF424
(5161)application has several components. Some components are required, others are optional. The forms package associated with this FOA in Grants.gov/APPLY includes all applicable components, required, and optional. B. Format for Application A completed application in response to this FOA includes the data in the following components: The face page of the application should indicate “Response to Food Protection Task Force Conference Grant Program RFA FD 08-006”. Applications should include the following:
(1)A title which has the term “state food protection task force meetings”, “conference”, “council”, “workshop”, “alliance” or other similar description to assist in the identification of the request;
(2)location of the conference;
(3)expected number of registrants and type of audience expected with their credentials;
(4)dates of conference(s);
(5)conference format and projected agenda(s), including list of principal areas or topics to be addressed;
(6)physical facilities required for the conduct of the meeting;
(7)justification of the conference(s), including the problems it intends to clarify and any developments it may stimulate;
(8)brief biographical sketches of individuals responsible for planning the conference(s) and details concerning adequate support staff;
(9)information about all related conferences held on this subject during the last 3 years (if available);
(10)details of proposed per diem/subsistence rates, transportation, printing, supplies and facility rental costs; and
(11)the necessary checklist and assurances pages provided in each application package. IX. Freedom of Information Data included in the application which have been specifically identified by the applicant as containing restricted and/or proprietary information may be entitled to confidential treatment as trade secret or confidential commercial information within the meaning of the Freedom of Information Act, (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), and FDA's implementing regulations (21 CFR 20.61). Dated: June 3, 2008. Jeffrey Shuren, Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning. [FR Doc. E8-13015 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; Comment Request; NIH-American Association for Retired Persons
(AARP)Comprehensive Lifestyle Interview by Computer
(CLIC)Study
(NCI)SUMMARY: 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 National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institutes of Health
(NIH)will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval. *Proposed Collection:* *Title:* NIH-American Association for Retired Persons
(AARP)Comprehensive Lifestyle Interview by Computer
(CLIC)Study. *Type of Information Collection Request:* New. *Need and Use of Information Collection:* The Nutritional Epidemiology Branch of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics of the National Cancer Institute has planned this study to evaluate the feasibility of using these three new computerized questionnaires as well as the Diet and Health Questionnaire (DHQ), a well-established food frequency questionnaire in a population of early-to-late-middle-aged men and women. Participants will be asked to complete one of four different series (pathways) of computerized questionnaires over a 90 day period, with some questionnaires in a series being completed twice. This evaluation study comprises the necessary performance and feasibility tests for the new computerized questionnaires, which will provide an opportunity to assess the possibility of administering computerized questionnaires in future large prospective cohort studies. The computerized questionnaires will support the ongoing examination between cancer and other health outcomes with nutritional, physical activity, and lifestyle exposures. The computerized questionnaires adhere to The Public Health Service Act, Section 412 (42 U.S.C. 285a-1) and Section 413 (42 U.S.C. 285a-2), which authorizes the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics of the National Cancer Institute
(NCI)to establish and support programs for the detection, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of cancer; and to collect, identify, analyze and disseminate information on cancer research, diagnosis, prevention and treatment. *Frequency of Response:* Either 2 or 4 times, depending on the pathway. *Affected Public:* Individuals. *Type of Respondents:* U.S. adults (aged 50 and over). The annual reporting burden is displayed in the table below. The estimated total annualized burden hours being requested is 2616. The annualized cost to respondents is estimated at: $46,242. There are no Capital Costs, Operating Costs, and/or Maintenance Costs to report. Table 1.—Estimates of Annual Burden Hours Type of respondents Instrument(s) tested Frequency of response Average time per response (minutes/hour) Number of respondents/pathway Annual hour burden Senior Adults Read Invitation 1 1/60 7500 125.000 Pre-Enrollment 1 10/60 1046 174.333 Enrollment Process 1 5/60 1035 86.250 Assigned Pathway 1 ACT-24 2 15/60 156 78.000 LHQ 1 20/60 156 52.000 DHQ 1 30/60 156 78.000 1 Web Re-entry 1 1/60 156 2.600 Assigned Pathway 2 ASA24 2 30/60 156 156.000 DHQ 1 30/60 156 78.000 LHQ 1 20/60 156 52.000 1 Web Re-Entry 1 1/60 156 2.600 Assigned Pathway 3 ACT-24 2 15/60 362 181.000 ASA24 2 30/60 362 362.000 LHQ 1 20/60 362 120.667 DHQ 1 30/60 362 181.000 1 Web Re-Entry * 1 1/60 362 6.033 Assigned Pathway 4 ACT-24 2 15/60 362 181.000 ASA24 2 30/60 362 362.000 LHQ 1 20/60 362 120.667 DHQ 1 30/60 362 181.000 3 Web Re-entries** 3 1/60 362 18.100 Evaluation Survey 1 1/60 1035 17.250 Totals 2615.50 *Request for Comments:* Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited on one or more of the following points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, contact Arthur Schatzkin, M.D., Dr.P.H, Chief, Nutritional Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS, Executive Plaza South, Room 3040, 6120 Executive Blvd., EPS-MSC 7242, Bethesda, MD 20892-7335 or call non-toll-free number 301-594-2931 or e-mail your request, including your address to: *schatzka@mail.nih.gov.* *Comments Due Date:* Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication. Dated: June 2, 2008. Vivian Horovitch-Kelley, NCI Project Clearance Liaison Office, National Institutes of Health. [FR Doc. E8-12920 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Prospective Grant of Exclusive License: Use of the Licensed Patent Rights To Develop Fully Human and/or Humanized Monoclonal Antibodies Against IGF-I and/or IGF-II for the Treatment of Human Cancers AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is notice, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR part 404.7(a)(1)(i), that the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, is contemplating the grant of an exclusive patent license to practice the inventions embodied in the following U.S. Patent Applications to Systems Medicine, Inc., which is located in Tucson, Arizona. 1. PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2006/031814 entitled “Human Monoclonal Antibodies that Specifically Bind IGF-II” [HHS Ref. Nos. E-217-2005/0, 1, and 2]; and 2. PCT Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/66180 entitled “Human IGF-I-Specific and IGF-I and IGF-II Cross-Reactive Human Monoclonal Antibodies” [HHS Ref. No. E-336-2005/0]. The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned to the United States of America. The prospective exclusive license territory may be worldwide and the field of use may be limited to the use of the antibodies and their method of use in the Licensed Patent Rights for the treatment of human cancers DATES: Only written comments and/or applications for a license which are received by the NIH Office of Technology Transfer on or before August 11, 2008 will be considered. ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the patent application, inquiries, comments, and other materials relating to the contemplated exclusive license should be directed to: Whitney Hastings, PhD, Technology Licensing Specialist, Office of Technology Transfer, National Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, MD 20852-3804; Telephone:
(301)451-7337; Facsimile:
(301)402-0220; E-mail: *hastingw@mail.nih.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The type 1 insulin-like growth factor
(IGF)receptor (IGF1R) is over-expressed by many tumors and mediates proliferation, motility, and protection from apoptosis. Agents that inhibit IGF1R expression or function can potentially block tumor growth and metastasis. Its major ligand, IGF-II, is over-expressed by multiple tumor types. Previous studies indicate that inhibition of IGF-II binding to its cognizant receptor negatively modulates signal transduction through the IGF pathway and concomitant cell growth. Therefore, use of humanized or fully human antibodies against IGFs represents a valid approach to inhibit tumor growth. The above identified patent applications relate to the identification of multiple, novel fully human monoclonal antibodies that are specific for IGF-II and do not cross-react with IGF-1 or insulin and identification and characterization of three
(3)novel fully human monoclonal antibodies designated m705, m706, and m708, which are specific for insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I. Two
(2)of the three
(3)antibodies, m705 and m706 are specific for IGF-I and do not cross react with IGF-II and insulin while, m708 cross reacts with IGF-II. These antibodies can be used to prevent binding of IGF-I to its concomitant receptor IGFIR, consequently, modulating diseases such as cancer. Additional embodiments describe methods for treating various human diseases associated with aberrant cell growth and motility including breast, prostate, and leukemia carcinomas. Thus, these novel antibodies may provide a therapeutic intervention for multiple carcinomas without the negative side effects associated with insulin inhibition. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless within sixty
(60)days from the date of this published notice, the NIH receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Applications for a license in the field of use filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license. Comments and objections submitted to this notice will not be made available for public inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. Dated: May 30, 2008. Steven M. Ferguson, Director, Division of Technology Development and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, National Institutes of Health. [FR Doc. E8-12925 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Office of the Director, Office of Biotechnology Activities; Recombinant DNA Research: Action Under the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules (NIH Guidelines) AGENCY: National Institutes of Health (NIH), DHHS. ACTION: Notice of a final action under the NIH Guidelines and notice of additions to Appendix D of the NIH Guidelines. SUMMARY: Proposal to conduct research involving the deliberate transfer of a drug resistance trait to a microorganism that causes disease in humans has been reviewed by the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee
(RAC)and approved by the NIH Director. DATES: The final action is effective April 7, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Background documentation and additional information can be obtained from the Office of Biotechnology Activities (OBA), National Institutes of Health, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 750, MSC 7985, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7985; e-mail at *oba@od.nih.gov* , or telephone at 301-496-9838. The NIH/OBA Web site is located at: *http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final action allows Dr. David Walker, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston to deliberately introduce a gene encoding chloramphenicol resistance into *Rickettsia conorii.* This approval is specific to Dr. Walker. His research with these resistant organisms may only occur under the conditions outlined below. It should be noted that any work involving the introduction of chloramphenicol resistance into *R. conorii* by other investigators would need to be reviewed by the RAC and specifically approved by the NIH Director. *Background Information and Response to Comments:* On July 24, 2007, background on the proposed action and information on how to submit public comment, was published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 40320). On September 17, 2007, and December 5, 2007, the RAC discussed this proposed action and a proposed action to allow the transfer of chloramphenicol resistance into *R. typhi.* The RAC reviewed the three public comments received regarding the transfer of chloramphenicol resistance to *R. conorii* and to *R. typhi.* The RAC unanimously recommended that the transfer of chloramphenicol resistance to *R. conorii* be approved at this time and the majority of the members present did not recommend the transfer of chloramphenicol resistance to *R. typhi.* On April 7, 2008, the NIH Director approved the transfer of chloramphenicol resistance to *R. conorii* with the following containment provisions/stipulations:
(1)Perform all research involving the introduction of chloramphenicol resistance into *Rickettsia conorii* at minimum biosafety level 3 (BL-3) containment. Access will therefore be restricted to well-trained personnel whose presence is required for the conduct of this work. In addition, there must be a standard training procedure to make sure that personnel are trained and training is ongoing.
(2)Maintain at least one back-up power source to insure computer based security remains in place at all times.
(3)Include a signature nucleic acid sequence (“bar-code”) to allow identification of laboratory-created (chloramphenicol resistant) strains.
(4)Incorporate the following elements into a health surveillance program for individuals working with chloramphenicol resistant *R. conorii* :
(a)Exclude those with a known allergy or sensitivity to tetracycline, and in particular doxycycline, from working with chloramphenicol resistant *R. conorii* ;
(b)Obtain and store a baseline blood sample from laboratory workers;
(c)Do not permit pregnant individuals to work in any laboratory in which chloramphenicol resistant rickettsia is being handled;
(d)Provide workers education on the possible clinical manifestations of a rickettsial laboratory acquired infection;
(e)Develop a medical card that would be carried by all laboratory workers that includes at a minimum the following:
(i)Identification of the organism to which the labworker has been exposed;
(ii)Identification of key personnel responsible for providing diagnosis and treatment;
(iii)A CDC telephone number for reporting the infection and obtaining treatment recommendations; and
(iv)A twenty-four hour contact number for the principal investigators.
(5)Have a detailed standard operating procedures outlining the specific steps to be taken in the case of a laboratory exposure or infection containing at a minimum:
(a)Identification of key personnel who would provide diagnostic testing and treatment; and
(b)Instructions on managing exposures or infections discovered during off hours (after close of business, holidays, weekends, etc.). *Additions to Appendix D of the NIH Guidelines:* In accordance with Section III-A of the NIH Guidelines, Appendix D of the NIH Guidelines will be modified as follows to reflect the recent approvals for the transfer of drug resistance traits to microorganisms. Specifically, Appendix D will be modified to include approval of experiments to be conducted by Dr. Daniel Rockey, Oregon State University and Dr. Walter Stamm, University of Washington in which tetracycline resistance will be transferred into *Chlamydia trachomatis* (72 FR 61661) and approval of the Dr. Walker's experiment to transfer chloramphenicol resistance to *Rickettsia conorii.* *Appendix D-116.* Dr. Daniel Rockey at Oregon State University and Dr. Walter Stamm at the University of Washington may conduct experiments to deliberately transfer a gene encoding tetracycline resistance from *Chlamydia suis* (a swine pathogen) into *C. trachomatis* (a human pathogen). This approval is specific to Drs. Rockey and Stamm and research with these resistant organisms may only occur under the conditions specified by the NIH Director. It should be noted that any work involving the introduction of tetracycline resistance into *C. trachomatis* by other investigators would need to be reviewed by the RAC and specifically approved by the NIH Director. This approval was effective as of September 24, 2007 (72 FR 61661). *Appendix D-117.* Dr. David Walker at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston may conduct experiments to deliberately introduce a gene encoding chloramphenicol resistance into *Rickettsia conorii.* This approval is specific to Dr. Walker and research with these resistant organisms may only occur under the conditions specified by the NIH Director. It should be noted that any work involving the introduction of chloramphenicol resistance into *R. conorii* by other investigators would need to be reviewed by the RAC and specifically approved by the NIH Director. This approval was effective as of April 7, 2008. Dated: June 3, 2008. Amy P. Patterson, Director, Office of Biotechnology Activities. [FR Doc. E8-12924 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary [DHS-2008-0052] Privacy Act of 1974; Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection—Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), Systems of Records AGENCY: Privacy Office; Office of the Secretary; DHS. ACTION: Notice of Privacy Act system of records. SUMMARY: To provide notice and transparency to the public, the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection announces a new Privacy Act system of records, the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, to collect and maintain a record of nonimmigrant aliens who want to travel to the United States under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP). This new system will determine whether the applicant is eligible to travel to the United States under the VWP by checking their information against various security and law enforcement databases. CBP is publishing a new system of records notice to permit the traveling public greater access to individual information and to provide a more complete understanding of how and where information pertaining to them is collected and maintained. DATES: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and (11), the public is given a 30-day period in which to comment on this notice; and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which has oversight responsibility under the Act, requires a 40-day period in which to conclude its review of the system. Therefore, the public, OMB, and Congress are invited to submit comments by July 21, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DHS-2008-0052 by one of the following methods: • *Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 1-866-466-5370. • *Mail:* Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528. • *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided. • *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions please contact: Laurence E. Castelli (202-572-8790), Chief, Privacy Act Policy and Procedures Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of International Trade, Regulations & Rulings, Mint Annex, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20229. For privacy issues contact: Hugo Teufel III (703-235-0780), Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The priority mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)is to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the country while facilitating legitimate travel and trade. Upon arrival in the United States, all individuals crossing the border are required to clear CBP. As part of this clearance process, CBP reserves the right to verify the identity, nationality, and determine admissibility of persons traveling to the United States and to create records to assist in this process. Similarly, CBP has authority to keep records of departures from the United States. CBP does not require that qualifying nationals of countries participating in the VWP present a visa upon their application for admission at a United States port of entry as a nonimmigrant visitor for a period of 90 days or less. As required by Section 711 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act), DHS/CBP will be implementing an Electronic System for Travel Authorization
(ESTA)in order to determine, in advance of departure, whether a traveler is eligible to travel to the United States under the VWP and whether such travel poses a law enforcement or security risk. Applicants under this program will electronically provide information via an online application prior to traveling to the United States by air or sea. ESTA will store that information in an account. The individual will have the opportunity to verify the accuracy of the information entered in ESTA during the application process and before the application is submitted through ESTA. Applicants will be given a tracking number which, combined with some personal information already provided to the system, will allow the applicant to submit updates to data elements that do not affect their admissibility, or apply for a new ESTA. Once an applicant has submitted the required information to ESTA, the information supplied by the applicant will be used to automatically query terrorist and law enforcement databases to determine whether the applicant is eligible to travel to the United States under the VWP. When possible matches to derogatory information are found, applications will be vetted through normal CBP procedures. During this time, the applicant will receive a “pending” status. If the applicant is cleared to travel under the VWP, he or she will receive an “authorized to travel” status via the ESTA Web site. If the applicant is not cleared for travel, the applicant will receive a “not authorized to travel” status and be directed to the State Department Web site to obtain information on how to apply for a visa at a U.S. consulate or embassy. The Department of State will have access to the information supplied by the applicant and the ESTA results to assist in determining whether to issue a visa. Carriers, when querying the applicant through the Advance Passenger Information System/APIS Quick Query (APIS/AQQ) system to determine whether a boarding pass should be issued, will be notified whether the applicant traveler has been authorized to travel, not authorized to travel, pending, or has not applied for an ESTA. VWP travelers must have an authorized ESTA or a visa to be issued a boarding pass. In conjunction with CBP's final rule “Advance Electronic Transmission of Passenger and Crew Member Manifests for Commercial Aircraft and Vessels,” which was published in the **Federal Register** on August 23, 2007 (and became effective on February 19, 2008), DHS has been coordinating with commercial aircraft and commercial vessel carriers on the development and implementation of messaging capabilities for passenger data transmissions that will enable DHS to provide the carriers with messages pertaining to a passenger's boarding status. A prospective VWP traveler's ESTA status is a component of a passenger's boarding status that has been introduced into the plans for implementing messaging capabilities between DHS and the carriers. The development and implementation of the ESTA program will eventually allow DHS to eliminate the requirement that VWP travelers complete an I-94W prior to being admitted to the United States. Upon ESTA becoming mandatory, a VWP traveler with valid ESTA will not be required to complete the paper Form I-94W when arriving on a carrier that is capable of receiving and validating messages pertaining to the traveler's ESTA status as part of the traveler's boarding status. Consistent with DHS's information sharing mission, information stored in the ESTA may be shared with other DHS components, as well as appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies. This sharing will only take place after DHS determines that the receiving component or agency has a need to know the information to carry out national security, law enforcement, immigration, intelligence, or other functions consistent with the routine uses set forth in this system of records notice. II. Privacy Act The Privacy Act embodies fair information principles in a statutory framework governing the means by which the United States Government collects, maintains, uses, and disseminates individuals' records. The Privacy Act applies to information that is maintained in a “system of records.” A “system of records” is a group of any records under the control of an agency for which information is retrieved by the name of an individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual. In the Privacy Act, an individual is defined to encompass United States citizens and legal permanent residents. As a matter of policy, DHS extends administrative Privacy Act protections to all individuals where systems of records maintain information on U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, and visitors. Individuals may request access to their own records that are maintained in a system of records in the possession or under the control of DHS by complying with DHS Privacy Act regulations, 6 CFR Part 5. The Privacy Act requires each agency to publish in the **Federal Register** a description denoting the type and character of each system of records that the agency maintains, and the routine uses that are contained in each system to make agency record keeping practices transparent, to notify individuals regarding the uses to which their records are put, and to assist individuals to more easily find such files within the agency. Below is the description of the ESTA system of records. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), DHS has provided a report of this new system/system change to the Office of Management and Budget and to Congress. SYSTEM OF RECORDS: DHS/CBP-009. SYSTEM NAME: Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA). SYSTEM CLASSIFICATION: Unclassified. SYSTEM LOCATION: This computer database is located at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)National Data Center. Computer terminals are located at customhouses, border ports of entry, airport inspection facilities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security and other locations at which DHS authorized personnel may be posted to facilitate DHS's mission. Terminals may also be located at appropriate facilities for other participating government agencies, which have obtained system access pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: Individuals covered by ESTA consist of foreign nationals from VWP countries who are seeking to enter the United States by air or sea under the VWP. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), title 8 of the United States Code, these persons are required to report their arrival and departure to and from the United States. This system only collects information pertaining to persons in non-immigrant status, that is, persons who are not covered by the protections of the Privacy Act at the time they provide their information. However, given the importance of providing privacy protections to international travelers, DHS has decided to apply the privacy protections and safeguards outlined in this notice to all international travelers subject to ESTA. CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: • Full Name (First, Middle, and Last) • Date of birth • Gender • E-mail address • Phone Number • Travel document type ( *e.g.* , passport), number, issuance date, expiration date and issuing country • Country of Citizenship • Date of crossing • Airline and Flight Number • City of Embarkation • Address while visiting the United States (Number, Street, City, State) • Whether the individual has a communicable disease, physical or mental disorder, or is a drug abuser or addict • Whether the individual has been arrested or convicted for a moral turpitude crime, drugs, or has been sentenced for a period longer than five years • Whether the individual has engaged in espionage, sabotage, terrorism or Nazi activity between 1933 and 1945 • Whether the individual is seeking work in the U.S. • Whether the individual has been excluded or deported, or attempted to obtain a visa or enter U.S. by fraud or misrepresentation • Whether the individual has ever detained, retained, or withheld custody of a child from a U.S. citizen granted custody of the child • Whether the individual has ever been denied a U.S. visa or entry into the U.S., or had a visa cancelled. (If yes, when and where) • Whether the individual has ever asserted immunity from prosecution • Any change of address while in the U.S. • ESTA Tracking Number AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: The Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296; 5 U.S.C. 301 and Section 711 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act), (Pub. L. 110-53). PURPOSE:
(1)To create a system where foreign nationals of VWP countries may apply for and secure advance authorization to travel to the United States under the VWP;
(2)to afford DHS the opportunity to fully screen
(vet)the applicant before granting the authorization to travel to the United States under the VWP. ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, all or a portion of the records or information contained in this system may be disclosed to authorized entities, as is determined to be relevant and necessary, outside DHS as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows: A. To an agency, organization, or individual for the purpose of performing audit or oversight operations as authorized by law, but only such information as is necessary and relevant to such audit or oversight function; B. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when
(1)DHS suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of information in the system of records has been compromised;
(2)the Department has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by the Department or another agency or entity) or to the individual that rely upon the compromised information; and
(3)the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the Department's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm; C. To a Congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from that Congressional office made at the request of the individual to whom the record pertains. D. To contractors, grantees, experts, consultants, and the agents thereof, and others performing or working on a contract, service, grant, cooperative agreement, or other assignment for DHS, when necessary to accomplish an agency function related to this system of records. Individuals provided information under this routine use are subject to the same Privacy Act requirements and limitations on disclosure as are applicable to DHS officers and employees; E. To appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, or foreign governmental agencies or multilateral governmental organizations for the purpose of protecting the vital health interests of a data subject or other persons ( *e.g.* to assist such agencies or organizations in preventing exposure to or transmission of a communicable or quarantinable disease or to combat other significant public health threats; appropriate notice will be provided of any identified health threat or risk); F. To third parties during the course of a law enforcement investigation to the extent necessary to obtain information pertinent to the investigation, provided disclosure is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the officer making the disclosure. G. To appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, or foreign governmental agencies or multilateral governmental organizations responsible for investigating or prosecuting the violations of, or for enforcing or implementing, a statute, rule, regulation, order, license, or treaty where DHS determines that the information would assist in the enforcement of civil or criminal laws; H. To an appropriate Federal, State, tribal, local, international, or foreign law enforcement agency or other appropriate authority charged with investigating or prosecuting a violation or enforcing or implementing a law, rule, regulation, or order, where a record, either on its face or in conjunction with other information, indicates a violation or potential violation of law, which includes criminal, civil, or regulatory violations and such disclosure is proper and consistent with the official duties of the person making the disclosure; I. To the Department of Justice (including U.S. Attorney offices) or other Federal agencies conducting litigation or in proceedings before any court, adjudicative or administrative body, when it is necessary to the litigation and one of the following is a party to the litigation or has an interest in such litigation :
(a)DHS or any component thereof, or
(b)any employee of DHS in his/her official capacity, or
(c)any employee of DHS in his/her individual capacity where DOJ or DHS has agreed to represent the employee, or
(d)the United States or any agency thereof, is a party to the litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and DHS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation and the use of such records is compatible with the purpose for which DHS collected the records. J. To the National Archives and Records Administration or other Federal government agencies pursuant to records management inspections being conducted under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906; K. To a Federal, State, tribal, local, international, or foreign government agency or entity for the purpose of consulting with that agency or entity:
(1)To assist in making a determination regarding redress for an individual in connection with the operations of a DHS component or program;
(2)for the purpose of verifying the identity of an individual seeking redress in connection with the operations of a DHS component or program; or
(3)for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of information submitted by an individual who has requested such redress on behalf of another individual; L. To Federal and foreign government intelligence or counterterrorism agencies when DHS reasonably believes there to be a threat or potential threat to national or international security for which the information may be useful in countering the threat or potential threat, when DHS reasonably believes such use is to assist in anti-terrorism efforts, and disclosure is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the person making the disclosure; M. To the Department of State in the processing of petitions or applications for benefits under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and all other immigration and nationality laws including treaties and reciprocal agreements; N. To an organization or individual in either the public or private sector, either foreign or domestic, where there is a reason to believe that the recipient is or could become the target of a particular terrorist activity or conspiracy, to the extent the information is relevant to the protection of life or property and disclosure is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the person making the disclosure; O. To the carrier transporting an individual to the United States, but only to the extent that CBP provides information that the individual is authorized to travel, not authorized to travel, pending, has not applied. Disclosure to consumer reporting agencies: None. POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: STORAGE: The data is stored electronically at the CBP Data Center for current data and offsite at an alternative data storage facility for historical logs and system backups. Applicants who submit their information online through ESTA will have their information stored in online accounts. RETRIEVABILITY: These records may be searched by any of the data elements supplied by the applicant. An admission number, issued at each entry to the United States to track the particular admission, may also be used to identify a database record. ESTA will not allow applicants to retrieve directly any information from the system, except for their ESTA determination (authorized to travel, not authorized to travel, pending), but will allow the applicant to submit limited updates to data elements that do not affect their admissibility. SAFEGUARDS: All ESTA records are protected from unauthorized access through appropriate administrative, physical, and technical safeguards. These safeguards include all of the following: restricting access to those with a “need to know”; using locks, alarm devices, and passwords; compartmentalizing databases; auditing software; and encrypting data communications. ESTA information is secured in full compliance with the requirements of the DHS IT Security Program Handbook. This handbook establishes a comprehensive program, consistent with federal law and policy, to provide complete information security, including directives on roles and responsibilities, management policies, operational policies, and application rules, which will be applied to component systems, communications between component systems, and at interfaces between component systems and external systems. One aspect of the DHS comprehensive program to provide information security involves the establishment of rules of behavior for each major application, including ESTA. These rules of behavior require users to be adequately trained regarding the security of their systems. These rules also require a periodic assessment of technical, administrative and managerial controls to enhance data integrity and accountability. System users must sign statements acknowledging that they have been trained and understand the security aspects of their systems. System users must also complete annual privacy awareness training to maintain current access. ESTA transactions are tracked and can be monitored. This allows for oversight and audit capabilities to ensure that the data is being handled consistent with all applicable federal laws and regulations regarding privacy and data integrity. Data exchange, which will take place over an encrypted network between the applicant or a third party submitter on behalf of the applicant, CBP, the carrier industry, Department of State, and other DHS components that have access to the ESTA data, is limited and confined only to those entities that have a need for the data in the performance of official duties. These encrypted networks comply with standards set forth in the Interconnection Security Agreements required to be executed prior to external access to a CBP computer system. For applicants submitting information to ESTA, access is limited to the online application and the applicant's ESTA determination (authorized to travel, not authorized to travel, pending). Applicants under ESTA do not have access to any other portions of ESTA. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: Information submitted to ESTA generally expires and is deemed “inactive” two years after the last submission or change in information by the applicant. In the event that a traveler's passport remains valid for less than two years from the date of the ESTA approval, the ESTA will expire concurrently with the passport. Information in ESTA will be retained for one year after the ESTA expires. After this period, the inactive account information will be purged from online access and archived for 12 years. Data linked, at any time during the 15 year retention period (3 years active, 12 years archived), to active law enforcement lookout records, CBP matches to enforcement activities, and/or investigations or cases, including applications for ESTA that are denied, will remain accessible for the life of the law enforcement activities to which they may become related. NARA guidelines for retention and archiving of data will apply to ESTA and CBP is in negotiation with NARA for approval of the ESTA data retention and archiving plan. The ESTA will over time replace the paper I-94W form. In those instances where an ESTA is then used in lieu of a paper I-94W, the ESTA will be maintained in accordance with the retention schedule for I-94W, which is 75 years. I-94W and I-94 data are maintained for this period of time in order to ensure that the information related to a particular admission to the United States is available for providing any applicable benefits related to immigration or other enforcement purposes. SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: Director, Office of Automated Systems, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Headquarters, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20229. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES: DHS allows persons (including foreign nationals) to seek administrative access under the Privacy Act to information maintained in ESTA. To determine whether ESTA contains records relating to you, write to the CBP Customer Service Center (Rosslyn VA), 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20229; Telephone
(877)227-5511; or through the “Questions” tab at *http://www.cbp.gov.xp.cgov/travel/customerservice.* RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: Requests for notification or access must be in writing and should be addressed to the Customer Service Center, OPA—CSC—Rosslyn, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20229. Requests should conform to the requirements of 6 CFR Part 5, Subpart B, which provides the rules for requesting access to Privacy Act records maintained by DHS and can be found at *http://www.dhs.gov.* The envelope and letter should be clearly marked “Privacy Act Access Request.” The request should include a general description of the records sought and must include the requester's full name, current address, and date and place of birth. The request must be signed and either notarized or submitted under penalty of perjury. Individuals may seek redress through the DHS Traveler Redress Program (“TRIP”) (See 72 FR 2294, dated January 18, 2007). Individuals who, for example, believe they have been improperly denied entry, refused boarding for transportation, or identified for additional screening by a DHS component may submit a redress request through the TRIP. TRIP is a single point of contact for individuals who have inquiries or seek resolution regarding difficulties they experienced during their travel screening at transportation hubs such as airports and train stations or when crossing U.S. borders. Through TRIP, a traveler can correct erroneous information stored in DHS databases through one application. Redress requests should be sent to: DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP), 601 South 12th Street, TSA-901, Arlington, VA 22202-4220 or online at *http://www.dhs.gov/trip.* CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: See the “Record Access Procedures” above. RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: The system obtains information from the online ESTA application submitted by the applicant. This information is processed by the Automated Targeting System
(ATS)(to screen for terrorists or threats to aviation and border security) and the Treasury Enforcement Communications System
(TECS)(for matches to persons identified to be of law enforcement interest), and result of “authorized to travel”, “not authorized to travel”, or “pending” is maintained in ESTA. “Pending” will be resolved to “authorized to travel” or “not authorized to travel” based on further research by the CBP. EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: No exemption shall be asserted with respect to information maintained in the system as it relates to data submitted by or on behalf of a person who travels to visit the United States and crosses the border, nor shall an exemption be asserted with respect to the resulting determination (authorized to travel, pending, or not authorized to travel). Information in the system may be shared with law enforcement and/or intelligence agencies pursuant to the above routine uses. The Privacy Act requires DHS to maintain an accounting of the disclosures made pursuant to all routines uses. Disclosing the fact that a law enforcement or intelligence agencies has sought particular records may affect ongoing law enforcement or intelligence activity. As such pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552 a (j)(2) and (k)(2), DHS will claim exemption from (c)(3), (e)(8), and
(g)of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, as is necessary and appropriate to protect this information. Dated: June 2, 2008. Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E8-12789 Filed 6-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Report of Diversion AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing information collection: 1651-0025; proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Report of Diversion. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15767) on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Report of Diversion. *OMB Number:* 1651-0025. *Form Number:* Form CBP-26. *Abstract:* CBP uses Form-26 to track vessels traveling coastwise from U.S ports to other U.S. ports when a change occurs in scheduled itineraries. This is required for enforcement of the Jones Act (46 U.S.C. App. 883) and for continuity of vessel manifest information and permits to proceed actions. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 2800. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 233. If additional information is required contact: Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2008. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-12933 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Documentation Requirements for Articles Entered Under Special Tariff Treatment Provisions AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing information collection: 1651-0067. Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Documentation Requirements for Articles Entered Under Special Tariff Treatment Provisions. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15762-15763) on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components' estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Documentation Requirements for Articles Entered Under Various Special Tariff Treatment Provisions. *OMB Number:* 1651-0067. *Form Number:* N/A. *Abstract:* This collection is used to ensure that certain imported merchandise is eligible for reduced duty treatment under provisions of Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 19,433. *Estimated Time per Respondent:* 45 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 14,575. If additional information is required contact: Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2008. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-12950 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Permit To Transfer Containers to a Container Station AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing information collection: 1651-0049. Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Permit to Transfer Containers to a Container Station. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15765) on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of The proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Permit to Transfer Containers to a Container Station. *OMB Number:* 1651-0049. *Form Number:* N/A. *Abstract:* This information collection is needed in order for a container station operator to receive a permit to transfer a container to a container station. In addition, the station operator must furnish a list of names, addresses, etc., of the persons they employ if requested by CBP officials. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 350. *Estimated Number of Annual Responses:* 1,400. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 20 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 466. If additional information is required contact: Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2008. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-12952 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Automated Clearinghouse Credit AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing information collection: 1651-0078. Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Automated Clearinghouse Credit. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15765) on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of The proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Automated Clearinghouse Credit. *OMB Number:* 1651-0078. *Form Number:* N/A. *Abstract:* The information is to be used by CBP to send information to the company (such as revised format requirements) and to contact participating companies if there is a payment problem. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 65 *Estimated Total Annual Responses:* 3000. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 249. If additional information is required contact: Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2008. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-12954 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Alien Crewman Landing Permit AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing information collection: 1651-0114; Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Alien Crewman Landing Permit (Form I-95). This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15761-15762) on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Alien Crewman Landing Permit. *OMB Number:* 1651-0114. *Form Number:* I-95. *Abstract:* This collection of information is used by CBP to document conditions and limitations imposed upon an alien crewman applying for benefits under Section 251 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Individuals. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 433,000. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 35,939. If additional information is required contact: Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2008. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-12959 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Application of Waiver of Passport or Visa AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing information collection: 1651-0107; Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Application for Waiver of Passport or Visa (Form I-193). This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15763) on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa. *OMB Number:* 1651-0107. *Form Number:* I-193. *Abstract:* This information collection is used by CBP to determine an applicant's eligibility to enter the United States. This form is used by aliens who wish to waive the documentary requirements for passports and/or visas due to an unforeseen emergency. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Individuals. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 25,000. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 10 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 4,150. If additional information is required contact: Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2008. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-12977 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP Dec. 08-19] Bonds; Approval To Use Authorized Facsimile Signatures and Seals The use of facsimile signatures and seals on U. S. Customs and Border Protection bonds by the following corporate surety has been approved effective this date. The Guarantee Company of North America USA Authorized facsimile signatures on file for: Jennifer E. Rome, Attorney-in-fact; Maya Mackey, Attorney-in-fact; Paul D. Amstutz, Attorney-in-fact; Janet M. Ciesko, Attorney-in-fact. The corporate surety has provided U.S. Customs and Border Protection with a copy of the signatures to be used, a copy of the corporate seal, and a copy of the corporate resolution agreeing to be bound by the facsimile signatures and seal. This approval is without prejudice to the surety's right to affix signatures and seals manually. Dated: June 4, 2008. William G. Rosoff, Chief, Entry Process and Duty Refunds Branch. [FR Doc. E8-12957 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5187-N-38] Annual Adjustment Factor
(AAF)Rent Increase Requirement AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal. Owners of project-based section 8 contracts that utilize the AAF as the method of rent adjustment provide this information which is necessary to determine whether or not the subject properties' rents are to be adjusted and, if so, the amount of the adjustment. DATES: *Comments Due Date:* July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB approval Number (2502-0507) and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-6974. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lillian Deitzer, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; e-mail Lillian Deitzer at *Lillian_L_Deitzer@HUD.gov* or telephone
(202)402-8048. This is not a toll-free number. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Deitzer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice informs the public that the Department of Housing and Urban Development has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the Information collection described below. This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. This Notice Also Lists the Following Information *Title of Proposal:* Annual Adjustment Factor
(AAF)Rent Increase Requirement. *OMB Approval Number:* 2502-0507. *Form Numbers:* HUD-92273-S8. *Description of the Need for the Information and its Proposed Use:* Owners of project-based section 8 contracts that utilize the AAF as the method of rent adjustment provide this information which is necessary to determine whether or not the subject properties' rents are to be adjusted and, if so, the amount of the adjustment. *Frequency of Submission:* Annually. Number of respondents Annual responses × Hours per response = Burden hours Reporting Burden 4,287 0.142 1.5 918 *Total Estimated Urden Hours:* 918. *Status:* Extension of a currently approved collection. Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as amended. Dated: June 3, 2008. Lillian L. Deitzer, Departmental Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E8-12886 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-ES-2008-N0106; 1112-0000-81420-F2] Habitat Conservation Plan for South Sacramento, Sacramento County, CA AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) and notice of public scoping meetings. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)we, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), advise the public that we intend to gather information necessary to prepare, in coordination with the County of Sacramento (the County), a joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR). The EIS/EIR will analyze the environmental effects of the Service's proposed issuance of an incidental take permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (ESA), for a habitat conservation plan
(HCP)within a portion of south Sacramento County, California. The County, along with their local partners (the cities of Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova, Galt, the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District, and the Sacramento County Water Agency), is facilitating the preparation of the South Sacramento HCP (SSHCP) in compliance with section 10(a)(2) of the ESA. The County and their local partners intend to apply to the Service for a 30-year permit that would authorized the incidental take of 40 species due to ground-disturbing private activities implemented under the SSHCP. The County, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)and with 40 CFR 1506.6(b)(3), has published a similar notice of preparation for this EIS/EIR with the State Clearinghouse. We provide this notice to
(1)Describe the proposed action and possible alternatives;
(2)announce the initiation of a public scoping period, including when and where scoping meetings will be held;
(3)advise other interested Federal, State, and local agencies, affected Tribes, and the public of our intent to prepare an EIS/EIR and invite their participation in the scoping process and;
(4)obtain suggestions, comments, and useful information from interested parties and other agencies on the range of actions, the significant issues, range of alternatives, and impacts to be considered in the EIS/EIR document. We invite written comments on this notice from any interested party. DATES: Submit written comments on or before July 30, 2008. Four public scoping meeting will be held on: 1. Tuesday, July 8, 2008, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Galt, CA. 2. Friday, July 11, 2008, from 10 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., Sacramento, CA. 3. Tuesday, July 15, 2008, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Rancho Cordova, CA. 4. Wednesday, July 16, 2008, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Elk Grove, CA. ADDRESSES: The public meetings will be held at the following locations: 1. Tuesday, July 8, 2008, at the Anthony Pescetti Community Room, Galt Police Facility, 455 Industrial Drive, Galt, CA 95632. 2. Friday, July 11, 2008, at the Sixth Floor Meeting Room, Sacramento County Administration Building, 700 H Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. 3. Tuesday, July 15, 2008, at the American River Room, Rancho Cordova City Hall, 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670. 4. Wednesday, July 16, 2008, at the City Council Chambers, Elk Grove City Hall, 8400 Laguna Palms Way, Elk Grove, CA 95758. Submit written comments to Nina Bicknese, Conservation Planning Branch, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825. Comments may also be sent by facsimile to
(916)414-6713. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nina Bicknese, Senior Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office at
(916)414-6600. Additional details of the County's proposed South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan are available at *http://www.planning.saccounty.net/habitat-conservation/overview/html.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Reasonable Accommodation Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and participate in a public meeting should contact Nina Bicknese at
(916)414-6600 as soon as possible. In order to allow sufficient time to process requests, please call no later than one week before the public meeting. Information regarding this proposed action is available in alternative formats upon request. Background The County and their local partners anticipate that landowners and individuals will continue to request their discretionary or ministerial approval of ground-disturbing land development projects in portions of south Sacramento County where species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA are present. The County and their local partners intend to apply for a permit from the Service for the incidental take of listed species resulting from their approval of otherwise lawful land-use changes within portions of south Sacramento County over the next 30 years. Pursuant to the ESA and federal regulations governing incidental take permits (ITPs), the County and their local partners are in the process of preparing a habitat conservation plan titled South Sacramento HCP (SSHCP). Development of the SSHCP involved a public process that has included open meetings of a stakeholder Steering Committee. Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1538) and Federal regulations (50 CFR 17.21 and 17.31) prohibit the “take” of wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened. The term “take” means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed species, or to attempt to engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1532). “Harm” in the definition of “take” includes significant habitat modifications or degradations (50 CFR 17.3). Pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, the Service may permit authorized take of species other wise prohibited by Section 9 of the ESA if such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity (16 U.S.C. 1539). Federal regulations governing ITPs for threatened and endangered wildlife species, respectively, are promulgated in 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22 and in Section 10(a)(2) of the ESA. Pursuant to these regulations, no permit authorizing incidental take may be issued unless the applicant prepares a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). An HCP must include: a description of the activities sought to be authorized; the names of the species sought to be covered by the ITP; the impacts that will likely result from the proposed taking; steps the applicant will take to minimize and mitigate such taking to the maximum extent practicable; the funding that will be available to implement such steps; biological goals and objectives; a monitoring plan; an adaptive management plan; alternatives to the proposed taking the applicant considered and reasons why such alternatives are not proposed for implementation; other measures that may be necessary or appropriate for the purposes of the HCP; and the procedures the applicant will use to deal with unforeseen circumstances over the term of the ITP. The SSHCP Planning Area—the area in which all impacts would be evaluated and all conservation actions will be implemented—is approximately 341,000-acres within south Sacramento County. The approximate geographical boundary of the SSHCP Planning Area is the area bound by U.S. Highway 50 in the north, the county line dividing Sacramento County with San Joaquin County on the south, the county line dividing Sacramento County with Amador and El Dorado counties in the east, and Interstate 5 on the west. The SSHCP's 341,000-acre Planning Area includes a 123,000-acre Urban Development Area
(UDA)where most ground-disturbing development and infrastructure projects would be approved by the County and its local partners over the next 30 years. The 123,000-acre UDA includes lands within Sacramento County's Urban Service Boundary, lands within the city limits of Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove, and Galt, and lands within Galt's adopted sphere of influence area. The County and its partners propose that approximately 43,500 acres within the 123,000-acre UDA would be developed or otherwise disturbed, while approximately 8,000 acres of the UDA would be permanently preserved or restored. The County and its partners also propose that approximately 40,500 acres of the Planning Area outside the UDA would be permanently preserved or restored, and only approximately 2,000 acres of the Planning Area outside the UDA would be developed or otherwise disturbed. The species proposed for coverage in the SSHCP are those that occur within the SSHCP Planning Area and are currently listed as federally threatened or endangered, or that may become federally listed during the term of the proposed permit. The County intends to request an ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit to authorize the incidental take of 40 species (7 federally listed and 33 unlisted). The proposed SSHCP would provide for the long-term conservation and management of these 40 covered-species and their habitats within the SSHCP Planning Area. Species may be added or deleted during the course of the SSHCP development based on public comment, new information, further analysis, and agency consultation. Listed animal species proposed to be covered under the SSHCP permit are the federally-endangered vernal pool tadpole shrimp ( *Lepidurus packardi* ), the federally-threatened California tiger salamander ( *Ambystoma californiense* ), the federally-threatened giant garter snake ( *Thamnophis gigas* ), the federally-threatened valley elderberry longhorn beetle ( *Desmocerus californicus dimorphus* ), and the federally-threatened vernal pool fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta lynchi* ). Listed plant species proposed to be covered are the federally endangered Sacramento Orcutt grass ( *Orcuttia viscida* ) and the federally endangered slender Orcutt grass ( *Orcuttia tenuis* ). The 33 unlisted species (27 animal and 6 plant species) proposed to be covered under the SSHCP permit are the mid-valley fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta mesovallensis* ), Ricksecker's water scavenger beetle ( *Hydrochara rickseckeri* ), western pond turtle (2 sub-species) ( *Actinemys marmorata marmorata* and *Actinemys marmorata pallida* ), western spadefoot toad ( *Scaphiopus hammondii* ), the white-tailed kite ( *Elanus leucurus* ), Cooper's hawk ( *Accipiter cooperii* ), the ferruginous hawk (wintering) ( *Buteo regalis* ), golden eagle ( *Aquila chrysaetos* ), the state-threatened Swainson's hawk ( *Buteo swainsoni* ), bald eagle ( *Haliaeetus leucocephalus* ), loggerhead shrike ( *Lanius ludovicianus* ), northern harrier (nesting) ( *Circus cyaneus* ), sharp-shinned hawk ( *Accipiter striatus* ), the state-endangered American peregrine falcon (wintering) ( *Falco peregrinus anatum* ), tricolored blackbird (nesting) ( *Agelaius tricolor* ), western burrowing owl ( *Athene cunicularia hypugaea* ), long-eared owl ( *Asio otus* ), merlin ( *Falco columbarius* ), short-eared owl ( *Asio flammeus* ), white-faced ibis ( *Plegadis chihi* ), yellow breasted chat ( *Icteria virens* ) the state-threatened greater sandhill crane ( *Grus canadensis tabida* ), American badger ( *Taxidae taxus* ), pallid bat ( *Antrozous pallidus* ), ringtail ( *Bassariscus astutas* ), western red bat ( *Lasirus blossevilli* ),Yuma myotis bat ( *Myotis yumanensis* ), Ahart's dwarf rush ( *Juncus leiospermus* var. *ahartii* ), dwarf downingia ( *Downingia pusilla* ), legenere ( *Legenere limosa* ), pincushion navarretia ( *Navarretia myersii* ), Sanford's arrowhead ( *Sagittaria sanfordii* ) and the state-endangered Bogg's Lake hedge-hyssop ( *Gratiola heterosepala* ). Should any of these unlisted covered-species become listed under the ESA during the term of the permit, take authorization for those species would become effective upon listing. The County proposes to include 8 plant species (2 listed and 6 unlisted) in the SSHCP. The ESA does not prohibit the incidental take of federally listed plants on private lands unless the take is a violation of state law or regulation. We propose to include these plant species on the ITP in recognition of the conservation benefits that would be provided for these plant species under the SSHCP and to meet regulatory obligations under Section 7 of the ESA and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). All wildlife and plant species included on the proposed ITP would receive assurances under the Service's “No Surprises” regulations found in 50 CFR 17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5). The activities proposed for coverage in the SSHCP are wide-ranging, but are generally related to urban-suburban development on city and unincorporated lands. Proposed covered-activities presently include the construction, installation, extension, or removal of:
(1)Private and commercial developments,
(2)transportation facilities,
(3)surface water and groundwater supply and delivery facilities,
(4)water treatment facilities,
(5)flood control facilities,
(6)sanitation facilities (landfills, transfer stations, recycling stations),
(7)public facilities (fire stations, police stations, hospitals, schools, community centers, cemeteries, and administration centers),
(8)outdoor and indoor recreation facilities,
(9)utility facilities,
(10)aggregate mining activities, and
(11)conservation activities (habitat restoration, creation, and enhancement; preserve management and monitoring). These covered activities are expected to impact 18 existing habitat and agricultural land-cover types within the 341,000-acre Planning Area. Approximately 43,500 acres of the existing natural habitat and agricultural land-cover in the Planning Area would be converted to a developed condition under the proposed SSHCP. The proposed SSHCP Conservation Strategy would provide a regional approach for the conservation of the 40 covered-species and their 18 habitat types so as to aid recovery of the species and to minimize and mitigate impacts of the covered activities on the species and their habitats within the Planning Area. The 18 species habitat types include vernal pools and associated uplands, valley grasslands, other wetlands, woodlands, riparian habitats, and several agricultural land-cover types. The proposed SSHCP Conservation Strategy would protect a total of approximately 47,000 acres and restore or create a total of approximately 1,500 acres within the 341,000-acre Planning Area. The SSHCP Planning Area would be divided into a system of 12 conservation zones with an explicit amount of species habitat preservation directed to specific zones. The County and its partners anticipate that large landscape preserves and linkage corridors would be established outside of the UDA, and that these habitat preserves would be established within a matrix of open space and agricultural land uses. The proposed Conservation Strategy also includes approximately 8,000 acres of habitat preserves within the UDA, but these UDA habitat preserves would be much smaller and would eventually be surrounded by urban or suburban development. Components of the proposed SSHCP conservation program are now under consideration by the Service and the County. These components may include monitoring, adaptive management, species avoidance measures, and species mitigation measures including the preservation, restoration, and enhancement of suitable habitat. It is anticipated the SSHCP would be implemented through a section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit and an Implementation Agreement. Environmental Impact Statement/Report The proposed EIS/EIR will consider
(1)The proposed action (i.e. the Service issues an ITP for the SSHCP proposed by the County and its partners),
(2)a no-action alternative (i.e. the Service does not issue an ITP and a SSHCP is not implemented) and,
(3)reasonable alternatives to the proposed action (i.e. the Service considers alternative versions of the SSHCP, and then permits alternative). We anticipate that several alternatives will be developed for analysis in the EIS/EIR. These alternatives might vary by the number of covered species; the covered activities, different strategies for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating the impacts of incidental take; the amount of land preserved or restored, the type of future conservation efforts; or a combination of these factors. A detailed description of all reasonable alternatives, including the proposed action, will be included in the EIS/EIR. The EIS/EIR will analyze in depth all significant environmental issues identified through this scoping process. These issues may include biological resources, agricultural resources, land use, housing, hydrology and water resources, cultural resources, aesthetics, transportation and circulation, mineral resources, recreation, air quality, noise and vibration, or other components of the human environment that could be directly, indirectly, or cumulatively impacted by the proposed action or by the alternatives. We anticipate that a draft EIS/EIR and the draft SSHCP will be available in late 2009 and will have a 60-day public review period. The environmental review of the EIS/EIR will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), other applicable regulations, and Service policy and guidance on compliance with those regulations. We expect to complete the final EIS/EIR in the middle of 2010 and to make the decision on issuing a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for a SSHCP in late 2010. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) will be a NEPA Cooperating Agency on the proposed EIS/EIR pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.6, 1506.3(c), and 1508.5. The County and their partners expect to apply to the Corps for a Programmatic General Permit
(PGP)under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Section 404 of the CWA regulates and requires Corps authorizations for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. A PGP is among the types of general permits which can be issued for any category of activities involving discharges of dredged or fill material if the Corps makes certain determinations (33 U.S.C. 1344(e)). Corps regulations promulgated under the CWA define dredged or fill material in detail at 33 CFR 323.2 and regulations concerning processing of Corps permits are at 33 CFR part 325. The Corps may use the EIS/EIR to inform their discretionary decision to issue to a PGP for certain components of the proposed SSHCP. The California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG)will be a NEPA Cooperating Agency on the proposed EIS/EIR pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5. The County and their partners expect to apply to CDFG for an incidental take permit under Section 2081 of the California Fish and Game code and to apply for a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game code. CDFG intends to use the EIS/EIR in conducting its review of the SSHCP as a CEQA Trustee Agency. CDFG will also use the EIS/EIR in makings its CEQA findings in their decision to issue an incidental take permit under Section 2081 of the California Fish and Game Code. As a CEQA Responsible Agency, CDFG may also use the EIS/EIR during their consideration to approve a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code. The SSHCP will incorporate best management practices that have been developed in cooperation with, and approved by, CDFG. This notice of intent is being furnished in accordance with 40 CFR Sections 1501.2, 1501.7, 1506.6, and 1508.22 to obtain suggestions, comments, and useful information from other agencies and the public on the scope of the proposed EIS/EIR, including the significant environmental issues deserving of study, the range of actions, the range of alternatives, and the range of impacts to be considered. Written comments from interested parties are invited to ensure that all issues related to the proposed section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental-take permit application are identified. Comments will only be accepted in written form. You may submit written comments by mail, facsimile transmission, or in person (see ADDRESSES ). All comments received will become part of the official administrative record. Our practice is to make comment letters (including names, home addresses, home phone numbers and email addresses of respondents) available for public review. You may request that we withhold personal information, if so, please state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: June 4, 2008. John Engbring, Deputy Regional Director, California and Nevada Region, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. E8-12963 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R9-FHC-2008-N0085; 80221-1113-0000-L5] Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Report AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability of draft revised marine mammal stock assessment report for the southern sea otter in California; request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has developed a draft revised marine mammal stock assessment report for the southern sea otter ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ) stock in the State of California, which is available for public review and comment. DATES: Comments must be received by September 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: Copies of the draft revised stock assessment report for the southern sea otter in California are available from the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003;
(805)644-1766. It can also be viewed in Adobe Acrobat by navigating to the species information page for the southern sea otter at *http://www.fws.gov/ventura.* If you wish to submit comments on the draft revised stock assessment report for the southern sea otter in California, you may do so by any of the following methods: 1. You may mail or hand-deliver (during normal business hours) written comments to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003. 2. You may fax your comments to
(805)644-3958. 3. You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to *fw8ssostock@* fws.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: One of the goals of the MMPA is to ensure that stocks of marine mammals occurring in waters under the jurisdiction of the United States do not experience a level of human-caused mortality and serious injury that is likely to cause the stock to be reduced below its optimum sustainable population level (OSP). OSP is defined as “the number of animals which will result in the maximum productivity of the population or the species, keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the habitat and the health of the ecosystem of which they form a constituent element.” To help accomplish the goal of maintaining marine mammal stocks at their OSPs, section 117 of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361-1407) requires the Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS)to prepare stock assessment reports for each marine mammal stock that occurs in waters under the jurisdiction of the United States. These stock assessments are to be based on the best scientific information available and are, therefore, prepared in consultation with established regional scientific review groups. Each stock assessment must include:
(1)A description of the stock and its geographic range;
(2)a minimum population estimate, maximum net productivity rate, and current population trend;
(3)an estimate of human-caused mortality and serious injury;
(4)a description of commercial fishery interactions;
(5)the status of the stock; and
(6)the potential biological removal level (PBR). The PBR is defined as “the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its OSP.” The PBR is the product of the minimum population estimate of the stock (N <sup>min</sup> ), one-half the maximum theoretical or estimated net productivity rate of the stock at a small population size (R <sup>max</sup> ); and a recovery factor (F <sup>r</sup> ) of between 0.1 and 1.0, which is intended to compensate for uncertainty and unknown estimation errors. Section 117 of the MMPA also requires the Service and the NMFS to review the stock assessment reports:
(A)At least annually for stocks that are specified as strategic stocks;
(B)at least annually for stocks for which significant new information is available; and
(C)at least once every 3 years for all other stocks. A strategic stock is defined in the MMPA as a marine mammal stock:
(A)For which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds the potential biological removal level;
(B)which, based on the best available scientific information, is declining and is likely to be listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ), within the foreseeable future; or
(C)which is listed as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, or is designated as depleted under the MMPA. A summary of the draft revised stock assessment report for southern sea otters in California is presented in Table 1. The table lists the stock's N <sup>min</sup> , R <sup>max</sup> , F <sup>r</sup> , PBR, annual estimated human-caused mortality and serious injury, and status. After consideration of any public comments received, the Service will revise the stock assessment, as appropriate. We will publish a notice of availability and summary of the final stock assessment, including responses to comments we received. In accordance with the MMPA, a list of the sources of information or public reports upon which the assessment is based is included in this notice. Table 1.—Summary of Draft Revised Stock Assessment Report for the Southern Sea Otter in California Stock N <sup>MIN</sup> R <sup>MAX</sup> F <sup>R</sup> PBR Annual estimated average human-caused mortality Stock status Southern sea otters: Mainland California 3,026 0.06 0.1 9 Unknown Strategic. Mainland California San Nicolas Island
(CA)41 0.09 0.1 0 Unknown Strategic. List of References Bacon, C.E. 1994. An ecotoxicological comparison of organic contaminants in sea otters among populations in California and Alaska. M.S. thesis, University of California, Santa Cruz. Bacon, C.E., W.M. Jarman, J.A. Estes, M. Simon, and R.J. Norstrom. 1999. Comparison of organochlorine contaminants among sea otter ( *Enhydra lutris* ) populations in California and Alaska. Environ. Toxicology and Chemistry 18(3):452-458. Bryant, H.C. 1915. Sea otters near Point Sur. California Department of Fish and Game Bull. 1:134-135. Cameron, G.A., and K.A. Forney. 2000. Preliminary estimates of cetacean mortality in California/Oregon gillnet fisheries for 1999. Paper SC/S2/O24 presented to the International Whaling Commission, 2000 (unpublished). 12 pp. Available from NMFS, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, P.O. Box 271, La Jolla, California, 92038, USA. Carretta, J.V. 2001. Preliminary estimates of cetacean mortality in California gillnet fisheries for 2000. Paper SC/53/SM9 presented to the International Whaling Commission, 2001 (unpublished). 21 pp. Available from NMFS, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, P.O. Box 271, La Jolla, California, 92038, USA. Cronin, M.A., J. Bodkin, B. Bellachey, J.A. Estes, and J.C. Patton. 1996. Mitochondrial-DNA variation among subspecies and populations of sea otters ( *Enhydra lutris* ). J. Mammal. 77:546-557. Estes, J.A. 1990. Growth and equilibrium in sea otter populations. J. Anim. Ecol. 59:385-401. Estes, J.A., and R.J. Jameson. 1988. A double-survey estimate for sighting probability of sea otters in California. J. Wildl. Manage. 52:70-76. Estes, J.A., B.B. Hatfield, K. Ralls, and J. Ames. 2003. Causes of mortality in California sea otters during periods of population growth and decline. Marine Mammal Science 19(1):198-216. Forney, K.A., S.R. Benson, and G.A. Cameron. 2001. Central California gill net effort and bycatch of sensitive species, 1990-1998. Pages 141-160 *in* Seabird Bycatch: Trends, Roadblocks, and Solutions, E.F. Melvin and J.K. Parrish, eds. Proceedings of an International Symposium of the Pacific Seabird Group, University of Alaska Sea Grant, Fairbanks, Alaska, 212 pp. Hatfield, B.B., and J.A. Estes. 2000. Preliminary results of an evaluation of the potential threat to sea otters posed by the nearshore finfish trap fishery. Unpublished. 6 pp. + appendices. Herrick, S.F., Jr., and D. Hanan. 1988. A review of California entangling net fisheries, 1981-1986. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum. National Marine Fisheries Service. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-108. 39 pp. Jameson, R.J. 1989. Movements, home range, and territories of male sea otters off central California. Marine Mammal Science 5:159-172. Jameson, R.J., and S. Jeffries. 1999. Results of the 1999 survey of the Washington sea otter population. Unpublished report. 5 pp. Jameson, R.J., and S. Jeffries. 2005. Results of the 2005 survey of the reintroduced Washington sea otter population. Unpublished report. 6 pp. Kannan, K., E. Perrotta, and N.J. Thomas. 2006. Association between perfluorinated compounds and pathological conditions in southern sea otters. Environmental Science & Technology 40:4943-4948. Kannan, K., E. Perrotta, N.J. Thomas, and K.M. Aldous. 2007. A comparative analysis of polybrominated diphenyl ethers and polychlorinated biphenyls in southern sea otters that died of infectious diseases and noninfectious causes. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 53:293-302. Kannan K., K.S. Guruge, N.J. Thomas, S. Tanabe, J.P. Giesy. 1998. Butyltin residues in southern sea otters ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ) found dead along California coastal waters. Environmental Science and Technology 32:1169-1175. Kooyman, G.L., and D.P. Costa. 1979. Effects of oiling on temperature regulation in sea otters. Yearly progress report, Outer Continental Shelf Energy Assessment Program. Kreuder, C., M.A. Miller, D.A. Jessup, L.J. Lowenstein, M.D. Harris, J.A. Ames, T.E. Carpenter, P.A. Conrad, and J.A.K. Mazet. 2003. Patterns of mortality in southern sea otters ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ) from 1998-2001. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 39(3):495-509. Kreuder, C., M.A. Miller, L.J. Lowenstine, P.A. Conrad, T.E. Carpenter, D.A. Jessup, and J.A.K. Mazet. 2005. Evaluation of cardiac lesions and risk factors associated with myocarditis and dilated cardiomyopathy in southern sea otters ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ). American Journal of Veterinary Research 66:289-299. Laidre, K.L., R.J. Jameson, and D.P. DeMaster. 2001. An estimation of carrying capacity for sea otters along the California coast. Marine Mammal Science 17(2):294-309. Larson, S., R. Jameson, J. Bodkin, M. Staedler, and P. Bentzen. 2002. Microsatellite DNA and mitochondrial DNA variation in remnant and translocated sea otter ( *Enhydra lutris* ) populations. J. Mammal. 83(3):893-906. Mayer, K.A., M.D. Dailey, and M.A. Miller. 2003. Helminth parasites of the southern sea otter *Enhydra lutris nereis* in central California: abundance, distribution, and pathology. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 53:77-88. Nakata, H., K. Kannan, L. Jing, N. Thomas, S. Tanabe, and J.P. Giesy. 1998. Accumulation pattern of organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls in southern sea otters ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ) found stranded along coastal California, USA. Environ. Poll. 103:45-53. Ralls, K., T.C. Eagle, and D.B. Siniff. 1996. Movement and spatial use patterns of California sea otters. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74:1841-1849. Riedman, M.L., and J.A. Estes. 1990. The sea otter ( *Enhydra lutris* ): behavior, ecology, and natural history. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biol. Rep. 90(14). 126 pp. Riedman, M.L., J.A. Estes, M.M. Staedler, A.A. Giles, and D.R. Carlson. 1994. Breeding patterns and reproductive success of California sea otters. J. Wildl. Manage. 58:391-399. Sanchez, M.S. 1992. Differentiation and variability of mitochondrial DNA in three sea otter, *Enhydra lutris* , populations. M.S. Thesis, University of California Santa Cruz. Siniff, D.B., and K. Ralls. 1991. Reproduction, survival, and tag loss in California sea otters. Marine Mammal Science 7(3):211-229. Siniff, D.B., T.D. Williams, A.M. Johnson, and D.L. Garshelis. 1982. Experiments on the response of sea otters, *Enhydra lutris* , to oil contamination. Biol. Conserv. 2: 261-272. Taylor, B.L., M. Scott, J. Heyning, and J. Barlow. 2002. Suggested guidelines for recovery factors for endangered marine mammals. Unpublished report submitted to the Pacific Scientific Review Group. 7 pp. Tinker, M.T., G. Bentall, and J.A. Estes. 2008. Food limitation leads to behavioral diversification and dietary specialization in sea otters. PNAS 105:560-565. Tinker, M.T., J.A. Estes, K. Ralls, T.M. Williams, D. Jessup, and D.P. Costa. 2006. Population Dynamics and Biology of the California Sea Otter ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ) at the Southern End of its Range. MMS OCS Study 2006-007. Coastal Research Center, Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, California. MMS Cooperative Agreement Number 14-35-0001-31063. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Final Revised Recovery Plan for the Southern Sea Otter ( *Enhydra lutris nereis* ). Portland, Oregon. xi + 165 pp. Wendell, F.E., R.A. Hardy, and J.A. Ames. 1986. An assessment of the accidental take of sea otters, *Enhydra lutris* , in gill and trammel nets. California Department of Fish and Game, Mar. Res. Tech. Rep. 1991. Geographic variation in sea otters, *Enhydra lutris* . J. Mammal. 72(1):22-36. Wilson, D.E., M.A. Bogan, R.L. Brownell, Jr., A.M. Burdin, and M.K. Maminov. 1991. Geographic variation in sea otters, *Enhydra lutris* . J. Mammal. 72(1):22-36. Dated: June 3, 2008. H. Dale Hall, Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. E8-12890 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [AA-8101-01, AA-8101-03, AA-8101-04, AA-8101-05, AA-8101-09; AK-964-1410-KC-P] Alaska Native Claims Selection AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance. SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the subsurface estate in certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act will be issued to The Aleut Corporation. The lands are in the vicinity of the Alaska Peninsula, and are located in: Seward Meridian, Alaska T. 49 S., R. 69 W., Sec. 1; Secs. 11 to 15, inclusive; Secs. 21 to 36, inclusive. Containing approximately 14,026 acres. T. 50 S., R. 69 W., Secs. 1 to 15, inclusive; Secs. 18, 19, 22, and 24. Containing approximately 12,052 acres. T. 52 S., R. 73 W., Secs. 19 and 20; Secs. 29 to 32, inclusive. Containing 3,833.64 acres. T. 52 S., R. 74 W., Sec. 24. Containing 640 acres. T. 53 S., R. 74 W., Secs. 17 to 20, inclusive. Containing 2,501.16 acres. T. 53 S., R. 75 W., Secs. 3, 10, 11, and 13; Secs. 14, 15, and 22. Containing 4,480 acres. T. 55 S., R. 76 W., Sec. 6. Containing 53.24 acres. T. 55 S., R. 77 W., Secs. 1 to 12, inclusive; Secs. 15 to 21, inclusive; Sec. 30. Containing approximately 10,207 acres. T. 52 S., R. 78 W., Secs. 1 to 36, inclusive. Containing 22,902.48 acres. T. 55 S., R. 81 W., Secs. 7, 8, and 9; Secs. 16 to 21, inclusive; Sec. 25; Secs. 28 to 32, inclusive. Containing approximately 6,110 acres. T. 56 S., R. 81 W., Secs. 6 and 7. Containing approximately 226 acres. T. 56 S., R. 82 W., Secs. 1 to 23, inclusive; Secs. 27 to 34, inclusive. Containing approximately 17,075 acres. T. 73 S., R. 121 W., Secs. 1, 2, 11, and 12. Containing 2,560 acres. Aggregating approximately 96,667 acres. Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Dutch Harbor Fisherman. DATES: The time limits for filing an appeal are: 1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until July 10, 2008 to file an appeal. 2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal. Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR Part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights. ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov.* Persons who use a telecommunication device
(TTD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management. Michael Bilancione, Land Transfer Resolution Specialist, Land Transfer Adjudication I. [FR Doc. E8-12947 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [ES-956-1910-BJ-5043, ES-051993, Group No. 1, Rhode Island] Eastern States: Filing of Plat of Survey AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of filing of plat of survey; Rhode Island. SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)will file the plat of survey of the lands described below in the BLM-Eastern States, Springfield, Virginia, 30 calendar days from the date of publication in the **Federal Register** . *Contact Information:* Bureau of Land Management, 7450 Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153. Attn: Cadastral Survey. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The survey was requested by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Narragansett Indian Tribe. The lands we surveyed are: Trust Lands of the Narragansett Indian Tribe, Washington County, Rhode Island; Survey of the Niles Land, designated Tract No. 8. The plat of survey represents the survey of the Niles Land, designated Tract No. 8, a portion of the lands held in trust for the Narragansett Indian Tribe in Washington County, Rhode Island, and was accepted September 23, 2003. We will place a copy of the plat we described in the open files. It will be available to the public as a matter of information. If BLM receives a protest against this survey, as shown on the plat, prior to the date of the official filing, we will stay the filing pending our consideration of the protest. We will not officially file the plat until the day after we have accepted or dismissed all protests and they have become final, including decisions on appeals. Copies of the plat will be made available upon request and prepayment of the reproduction fees. Dated: June 3, 2008. Dominica Van Koten, Acting Chief Cadastral Surveyor. [FR Doc. E8-12953 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-GJ-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [MT-921-08-1320-EL-P; MTM 98207] Notice of Invitation—Coal Exploration License Application MTM 98207 AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Members of the public are hereby invited to participate with Spring Creek Coal Company in a program for the exploration of coal deposits owned by the United States of America in lands located in Big Horn County, Montana, encompassing 4,589.36 acres. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Giovanini, Mining Engineer, or Connie Schaff, Land Law Examiner, Branch of Solid Minerals (MT-921), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Montana State Office, Billings, Montana 59101-4669, telephone
(406)896-5084 or
(406)896-5060, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The lands to be explored for coal deposits are described as follows: T.8S., R.38E., P.M.M. 1: Lot 14, SE 1/4 SE 1/4 12: Lots 1, 6, 7, 10, E 1/2 E 1/2 13: Lots 1, 4, 5, 8, E 1/2 E 1/2 T.8S., R.39E., P.M.M. 4: Lots 1-24, S 1/2 5: Lots 1-26, E 1/2 SW 1/4 , SE 1/4 8: Lots 2-4, E 1/2 , E 1/2 W 1/2 9: All 17: Lots 1-4, E 1/2 , E 1/2 W 1/2 Any party electing to participate in this exploration program shall notify, in writing, both the State Director, BLM, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings, Montana 59101-4669, and Spring Creek Coal Company, P.O. Box 67, Decker, Montana 59025. Such written notice must refer to serial number MTM 98207 and be received no later than 30 calendar days after publication of this Notice in the **Federal Register** or 10 calendar days after the last publication of this Notice in the Sheridan Press newspaper, whichever is later. This Notice will be published once a week for two
(2)consecutive weeks in the *Sheridan Press, Sheridan, Wyoming.* The proposed exploration program is fully described, and will be conducted pursuant to an exploration plan to be approved by the Bureau of Land Management. The exploration plan, as submitted by Spring Creek Coal Company, is available for public inspection at the BLM, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings, Montana, during regular business hours (9 a.m. to 4 p.m.), Monday through Friday. Dated: June 4, 2008. Edward L. Hughes, Acting Chief, Branch of Solid Minerals. [FR Doc. E8-12945 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Supplemental Oil and Gas Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Padre Island National Seashore, TX AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior. ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare a Supplemental Oil and Gas Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, for Padre Island National Seashore, Texas. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service is preparing a Supplemental Oil and Gas Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, for Padre Island National Seashore, Texas. This will supplement the Oil and Gas Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement completed on October 12, 2000. The major change in the Supplemental Oil and Gas Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, will be a revised reasonably foreseeable development scenario. Minor revisions will include new information on some resources in Padre Island National Seashore. A scoping brochure has been prepared that detail the proposed revisions identified to date. Copies of the scoping brochure may be obtained from Linda Dansby, SEIS Manager, Office of Minerals/Oil and Gas Support, Intermountain Region-Santa Fe, National Park Service, P.O. Box 728, Santa Fe, NM 87504-0728, telephone 505-988-6095. DATES: The Park Service will accept comments from the public through July 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: The scoping brochure will be available for public review and comment online at the Planning, Environment and Public Comment
(PEPC)Web site at *http://parkplanning.nps.gov/pais* . The scoping brochure is also available in the office of the Superintendent, Joe Escoto, 20301 Park Road 22, Corpus Christi, Texas; and in the office of the SEIS Manager, Office of Minerals/Oil and Gas Support, 1100 Old Santa Fe Trail, Santa Fe, New Mexico. The Oil and Gas Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement completed on October 12, 2000 is also available online at the PEPC Web site provided above; and a limited number of printed copies are available by contacting the SEIS Manager. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Dansby, SEIS Manager, Office of Minerals/Oil and Gas Support, Intermountain Region-Santa Fe, National Park Service, P.O. Box 728, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-0728, Telephone 505-988-6095, e-mail at *Linda_Dansby@nps.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you wish to comment on the scoping brochure or on any other issues associated with the supplemental oil and gas management plan, environmental impact statement, you may submit your comments by any one of several methods. You may mail comments to SEIS Manager Linda Dansby, at the mailing address provided above. You may also post comments online at *http://parkplanning.nps.gov/pais* . If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your Internet message, contact SEIS Manager Linda Dansby directly at 505-988-6095. Finally, you may hand-deliver comments to Padre Island National Seashore or SEIS Manager Linda Dansby at the street addresses provided. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: June 4, 2008. Hal J. Grovert, Acting Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service. [FR Doc. E8-12984 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-CD-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(i), the Attorney General shall, prior to issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a controlled substance in schedule I or II, and prior to issuing a regulation under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2)(B) authorizing the importation of such a substance, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the bulk manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing. Therefore, in accordance with Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 1301.34(a), this is notice that on May 7, 2008, Cambrex Charles City, Inc., 1205 11th Street, Charles City, Iowa 50616, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA)to be registered as an importer of Phenylacetone (8501), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II. The company plans to import Phenylacetone for use as a precursor in the manufacture of amphetamine only. Any bulk manufacturer who is presently, or is applying to be, registered with DEA to manufacture such basic class of controlled substance may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 and in such form as prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47. Any such written comments or objections being sent via regular mail should be addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), Washington, DC 20537, or any being sent via express mail should be sent to Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and must be filed no later than July 10, 2008. This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with and independent of the procedures described in 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d),
(e)and (f). As noted in a previous notice published in the **Federal Register** on September 23, 1975, (40 FR 43745), all applicants for registration to import a basic class of any controlled substance listed in schedule I or II are, and will continue to be, required to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d),
(e)and
(f)are satisfied. Dated: June 3, 2008. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration. [FR Doc. E8-12983 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-58,807] Panasonic Shikoku Electronics Corporation of America (PSECA), Including On-Site Leased Workers From Express Personnel Services, Vancouver, WA; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on March 21, 2006, applicable to workers of Panasonic Shikoku Electronics Corporation of America (PSECA), Vancouver, Washington. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on April 12, 2006 (71 FR 18771). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers assemble combination and rear projection televisions (includes DVD/VCR) and act in a support capacity for sales and purchasing. New information shows that leased workers from Express Personnel Services were employed on-site at the Vancouver, Washington location of Panasonic Shikoku Electronics Corporation of America (PSECA). The Department has determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of the subject firm. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include leased workers from Express Personnel Services working on-site at the Vancouver, Washington location of the subject firm. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at Panasonic Shikoku Electronics Corporation of America (PSECA) who were adversely affected by increased imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-58,807 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Panasonic Shikoku Electronic Corporation of America (PSECA), including on-site leased workers from Express Personnel Services, Vancouver, Washington, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after February 7, 2005, through March 21, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of May 2008. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12969 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,041] Delphi Corporation, Automotive Holdings Group, Needmore Road/Dayton Plant 3, Including On-Site Leased Workers From Aerotek Automotive, PDSI Technical Services, Acro Service Corp., G-Tech Professional Staffing, Tac Automotive, Bartech, Manpower Professional Services, Manpower of Vandalia, Setech and Mays Chemical, Dayton, OH; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on November 30, 2006, applicable to workers of Delphi Corporation, Automotive Holdings Group, Needmore Road/Dayton Plant 3, Dayton, Ohio. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on December 12, 2006 (71 FR 74564). At the request of a petitioner, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of automotive brake parts. New information shows that leased workers from Aerotek Automotive, PDSI Technical Services, Acro Service Corp., G-Tech Professional Staffing, TAC Automotive, Bartech, Manpower Professional Services, Manpower of Vandalia, Setech and Mays Chemical were employed on-site at the Needmore Road/Dayton Plant 3, Dayton, Ohio, location of Delphi Corporation, Automotive Holdings Group. The Department has determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of the subject firm to be considered leased workers. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include leased workers from the above mentioned firms working on-site at the Needmore Road/Dayton Plant 3, Dayton, Ohio, location of the subject firm. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at Delphi Corporation, Automotive Holdings Group, Needmore Road/Dayton Plant 3 who were adversely affected by increased imports of automotive brake parts. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-60,041 is hereby issued as follows: “All workers of Delphi Corporation, Automotive Holdings Group, Needmore Road/Dayton Plant 3, including on-site leased workers from Aerotek Automotive, PDSI Technical Services, Acro Service Corp., G-Tech Professional Staffing, TAC Automotive, Bartech, Manpower Professional Services, Manpower of Vandalia, Setech and Mays Chemicals, Dayton, Ohio, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after August 24, 2005, through November 30, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.” Signed at Washington, DC, this 3rd day of June 2008. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12970 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-63,027] Powermate Corporation, Including Temporary Workers From Manpower Temp Agency, Springfield, MN; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on March 28, 2008, applicable to workers of Powermate Corporation, Springfield, Minnesota. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on April 11, 2008 (73 FR 19899). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of air compressors and pressure washers. New information provided to the Department shows that beginning in June 2007, some workers at the subject firm were temporary workers from Manpower Temp Agency and were subsequently hired by Powermate Corporation. Consequently, some of the workers at the subject firm had their wages reported under the Unemployment Insurance
(UI)tax account for Manpower. Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to properly reflect this matter. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Powermate Corporation who were adversely affected by increased company imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-63,027 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Powermate Corporation, including temporary workers from Manpower Temp Agency, Springfield, Minnesota, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after March 18, 2007, through March 28, 2010, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC, this 3rd day of June Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12972 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-41,377E; TA-W-41,377F] Levi Strauss & Co, San Antonio Finishing Plant, San Antonio, TX; Levi Strauss & Co, San Benito Manufacturing Plant, San Benito, TX; Notice of Determination Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance; Correction ACTION: Notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration published a document in the **Federal Register** on July 22, 2002, titled Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance. The Department is issuing a restructured paragraph for clarification purposes. Correction This is to correct the “text” caption in the **Federal Register** of July 22, 2002, in FR Doc. 02-18420, on page 47861, in the third column, under the heading Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance, to read: TA-W-41,377E; Levi Strauss & Co., San Antonio Finishing Plant, San Antonio, Texas, TA-W-41,377F; Levi Strauss & Co., San Benito Manufacturing Plant, San Benito, Texas. Signed in Washington, DC this 5th day of June 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12974 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act. The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than June 20, 2008. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than June 20, 2008. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of May 2008. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. Appendix TAA Petitions Instituted Between 5/19/08 and 5/23/08 TA-W Subject Firm (petitioners) Location Date of institution Date of petition 63401 Unifi, Inc.
(Comp)Staunton, VA 05/19/08 05/19/08 63402 NTN-BCA Corporation
(USW)Lititz, PA 05/19/08 05/18/08 63403 Lear Corporation
(UAW)Tampa, FL 05/19/08 05/16/08 63404 FMC (Spring Hill Facility)
(Wkrs)South Charleston, WV 05/19/08 05/16/08 63405 Esselte Corporation
(Comp)Buena Park, CA 05/20/08 05/19/08 63406 Cocomo Apparel (State) Vernon, CA 05/20/08 05/19/08 63407 Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc.
(Comp)Bucks, AL 05/20/08 05/19/08 63408 Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp.
(Comp)Blytheville, AR 05/20/08 05/19/08 63409 Twigg Corporation
(Wkrs)Martinsville, IN 05/20/08 05/14/08 63410 Comau, Inc.
(Wkrs)Warren, MI 05/20/08 05/19/08 63411 Pass & Seymour/Legrand
(Comp)Concord, NC 05/20/08 05/19/08 63412 Pfizer, Inc.
(Wrks)Conshohocken, PA 05/20/08 05/19/08 63413 Dana Corp Holding Co.
(Comp)Marion, IN 05/20/08 05/12/08 63414 Uster Technologies, Inc.
(Comp)Knoxville, TN 05/20/08 05/19/08 63415 Acklin Stamping Co.
(Comp)Toledo, OH 05/20/08 05/19/08 63416 Novelis Aluminum
(USWA)Louisville, KY 05/21/08 05/20/08 63417 Greene Plastics Corporation
(Comp)Hope Valley, RI 05/21/08 05/20/08 63418 Gramercy Jewelry Mfg. Corp.
(Wkrs)New York, NY 05/21/08 04/23/08 63419 Ansonia Copper and Brass
(Comp)Ansonia, CT 05/21/08 05/20/08 63420 Bernhardt Furniture Company
(Comp)Shelby, NC 05/21/08 05/20/08 63421 Kimble Chase LLC
(Wkrs)Vineland, NJ 05/21/08 05/12/08 63422 Springs Direct Division
(Wkrs)Lancaster, SC 05/21/08 05/19/08 63423 American Axle and Manufacturing
(Wkrs)Tonawanda, NY 05/22/08 05/21/08 63424 Ferguson Aluminum
(Comp)Olmsted, IL 05/22/08 05/16/08 63425 Steris Corporation
(Comp)Erie, PA 05/22/08 05/21/08 63426 Pacific Continental Apparel, Inc. (State) Rancho Dominguez, CA 05/22/08 05/21/08 63427 Lumberg Automation
(Comp)Midlothian, VA 05/22/08 05/13/08 63428 Markay Designs, Inc.
(Comp)Sophia, NC 05/23/08 05/22/08 63429 Borgwarner Transmission Systems
(Comp)Frankfort, IL 05/23/08 05/21/08 63430 Comau Inc. East (Union) Macomb Twp., MI 05/23/08 05/22/08 63431 Greenville Tool & Die Company
(Comp)Greenville, MI 05/23/08 05/22/08 [FR Doc. E8-12968 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,808] Invista, S.A.R.L., Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, a Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, TN; Notice of Negative Determination on Remand On March 27, 2008, the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the Department of Labor's motion for a second voluntary remand in *Former Employees of Invista, S.A.R.L.* v. *U.S. Secretary of Labor,* Court No. 07-00160. On December 15, 2006, an official of Invista, S.A.R.L., Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, A Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee (the subject firm) filed a petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA)and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance
(ATAA)on behalf of workers and former workers at the subject firm engaged in activity related to the production of nylon fiber. AR 1. The company official stated that the “petition is a continuation of the shift of production to Mexico as described in TA-W-55,055 that expired August 20, 2006. After the shift in production to another country * * * . all orders continued to be processed from the United States until now. The Customer Service Representatives
(CSRs)losing their jobs are being replaced by CSRs located in South America who will handle orders for companies located in the United States.” AR 2. The TAA/ATAA certification applicable TA-W-55,055 (issued August 20, 2004) was based on the Department's findings that the subject firm shifted production of three types of nylon filament to Mexico. AR 5-6. The Department of Labor (Department) issued a negative determination regarding workers' eligibility to apply for TAA/ATAA on February 7, 2007. The determination was based on the Department's findings that, during the relevant period, the subject workers did not produce an article or support an appropriate subdivision that produced an article domestically, and, as such, cannot be adversely impacted or affected by a shift in production. AR 30-32. The Department's Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on February 21, 2007 (72 FR 7909). AR 43. In the request for administrative reconsideration, dated February 18, 2007, a worker at the subject firm stated that after TA-W-55,055 was filed, the subject firm ceased to produce apparel textile and began producing Performance Materials. The worker also stated that “after the petition (TA-W-55,055) expired, (the subject firm) let go the last of the apparel fibers personnel. Since I sold 100% apparel fiber, there was no reason to keep me.” AR 35. The worker further stated that “I was downsized, yet there were people in Brazil hired to do my work.” AR 36. In a subsequent letter, the worker who filed the request for reconsideration stated that “I was informed by management on 11/14/06, that my job was being split up; part of it going to Brazil and part going to Wilmington, Delaware.” AR 37. The worker also stated that “All the apparel people were let go. This is a direct result of the textile industry going to developing countries and the loss of textile manufacturing in the U.S.” AR 38. In a letter dated March 15, 2007, the Department stated that the request for reconsideration was being dismissed because insufficient evidence was furnished to warrant reconsideration pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) and reiterated that, because the subject workers did not produce an article or support domestic production of an article during the one year period prior to the petition, the subject workers are not eligible to apply for worker adjustment assistance under the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. AR 45. The Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration was issued on March 21, 2007. AR 47. The Department's Notice of dismissal was published in the **Federal Register** on March 30, 2007 (72 FR 15169). AR 48. By application dated May 11, 2007, Plaintiffs sought review by the USCIT. The complaint stated that the certification of TA-W-55,055 was based on a shift of textile machines to Mexico and that the negative determination of TA-W-60,808 was “due to the machines having been shipped to Mexico more than a year earlier. Yet my job did not officially terminate till the reorganization to rid the Chattanooga plant of ALL textile employees.” Under the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, certification of group eligibility to apply for TAA will be issued provided that
(1)a significant number or proportion of the workers of such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision, have been totally or partially separated or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; and
(2)there has been a shift in production from the workers' firm or subdivision to an eligible foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm or subdivision under section 222(a)(2)(B)(i); and, either the foreign country is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States under section 222(a)(2)(B)(ii)(I), is a beneficiary country under section 222(a)(2)(B)(ii)(II), or there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of like or directly competitive articles. The Department interprets this standard for certification as requiring that the shift of production of an article to a foreign country must be a cause of the separations of workers of the firm that were engaged in or supported the production of that article. After the shift of nylon filament production to Mexico in 2004, the subject firm continued to employ the subject workers to market nylon apparel filament produced in Mexico and to process orders of nylon apparel filament produced in Mexico. AR 2, 26-27, 29, 35-38, SAR 8. Information provided by the subject firm during the remand investigation revealed that the workers' separations are not related to the shift of production of apparel nylon filament to Mexico in 2004. During the relevant period, customer service functions were performed at Invista facilities in Canada, South America, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Wilmington Delaware. The customer service functions were consolidated to Paulinia, Brazil, and Wilmington, Delaware due to a business decision to improve the efficiency of the customer service organization. At the time of plaintiff separations the subject firm terminated other workers whose functions were unrelated to the production of apparel nylon filaments. SAR 11, 18. The separated workers were “two
(2)Apparel Nylon Customer Service Representatives located at Chattanooga, one
(1)Performance Materials Customer Service Representative located at Chattanooga, and one
(1)Performance Materials Product Coordinator located at Chattanooga.” SAR 8. The fact that two of the four separated workers worked on a product line (Performance Materials) whose production was not shifted to Mexico confirms the company's statements that the layoffs were part of a business decision to increase efficiency in the customer service operation. This bolsters the conclusion that the plaintiff separations were not caused by the shift of production of apparel nylon filaments to Mexico over two years earlier. That the subject workers were not threatened with separation until November 14, 2006 (more than two years after the subject firm's shift of production of nylon apparel filament to Mexico) and that the customer service representatives have been replaced by workers in Brazil and Delaware, SAR 3, 8, 11, 18, and not by workers in Mexico, support the Department's findings that the subject workers' employment with the subject firm was not dependent upon domestic production and that the subject firm's shift of nylon apparel filament production to Mexico was not a factor in the subject workers' separations. Based on previously-submitted material and information provided during the remand investigation, the Department finds that, while the subject firm shifted its production of nylon apparel filament to Mexico, that event was not a cause of the subject workers' separations. Therefore, the Department determines that the group eligibility to apply for benefits under the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, has not been met. Because the administrative record clearly demonstrates that the shift of production to a foreign country was not a cause to the workers' separations, the Department has not addressed the impact of the fact that no production took place at the subject firm during the twelve month period prior to filing of the petition. In addition, in accordance with Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the Department herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA. In order to apply for ATAA, the subject worker group must be certified eligible to apply for TAA. Since the workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, they cannot be certified eligible to apply for ATAA. Conclusion After careful review of the findings of the remand investigation, I affirm the notice of negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Invista, S.A.R.L, Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, A Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee. Signed at Washington, DC this 2nd day of June 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12971 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-63,093] Saint-Gobain Vetrotex America, Including On-Site Leased Workers From Industrial Outsourcing, Wichita Falls, TX; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration of Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance By letter dated May 2, 2008, a company official of Saint-Gobain Vetrotex America requested administrative reconsideration regarding Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance
(ATAA)applicable to workers of the subject firm. The negative determination was signed on April 25, 2008. The notice of affirmative determination for ATAA was erroneously published in the **Federal Register** on May 13, 2008 (73 FR 27560). The workers of Saint-Gobain Vetrotex America, Wichita Falls, Texas were certified eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA)on April 25, 2008. The decision was amended to include on-site leased workers from Industrial Outsourcing on May 21, 2008. The amended version of the determination was published in the **Federal Register** on May 29, 2008 (73 FR 30976). The initial ATAA investigation determined that workers in the workers' firm possess skills that are easily transferrable. In the request for reconsideration, the company official stated that the information provided by the subject firm in the initial investigation was inaccurate and that skills of the workers employed at the subject firm are not easily transferrable to other businesses within the local commuting area. The company official provided sufficient information confirming this statement. Additional investigation has determined that the workers possess skills that are not easily transferable and that the conditions within the industry are adverse. A significant number or proportion of the worker group is age fifty years or over. Conclusion After careful review of the additional facts obtained on reconsideration, I conclude that the requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, have been met for workers at the subject firm. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following revised determination: All workers of Saint-Gobain Vetrotex America, including on-site leased workers from Industrial Outsourcing, Wichita Falls, Texas, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after March 19, 2007 through April 25, 2010, are eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed in Washington, DC this 2nd day of June, 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12973 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [A-W-63,457] MTD Southwest, Inc., Tempe, AZ; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on June 2, 2008 in response to a petition filed by company officials on behalf of the workers at MTD Southwest, Inc., Tempe, Arizona. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 3rd day of June 2008. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-12967 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Workforce Investment Act; Lower Living Standard Income Level; Correction AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor. ACTION: Notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration published a document in the **Federal Register** on April 25, 2008, concerning the 2008 Lower Living Standard Income Levels. The following are corrections to Tables 4 and 5. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please contact Mr. Evan Rosenberg, telephone 202-693-3593; fax 202-693-3532 (these are not toll-free numbers). Correction In the **Federal Register** of April 25, 2008, FR Doc. E8-9076 on pages 22439 and 22441, replace Table 4 and Table 5 with the following: Table 4.—70% LLSIL Family of one Family of two Family of three Family of four Family of five Family of six $7,520 $12,321 $16,910 $20,873 $24,634 $28,809 7,753 12,701 17,431 21,518 25,394 29,698 7,761 12,718 17,457 21,545 25,430 29,737 7,892 12,928 17,746 21,904 25,850 30,227 7,977 13,076 17,954 22,159 26,151 30,584 7,994 13,102 17,991 22,203 26,204 30,642 8,040 13,171 18,080 22,317 26,340 30,804 8,112 13,292 18,243 22,523 26,583 31,089 8,146 13,346 18,325 22,618 26,692 31,214 8,149 13,357 18,338 22,637 26,715 31,241 8,204 13,444 18,457 22,781 26,886 31,443 8,324 13,645 18,731 23,118 27,284 31,906 8,392 13,756 18,880 23,309 27,504 32,172 8,651 14,176 19,461 24,018 28,344 33,149 8,689 14,244 19,549 24,131 28,480 33,303 8,861 14,526 19,935 24,611 29,045 33,970 8,924 14,626 20,081 24,786 29,252 34,212 9,087 14,895 20,447 25,235 29,782 34,824 9,194 15,063 20,677 25,524 30,125 35,225 9,240 15,142 20,790 25,665 30,285 35,422 9,439 15,469 21,231 26,208 30,932 36,170 9,774 16,017 21,991 27,148 32,036 37,470 9,809 16,073 22,060 27,233 32,138 37,587 9,884 16,197 22,233 27,442 32,388 37,875 9,973 16,335 22,427 27,684 32,671 38,206 9,974 16,347 22,438 27,700 32,687 38,233 10,088 16,532 22,691 28,009 33,057 38,660 10,300 16,879 23,176 28,605 33,758 39,476 10,453 17,124 23,512 29,021 34,248 40,055 11,157 18,282 25,093 30,975 36,557 42,746 11,201 18,350 25,194 31,099 36,700 42,918 11,957 19,594 26,895 33,201 39,180 45,820 12,006 19,669 27,002 33,335 39,338 46,010 Table 5.—100% LLSIL Family of one Family of two Family of three Family of four Family of five Family of six $10,743 $17,601 $24,157 $29,819 $35,191 $41,155 11,075 18,144 24,902 30,740 36,277 42,425 11,087 18,169 24,938 30,779 36,328 42,481 11,274 18,469 25,351 31,291 36,928 43,182 11,396 18,680 25,649 31,656 37,359 43,691 11,420 18,717 25,702 31,719 37,434 43,774 11,486 18,815 25,829 31,881 37,629 44,005 11,589 18,988 26,062 32,176 37,975 44,413 11,637 19,065 26,178 32,312 38,131 44,591 11,642 19,082 26,197 32,338 38,164 44,630 11,720 19,205 26,367 32,544 38,409 44,918 11,892 19,493 26,759 33,026 38,977 45,580 11,988 19,651 26,972 33,298 39,292 45,960 12,358 20,251 27,801 34,312 40,491 47,356 12,413 20,348 27,927 34,473 40,685 47,575 12,658 20,752 28,478 35,158 41,493 48,528 12,749 20,894 28,687 35,409 41,789 48,875 12,981 21,278 29,210 36,050 42,546 49,749 13,134 21,518 29,539 36,463 43,035 50,322 13,200 21,632 29,700 36,664 43,264 50,603 13,484 22,099 30,330 37,441 44,188 51,672 13,963 22,882 31,416 38,783 45,765 53,528 14,013 22,961 31,514 38,904 45,911 53,696 14,120 23,139 31,762 39,203 46,268 54,107 14,247 23,336 32,039 39,549 46,673 54,580 14,248 23,353 32,054 39,572 46,696 54,619 14,411 23,617 32,416 40,013 47,224 55,228 14,714 24,113 33,109 40,864 48,226 56,394 14,933 24,463 33,588 41,459 48,926 57,222 15,938 26,117 35,847 44,250 52,224 61,066 16,001 26,214 35,991 44,428 52,428 61,311 17,081 27,991 38,422 47,430 55,971 65,457 17,151 28,099 38,574 47,622 56,197 65,728 Signed in Washington, DC, this 5th day of June 2008. Brent R. Orrell, Acting Assistant Secretary, Employment and Training Administration. [FR Doc. E8-12986 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FT-P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (08-050)] NASA Advisory Council; Science Committee; Astrophysics Subcommittee; Meeting AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA)announces a meeting of the Astrophysics Subcommittee of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC). This Subcommittee reports to the Science Committee of the NAC. The Meeting will be held for the purpose of soliciting from the scientific community and other persons scientific and technical information relevant to program planning. DATES: Wednesday, July 2, 2008, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Thursday, July 3, 2008, 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. ADDRESSES: NASA Headquarters, 300 E Street, SW., Room 5H45, Washington, DC 20546. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Marian Norris, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546,
(202)358-4452, fax
(202)358-4118, or *mnorris@nasa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be open to the public up to the capacity of the room. The agenda for the meeting includes the following topics: —Astrophysics Division Overview and Program Status; —Government Performance and Results Act Discussion; —Exoplanet Task Force Report Discussion. It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. Attendees will be requested to sign a register and to comply with NASA security requirements, including the presentation of a valid picture ID, before receiving an access badge. Foreign nationals attending this meeting will be required to provide the following information no less than 7 working days prior to the meeting: full name; gender; date/place of birth; citizenship; visa/green card information (number, type, expiration date); passport information (number, country, expiration date); employer/affiliation information (name of institution, address, country, telephone); title/position of attendee. To expedite admittance, attendees with U.S. citizenship can provide identifying information 5 working days in advance by contacting Marian Norris via e-mail at *mnorris@nasa.gov* or by telephone at
(202)358-4452. Dated: June 4, 2008. P. Diane Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. [FR Doc. E8-12878 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information or Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information or Safeguards Information I. Background Pursuant to section 189a.
(2)of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC staff) is publishing this notice. The Act requires the Commission publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person. This notice includes notices of amendments containing sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI) or safeguards information (SGI). Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not
(1)Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or
(2)create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3)involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the **Federal Register** a notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this **Federal Register** notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D44, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of written comments received may be examined at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, person(s) may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request via electronic submission through the NRC E-Filing system for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings” in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part002/part002-0309.html.* Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/.* If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed within 60 days, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements:
(1)The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner;
(2)the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding;
(3)the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and
(4)the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. A request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated in August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve documents over the internet or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten
(10)days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at *hearingdocket@nrc.gov,* or by calling
(301)415-1677, to request
(1)a digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or
(2)creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative) already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each petitioner/requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms Viewer(tm) to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms Viewer(tm) is free and is available at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html.* Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRC's public website at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.* Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF)in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.* A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html* or by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is
(800)397-4209 or locally,
(301)415-4737. Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by:
(1)First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or
(2)courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville, Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted and/or the contentions should be admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, filings must be submitted no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at *http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp* , unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission. For further details with respect to this amendment action, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the PDR Reference staff at 1
(800)397-4209,
(301)415-4737 or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Carolina Power & Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina *Date of amendment request:* April 3, 2008. *Description of amendment request:* This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification Section 5.6.3.b to allow a reconfiguration of the fuel racks in spent fuel pool
(SFP)C and allow the use of Metamic as an alternate neutron poison material in the new storage racks for SFP C and D. The proposed amendment will:
(1)revise the rack configuration in SFP C to allow the substitution of four previously approved (13 x 13 cell) boiling water reactor racks with an equal number of (9 x 9 cell) pressurized water reactor racks, and
(2)authorize the use of Metamic as an alternate spent fuel rack poison material. *Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:* As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The license amendment only revises the SFP C configuration and provides an optional poison material Metamic for the spent fuel pool racks. These changes do not modify the design of Structures, Systems and Components
(SSCs)that could initiate an accident. This system has been evaluated for the conditions that would exist with the new configuration and new poison materials. It was found that the rack configuration has been previously evaluated for all enveloping accidents. Also, the Metamic poison material has been evaluated for all enveloping accidents and it can be concluded that there would be no increase in dose from a fuel handling accident in the FHB [Fuel Handling Building]. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The license amendment only revises the SFP C configuration and allows the optional poison material Metamic for the spent fuel pool racks. License Amendment 103 Safety Evaluation addressed applicable design basis accidents for the addition of the SFP racks. Since no structural properties are attributed to the Boral or Metamic, this is an acceptable substitution. The properties of Metamic are equal to or better than Boral in ensuring criticality control. No significant impact on any postulated accident is made due to this change. The Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup System (FPCCS) and Spent Fuel Pool Racks will operate within design parameters. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety? Response: No. In accordance with License Amendment 103 and the submitted Holtec report in Attachment 7, the change in the Spent Fuel Pool Rack configuration and poison substitution is bounded by previous evaluations of the safety-related systems to design basis accidents. The fixed neutron absorber (Metamic) has been demonstrated as acceptable for dry and wet storage applications on a generic basis. Additionally, the NRC has approved the use of Metamic in both wet storage and dry storage nuclear plant applications. The margin of safety for sub criticality is maintained by having k eff [effective multiplication factor] equal to or less than 0.95 under all normal storage, fuel handling and accident conditions, including uncertainties. Since Metamic provides a lower calculated k eff than does Boral, 0.90929 versus 0.91062, the margin of safety slightly increases with the use of Metamic.Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. *Attorney for licensee:* David T. Conley, Associate General Counsel II—Legal Department, Progress Energy Service Company, LLC, Post Office Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602. *NRC Branch Chief:* Thomas H. Boyce. FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, *et al.* , Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Beaver County, Pennsylvania *Date of amendment request:* December 21, 2007. *Description of amendment request:* This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The amendments would revise the Technical Specifications
(TSs)to adopt the bypass test time, Completion Time, and Surveillance Frequency changes through the implementation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)approved WCAP-14333-P-A, Revision 1 and WCAP-15376-P-A, Revision 1. *Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:* As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The overall protection system performance will remain within the bounds of the previously performed accident analyses since no hardware changes are proposed. The same reactor trip system (RTS), engineered safety feature actuation system (ESFAS), and loss of power
(LOP)diesel generator start and bus separation instrumentation will continue to be used. The protection systems will continue to function in a manner consistent with the plant design basis. The changes to the TSs do not result in a condition where the design, material, and construction standards that were applicable prior to the change are altered. The proposed changes will not modify any system interface. The proposed changes will not affect the probability of any event initiators. There will be no degradation in the performance of or an increase in the number of challenges imposed on safety-related equipment assumed to function during an accident situation. There will be no change to normal plant operating parameters or accident mitigation performance. The proposed changes will not alter any assumptions or change any mitigation actions in the radiological consequence evaluations in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The determination that the results of the proposed changes are acceptable was established in the NRC Safety Evaluations prepared for WCAP-14333-P-A (issued by letter dated July 15, 1998) and for WCAP-1 5376-P-A (issued by letter dated December 20, 2002). Implementation of the proposed changes will result in an insignificant risk impact. Applicability of these conclusions has been verified through plant-specific reviews and implementation of the generic analysis results in accordance with the respective NRC Safety Evaluation conditions. The proposed changes to the Completion Times, bypass test times, and Surveillance Frequencies reduce the potential for inadvertent reactor trips and spurious engineered safety feature
(ESF)actuations, and therefore do not increase the probability of any accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes do not change the response of the plant to any accidents and have an insignificant impact on the reliability of the RTS, ESFAS and LOP diesel generator start and bus separation signals. The RTS, ESFAS and LOP diesel generator start and bus separation instrumentation will remain highly reliable and the proposed changes will not result in a significant increase in the risk of plant operation. This is demonstrated by showing that the impact on plant safety as measured by the increase in core damage frequency
(CDF)is less than 1.0E-06 per year and the increase in large early release frequency
(LERF)is less than 1.0E-07 per year. In addition, for the Completion Time changes, the incremental conditional core damage probabilities (ICCDP) and incremental conditional large early release probabilities (ICLERP) are less than 5.0E-07 and 5.0E-08, respectively. These changes meet the acceptance criteria in Regulatory Guides 1.174 and 1.177. Therefore, since the RTS, ESFAS and LOP diesel generator start and bus separation instrumentation will continue to perform their functions with high reliability as originally assumed, and the risk impact as measured by the △CDF, △LERF, ICCDP, and ICLERP risk metrics is within the acceptance criteria of existing regulatory guidance, there will not be a significant increase in the consequences of any accidents. The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, or configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the ability of structures, systems, and component from performing their intended function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The proposed changes do not affect the source term, containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes are consistent with safety analysis assumptions and resultant consequences. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. There are no hardware changes nor are there any changes in the method by which any safety-related plant system performs its safety function. The proposed changes will not affect the normal method of plant operation. No performance requirements will be affected or eliminated. The proposed changes will not result in physical alteration to any plant system nor will there be any change in the method by which any safety-related plant system performs its safety function. There will be no setpoint changes or changes to accident analysis assumptions. No new accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced as a result of these changes. There will be no adverse effect or challenges imposed on any safety-related system as a result of these changes. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. 3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed changes do not affect the acceptance criteria for any analyzed event nor is there a change to any Safety Analysis Limit (SAL). There will be no effect on the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting conditions for operation are determined nor will there be any effect on those plant systems necessary to assure the accomplishment of protection functions. The redundancy of RTS and ESFAS trains and the LOP diesel generator start and bus separation instrumentation is maintained, and diversity with regard to the signals that provide reactor trip and ESF actuation is also maintained. All signals credited as primary or secondary, and all operator actions credited in the accident analyses will remain the same. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis. The calculated impact on risk is insignificant and meets the acceptance criteria contained in Regulatory Guides 1.174 and 1.177. Although there was no attempt to quantify any positive human factors benefit due to increased Completion Times and bypass test times, it is expected that there would be a net benefit due to a reduced potential for spurious reactor trips and actuations associated with testing. Implementation of the proposed changes is expected to result in an overall improvement in safety, as follows:
(a)Reduced testing should result in fewer inadvertent reactor trips, less frequent actuation of ESFAS components, less frequent distraction of operations personnel without significantly affecting RTS and ESFAS reliability.
(b)Improvements in the effectiveness of the operating staff in monitoring and controlling plant operation should be realized. This is due to less frequent distraction of the operators and shift supervisor to attend to instrumentation Required Actions with short Completion Times.
(c)The time provided by the proposed increase in Completion Times and bypass test times should reduce the potential for human errors by the personnel performing Required Actions, corrective maintenance, and Surveillance Testing.
(d)The Completion Time extensions for the reactor trip breakers should provide additional time to complete test and maintenance activities while at power, potentially reducing the number of forced outages related to compliance with reactor trip breaker Completion Times, and provide consistency with the Completion Times for the logic trains. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. *Attorney for licensee:* David W. Jenkins, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, FirstEnergy Corporation, 76 South Main Street, Akron, OH 44308. *NRC Branch Chief:* Mark G. Kowal. Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-327, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1, Hamilton County, Tennessee *Date of amendment request:* April 14, 2008. *Description of amendment request:* This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed amendment would revise the list of topical reports used to prepare the core operating limits report by adding a new methodology that implements a realistic analysis methodology. The proposed changes would add a new reference in Technical Specification Section 6.9.1.14.a. The new reference is “EMF-2103P-A, “Realistic Large Break LOCA Methodology for Pressurized Water Reactors”.” The change would be utilized in core loading designs for Unit 1 fuel-load configurations in future operating cycles. *Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:* As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed change adds an approved analytical method for evaluating a large break
(LB)loss of coolant accident (LOCA). The proposed change will not affect previously evaluated accidents because they continue to be analyzed by NRC approved methodologies to ensure required safety limits are maintained. The acceptance criteria of the SQN Final Safety Analysis Report analyzed accidents and anticipated operational occurrences are not affected by the proposed addition of the realistic LB LOCA methodology. As the evaluations for accidents and operation occurrences are not adversely affected, the proposed change will not increase the consequences of a postulated event. The proposed change does not result in any modification of the plant equipment or operating practices and therefore, does not alter plant conditions or plant response prior to or after postulated events. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. As previously noted, the proposed change does not result in any modification of the plant equipment or operating practices and therefore, does not alter plant conditions or plant response prior to or after postulated events. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed change does not alter plant equipment including the automatic accident mitigation setpoints designed to mitigate the affects of a postulated accident. The accident analyses and plant safety limits continue to be acceptable as evaluated by NRC approved methodologies. The proposed application of the realistic LB LOCA methodology ensures acceptable margins and limits for fuel core designs. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. *Attorney for licensee:* General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11A, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. *NRC Branch Chief:* Thomas H. Boyce. Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and Safeguards Information
(SGI)for Contention Preparation Carolina Power & Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina; FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Beaver County, Pennsylvania; Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-327, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1, Hamilton County, Tennessee 1. This order contains instructions regarding how potential parties to the proceedings listed above may request access to documents containing sensitive unclassified information (SUNSI and SGI). 2. Within ten
(10)days after publication of this notice of opportunity for hearing, any potential party as defined in 10 CFR 2.4 who believes access to SUNSI or SGI is necessary for a response to the notice may request access to SUNSI or SGI. A “potential party” is any person who intends or may intend to participate as a party by demonstrating standing and the filing of an admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests submitted later than ten
(10)days will not be considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing, addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier. 3. The requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to access SUNSI and/or SGI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the General Counsel, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address for both offices is U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The e-mail address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are *HearingDocket@nrc.gov* and *OGCmail@nrc.gov* , respectively. 1 The request must include the following information: 1 See footnote 6. While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC's “E-Filing Rule,” the initial request to access SUNSI and/or SGI under these procedures should be submitted as described in this paragraph. a. A description of the licensing action with a citation to this **Federal Register** notice of opportunity for hearing; b. The name and address of the potential party and a description of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed by the action identified in (a); c. If the request is for SUNSI, the identity of the individual requesting access to SUNSI and the requester's need for the information in order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding, particularly why publicly available versions of the application would not be sufficient to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered contention; d. If the request is for SGI, the identity of the individual requesting access to SGI and the identity of any expert, consultant or assistant who will aid the requester in evaluating the SGI, and information that shows:
(i)Why the information is indispensable to meaningful participation in this licensing proceeding; and
(ii)The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, experience, training or education) of the requester to understand and use (or evaluate) the requested information to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered contention. The technical competence of a potential party or its counsel may be shown by reliance on a qualified expert, consultant or assistant who demonstrates technical competence as well as trustworthiness and reliability, and who agrees to sign a non-disclosure affidavit and be bound by the terms of a protective order; and e. If the request is for SGI, Form SF-85, “Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive Positions,” Form FD-248 (fingerprint card), and a credit check release form completed by the individual who seeks access to SGI and each individual who will aid the requester in evaluating the SGI. For security reasons, Form SF-85 can only be submitted electronically, through a restricted-access database. To obtain online access to the form, the requester should contact the NRC's Office of Administration at 301-415-0320. 2 The other completed forms must be signed in original ink, accompanied by a check or money order payable in the amount of $191.00 to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each individual, and mailed to the: Office of Administration, Security Processing Unit, Mail Stop T-6E46, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0012. 2 The requester will be asked to provide his or her full name, social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number, and e-mail addess. After providing this information, the requester usually should be able to obtain access to the online form within one business day. These forms will be used to initiate the background check, which includes fingerprinting as part of a criminal history records check. Note: Copies of these forms do not need to be included with the request letter to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter should state that the forms and fees have been submitted as described above. 4. To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, all forms should be reviewed for completeness and accuracy (including legibility) before submitting them to the NRC. Incomplete packages will be returned to the sender and will not be processed. 5. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under items 2 and 3.a through 3.d, above, the NRC staff will determine within ten days of receipt of the written access request whether
(1)there is a reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely to establish standing to participate in this NRC proceeding, and
(2)there is a legitimate need for access to SUNSI or need to know the SGI requested. For SGI, the need to know determination is made based on whether the information requested is necessary (i.e., indispensable) for the proposed recipient to proffer and litigate a specific contention in this NRC proceeding 3 and whether the proposed recipient has the technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, training, education, or experience) to evaluate and use the specific SGI requested in this proceeding. 3 Broad SGI requests under these procedures are thus highly unlikely to meet the standard for need to know; furthermore, staff redaction of information from requested documents before their release may be appropriate to comport with this requirement. These procedures do not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny of a requester's need to know than ordinarily would be applied in connection with an already-admitted contention. 6. If standing and need to know SGI are shown, the NRC staff will further determine based upon completion of the background check whether the proposed recipient is trustworthy and reliable. The NRC staff will conduct (as necessary) an inspection to confirm that the recipient's information protection systems are sufficient to protect SGI from inadvertent release or disclosure. Recipients may opt to view SGI at the NRC's facility rather than establish their own SGI protection program to meet SGI protection requirements. 7. A request for access to SUNSI or SGI will be granted if: a. The request has demonstrated that there is a reasonable basis to believe that a potential party is likely to establish standing to intervene or to otherwise participate as a party in this proceeding; b. The proposed recipient of the information has demonstrated a need for SUNSI or a need to know for SGI, and that the proposed recipient of SGI is trustworthy and reliable; c. The proposed recipient of the information has executed a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit and agrees to be bound by the terms of a Protective Order setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI and/or SGI; and d. The presiding officer has issued a protective order concerning the information or documents requested. 4 Any protective order issued shall provide that the petitioner must file SUNSI or SGI contentions 25 days after receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI or SGI contentions by that later deadline. 4 If a presiding officer has not yet been designated, the Chief Administative Judge will issue such orders, or will appoint a presiding officer to do so. 8. If the request for access to SUNSI or SGI is granted, the terms and conditions for access to sensitive unclassified information will be set forth in a draft protective order and affidavit of non-disclosure appended to a joint motion by the NRC staff, any other affected parties to this proceeding, 5 and the petitioner(s). If the diligent efforts by the relevant parties or petitioner(s) fail to result in an agreement on the terms and conditions for a draft protective order or non-disclosure affidavit, the relevant parties to the proceeding or the petitioner(s) should notify the presiding officer within five
(5)days, describing the obstacles to the agreement. 5 Parties/persons other than the requester and the NRC staff will be notified by the NRC staff of a favorable access determination (and may participate in the development of such a motion and protective order) if it concerns SUNSI and if the party/person's interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information (e.g., as with properietary information). 9. If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff or a request for access to SGI is denied by NRC staff either after a determination on standing and need to know or, later, after a determination on trustworthiness and reliability, the NRC staff shall briefly state the reasons for the denial. Before the Office of Administration makes an adverse determination regarding access, the proposed recipient must be provided an opportunity to correct or explain information. The requester may challenge the NRC staff's adverse determination with respect to access to SUNSI or with respect to standing or need to know for SGI by filing a challenge within five
(5)days of receipt of that determination with
(a)The presiding officer designated in this proceeding;
(b)if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an administrative law judge with jurisdiction pursuant to § 2.318(a); or
(c)if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer. In the same manner, an SGI requester may challenge an adverse determination on trustworthiness and reliability by filing a challenge within fifteen
(15)days of receipt of that determination. In the same manner, a party other than the requester may challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. Such a challenge must be filed within five
(5)days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of such a request. If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10 CFR 2.311. 6 6 As of Ocober 15, 2007, the NRC's final “E-Filing Rule” became effective. See Use of Electronic Submissions in Agency Hearings (72 FR 49139; Aug. 28, 2007). Requesters should note that the filing requirements of that rule apply to appeals of NRC staff determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer of the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI/SGI requests submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures. 10. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers (and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests for access to SUNSI and/or SGI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR Part 2. Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for processing and resolving requests under these procedures. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of June 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. Attachment 1—General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and Safeguards Information
(SGI)in This Proceeding Day Event/Activity 0 Publication of **Federal Register** notice of proposed action and opportunity for hearing, including order with instructions for access requests. 10 Deadline for submitting requests for access to SUNSI and/or SGI with information: supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding; demonstrating that access should be granted (e.g., showing technical competence for access to SGI); and, for SGI, including application fee for fingerprint/background check. 60 Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing:
(i)Demonstration of standing;
(ii)all contentions whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI and/or SGI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply). 20 NRC staff informs the requester of the staff's determination whether the request for access provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows
(1)need for SUNSI or
(2)need to know for SGI. (For SUNSI, NRC staff also informs any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents). If NRC staff makes the finding of need to know for SGI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins background check (including fingerprinting for a criminal history records check), information processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents), and readiness inspections. 25 If NRC staff finds no “need,” “need to know,” or likelihood of standing, the deadline for petitioner/requester to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff's denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds “need” for SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff's grant of access. 30 Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s). 40 (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI. 190 (Receipt +180) If NRC staff finds standing, need to know for SGI, and trustworthiness and reliability, deadline for NRC staff to file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-disclosure Affidavit (or to make a determination that the proposed recipient of SGI is not trustworthy or reliable). Note: Before the Office of Administration makes an adverse determination regarding access, the proposed recipient must be provided an opportunity to correct or explain information. 205 Deadline for petitioner to seek reversal of a final adverse NRC staff determination either before the presiding officer or another designated officer. A If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a final adverse determination by the NRC staff. A + 3 Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI and/or SGI consistent with decision issuing the protective order. A + 28 Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI or SGI contentions by that later deadline. A + 53 (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI. A + 60 (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers. B Decision on contention admission. [FR Doc. E8-12827 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sunshine Federal Register Notice Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Date: Weeks of June 9, 16, 23, 30, July 7, 14, 2008. Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Status: Public and Closed. Week of June 9, 2008 There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of June 9, 2008. Week of June 16, 2008—Tentative Tuesday, June 17, 2008 12:55 p.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. U.S. DOE (HLW Repository: Pre-Application Matters), Docket No. PAPO-00—The State of Nevada's Notice of Appeal from the PAPO Board's 1/4/08 and 12/12/07 Orders and The State of Nevada's Motion to File a Limited Reply (Tentative). b. AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, (License Renewal for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station); Citizens' Motion to Stay proceedings (Tentative). 1 p.m. Discussion of Adjudicatory Issues (Closed—Ex. 10). Week of June 23, 2008—Tentative Friday, June 27, 2008 9:30 a.m. Periodic Briefing on New Reactor Issues, (Public Meeting) (Contact: Donna Williams, 301 415-1322). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address— *http://www.nrc.gov.* Week of June 30, 2008—Tentative Tuesday, July 1, 2008 9 a.m. Hearing: Diablo Canyon, 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart K Proceeding, Oral Arguments (Public Meeting). (Contact: John Cordes, 301 415-1600). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address— *http://www.nrc.gov.* Week of July 7, 2008—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of July 7, 2008. Week of July 14, 2008—Tentative Thursday, July 17, 2008 1 p.m. Briefing on Fire Protection Issues (Public Meeting) (Contact: Alex Klein, 301 415-2822). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address— *http://www.nrc.gov.* *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings, call (recording)—(301) 415-1292. Contact person for more information: Michelle Schroll,
(301)415-1662. Additional Information: By a vote of 4-0 on June 2, 2008, the Commission determined pursuant to U.S.C. 552b(e) and § 9.107(a) of the Commission's rules that “Affirmation of U.S. Department of Energy (High-Level Waste Repository Pre-Application Matters, Advisory Pre-License Application Presiding Officer
(PAPO)Board), Nevada Motion to Disqualify Department of Energy Counsel” be held June 5, 2008, and on less than one week's notice to the public. The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: *http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policy-making/sch edule.html* The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, Rohn Brown, at 301-492-2279, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at *REB3@nrc.gov.* Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to *dkw@nrc.gov.* Dated: June 5, 2008. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 08-1339 Filed 6-6-08; 10:11 am]
Connectionstraces to 43
Traces to 43 documents
U.S. Code
CFR
29 references not yet in our index
  • 12 CFR 225
  • Pub. L. 105-85
  • 45 CFR 46
  • Pub. L. 92-463
  • 42 USC 300u-300u
  • 42 CFR 52
  • 45 CFR 100
  • 6 CFR 5
  • Pub. L. 107-296
  • Pub. L. 110-53
  • 5 CFR 1320.10
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • 44 USC 35
  • 40 CFR 1506.6(b)(3)
  • 50 CFR 17.21
  • 50 CFR 17.3
  • 50 CFR 17.32
  • 50 CFR 17.22
  • 50 CFR 17.22(b)(5)
  • 40 CFR 1500
  • 40 CFR 1501.6
  • 33 CFR 325
  • 40 CFR 1501.2
  • 16 USC 1361-1407
  • 43 CFR 2650.7(d)
  • 43 CFR 4
  • 26 USC 2813
  • 29 CFR 90.18(c)
  • 10 CFR 2
Citation graph
cites case law
Rules and Regulations
Notice
U.S.C.§ 1817
C.F.R.§ 225.41
U.S.C.§ 1841
U.S.C.§ 1842
U.S.C.§ 1843
U.S.C.§ 902
Stat.Public Law 105–354
U.S.C.§ 3506
U.S.C.§ 299b–3
Cite12 CFR 225
Pub. L.Pub. L. 105-85
Cite45 CFR 46
Cites 72 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.