5–20–05 Friday Vol. 70 No. 97 May 20, 2005
Pages 29189–29436
VerDate jul 14 2003 21:16 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\20MYWS.LOC 20MYWS
i II Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005
The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see www.archives.gov. FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication THE FEDERAL REGISTER: WHAT IT IS AND HOW TO USE IT established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: The online edition of the Federal Register www.gpoaccess.gov/ nara, available through GPO Access, is issued under the authority 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the Register system and the public’s role in the development official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 of regulations. U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. Code of Federal Regulations. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register doc- User Support Team, call toll free 1-888-293-6498; DC area 202- uments. 512-1530; fax at 202-512-1262; or via e-mail at [email protected]. 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR sys- The Support Team is available between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. tem. Eastern Time, Monday–Friday, except official holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper WHY: To provide the public with access to information nec- edition is $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, for a combined essary to research Federal agency regulations which di- Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections rectly affect them. There will be no discussion of specific Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal agency regulations. Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $165, llllllllllllllllll plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to WHEN: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, 9:00 a.m.–Noon is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing WHERE: Office of the Federal Register less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues Conference Room, Suite 700 of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, 800 North Capitol Street, NW. including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable Washington, DC 20002 to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or RESERVATIONS: (202) 741–6008 Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954; or call toll free 1-866- 512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 70 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.
.
VerDate jul 14 2003 21:16 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\20MYWS.LOC 20MYWS III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 97
Friday, May 20, 2005
Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES RULES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Pears (winter) grown in— Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Advisory Oregon and Washington, 29388–29398 Committee, 29339–29340 PROPOSED RULES Milk marketing orders: Commerce Department Appalachian and Southeast, 29410–29428 See Foreign-Trade Zones Board See International Trade Administration Agriculture Department See National Institute of Standards and Technology See Agricultural Marketing Service See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service See Food and Nutrition Service Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or See Food Safety and Inspection Service Severely Disabled See Forest Service NOTICES Procurement list; additions and deletions, 29274–29276 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service PROPOSED RULES Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements Plant-related quarantine, foreign: NOTICES Wheat importation; flag smut-related prohibitions; Textile and apparel categories: proposed removal, 29212–29214 Commercial availability actions— NOTICES Sub-Saharan; handloomed, handmade, or folklore Environmental statements; availability, etc.: articles, 29287–29288 Garbage from Hawaii; interstate movement, 29269 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Customs and Border Protection Bureau National Animal Identification System; draft strategic NOTICES plan and draft program standards, 29269–29270 Trade name recordation applications: JOY ENTERPRISES, 29340 Arts and Humanities, National Foundation See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Defense Department NOTICES Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): People Who Are Agency information collection activities; proposals, See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind submissions, and approvals, 29288 or Severely Disabled Meetings: Science Board task forces, 29288–29290 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Education Department Agency information collection activities; proposals, NOTICES submissions, and approvals, 29313–29314 Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 29290–29292 Children and Families Administration Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: NOTICES Elementary and secondary education— Agency information collection activities; proposals, Small, Rural School Achievement Program, 29292– submissions, and approvals, 29314–29318 29293 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Meetings: Community-Based Abstinence Education Program, Historically Black Colleges and Universities Capital 29318–29328 Financing Advisory Board, 29293
Coast Guard Employment and Training Administration RULES NOTICES Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, Agency information collection activities; proposals, safety zones, security zones, etc.: submissions, and approvals, 29365–29366 HOVENSA refinery facility waterfront area, St. Croix, VI, 29200–29202 Employment Standards Administration Portland Captain of Port Zone, OR, 29202 See Wage and Hour Division Regattas and marine parades: NOTICES Escape from Fort Delaware Triathlon, 29197–29199 Minimum wages for Federal and federally-assisted Fort Myers Beach Air Show, 29195–29197 construction; general wage determination decisions, PROPOSED RULES 29366–29367 Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.: Energy Department Milwaukee Harbor, WI, 29235–29237 See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
VerDate Aug<04>2004 21:02 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\20MYCN.SGM 20MYCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Contents
Environmental Protection Agency Federal Energy Regulatory Commission RULES NOTICES Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Electric rate and corporate regulation filings, 29299–29302 Iron and steel foundries, 29400–29405 Hydroelectric applications, 29302–29304 Air quality implementation plans; approval and Meetings: promulgation; various States: Energy Infrastructure and Investment in California, Michigan, 29202–29207 California Independent System Operator Corp.; PROPOSED RULES technical conference, 29304–29305 Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Liberty Gas Storage, LLC; Calcasieu and Beauregard Iron and steel foundries, 29406–29407 Parishes, LA; site visit, 29305 Air quality implementation plans; approval and Northwest Natural Gas Co.; technical conference, 29305 promulgation; various States; air quality planning Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: purposes; designation of areas: ANR Pipeline Co., 29293–29294 Idaho, 29243–29252 Columbia Gas Transmission Corp., 29294 Air quality implementation plans; approval and Discovery Gas Transmission LLC, 29294 promulgation; various States: El Paso Natural Gas Co., 29294–29295 Michigan, 29238–29239 Entergy Services, Inc., 29295 Washington, 29239–29243 Florida Power Corp., et al., 29295 NOTICES LG & E Marketing, Inc., et al., 29295 Agency information collection activities; proposals, Major Lending, LLC, 29295–29296 submissions, and approvals, 29305–29307 Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Inc., et al., 29296 Agency statements North Baja Pipeline, LLC, 29296 Comment availability, 29307–29308 PacificCorp et al., 29296–29297 Weekly receipts, 29307 San Joaquin Cogen, L.L.C., 29297 Grants, States and local assistance: Southern Companies Energy Marketing, Inc., et al., 29297 Grantee performance evaluation reports— Southern Company Services, Inc., 29297 Various States, 29308 TransColorado Gas Transmission Co., 29297–29298 Meetings: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 29298–29299 Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances National Advisory Committee, 29309 Federal Highway Administration Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.: NOTICES Gametrics Ltd. et al., 29309–29311 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Superfund; response and remedial actions, proposed Nueces County, TX, 29375–29376 settlements, etc.: Li Tungsten Site, NY, 29312 Pittsburgh Metal & Equipment Site, NJ, 29312–29313 Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Executive Office of the President Endangered and threatened species: See Presidential Documents Findings on petitions, etc.— Pygmy rabbit, 29253–29265 Federal Aviation Administration NOTICES NOTICES Endangered and threatened species and marine mammal Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: permit applications, 29362–29363 Chicago O’Hare International Airport, IL; new runways and associated development, 29374 Food and Drug Administration Transport category airplanes— PROPOSED RULES Seats, berths, safety belts, and harnesses requirements; Food for human consumption: conducting component level tests to demonstrate Food standards; general principles, 29214–29235 compliance; policy statement, 29374–29375 NOTICES Technical standard orders: Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; program Galley carts and containers, 29375 priorities:, 29328–29329 Human drugs: Federal Communications Commission Drug products withdrawn from sale for reasons other PROPOSED RULES than safety or effectiveness— Common carrier services: ZITHROMAX 250-milligram oral capsules, 29329– Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act 29330 of 2004 (SHVERA) implementation— Section 338 of the Communications Act; amendments; Food and Nutrition Service correction, 29252–29253 NOTICES NOTICES Rulemaking proceedings; petitions filed, granted, denied, Agency information collection activities; proposals, etc., 29313 submissions, and approvals, 29270–29271
Federal Emergency Management Agency Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Disaster and emergency areas: Meat and poultry inspection: Florida, 29340–29341 Food standards; general principles, 29214–29235
VerDate Aug<04>2004 21:02 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\20MYCN.SGM 20MYCN Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Contents V
Foreign-Trade Zones Board Interior Department NOTICES See Fish and Wildlife Service Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: See Geological Survey Connecticut See Indian Affairs Bureau Pfizer, Inc.; pharmaceuticals/animal health products See Land Management Bureau manufacturing facilities, 29276 RULES Illinois, 29277 Acquisition regulations: Louisiana, 29277 Woody biomass utilization, 29208–29211 North Dakota, 29277–29278 NOTICES Meetings: Forest Service California Desert District Advisory Council, 29362 NOTICES Internal Revenue Service Environmental statements; notice of intent: NOTICES Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, WI, 29271–29272 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, CA and NV; Great Low Income Taxpayer Clinic Grant Program, 29376– Basin South Rangeland Project, 29272–29273 29377 Meetings: Meetings: National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Taxpayer Advocacy Panels, 29377 Council, 29273 Resource Advisory Committees— International Trade Administration Trinity County, 29273–29274 NOTICES Antidumping: General Services Administration Cased pencils from— NOTICES China, 29278 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip from— Agency information collection activities; proposals, India, 29278–29279 submissions, and approvals, 29288 Meetings: President’s Export Council, 29279 Geological Survey NOTICES International Trade Commission Agency information collection activities; proposals, NOTICES submissions, and approvals, 29363 Import investigations: Fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon from— Health and Human Services Department Norway, 29364 See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Sodium thiosulfate from— See Children and Families Administration Various countries, 29364–29365 See Food and Drug Administration Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29365 See Health Resources and Services Administration See National Institutes of Health Justice Department See Prisons Bureau Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Labor Department Meetings: See Employment and Training Administration Rural Health and Human Services National Advisory See Employment Standards Administration Committee, 29330 See Wage and Hour Division Land Management Bureau Homeland Security Department RULES See Coast Guard General management: See Customs and Border Protection Bureau Land use planning See Federal Emergency Management Agency Correction, 29207–29208 NOTICES Housing and Urban Development Department Coal leases, exploration licenses, etc.: NOTICES Washington; correction, 29364 Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 29341–29343 Legal Services Corporation Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: NOTICES America’s Affordable Communities Initiative, 29343– Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: 29360 Regulatory agenda (2005-2006), development; comment Homeless assistance; excess and surplus Federal request, 29368 properties, 29360–29361 Strategic directions (2006-2010), development; comment request, 29368–29369 Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES National Aeronautics and Space Administration Environmental statements; notice of intent: NOTICES Estom Yumeka Maidu Tribe, Yuba County, CA; fee-to- Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): trust transfer and casino and hotel project, 29363– Agency information collection activities; proposals, 29364 submissions, and approvals, 29288
VerDate Aug<04>2004 21:02 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\20MYCN.SGM 20MYCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Contents
National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Access to government information and services at public Southern Nuclear Operating Co., Inc., 29369–29370 libraries and public access computing centers; user satisfaction study, 29369 Presidential Documents Meetings: ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Humanities Panel, 29369 Government agencies and employees: Office of Management and Budget; assignment of function to submit a report to the Director National Institute of Standards and Technology (Memorandum of May 13, 2005), 29429–29431 NOTICES Iraq; continuation of the national emergency protecting the Meetings: Development Fund for Iraq and certain other property Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board, 29279 (Notice of May 19, 2005), 29433–29436 Prisons Bureau National Institutes of Health RULES NOTICES Inmate control, custody, care, etc.: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Emergency operations, 29189–29191 Cocaine and methamphetamine dependence; research Infectious disease management; voluntary and and development of vigabatrin as potential involuntary testing, 29191–29194 pharmacotherapy treatment, 29330–29332 Over-the-counter (OTC) medications; inmate access; Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, technical correction, 29194–29195 29332–29336 Release transportation regulations; release gratuities; Meetings: clarification, 29195 National Cancer Institute, 29336–29337 National Center for Complementary and Alternative Securities and Exchange Commission Medicine, 29337 NOTICES National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Agency information collection activities; proposals, 29337–29338 submissions, and approvals, 29370 National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29370–29371 Skin Diseases, 29338 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 29338– Pacific Exchange, Inc., 29371–29373 29339 National Institute of Mental Health, 29337–29338 Surface Transportation Board National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication NOTICES Disorders, 29339 Railroad operation, acquisition, construction, etc.: Central of Georgia Railroad Co., 29376
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Textile Agreements Implementation Committee PROPOSED RULES See Committee for the Implementation of Textile Fishery conservation and management: Agreements Northeastern United States fisheries— Transportation Department Atlantic deep-sea red crab, 29265–29268 Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992: See Federal Aviation Administration Private land remote-sensing space systems; licensing See Federal Highway Administration requirements, 29380–29386 See Surface Transportation Board NOTICES NOTICES Aviation proceedings: Coastal zone management programs and estuarine Agreements filed, etc., 29373 sanctuaries: Certificates of public convenience and necessity and State programs— foreign air carrier permits; weekly applications, Intent to evaluate performance, 29280 29373–29374 Damage Assessment and Restoration Program; indirect cost rates (2003 FY), 29280–29281 Treasury Department Endangered and threatened species: See Internal Revenue Service Anadromous fish take— Idaho Fish and Game Department, Snake River Wage and Hour Division salmonids, 29281–29282 NOTICES Washington Fish and Wildlife Department et al.; Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Pacific salmon, 29282–29283 All Industries in American Samoa Special Industry Meetings: Committee, 29368 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 29283– 29284 New England Fishery Management Council, 29284 Separate Parts In This Issue North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 29284–29285 Sea turtle release protocol workshops, 29285–29286 Part II South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 29286– Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 29287 Administration, 29380–29386
VerDate Aug<04>2004 21:02 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\20MYCN.SGM 20MYCN Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Contents VII
Part III Part VII Agriculture Department, Agricultural Marketing Service, Executive Office of the President, Presidential Documents, 29388–29398 29433–29436
Part IV Environmental Protection Agency, 29400–29407 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Part V and notice of recently enacted public laws. Agriculture Department, Agricultural Marketing Service, 29410–29428 To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Part VI listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Executive Office of the President, Presidential Documents, archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change 29429–29431 settings); then follow the instructions.
VerDate Aug<04>2004 21:02 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\20MYCN.SGM 20MYCN VIII Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Contents
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
3 CFR 648...... 29253 Executive Orders: 12722 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 12724 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 13290 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 13303 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 13315 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 13350 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 13364 (see Notice of May 19, 2005)...... 29435 Administrative Orders: Memorandums: Memorandum of May 13, 2005 ...... 29431 Notices: Notice of May 19, 2005 ...... 29435 7 CFR 927...... 29388 Proposed Rules: 319...... 29212 1005...... 29410 1007...... 29410 9 CFR Proposed Rules: 410...... 29214 15 CFR Proposed Rules: 960...... 29380 21 CFR Proposed Rules: 130...... 29214 28 CFR 501...... 29189 549 (2 documents) ...... 29191, 29194 571...... 29195 33 CFR 100 (2 documents) ...... 29195, 29197 165 (3 documents) ...... 29200, 29202 Proposed Rules: 165...... 29235 40 CFR 52...... 29202 63...... 29400 Proposed Rules: 52 (3 documents) ...... 29238, 29239, 29243 63...... 29406 81...... 29243 43 CFR 1600...... 29207 47 CFR Proposed Rules: 76...... 29252 48 CFR 1437...... 29208 1452...... 29208 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 17...... 29253
VerDate Aug 04 2004 21:04 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\20MYLS.LOC 20MYLS 29189
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 97
Friday, May 20, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER interim final rule we published on this necessary in the limited situation of an contains regulatory documents having general subject on April 16, 2003 (68 FR 18544). emergency that threatens human life or applicability and legal effect, most of which This Final rule clarifies that, when safety. are keyed to and codified in the Code of there is an institutional or system-wide Federal Regulations, which is published under Bureau emergency which the Director or Notice to Inmates 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. designee considers a threat to human A commenter suggested that when The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by life or safety, the Director or designee rules are suspended, inmates should the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of may suspend the operation of the rules receive notice of the suspension new books are listed in the first FEDERAL in this chapter as necessary to handle immediately, including a description of REGISTER issue of each week. the emergency. This rule change the rules being suspended, a clear clarifying the Director’s authority to reason for the suspension and authority modify Bureau rules to handle for suspension. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE emergencies is especially necessary in Because the reason for suspending the light of the continued threats of terrorist rules will necessarily involve an Bureau of Prisons attacks, dangers to national security, emergency, it will not always be and other events occurring on and after practical or possible to provide notice to 28 CFR Part 501 September 11, 2001. inmates of the specific circumstances surrounding suspension. However, the [BOP Docket No. 1117–F] Response to Comments Bureau intends that inmates will be We received a total of four comments notified as soon as practicable of the RIN 1120–AB17 which raised similar issues. We will suspension. therefore address each of the issues Bureau of Prisons Emergencies raised instead of addressing each Administrative Remedies comment separately. AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice. Two commenters incorrectly assume ACTION: Final rule. Authority To Suspend Rules that there is no way for an inmate to One commenter claimed that ‘‘[t]here grieve a suspension of the rules. One SUMMARY: The Bureau of Prisons is no authority to suspend the rules.’’ commenter asked, ‘‘If the rules are (Bureau) makes this final rule to clarify This rule was promulgated on June suspended, does BOP waive any claim that, when there is an institutional or 29, 1979 (44 FR 38244) and proposed on to administrative remedies regarding system-wide Bureau emergency which May 23, 1977 (42 FR 26334), along with any incident occurring during the the Director or designee considers a several other core Bureau regulations. suspension period?’’ The Bureau will threat to human life or safety, the There were no amendments made to not waive claim to administrative Director or designee may suspend the this rule after 1979, until the interim remedies because inmates are permitted operation of the rules in this chapter as final rule was published in 2003. When to follow the Administrative Remedy necessary to handle the emergency. This we proposed this rule in 1977, we rules as set forth in 28 CFR part 542 to rule clarifies that the Director may referred to 18 U.S.C. 4001 and 4042 as register complaints regarding incidents suspend Bureau rules as needed in light the authority for the rule. occurring during the suspension period. of any emergency affecting the Bureau, 18 U.S.C. 4001(b)(1) states that the Freedom of Information Act and the Warden may do so to deal with Attorney General ‘‘shall promulgate emergencies at the institution level. rules for the government’’ of Federal A commenter asked whether the This rule change clarifying the penal and correctional institutions. notice of suspension of rules, provided Director’s authority to modify Bureau Subsection (b)(2) also gives the Attorney by the Warden to the Director, would be rules to handle emergencies is General the authority to ‘‘provide for subject to release under the Freedom of especially necessary in light of the [inmates’] proper government, Information Act (FOIA). The Warden’s recent terrorist attacks, threats to discipline, treatment, care, notice to the Director regarding national security, threats of anthrax rehabilitation, and reformation.’’ The suspension of the rules will be treated surrounding mail processing, and other Attorney General delegates these as any other Bureau document for the events occurring on and after September statutory rulemaking and custodial purposes of FOIA. Certain FOIA 11, 2001. authorities to the Director of the Federal exemptions may apply, depending on DATES: This rule is effective June 20, Bureau of Prisons in 28 CFR 0.96(o). 18 the content of the notice. 2005. U.S.C. 4042(a) gives the Director of the Suspension of Rules Relating to Inmate ADDRESSES: Rules Unit, Office of Bureau of Prisons the authority to Rights General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 manage and regulate all Federal penal First Street, NW., Washington, DC and correctional institutions and Three commenters claimed that rule 20534. provide for the ‘‘safekeeping, care and suspension would mean denial of subsistence’’ of inmates. Constitutional rights, such as attorney FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau’s authority to promulgate visits or other due process. Commenters Sarah Qureshi, Office of General rules, together with its authority to asserted that there should never be a Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) provide for the care and safekeeping of suspension of rules relating to other 307–2105. inmates, gives the Bureau implicit inmate programs or privileges, such as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this authority to create a rule that allows for the Inmate Financial Responsibility document, the Bureau finalizes an the suspension of other rules as Program, religious programs,
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29190 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
institutional lock-downs, meal service in the same format as outlined [for the Executive Order 13132, we determine and hygiene allowances. Warden to report to the Director].’’ that this rule does not have sufficient The Bureau intends that any The Attorney General has delegated to federalism implications to warrant the suspension would be limited to those the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. rules that are directly impacted or authority to promulgate rules affected by the emergency necessitating ‘‘governing the control and management Regulatory Flexibility Act suspension. As stated in the rule, no of Federal penal and correctional The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, Bureau rules would be suspended institutions and providing for the under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 unless there is a threat to human life or classification, government, discipline, U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation safety. In no situation would inmates be treatment, care, rehabilitation, and and by approving it certifies that it will deprived of rights in a manner that reformation of inmates confined not have a significant economic impact violates the Constitution. See Turner v. therein,’’ (28 CFR 0.96), as further upon a substantial number of small Safely, 482 U.S. 78, 107 S.Ct. 2254, 96 authorized by 18 U.S.C. 4001, 4041, and entities for the following reasons: This L.Ed.2d 64 (1987). 4042. The Attorney General does not rule pertains to the correctional management of offenders committed to 30-Day Review of Suspension Is Not require the Director therefore to report the custody of the Attorney General or Frequent Enough suspension of the rules because the Director has been given authority to the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, One commenter opined that more oversee and monitor such suspension. and its economic impact is limited to safeguards are needed to ensure that a the Bureau’s appropriated funds. prisoner’s rights are not violated. The Report Criteria ‘‘removal or limitation of certain Finally, one commenter suggested Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of privileges * * * warrant[s] increased that when the Warden reports a 1995 scrutiny. This * * * can be suspension to the Director, the Warden This rule will not result in the accomplished by shortening the 30 day should be required to report ‘‘how long expenditure by State, local and tribal time frame the Warden is given to the suspension of the rules will last and governments, in the aggregate, or by the certify to the Director that the what criteria must be fulfilled in order private sector, of $100,000,000 or more institutional emergency still exist[s] and to end the suspension. This would in any one year, and it will not that suspension of the rules is provide interested parties with an idea significantly or uniquely affect small necessary, while giving the prisoner an of how and when to expect the governments. Therefore, no actions were increased level of scrutiny by the restoration of the rules. Requiring this deemed necessary under the provisions Director.’’ component in a report would help of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act After internal deliberation, we inmates and their families to understand of 1995. determined that the 30-day period of why rules have been suspended and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement review and reporting to the Director would enhance the policy process by Fairness Act of 1996 regarding suspensions of rules is the providing defined criteria for best time frame alternative. Requiring resumption of normal operations.’’ This rule is not a major rule as the Warden to report more frequently We agree and therefore have added defined by § 804 of the Small Business than every 30 days would impose an the two requested criteria to the rule in Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of obligation on the Warden and § 501.1(b)(1), subparagraphs (iii) and 1996. This rule will not result in an institution staff when their efforts (iv). Under the revised rule, if the annual effect on the economy of should be on removing the emergency Warden suspends operation of the rules, $100,000,000 or more; a major increase conditions which necessitated the Warden must, within 24 hours of the in costs or prices; or significant adverse suspension of the rules in the first place. suspension or as soon as practicable, effects on competition, employment, The commenter posits that a shorter notify the Director by providing written investment, productivity, innovation, or time frame for reporting would result in documentation which not only on the ability of United States-based an ‘‘increased level of scrutiny by the describes the emergency and gives companies to compete with foreign- Director.’’ However, if an institutional reasons why suspension of rules is based companies in domestic and or system-wide emergency arises necessary, but also estimates how long export markets. causing suspension of rules, the Director the suspension will last and describes List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 501 and Bureau executives would criteria which would allow normal rules necessarily be in constant contact with application to resume. Prisoners. staff at any locations where rules are Harley G. Lappin, suspended, working to remove the Executive Order 12866 Director, Bureau of Prisons. emergency. The Bureau’s ‘‘level of This rule falls within a category of scrutiny’’ would already be heightened. actions that the Office of Management I Under the rulemaking authority vested Further, as stated earlier, the Bureau and Budget (OMB) has determined not in the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C 301; intends that any suspension would be to constitute ‘‘significant regulatory 28 U.S.C. 509, 510 and delegated to the limited to those rules that are directly actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Director, Bureau of Prisons, in 28 CFR impacted or affected by the emergency Order 12866 and, accordingly, it was 0.96, we amend 28 CFR part 501 as necessitating suspension. To the extent not reviewed by OMB. follows. that suspension is necessary to handle Executive Order 13132 SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL an emergency situation, prisoner’s rights MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION would not be compromised. This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, PART 501—SCOPE OF RULES Director Should Report to the Attorney on the relationship between the national General government and the States, or on I 1. The authority citation for 28 CFR One commenter felt that suspension distribution of power and part 501 continues to read as follows: of the rules ‘‘should be reported to the responsibilities among the various Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3621, Attorney General, subject to his review, levels of government. Therefore, under 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 4081, 4082 (Repealed
VerDate jul<14>2003 14:00 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29191
in part as to offenses committed on or after DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE refusing an order for one of these November 1, 1987), 4161–4166 (Repealed as mandatory HIV testing programs is to offenses committed on or after November Bureau of Prisons subject to an incident report for refusing 1, 1987), 5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, to obey an order. Previous regulations 1984 as to offenses committed after that 28 CFR Part 549 did not allow for involuntary HIV date), 5039; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510. [BOP–1104–F] testing of an inmate following any intentional or unintentional exposure, I 2. Revise § 501.1 to read as follows: RIN 1120–AB03 when there is a risk of transmission of HIV infection to Bureau employees or SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL Infectious Disease Management: MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION other persons in a Bureau institution. Voluntary and Involuntary Testing The Correction Officers Health and PART 501—SCOPE OF RULES AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice. Safety Act of 1998 provides that each individual convicted of a Federal ACTION: Final rule. § 501.1 Bureau of Prisons emergencies. offense who is sentenced to a period of (a) Suspension of rules during an SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau six months or more is to be tested for HIV, if such individual is determined to emergency. The Director of the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) finalizes regulations be at risk for HIV infection in of Prisons (Bureau) may suspend on the management of infectious accordance with the guidelines issued operation of the rules in this chapter as diseases. The changes address the circumstances under which the Bureau by the Bureau. The act also provides for necessary to handle an institutional conducts voluntary and involuntary involuntary HIV testing following any emergency or an emergency affecting testing for HIV, tuberculosis, and other intentional or unintentional exposure the Bureau. When there is an infectious diseases. We intend this when there is a risk of transmission of institutional emergency which the amendment to provide for the health HIV infection to Bureau employees or Director or Warden considers a threat to and safety of staff and inmates. other persons in a Bureau institution. human life or safety, the Director or DATES: This rule is effective on June 20, Because of this new statutory authority, Warden may suspend the operation of 2005. the Bureau amends its regulations to the rules in this chapter as necessary to allow involuntary testing in those FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: handle the emergency. instances where an inmate refuses to be Sarah Qureshi, Office of General (b) Responsibilities of the Warden. tested following any intentional or Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) unintentional exposure. The inmate (1) Notifying the Director. If the 307–2105. may also be subject to an incident report Warden suspends operation of the rules, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The for refusing to obey an order. the Warden must, within 24 hours of the Bureau finalizes its regulations on the The Bureau will continue to allow an suspension or as soon as practicable, infectious disease management program inmate to request to be tested for HIV. notify the Director by providing written (28 CFR part 549, subpart A). Such testing is limited to no more than documentation which: These regulations were first published once per 12-month period, unless the in the Federal Register on October 5, Bureau determines that additional (i) Describes the institutional 1995 (60 FR 52278) as interim final emergency that threatens human life or testing is warranted. The Bureau will rules. We received no public comment also continue to provide pre- and post- safety; on that interim rule. We had published test counseling, regardless of the test (ii) Sets forth reasons why suspension an entry in the Unified Regulatory results. of the rules is necessary to handle the Agenda describing the finalization of The Bureau also amends its institutional emergency; that interim final rule (BOP–1017–F, regulations on infectious disease (iii) Estimates how long suspension of RIN 1120–AA23). To clarify that this management to address testing the rules will last; and rulemaking is a change to the same requirements for tuberculosis (TB). The interim rules, we merged that action Bureau’s general authority to protect (iv) Describes criteria which would into a proposed rule which we and provide for the safekeeping and care allow normal rules application to published on July 12, 2002 (67 FR of inmates in Bureau custody (18 U.S.C. resume. 46136). 4042(a)) allows us to conduct medical (2) Submitting certification to Director Why we are making this rule: The tests as necessary to protect the health of continuing emergency. 30 days after Correction Officers Health and Safety of the inmate population. Currently, the Warden suspends operation of the Act of 1998 gave the Bureau new testing of inmates for TB is conducted rules, and every 30 days thereafter, the statutory authority for conducting HIV in accordance with the Warden must submit to the Director tests. Additionally, the Centers for recommendations and guidelines written certification that an institutional Disease Control (CDC) has issued a published by the Centers for Disease emergency threatening human life or variety of recommendations on Control (CDC) in 1992. In response to prevention and control of HIV, safety and warranting suspension of the the increased transmission of TB in tuberculosis, and other infectious correctional facilities, the CDC updated rules continues to exist. If the Warden diseases. Consequently, the Bureau and expanded previously published does not submit this certification to the revises its regulations in accordance recommendations for preventing and Director, or if the Director so orders at with the new statutory authority and in controlling TB in correctional facilities. any time, the suspension of the rules consideration of CDC recommendations. Based on these updated will cease. Previously, Bureau regulations on the recommendations, the Bureau will [FR Doc. 05–10043 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] management of infectious diseases screen each inmate for TB within two BILLING CODE 4410–05–P provided for mandatory HIV testing of a calendar days of initial incarceration. yearly random sample, yearly new We intend to appropriately treat, isolate commitment sample, new commitment and/or protect inmates as a result of re-test sample, pre-release testing, and exposure in the two-day interim before clinically indicated testing. Any inmate testing. The Bureau will also conduct
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29192 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
follow-up testing for each inmate inmates to further violation of religious testing showed an inmate was HIV annually. In addition, the Bureau will beliefs. negative, new commitment re-testing screen an inmate for TB when health Although the use of PPD as a was to be completed every year services staff determine that the inmate screening test is routine, questions thereafter, until further notice. may be at risk for infection. An inmate frequently arise about the required The new commitment, new who refuses TB screening may be tuberculin skin test. The current version recommitment re-test sample was not a subject to an incident report for refusing of the PPD uses a Purified Protein random sample. Unfortunately, when to obey an order. If an inmate refuses Derivative instead of a pork derivative. this system became effective, initial tuberculin skin testing, and there is no Inmates who object to the ‘‘PPD skin guidance referenced the testing contraindication to tuberculin skin test’’ frequently cite religious reasons incorrectly as a ‘‘subset of randomly testing, institution medical staff will based on a mistaken belief that the selected inmates’’. This may have educate and counsel the inmate liquid solution injected under the skin resulted in the use of the term regarding the need for such testing in an is a fat and/or animal derivative. The ‘‘random’’ in discussing the institutional setting (for example, the solution is not a fat or animal derivative, seroconversion testing and subsequent need to identify HIV+ inmates who have but is instead synthetic. However, the misconceptions by staff and inmates. not received a course of prophylaxis and guiding principle with medical issues Changes to § 549.14, Confidentiality of are at high risk for the development of and religion is weighing the individual Information active tuberculous disease). If an inmate interest and the compelling government still refuses tuberculin testing despite interest. TB is a highly communicable After internal agency deliberation, we education and counseling, institution disease. The tuberculin skin test is used made changes to this part of the medical staff will test the inmate as an early diagnostic tool because it is proposed rule for clarity and to more involuntarily. The intent of this highly effective in determining TB accurately reflect the intent of the amendment is to control TB among staff infection. Some cite that the x-ray is a Correction Officers Health and Safety and inmates in correctional facilities. least restrictive alternative because it Act (Pub. L. 105–370, codified at 18 To provide for the protection, can detect TB. However, x-rays do not U.S.C. 4014). safekeeping, and care of inmates in our provide early diagnostic information. In our proposed rule, this section custody (as required by 18 U.S.C. Therefore, the safety of the institution’s stated that any disclosure of test results 4042(a)), we retain, revised for clarity, population, staff and inmate, is put at or medical information would be made regulations on diagnostics (549.12(c)); risk if the x-ray is used as an alternative. in accordance with the Privacy Act of Programming, Duty and Housing The compelling government interest 1974 and the HHS Standards for Privacy Restrictions (549.13); Confidentiality of outweighs the sincerely held religious of Individually Identifiable Health Information (549.14); and Infectious belief and motivation of the inmate. Information promulgated pursuant to In response to the comment, however, Disease Training and Preventive the Health Insurance Portability and we recognize that the term ‘‘PPD test’’ Measures (549.15). Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). may be misleading and therefore will Finally, the Bureau removes change the name of the test to more The Bureau of Prisons is not a provisions dealing with medical accurately reflect what it is: The ‘‘covered entity’’ under subsequent isolation and quarantining as these are Tuberculin Skin Test. We also eliminate regulations promulgated by the governed by normal medical protocols references to the term ‘‘PPD’’ in the rule Department of Health and Human and do not need to appear in the text. Services to implement HIPAA. We regulations. Removing these provisions Also, our previous TB testing therefore exclude references to the from regulation and retaining them in provision had stated that after the initial Health Insurance Portability and Bureau policy allows us the flexibility screening, we would conduct follow-up Accountability Act of 1996. to adhere to ever-changing medical testing annually. To allay the Also, when we proposed this standards and Federal medical commenter’s apparent concern that regulation, we described four types of guidelines. inmates will be tested unnecessarily routine uses of such information Public Comments and Bureau every year, we clarify that we will maintained by the Bureau in its Privacy Responses: We received three comments conduct TB screening for each inmate Act systems of records. to the proposed rule. One supported the annually only as medically indicated. In our revised rule, instead of singling rule, stating that it would ‘‘help control Finally, the third commenter out four routine uses of such the epidemic of AIDS and other diseases complained that he had been subjected information, we merely state that a more in prison.’’ to seven HIV tests as part of ‘‘random’’ thorough description of routine uses The second commenter expressed testing. This inmate had filed an allowable for inmate health records may concern that using mandatory ‘‘PPD administrative remedy complaint with be found in the Department of Justice skin testing’’ to detect tuberculosis the Bureau requesting to be removed Privacy Act System of Records Notice would contravene his Buddhist from the HIV testing program. entitled ‘‘Inmate Physical and Mental religious beliefs. The ‘‘PPD skin test’’ is Before May 2000, the Bureau Health Record System, JUSTICE/BOP– a medical term of art referring to a test conducted random HIV testing. In May 007.’’ that, in earlier years, involved injecting 2000, the Bureau began testing a new In addition, we clarify that test results purified pork derivative liquid under commitment sample and, new may be disclosed in accordance with the skin. The commenter and other recommitment re-test sample in The Correction Officers Health and inmates were concerned that this would addition to voluntary, pre-release, and Safety Act of 1998 (codified at 18 U.S.C. amount to consuming a pork product, as clinically indicated as set forth in 4014), which authorizes the Bureau to which would contravene several then-current regulation (28 CFR communicate test results to a person religious beliefs, including Buddhism 549.13(b)). All new commitments requesting the test, the person tested, and Islam. The commenter further between October 1, 1999, and March 31, and, if the results of the test indicate the expressed concerns that there would be 2000, with release dates projected at 3 presence of HIV, to correctional facility unnecessary follow-up testing after years or more qualified initially for the personnel consistent with Bureau policy initial TB screening, thereby subjecting new commitment testing. If baseline on this issue.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29193
Executive Order 12866 on the ability of United States-based inmate is at risk for HIV infection. If the This rule has been reviewed as a companies to compete with foreign- inmate refuses testing, staff may initiate ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under based companies in domestic and an incident report for refusing to obey section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 by export markets. an order. (2) Exposure incidents. The Bureau the Office of Management and Budget List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 549 (OMB). This rule will not impose a tests an inmate, regardless of the length Prisoners. substantial cost on the public, the of sentence or pretrial status, when government or regulated entities. This Harley G. Lappin, there is a well-founded reason to believe that the inmate may have transmitted rule change, mandated by statute and Director, Bureau of Prisons. required to conform to CDC guidelines, the HIV infection, whether intentionally I Under rulemaking authority vested in or unintentionally, to Bureau employees will benefit inmates by allowing us to the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a) detect and treat infectious diseases more or other non-inmates who are lawfully and delegated to the Director, Bureau of present in a Bureau institution. efficiently, thereby decreasing further Prisons, we amend 28 CFR part 549 as infection. Exposure incident testing does not follows. require the inmate’s consent. Executive Order 13212 SUBCHAPTER C—INSTITUTIONAL (3) Surveillance Testing. The Bureau This regulation will not have MANAGEMENT conducts HIV testing for surveillance substantial direct effects on the States, purposes as needed. If the inmate on the relationship between the national PART 549—MEDICAL SERVICES refuses testing, staff may initiate an government and the States, or on I 1. Revise the authority citation for 28 incident report for refusing to obey an distribution of power and CFR part 549 to read as follows: order. responsibilities among the various (4) Inmate request. An inmate may levels of government. Therefore, in Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3621, request to be tested. The Bureau limits accordance with Executive Order 13132, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4005, 4014, 4042, 4045, such testing to no more than one per 12- 4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses it is determined that this rule does not committed on or after November 1, 1987), month period unless the Bureau have sufficient federalism implications 4241–4247, 5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, determines that additional testing is to warrant the preparation of a 1984, as to offenses committed after that warranted. Federalism Assessment. date), 5039; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510. (5) Counseling. Inmates being tested for HIV will receive pre- and post-test I Regulatory Flexibility Act 2. Revise Subpart A to read as follows: counseling, regardless of the test results. The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, Subpart A—Infectious Disease Management (b) Tuberculosis (TB). in accordance with the Regulatory Sec. (1) The Bureau screens each inmate Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has 549.10 Purpose and scope. for TB within two calendar days of reviewed this regulation and by 549.11 Program responsibility. initial incarceration. approving it certifies that this regulation 549.12 Testing. (2) The Bureau conducts screening for will not have a significant economic 549.13 Programming, duty, and housing each inmate annually as medically impact upon a substantial number of restrictions. indicated. small entities for the following reasons: 549.14 Confidentiality of information. (3) The Bureau will screen an inmate This rule pertains to the correctional 549.15 Infectious disease training and for TB when health services staff management of offenders committed to preventive measures. determine that the inmate may be at risk the custody of the Attorney General or Subpart A—Infectious Disease for infection. the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, Management (4) An inmate who refuses TB and its economic impact is limited to screening may be subject to an incident the Bureau’s appropriated funds. § 549.10 Purpose and scope. report for refusing to obey an order. If an inmate refuses skin testing, and there Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of The Bureau will manage infectious is no contraindication to tuberculin skin 1995 diseases in the confined environment of a correctional setting through a testing, then, institution medical staff This rule will not result in the comprehensive approach which will test the inmate involuntarily. expenditure by State, local and tribal includes testing, appropriate treatment, (5) The Bureau conducts TB contact governments, in the aggregate, or by the prevention, education, and infection investigations following any incident in private sector, of $100,000,000 or more control measures. which inmates or staff may have been in any one year, and it will not exposed to tuberculosis. Inmates will be significantly or uniquely affect small § 549.11 Program responsibility. tested according to paragraph (b)(4) of governments. Therefore, no actions were Each institution’s Health Services this section. deemed necessary under the provisions Administrator (HSA) and Clinical (c) Diagnostics. The Bureau tests an of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Director (CD) are responsible for the inmate for an infectious or of 1995. operation of the institution’s infectious communicable disease when the test is Small Business Regulatory Enforcement disease program in accordance with necessary to verify transmission Fairness Act of 1996 applicable laws and regulations. following exposure to bloodborne pathogens or to infectious body fluid. This rule is not a major rule as § 549.12 Testing. An inmate who refuses diagnostic defined by § 804 of the Small Business (a) Human Immunodeficiency Virus testing is subject to an incident report Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of (HIV). for refusing to obey an order. 1996. This rule will not result in an (1) Clinically indicated. The Bureau annual effect on the economy of tests inmates who have sentences of six § 549.13 Programming, duty, and housing $100,000,000 or more; a major increase months or more if health services staff restrictions. in costs or prices; or significant adverse determine, taking into consideration the (a) The CD will assess any inmate effects on competition, employment, risk as defined by the Centers for with an infectious disease for investment, productivity, innovation, or Disease Control guidelines, that the appropriateness for programming, duty,
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29194 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
and housing. Inmates with infectious work-related exposures and will be not had a trust fund account balance of diseases that are transmitted through offered vaccination for Hepatitis B. $6.00 for the past 30 days. We therefore casual contact will be prohibited from [FR Doc. 05–10042 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] issue this technical correction. work assignments in any area, until BILLING CODE 4410–05–P Executive Order 12866 fully evaluated by a health care provider. This regulation has been drafted and (b) Inmates may be limited in DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE reviewed in accordance with Executive programming, duty, and housing when Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and their infectious disease is transmitted Bureau of Prisons Review’’, section 1(b), Principles of through casual contact. The Warden, in Regulation. The Director of the Bureau consultation with the CD, may exclude 28 CFR Part 549 of Prisons has determined that this rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ inmates, on a case-by-case basis, from [BOP–1129–F] work assignments based upon the under Executive Order 12866, section security and good order of the RIN 1120–AB29 3(f), and accordingly this rule has not institution. been reviewed by the Office of Over-The-Counter (OTC) Medications: Management and Budget. (c) If an inmate tests positive for an Technical Correction infectious disease, that test alone does Executive Order 13132 not constitute sole grounds for AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice. This regulation will not have disciplinary action. Disciplinary action ACTION: Final rule. substantial direct effects on the States, may be considered when coupled with on the relationship between the national SUMMARY: This document finalizes a a secondary action that could lead to government and the States, or on minor technical correction to the Bureau transmission of an infectious agent. distribution of power and of Prisons (Bureau) regulations on Over- Inmates testing positive for infectious responsibilities among the various The-Counter (OTC) medications. disease are subject to the same levels of government. Under Executive Previously, our rule defined an inmate disciplinary policy that applies to all Order 13132, this rule does not have without funds as one who has had an inmates (see 28 CFR part 541, subpart sufficient federalism implications for average daily trust fund account balance B). Except as provided for in our which we would prepare a Federalism of less than $6.00 for the past 30 days. disciplinary policy, no special or Assessment. separate housing units may be The words ‘‘average daily’’ in that established for HIV-positive inmates. definition resulted in incorrect Regulatory Flexibility Act classifications by the Bureau’s business The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, § 549.14 Confidentiality of information. offices. The more accurate definition of under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Any disclosure of test results or an inmate without funds is one who has U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation. medical information is made in not had a trust fund account balance of By approving it, the Director certifies accordance with: $6.00 for the past 30 days. We therefore that it will not have a significant issue this technical correction. (a) The Privacy Act of 1974, under economic impact upon a substantial DATES: which the Bureau publishes routine This rule is effective June 20, number of small entities because: This uses of such information in the 2005. rule is about the correctional Department of Justice Privacy Act ADDRESSES: Rules Unit, Office of management of offenders committed to System of Records Notice entitled General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 the custody of the Attorney General or ‘‘Inmate Physical and Mental Health First Street, NW., Washington, DC the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, Record System, JUSTICE/BOP–007’’; 20534. Our email address is and its economic impact is limited to and [email protected]. the Bureau’s appropriated funds. (b) The Correction Officers Health and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of Safety Act of 1998 (codified at 18 U.S.C. Sarah Qureshi, Office of General 1995 4014), which provides that test results Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) This rule will not cause State, local must be communicated to a person 307–2105. and tribal governments, or the private requesting the test, the person tested, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We amend sector, to spend $100,000,000 or more in and, if the results of the test indicate the our regulations on Over-The-Counter any one year, and it will not presence of HIV, to correctional facility (OTC) medications (28 CFR part 549, significantly or uniquely affect small personnel consistent with Bureau subpart B). We published a final rule on governments. We do not need to take policy. this subject in the Federal Register on action under the Unfunded Mandates § 549.15 Infectious disease training and August 12, 2003 (68 FR 47847), and this Reform Act of 1995. preventive measures. correction as an interim final rule on September 3, 2004 (69 FR 53804). We Small Business Regulatory Enforcement (a) The HSA will ensure that a received no comments on the interim Fairness Act of 1996 qualified health care professional final rule, and therefore publish it as This rule is not a major rule as provides training, incorporating a final without change. defined by § 804 of the Small Business question-and-answer session, about Previously, our rule defined an Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of infectious diseases to all newly inmate without funds as one who has 1996. This rule will not result in an committed inmates, during Admission had an average daily trust fund account annual effect on the economy of and Orientation. balance of less than $6.00 for the past $100,000,000 or more; a major increase (b) Inmates in work assignments 30 days. The words ‘‘average daily’’ in in costs or prices; or significant adverse which staff determine to present the that definition resulted in incorrect effects on competition, employment, potential for occupational exposure to classifications by the Bureau’s business investment, productivity, innovation, or blood or infectious body fluids will offices. The more accurate definition of on the ability of United States-based receive annual training on prevention of an inmate without funds is one who has companies to compete with foreign-
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29195
based companies in domestic and with the Bureau’s statutory authority. in costs or prices; or significant adverse export markets. The new 28 CFR 571.22(c) correctly effects on competition, employment, states that ‘‘[t]ransportation will be investment, productivity, innovation, or List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 549 provided to an inmate’s place of on the ability of United States-based Prisoners. conviction or legal residence within the companies to compete with foreign- Harley G. Lappin, United States or its territories.’’ based companies in domestic and export markets. Director, Bureau of Prisons. Executive Order 12866 [FR Doc. 05–10044 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] This regulation has been drafted and List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 571 BILLING CODE 4410–05–P reviewed in accordance with Executive Prisoners. Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’, section 1(b), Principles of Harley G. Lappin, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Regulation. The Director of the Bureau Director, Bureau of Prisons. Under the rulemaking authority Bureau of Prisons of Prisons has determined that this rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ vested in the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and delegated to the 28 CFR Part 571 under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), and accordingly this rule has not Director, Bureau of Prisons, we adopt as [BOP–1108–F] been reviewed by the Office of final the interim rule published on June RIN 1120–AB21 Management and Budget. 9, 2003 (68 FR 34301), without change. Executive Order 13132 [FR Doc. 05–10045 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Clarifying of Release Gratuities— BILLING CODE 4410–05–P Release Transportation Regulations to This regulation will not have More Closely Conform to Statutory substantial direct effects on the States, Provisions on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice. distribution of power and SECURITY ACTION: Final rule. responsibilities among the various Coast Guard SUMMARY: This document finalizes an levels of government. Therefore, under interim rule which made a minor Executive Order 13132, we determine 33 CFR Part 100 clarifying change to the Bureau of that this rule does not have sufficient Prisons (Bureau) regulations on release federalism implications to warrant the [CGD 07–05–012] preparation of a Federalism Assessment. gratuities, transportation, and clothing. RIN 1625–AA08 The rule clarified that the Bureau is Regulatory Flexibility Act authorized, upon an inmate’s release, to Special Local Regulations: Annual Fort The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, provide transportation to an inmate’s Myers Beach Air Show, Fort Myers under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 place of conviction or his/her legal Beach, FL residence only within the United States, U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation under 18 U.S.C. 3624(d)(3). and by approving it certifies that it will AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. not have a significant economic impact DATES: This rule is effective on June 20, ACTION: Final rule. upon a substantial number of small 2005 entities for the following reasons: This SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is ADDRESSES: Rules Unit, Office of rule pertains to the correctional establishing permanent special local General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 management of offenders committed to regulations for the Fort Myers Beach Air First Street, NW., Washington, DC the custody of the Attorney General or Show, Fort Myers Beach, Florida. This 20534. the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, event will be held annually on the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and its economic impact is limited to second consecutive Friday, Saturday, Sarah Qureshi, Office of General the Bureau’s appropriated funds. and Sunday of May between 8:30 a.m. Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) and 4:30 p.m. EDT (eastern daylight 307–2105. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 time). This regulation is needed to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We restrict persons and vessels from published this rule as an interim final This rule will not result in the entering the sterile zone (air box) below rule on June 9, 2003 (68 FR 34301). We expenditure by State, local and tribal the aerial demonstration and restrict received no comments on this rule. We governments, in the aggregate, or by the vessels from mooring/anchoring or therefore finalize it without change. private sector, of $100,000,000 or more transiting within the surrounding Previously, 28 CFR 571.22 (c) stated in any one year, and it will not regulated area with the exception of the that ‘‘[t]ransportation will be provided significantly or uniquely affect small Matanzas Pass Channel. This rule is to an inmate’s place of conviction, his governments. Therefore, no actions were necessary to ensure the safety of life for legal residence within the United States, deemed necessary under the provisions the participating aircraft, spectators, and or to other such place as authorized and of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act mariners in the area on the navigable approved.’’ However, 18 U.S.C. of 1995. waters of the United States. 3624(d)(3) allows only for Small Business Regulatory Enforcement DATES: This rule is effective May 20, ‘‘transportation to the place of the Fairness Act of 1996 2005. prisoner’s conviction, to the prisoner’s bona fide residence within the United This rule is not a major rule as ADDRESSES: Comments and material States, or to such other place within the defined by § 804 of the Small Business received from the public, as well as United States as may be authorized by Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of documents indicated in this preamble as the Director.’’ 1996. This rule will not result in an being available in the docket, are part of This rule revises the former rule only annual effect on the economy of docket [CGD 07–05–012] and are to the extent that it appeared to conflict $100,000,000 or more; a major increase available for inspection or copying at
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29196 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Coast Guard Marine Safety Office County, Florida. All vessels and persons consecutive Friday, Saturday, and Tampa between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., are prohibited from entering, anchoring, Sunday in May. This rule would not Monday through Friday, except Federal mooring, or transiting the regulated have a significant economic impact on holidays. area. Vessel traffic will be allowed to a substantial number of small entities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: enter and exit Matanzas Pass Channel since it would be in effect for only eight Lieutenant Junior Grade Jennifer using the marked channel at Matanzas hours a day on each of the three event Andrew at Coast Guard Marine Safety Pass Channel daybeacon #3 (26°25′54″ days. Vessel traffic is minimal in this Office Tampa (813) 228–2191 Ext 8203. N, 82°58′12″ W, LLNR 16365) and #4 area and vessels will still be allowed to ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (26 26 06 N, 82 57 48 W, LLNR 16370) enter and exit through the Matanzas but may not linger within the regulated Pass Channel. Regulatory Information area. This regulation is intended to Assistance for Small Entities On April 1, 2005, we published a provide for the safety of life on the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) navigable waters of the United States for Small businesses may send comments entitled Special Local Regulations: Air Show participants and for mariners on the actions of Federal employees Annual Fort Myers Beach Air Show, transiting in the vicinity of the Air who enforce, or otherwise determine Fort Myers Beach, FL in the Federal Show and is based on FAA guidelines compliance with, Federal regulations to Register (70 FR 16781). We received no in the FAA Code: Order 8700.1, the Small Business and Agriculture comments on the proposed rule. No Operations Inspector Handbook, Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman public meeting was requested, and none Volume 2, Chapter 49. All coordinates and the Regional Small Business was held. referenced use datum NAD 83. Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Regulatory Evaluation Ombudsman evaluates these actions Guard finds that good cause exists for annually and rates each agency’s making this rule effective less than 30 This rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of responsiveness to small business. If you days after publication in the Federal wish to comment on actions by Register. This rule is needed to Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– minimize danger to the public and 888-REG-FAIR (1–888–734–3247). waiting delaying the effective date require an assessment of potential costs would be contrary to the public interest. and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Collection of Information A notice of proposed rulemaking for this Order. The Office of Management and rule was published in the Federal Budget has not reviewed it under that This rule calls for no new collection Register (70 FR 16781) with a thirty-day Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the of information under the Paperwork comment period ending May 2, 2005. regulatory policies and procedures of Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– During the comment period, no the Department of Homeland Security 3520). comments were received regarding this (DHS). Federalism rulemaking, and this final rule does not We expect the economic impact of change the provisions of the notice of this rule to be so minimal that a full A rule has implications for federalism proposed rulemaking. Regulatory Evaluation under the under Executive Order 13132, regulatory policies and procedures of Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Background and Purpose DHS is unnecessary. The regulation effect on State or local governments and The South West Florida Aviation would last for only eight hours on each would either preempt State law or Foundation’s air show involves the of the three event days. Vessel traffic is impose a substantial direct cost of performance of aerial demonstrations minimal in this area and vessels will compliance on them. We have analyzed over the near-shore waters of Fort Myers still be allowed to enter and exit the this rule under that Order and have Beach, Florida. The annual event will be Matanzas Pass Channel. determined that it does not have held on the second consecutive Friday, Small Entities implications for federalism. Saturday, and Sunday of May from 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. The nature of aerial Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered demonstrations requires aircraft to use The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act markers in the water as points of whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires reference for aircraft maneuvers. The Federal agencies to assess the effects of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises their discretionary regulatory actions. In has published guidelines that aircraft particular, the Act addresses actions must comply with based on the speed small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently that may result in the expenditure by a of the participating aircraft and the State, local, or tribal government, in the location of the audience. This regulation owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and aggregate, or by the private sector of is in accordance with those guidelines $100,000,000 or more in any one year. for the sterile zone (air box) as well as governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. Though this rule will not result in such egress routes and vessel movements an expenditure, we do discuss the outside the air box. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have effects of this rule elsewhere in this Discussion of Comments and Changes a significant economic impact on a preamble. No comments were received for this substantial number of small entities. Taking of Private Property rule. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small This rule will not effect a taking of Discussion of Rule entities: the owners and operators of private property or otherwise have This regulation will include a sterile vessels intending to transit near to shore taking implications under Executive zone (air box) directly under the aerial at Fort Myers Beach, FL in the vicinity Order 12630, Governmental Actions and demonstration over the near-shore of Matanzas Pass annually from 8:30 Interference with Constitutionally waters of Fort Myers Beach in Lee a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on the second Protected Property Rights.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29197
Civil Justice Reform This rule does not use technical coordinates referenced use datum: NAD standards. Therefore, we did not This rule meets applicable standards 83. consider the use of voluntary consensus (b) Special local regulations. in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive standards. (1) Vessels and persons are prohibited Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to from entering the air box area defined in minimize litigation, eliminate Environment paragraph (a)(2) of this section. ambiguity, and reduce burden. We have analyzed this rule under (2) No vessel may anchor/moor or Protection of Children Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, transit within the regulated area defined which guides the Coast Guard in in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, with We have analyzed this rule under complying with the National the exception of vessel transit permitted Executive Order 13045, Protection of Environmental Policy Act of 1969 in the marked channel as set forth in Children from Environmental Health (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and paragraph (b)(3) of this section. Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not have concluded that there are no factors (3) Vessels entering and exiting an economically significant rule and in this case that would limit the use of Matanzas Pass Channel will be allowed does not create an environmental risk to a categorical exclusion under section to transit using the marked channel only health or risk to safety that may 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this at Matanzas Pass Channel day beacon #3 disproportionately affect children. rule is categorically excluded, under (26°25′54″ N, 82°58′12″ W, LLNR 16365) Indian Tribal Governments figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), of the and #4 (26°26′06″ N, 82°57′48″ W, LLNR Instruction, from further environmental 16370) but may not linger within the This rule does not have tribal documentation. As a special local regulated area. All coordinates implications under Executive Order regulation issued in conjunction with an referenced use datum: NAD 83. 13175, Consultation and Coordination air show, this rule satisfies the (c) Dates. This section will be with Indian Tribal Governments, requirements of paragraph (34)(h). enforced annually on the second because it does not have a substantial Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), of consecutive Friday, Saturday, and direct effect on one or more Indian the Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental Sunday of May from 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 tribes, on the relationship between the Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical p.m. Federal Government and Indian tribes, Exclusion Determination’’ are not Dated: May 10, 2005. or on the distribution of power and required for this rule. responsibilities between the Federal D.B. Peterman, Government and Indian tribes. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. Energy Effects Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping [FR Doc. 05–10047 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] We have analyzed this rule under requirements, Waterways. BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Executive Order 13211, Actions I For the reasons discussed in the Concerning Regulations that preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Significantly Affect Energy Supply, amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: Distribution, or Use. We have SECURITY determined that it is not a ‘‘significant PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON Coast Guard energy action’’ under that order because NAVIGABLE WATERS it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not I 1. The authority citation for part 100 33 CFR Part 100 likely to have a significant adverse effect continues to read as follows: [CGD05–05–047] on the supply, distribution, or use of Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; Department of RIN 1625–AA08 energy. The Administrator of the Office Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 of Information and Regulatory Affairs I 2. Add § 100.736 to read as follows: Special Local Regulations for Marine has not designated it as a significant Events; Delaware River, Delaware City, energy action. Therefore, it does not § 100.736 Annual Fort Myers Beach air DE require a Statement of Energy Effects show; Fort Myers Beach, FL. under Executive Order 13211. (a)(1) Regulated Area. The regulated AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. area is formed by the following ACTION: Temporary final rule. Technical Standards coordinates; point 1: 26°28′08″ N, The National Technology Transfer 81°59′15″ W south to point 2: 26°27′37″ SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 N, 81°59′39″ W east to point 3: establishing temporary special local U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 26°25′45″ N, 81°55′34″ W north to point regulations during the ‘‘5th Annual voluntary consensus standards in their 4: 26°26′14″ N, 81°55′22″ W and west Escape from Fort Delaware Triathlon,’’ regulatory activities unless the agency along the contour of the shore to point an event to be held June 18, 2005 over provides Congress, through the Office of 5: 26°27′52″ N, 81°58′04″ W to original the waters of Delaware River at Management and Budget, with an point 1: 26°28′08″ N, 81°59′15″ W. All Delaware City, DE. These special local explanation of why using these coordinates referenced use datum: NAD regulations are necessary to provide for standards would be inconsistent with 83. the safety of life on navigable waters applicable law or otherwise impractical. (2) Air Box Area. The air box area is during the event. This action is Voluntary consensus standards are contained within the regulated area and intended to temporarily restrict vessel technical standards (e.g., specifications is formed by the following coordinates; traffic in a portion of the Delaware River of materials, performance, design, or point 1: 26°27′34″ N, 81°58′22″ W south during the 5th Annual Escape from Fort operation; test methods; sampling to point 2: 26°27′07″ N, 81°58′39″ W Delaware Triathlon. procedures; and related management east to point 3: 26°26′15″ N, 81°56′36″ DATES: This rule is effective from 8:30 systems practices) that are developed or W north to point 4: 26°26′42″ N, a.m. to 11:30 a.m. on June 18, 2005. adopted by voluntary consensus 81°56′22″ W and west to original point ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this standards bodies. 1: 26°27′34″ N, 81°58′22″ W. All preamble as being available in the
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29198 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
docket are part of docket CGD05–05– temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the substantial number of small entities. 047 and are available for inspection or event area to provide for the safety of The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises copying at Commander (oax), Fifth participants, support craft and other small businesses, not-for-profit Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford transiting vessels. organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not Street, Portsmouth, Virginia 23704– Discussion of Rule 5004, between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., dominant in their fields, and Monday through Friday, except Federal The Coast Guard is establishing governmental jurisdictions with holidays. temporary special local regulations on populations of less than 50,000. specified waters of the Delaware River FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 M. Sens, Project Manager, Auxiliary and between Fort Delaware on Pea Patch U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have Recreational Boating Safety Branch, at Island to the Delaware City Wharf at a significant economic impact on a (757) 398–6204. Delaware City, Delaware. The temporary substantial number of small entities. special local regulations will be in effect This rule will affect the following SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. on June 18, entities, some of which may be small Regulatory Information 2005. The effect will be to restrict entities: the owners or operators of general navigation in the regulated area vessels intending to transit this section We did not publish a notice of during the event. Except for persons or of the Delaware River during the event. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this vessels authorized by the Coast Guard This rule will not have a significant regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Patrol Commander, no person or vessel economic impact on a substantial Coast Guard finds that good cause exists may enter or remain in the regulated number of small entities for the for not publishing an NPRM, because area. Vessel traffic may be allowed to following reasons. This rule will be in publishing an NPRM would be transit the regulated area at slow speed effect for only a short period, from 8:30 impracticable and contrary to public as the swim progresses, when the Coast a.m. to 11:30 a.m. on June 18, 2005. interest as immediate action is Guard Patrol Commander determines it Vessels desiring to transit the event area necessary to protect those using the is safe to do so. The Patrol Commander will be able to transit the regulated area waterway. Because of the danger posed will notify the public of specific at slow speed as the swim progresses, to the swimmers competing within a enforcement times by Marine Radio when the Coast Guard Patrol confined area, special local regulations Safety Broadcast. These regulations are Commander determines it is safe to do are necessary to provide for the safety of needed to control vessel traffic during so. Before the enforcement period, we event participants, support craft and the event to enhance the safety of will issue maritime advisories so other vessels transiting the event area. participants, spectators and transiting mariners can adjust their plans Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast vessels. accordingly. Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 Regulatory Evaluation Assistance for Small Entities days after publication in the Federal This rule is not a ‘‘significant Under section 213(a) of the Small Register. Delaying the effective date regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Business Regulatory Enforcement would be contrary to the public interest, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), since immediate action is needed to Planning and Review, and does not we offered to assist small entities in ensure the safety of the event require an assessment of potential costs understanding the rule so that they participants, support craft, spectator and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that could better evaluate its effects on them craft and other vessels transiting the Order. The Office of Management and and participate in the rulemaking event area. For the safety concerns Budget has not reviewed it under that process. If the rule would affect your noted, it is in the public interest to have Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the small business, organization, or these regulations in effect during the regulatory policies and procedures of governmental jurisdiction and you have event. However advance notifications the Department of Homeland Security questions concerning its provisions or will be made to users of the waterway (DHS). options for compliance, please contact via marine information broadcasts and We expect the economic impact of the address listed under ADDRESSES. The area newspapers. this rule to be so minimal that a full Coast Guard will not retaliate against Background and Purpose Regulatory Evaluation under the small entities that question or complain regulatory policies and procedures of about this rule or any policy or action On June 18, 2005, the Escape from DHS is unnecessary. of the Coast Guard. Fort Delaware Triathlon, Inc. will Although this regulation restricts Small businesses may send comments sponsor the ‘‘5th Annual Escape from vessel traffic from transiting a portion of on the actions of Federal employees Fort Delaware Triathlon.’’ The the Delaware River during the event, the who enforce, or otherwise determine swimming segment of the event will effect of this regulation will not be compliance with, Federal regulations to consist of approximately 400 swimmers significant due to the limited duration the Small Business and Agriculture competing across a one mile course that the regulated area will be in effect Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman along the Delaware River between Pea and the extensive advance notifications and the Regional Small Business Patch Island and Delaware City, that will be made to the maritime Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Delaware. The competition will begin at community via marine information Ombudsman evaluates these actions Pea Patch Island. The participants will broadcasts and area newspapers so annually and rates each agency’s swim across to the finish line located at mariners can adjust their plans responsiveness to small business. If you the Delaware City Wharf, swimming accordingly. wish to comment on actions by approximately one mile, across employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Small Entities Bulkhead Shoal Channel. 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). Approximately 20 support vessels will Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act accompany the swimmers. Due to the (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered Collection of Information need for vessel control during the whether this rule would have a This rule calls for no new collection swimming event, the Coast Guard will significant economic impact on a of information under the Paperwork
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29199
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Energy Effects I For the reasons discussed in the 3520). We have analyzed this rule under preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Federalism Executive Order 13211, Actions CFR part 100 as follows: Concerning Regulations That PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON A rule has implications for federalism Significantly Affect Energy Supply, NAVIGABLE WATERS under Executive Order 13132, Distribution, or Use. We have Federalism, if it has a substantial direct determined that it is not a ‘‘significant I 1. The authority citation for part 100 effect on State or local governments and energy action’’ under that order because continues to read as follows: would either preempt State law or it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ impose a substantial direct cost of under Executive Order 12866 and is not Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233, Department of compliance on them. We have analyzed likely to have a significant adverse effect Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. this rule under that Order and have on the supply, distribution, or use of determined that it does not have energy. The Administrator of the Office I 2. Add temporary § 100.35–T05–047 to implications for federalism. of Information and Regulatory Affairs read as follows: has not designated it as a significant Unfunded Mandates Reform Act § 100.35–T05–047 Delaware River, energy action. Therefore, it does not Delaware City, DE. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act require a Statement of Energy Effects of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires under Executive Order 13211. (a) Regulated area. The regulated area Federal agencies to assess the effects of includes all waters of the Delaware Technical Standards their discretionary regulatory actions. In River within 500 yards either side of a particular, the Act addresses actions The National Technology Transfer line drawn southwesterly from a point that may result in the expenditure by a and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 near the shoreline at Pea Patch Island, State, local, or tribal government, in the U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use at latitude 39°34′43.2″ N, 075°35′12″ W, aggregate, or by the private sector of voluntary consensus standards in their thence to latitude 39°35′08″ N, $100,000,000 or more in any one year. regulatory activities unless the agency 075°34′18″ W, a position located near Though this rule will not result in such provides Congress, through the Office of the Delaware City Wharf, Delaware City, an expenditure, we do discuss the Management and Budget, with an DE. All coordinates reference Datum explanation of why using these effects of this rule elsewhere in this NAD 1983. preamble. standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. (b) Definitions. (1) Coast Guard Patrol Taking of Private Property Voluntary consensus standards are Commander means a commissioned, This rule will not effect a taking of technical standards (e.g., specifications warrant, or petty officer of the Coast private property or otherwise have of materials, performance, design, or Guard who has been designated by the taking implications under Executive operation; test methods; sampling Commander, Coast Guard Sector Order 12630, Governmental Actions and procedures; and related management Delaware Bay. Interference with Constitutionally systems practices) that are developed or (2) Official Patrol means any vessel Protected Property Rights. adopted by voluntary consensus assigned or approved by Commander, standards bodies. Civil Justice Reform Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay with This rule does not use technical a commissioned, warrant, or petty standards. Therefore, we did not This rule meets applicable standards officer on board and displaying a Coast consider the use of voluntary consensus in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Guard ensign. standards. Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to (c) Special local regulations. (1) minimize litigation, eliminate Environment Except for persons or vessels authorized ambiguity, and reduce burden. We have analyzed this rule under by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, Protection of Children Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, no person or vessel may enter or remain which guides the Coast Guard in in the regulated area. We have analyzed this rule under complying with the National Executive Order 13045, Protection of (2) The operator of any vessel in the Environmental Policy Act of 1969 regulated area shall: Children from Environmental Health (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not have concluded that there are no factors (i) Stop the vessel immediately when an economically significant rule and in this case that would limit the use of directed to do so by any Official Patrol. does not create an environmental risk to a categorical exclusion under section (ii) Proceed as directed by any Official health or risk to safety that may 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this Patrol. disproportionately affect children. rule is categorically excluded, under (d) Enforcement period. This section figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Indian Tribal Governments will be enforced from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 Instruction, from further environmental a.m. on June 18, 2005. This rule does not have tribal documentation. Special local implications under Executive Order regulations issued in conjunction with a Dated: May 6, 2005. 13175, Consultation and Coordination regatta or marine event permit are Lawrence J. Bowling, with Indian Tribal Governments, specifically excluded from further Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth because it does not have a substantial analysis and documentation under those Coast Guard District, Acting. direct effect on one or more Indian sections. [FR Doc. 05–10048 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 BILLING CODE 4910–15–P or on the distribution of power and Marine safety, Navigation (water), responsibilities between the Federal Reporting and recordkeeping Government and Indian tribes. requirements, Waterways.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29200 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND (67 FR 57952), April 28, 2003 (68 FR Planning and Review, and does not SECURITY 22296), July 10, 2003 (68 FR 41081), require an assessment of potential costs February 10, 2004 (69 FR 6150), May 21, and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Coast Guard 2004 (69 FR 29232), and January 19, Order. The Office of Management and 2005 (70 FR 2950). We did not receive Budget has not reviewed it under that 33 CFR Part 165 any comments on these regulations. Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the The Captain of the Port San Juan has [CGD07–05–042] regulatory policies and procedures of determined that due to the continued the Department of Homeland Security RIN 1625–AA87 risk, the need for the security zone (DHS). This security zone covers an area persists. On February 10, 2005, the that is not typically used by commercial Security Zone Regulations; St. Croix, Coast Guard published a notice of vessel traffic, including fishermen, and United States Virgin Islands proposed rulemaking to make this vessels may be allowed to enter the zone AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. security zone permanent (70 FR 7065). on a case by case basis with the While the Coast Guard intends to ACTION: Temporary final rule. permission of the Captain of the Port publish a final rule to ensure the San Juan or a designated representative. SUMMARY: security of this waterfront facility, this The Coast Guard is Small Entities establishing a temporary security zone temporary rule is required in the in the vicinity of the HOVENSA refinery interim. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered facility in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Background and Purpose This security zone extends whether this rule would have a approximately 2 miles seaward from the The Coast Guard recognizes that significant economic effect upon a HOVENSA facility waterfront area along subversive activity could be launched substantial number of small entities. the south coast of the island of St. Croix, by vessels or persons in close proximity The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises U.S. Virgin Islands. This security zone to the HOVENSA refinery on St. Croix, small businesses, not-for-profit is needed for national security reasons USVI, against tank vessels and the organizations that are independently to protect the public and the HOVENSA waterfront facility. Given the highly owned and operated and are not facility from potential subversive acts. volatile nature of the substances stored dominant in their fields, and Vessels without scheduled arrivals must at the HOVENSA facility, this security governmental jurisdictions with receive permission from the U.S. Coast zone is necessary to decrease the risk of populations of less than 50,000. Guard Captain of the Port San Juan prior subversive activity launched against the The Coast Guard certifies under 5 to entering this temporary security zone. HOVENSA facility. The Captain of the U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have Port San Juan is reducing this risk by a significant economic impact on a DATES: This rule is effective from May substantial number of small entities. 15, 2005, until November 15, 2005. prohibiting all vessels without a scheduled arrival from coming within This rule will affect the following ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this approximately 2 miles of the HOVENSA entities, some of which may be small preamble as being available in the facility, unless specifically permitted by entities: owners of small charter fishing docket, are part of docket [CGD07–05– the Captain of the Port San Juan or a or diving operations that may operate 042] and are available for inspection or designated representative. The Captain near the HOVENSA facility. This copying at Sector San Juan, 5 Calle La of the Port San Juan can be reached on security zone will not have a significant Puntilla, San Juan, Puerto Rico between VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 economic impact on a substantial 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through (156.8 Mhz), or by calling (787) 289– number of small entities for the Friday, except Federal holidays. 2040, 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week. following reasons. This zone covers an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The HOVENSA Facility Port Captain area that is not typically used by Lieutenant Junior Grade Katiuska can be reached on VHF Marine Band commercial fishermen, and vessels may Pabon, Sector San Juan, Puerto Rico at Radio channel 11 (156.6 Mhz) or by be allowed to enter the zone on a case- (787) 729–2376. calling (340) 692–3488, 24-hours-a-day, by-case basis with the permission of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 7-days-a-week. Captain of the Port San Juan. Regulatory Information Discussion of Rule Assistance for Small Entities We did not publish a notice of The temporary security zone around Under section 213(a) of the Small proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this the HOVENSA facility encompasses all Business Regulatory Enforcement regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the waters within a line connecting the Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), Coast Guard finds that good cause exists following coordinates: 17°41′31″ N, we offer to assist small entities in for not publishing an NPRM. Publishing 64°45′09″ W, to 17°39′36″ N, 64°44′12″ understanding this rule so that they can an NPRM and delaying the rule’s W, to 17°40′00″ N, 64°43′36″ W, to better evaluate its effects on them and effective date would be contrary to the 17°41′48″ N, 64°44′25″ W, and back to participate in the rulemaking process. If public interest. Immediate action is the beginning point. All vessels without the rule will affect your small business, needed to protect the public, ports and a scheduled arrival into the HOVENSA organization, or government jurisdiction waterways of the United States from facility are prohibited from coming and you have questions concerning its potential subversive acts against the within this security zone-that extends provisions or options for compliance, HOVENSA facility. approximately 2 mile seaward from the please contact the person listed under For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. facility, unless specifically permitted by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that the Captain of the Port San Juan or a assistance in understanding this rule. good cause exists for making this rule designated representative. Small businesses may send comments effective less than 30 days after on the actions of Federal employees publication in the Federal Register. Regulatory Evaluation who enforce, or otherwise determine Similar regulations were published in This rule is not a significant compliance with, Federal regulations to the Federal Register on January 17, regulatory action under section 3(f) of the Small Business and Agriculture 2002 (67 FR 2332), September 13, 2002 Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29201
and the Regional Small Business health or risk to safety that may 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this Regulatory Fairness Boards. The disproportionately affect children. rule is categorically excluded, under Ombudsman evaluates these actions figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Indian Tribal Governments annually and rates each agency’s Instruction, from further environmental responsiveness to small business. If you This rule does not have tribal documentation. Under figure 2–1, wish to comment on actions by implications under Executive Order paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, an employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 13175, Consultation and Coordination Environmental Analysis Check List and 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The with Indian Tribal Governments, a Categorical Exclusion Determination Coast Guard will not retaliate against because it does not have a substantial (CED) are not required for this rule. small entities that question or complain direct effect on one or more Indian List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 about this rule or any policy or action tribes, on the relationship between the of the Coast Guard. Federal Government and Indian tribes, Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation or on the distribution of power and Collection of Information (water), Reporting and recordkeeping responsibilities between the Federal requirements, Security measures, This rule calls for no new collection Government and Indian tribes. Waterways. of information under the Paperwork Energy Effects Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– I For the reasons discussed in the 3520). We have analyzed this rule under preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Executive Order 13211, Actions CFR part 165 as follows: Federalism Concerning Regulations That A rule has implications for federalism Significantly Affect Energy Supply, PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION under Executive Order 13132, Distribution, or Use. We have AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Federalism, if it has a substantial direct determined that it is not a significant effect on State or local governments and energy action under that order, because I 1. The authority citation for part 165 would either preempt State law or it is not a significant regulatory action continues to read as follows: under Executive Order 12866 and is not impose a substantial direct cost of Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. likely to have a significant adverse effect compliance on them. We have analyzed Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR this rule under that Order and have on the supply, distribution, or use of 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. determined that it does not have energy. The Administrator of the Office 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of implications for federalism. of Information and Regulatory Affairs Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. has not designated it as a significant Unfunded Mandates Reform Act energy action. Therefore, it does not I 2. From May 15, 2005, to November 15, require a Statement of Energy Effects The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 2005, add a new § 165.T07–042 to read under Executive Order 13211. of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires as follows: Federal agencies to assess the effects of Technical Standards § 165.T07–042 Security Zone; HOVENSA their discretionary regulatory actions. In The National Technology Transfer Refinery, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. particular, the Act addresses actions and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 (a) Location. The following area is a that may result in the expenditure by a U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use State, local, or tribal government, in the security zone: All waters from surface to voluntary consensus standards in their bottom, encompassed within a line aggregate, or by the private sector of regulatory activities unless the agency $100,000,000 or more in any one year. connecting the following coordinates: provides Congress, through the Office of ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Though this rule will not result in such 17 41 31 N, 64 45 09 W, to 17 39 36 Management and Budget, with an ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ an expenditure, we do discuss the N, 64 44 12 W, to 17 40 00 N, explanation of why using these ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ effects of this rule elsewhere in this 64 43 36 W, to 17 41 48 N, 64 44 25 standards would be inconsistent with W, and then back to the point of origin. preamble. applicable law or otherwise impractical. Taking of Private Property Voluntary consensus standards are (b) Regulations. In accordance with technical standards (e.g., specifications the general regulations in § 165.33 of This rule will not effect a taking of of materials, performance, design, or this part, with the exception of vessels private property or otherwise have operation; test methods; sampling that have an arrival scheduled with the taking implications under Executive procedures; and related management HOVENSA Facility, no vessel may enter Order 12630, Governmental Actions and systems practices) that are developed or the regulated area unless specifically Interference with Constitutionally adopted by voluntary consensus authorized by the Captain of the Port Protected Property Rights. standards bodies. (COTP) San Juan or a Coast Guard Civil Justice Reform This rule does not use technical commissioned, warrant, or petty officer standards. Therefore, we did not designated by COTP San Juan. The This rule meets applicable standards consider the use of voluntary consensus Captain of the Port will notify the public in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive standards. of any changes in the status of this zone Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to by Marine Safety Radio Broadcast on minimize litigation, eliminate Environment VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 ambiguity, and reduce burden. We have analyzed this rule under (156.8 Mhz). The Captain of the Port Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, San Juan can be reached on VHF Marine Protection of Children which guides the Coast Guard in Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 Mhz) or We have analyzed this rule under complying with the National by calling (787) 289–2040, 24-hours-a- Executive Order 13045, Protection of Environmental Policy Act of 1969 day, 7-days-a-week. The HOVENSA Children from Environmental Health (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and Facility Port Captain can be reached on Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not have concluded that there are no factors VHF Marine Band Radio channel 11 an economically significant rule and in this case that would limit the use of (156.6 Mhz) or by calling (340) 692– does not create an environmental risk to a categorical exclusion under section 3488, 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29202 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
(c) Dates. This section is effective Federal, State, or local agencies in unless authorized by the Captain of the from May 15, 2005, until November 15, enforcing these safety zones. Port or his designee. The Captain of the 2005. Dated: May 11, 2005. Port may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local agencies in enforcing D.P. Rudolph, Commander, Paul D. Jewell, these safety zones. U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Juan. Port, Portland, OR. Dated: May 11, 2005. [FR Doc. 05–10046 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 05–10140 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Paul D. Jewell, BILLING CODE 4910–15–P BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Portland, OR. [FR Doc. 05–10141 Filed 5–12–05; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND BILLING CODE 4915–01–P SECURITY SECURITY
Coast Guard Coast Guard ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 33 CFR Part 165 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD13–05–015] [CGD13–05–016] 40 CFR Part 52 [R05–OAR–2004–MI–0004; FRL–7915–8] RIN 1625–AA00 RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zones: Columbia River, Astoria, Safety Zones: Fort Vancouver Approval and Promulgation of OR Fireworks Display, Columbia River, Maintenance Plans; Michigan; Vancouver, WA Southeast Michigan Ozone AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Maintenance Plan Update to the State ACTION: Notice of enforcement. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Implementation Plan ACTION: Notice of enforcement. AGENCY: Environmental Protection SUMMARY: The Captain of the Port, Agency (EPA). Portland, Oregon, will enforce the safety SUMMARY: The Captain of the Port, zone established for the Astoria Regatta Portland, Oregon, will enforce the safety ACTION: Direct final rule. on the waters of the Columbia River. zone established for the Fort Vancouver SUMMARY: EPA is approving a December This action is being taken to safeguard Fireworks Display, Vancouver, WA on 19, 2003, request from Michigan to watercraft and their occupants from the waters of the Columbia River on July revise the ground level ozone State safety hazards associated with the 4, 2005. The Captain of the Port, Implementation Plan (SIP) for the display of fireworks. Entry into these Portland, Oregon, is taking this action to Southeast Michigan area. EPA originally safety zones is prohibited unless safeguard watercraft and their occupants approved the Southeast Michigan ozone authorized by the Captain of the Port. from safety hazards associated with the maintenance plan on April 6, 1995. This DATES: This rule will be enforced on display of fireworks. Entry into this action approves an update to the plan August 13, 2005, from 9:30 p.m. to 10:30 safety zone is prohibited unless prepared by Michigan to maintain the 1- p.m. authorized by the Captain of the Port. hour national ambient air quality FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DATES: This rule will be enforced on standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the Petty Officer Charity Keuter, c/o Captain July 4, 2005, from 9:30 p.m. to 11 p.m. Southeast Michigan maintenance area of the Port Portland, OR, 6767 North FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: through the year 2015. This update is Basin Avenue, Portland, OR 97217 at Petty Officer Charity Keuter, c/o Captain required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). (503) 240–2590 to obtain information of the Port Portland, OR 6767 North DATES: This ‘‘direct final’’ rule is concerning enforcement of this rule. Basin Avenue, Portland, OR 97217 at effective July 19, 2005, unless EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On (503) 240–2590 to obtain information receives written adverse comment by July 17, 2003, the Coast Guard concerning enforcement of this rule. June 20, 2005. If written adverse published a final rule (68 FR 42289) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May comment is received, EPA will publish establishing regulations in 33 CFR 28, 2003 the Coast Guard published a a timely withdrawal of the direct final 165.1316 to safeguard watercraft and final rule (68 FR 31609) establishing rule in the Federal Register and inform their occupants on the waters of the regulations in 33 CFR 165.1314 to the public that the rule will not take Columbia River from safety hazards safeguard watercraft and their occupants effect. associated with the display of fireworks on the waters of the Columbia River in ADDRESSES: Submit comments, within the Area of Responsibility of the the vicinity of Vancouver, WA from identified by Regional Material in Captain of the Port, Portland, Oregon. safety hazards associated with the EDocket (RME) ID No. R05–OAR–2004– The Coast Guard is issuing notice that display of fireworks within the Area of MI–0004, by one of the following the Captain of the Port, Portland, Responsibility of the Captain of the Port, methods: Oregon will enforce on August 13, 2005, Portland, Oregon. The Coast Guard is Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// from 9:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. the safety issuing notice that the Captain of the www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line zone established on the waters of the Port, Portland, Oregon on July 4, 2005, instructions for submitting comments. Columbia River in the vicinity of from 9:30 p.m. to 11 p.m. will enforce Agency Web site: http:// Astoria, Oregon and published in 33 the established safety zones on the docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. RME, EPA’s CFR 165.1316. Entry into this safety waters of the Columbia River between electronic public docket and comments zone is prohibited unless otherwise the Interstate 5 Bridge and channel buoy system, is EPA’s preferred method for exempted or excluded under the final RG F1(1+2)R 6s published at 33 CFR receiving comments. Once in the rule or unless authorized by the Captain 165.1314. Entry into this safety zone is system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then key of the Port or his designee. The Captain prohibited unless otherwise exempted in the appropriate RME Docket of the Port may be assisted by other or excluded under the final rule or identification number. Follow the
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29203
online instructions for submitting Although listed in the index, some documents specifically referenced in comments. information is not publicly available, this action, any public comments E-mail: [email protected]. i.e., CBI or other information whose received, and other information related Fax: (312) 886–5824. disclosure is restricted by statute. to this action. Although a part of the Mail: You may send written Publicly available docket materials are official docket, the public rulemaking comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, available either electronically in RME or file does not include CBI or other Criteria Pollutant Section (AR–18J), U.S. in hard copy at Environmental information whose disclosure is Environmental Protection Agency, 77 Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and restricted by statute. The official public West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson rulemaking file is the collection of Illinois 60604. Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (We materials that is available for public Hand delivery: Deliver your recommend that you telephone Anthony viewing at the Air Programs Branch, Air comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, Maietta, Life Scientist, at (312) 353– and Radiation Division, EPA Region 5, Criteria Pollutant Section (AR–18J), U.S. 8777 before visiting the Region 5 office.) 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Environmental Protection Agency, This Facility is open from 8:30 AM to Illinois 60604. EPA requests that if at all Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday, possible, you contact the person listed 18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. excluding legal holidays. in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Such deliveries are only accepted FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CONTACT section to schedule your during the Regional Office’s normal Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist, Criteria inspection. The Regional Office’s hours of operation. The Regional Pollutant Section (AR–18J), Air official hours of business are Monday Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to Programs Branch, Air and Radiation through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. Division, United States Environmental excluding Federal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 2. Electronic Access. You may access RME ID No. R05–OAR–2004–MI–0004. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois this Federal Register document EPA’s policy is that all comments 60604, (312) 353–8777, electronically through the received will be included in the public [email protected]. regulations.gov web site located at docket without change, including any SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: http://www.regulations.gov where you personal information provided, unless Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ can find, review, and submit comments the comment includes information or ‘‘our’’ means EPA. This section on Federal rules that have been claimed to be Confidential Business provides additional information by published in the Federal Register, the Information (CBI) or other information providing General Information and Government’s legal newspaper, and are whose disclosure is restricted by statute. addressing pertinent questions that open for comment. Do not submit information that you follow: For public commenters, it is consider to be CBI or otherwise important to note that EPA’s policy is protected through RME, regulations.gov, General Information that public comments, whether or e-mail. The EPA RME website and Does this action apply to me? submitted electronically or in paper, the federal regulations.gov website are How can I get copies of this document and will be made available for public ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which other related information? viewing at the EPA Regional Office, as means EPA will not know your identity How and to whom do I submit my EPA receives them and without change, comments? unless the comment contains or contact information unless you What is a SIP? provide it in the body of your comment. What is the federal approval process for a copyrighted material, CBI, or other If you send an e-mail comment directly SIP? information whose disclosure is to EPA without going through RME or What are the criteria for approval of a restricted by statute. When EPA regulations.gov, your e-mail address maintenance plan? identifies a comment containing will be automatically captured and What does federal approval of a state copyrighted material, EPA will provide included as part of the comment that is regulation mean to me? a reference to that material in the placed in the public docket and made Have the requirements for approval of a SIP version of the comment that is placed in revision been met? available on the Internet. If you submit Did Michigan hold a public hearing? the official public rulemaking file. The an electronic comment, EPA What is in the State’s plan to maintain the entire printed comment, including the recommends that you include your standard? copyrighted material, will be available name and other contact information in What action is EPA taking? at the Regional Office for public the body of your comment and with any Statutory and executive order review. inspection. disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA General Information How and to Whom Do I Submit My cannot read your comment due to Comments? technical difficulties and cannot contact Does This Action Apply to Me? you for clarification, EPA may not be This action is non-regulatory in You may submit comments able to consider your comment. nature. It updates an earlier plan which electronically, by mail, or through hand Electronic files should avoid the use of is intended to maintain the 1-hour delivery/courier. To ensure proper special characters, any form of ozone NAAQS in Southeast Michigan. receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate encryption, and be free of any defects or rulemaking identification number by viruses. For additional instructions on How Can I Get Copies of This Document including the text ‘‘Public comment on submitting comments, go to Section I of and Other Related Information? proposed rulemaking Region 5 Air the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 1. The Regional Office has established Docket ‘‘R05–OAR–2004–MI–0004’’ in of the related proposed rule which is an electronic public rulemaking file the subject line on the first page of your published in the Proposed Rules section available for inspection at RME under comment. Please ensure that your of this Federal Register. RME ID No. R05–OAR–2004–MI–0004, comments are submitted within the Docket: All documents in the and a hard copy file which is available specified comment period. Comments electronic docket are listed in the RME for inspection at the Regional Office. received after the close of the comment index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. The official public file consists of the period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29204 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
required to consider these late incorporated into the federally- Southeast Michigan Council of comments. approved SIP. Records of such SIP Governments offices located at 535 For detailed instructions on actions are maintained in the Code of Griswold, Suite 300, in Detroit, submitting public comments and on Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR Michigan. Four people attended the what to consider as you prepare your part 52, entitled ‘‘Approval and hearing, and one comment was comments see the ADDRESSES section Promulgation of Implementation Plans.’’ received. and the section I General Information of The actual state regulations which are What Is in the State’s Plan To Maintain the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section approved are not reproduced in the CFR the Standard? of the related proposed rule which is but are ‘‘incorporated by reference,’’ published in the Proposed Rules section which means that we have approved a The Southeast Michigan area has been of this Federal Register. given state submission with a specific designated as attainment for the 1-hour What Is a SIP? effective date. ozone NAAQS since April 1995 (60 FR The CAA, at section 110, requires What Are the Criteria for Approval of a 12459). The Southeast Michigan ozone states to develop air pollution Maintenance Plan? maintenance area consists of Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, regulations, laws, and control strategies Section 175A(b) of the CAA requires to ensure that state air quality meets the Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties. The a state, eight years after redesignation of existing plan demonstrates maintenance NAAQS established under section 109 an area as attainment, to submit to EPA of the CAA. EPA has established of the 1-hour ozone standard through a revision to its SIP to maintain the 2005. On December 19, 2003, Michigan standards for six criteria pollutants: NAAQS for ten years after the carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, submitted its plan to maintain the ozone expiration of the initial ten year period standard in Southeast Michigan during ozone, lead, particulate matter, and as an attainment area. A maintenance sulfur dioxide. Each state must submit the second ten-year period beginning in plan must provide a demonstration of 2005 and ending in 2015. Note that this regulations and control strategies to us continued attainment of the applicable for approval and incorporation into the action is in reference to the State’s plan NAAQS, including the submission of under the 1-hour ozone standard and is federally-enforceable SIP. Each control measures needed to maintain federally-approved SIP is designed to independent of other requirements for the standard. Further, the plan must 8-hour ozone nonattainment. The protect air quality primarily by provide contingency measures for the addressing air pollution at its point of following analysis will look at the prompt correction of any violation of elements necessary for approval of a origin. These SIPs can be extensive, the standard, the continued operation of containing state regulations or other maintenance plan and determine if they the ambient air quality monitoring have been fulfilled. enforceable documents and supporting network, a means of tracking the information such as emission progress of the plan, inclusion of the 1. Demonstration of Continued inventories, monitoring networks, and attainment emissions inventory, and Attainment modeling demonstrations. new emissions budgets for motor The primary requirement for vehicle emissions. What Is the Federal Approval Process maintenance plans is the demonstration for a SIP? What Does Federal Approval of a State that the relevant NAAQS will be For state regulations to be Regulation Mean to Me? maintained for a ten year period. To incorporated into the federally- Enforcement of the state regulation make this demonstration, states must enforceable SIP, states must formally before and after it is incorporated into establish an attainment level of adopt the regulations and control the federally-approved SIP is primarily emissions of volatile organic strategies consistent with state and a state responsibility. However, after the compounds (VOC) and oxides of federal requirements. This process state regulation is federally approved, it nitrogen (NOX) to maintain the 1-hour generally includes a public notice, becomes federally enforceable, or ozone standard. The state must maintain public hearing, public comment period, enforceable by EPA and by citizens this attainment level of emissions and a formal adoption by a state- pursuant to section 304 of the CAA. throughout the maintenance period via authorized rulemaking body. Once a a combination of control measures. state rule, regulation, or control strategy Have the Requirements for Approval of These measures may include stationary, is adopted, the state submits it to us for a SIP Revision Been Met? area, and mobile source controls. approval into the SIP. We must provide Yes, the State has met all the Michigan has made such a public notice and seek additional public necessary requirements for approval of demonstration, establishing the annual comment regarding the federal action on a SIP revision as stated in section emissions from the entire area for the the state submission. If we receive 110(A) of the CAA. year 2000, a period when no excursions adverse comments, we must address or violations of the standard occurred, them prior to taking final federal action. Did Michigan Hold a Public Hearing? and 2015, the last year of the All state regulations approved by EPA Yes, a public hearing was held on maintenance plan. These levels are under section 110 of the CAA are September 9, 2003, at 1:00 p.m., in the summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29205
TABLE 1.—SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN VOC EMISSIONS [Tons per day]
Source category 2000 2015 Change
Point ...... 72.1 117.8 45.7 Area ...... 250.1 306.6 56.5 On-Road Mobile ...... 240.9 74.6 ¥166.3 Non-Road Mobile ...... 113.2 79.0 ¥34.2
Total ...... 676.3 578.0 ¥98.3
TABLE 2.—SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN NOX EMISSIONS [Tons per day]
Change Source category 2000 2015 2000– 2015
Point ...... 422.6 159.5 ¥263.1 Area ...... 33.5 36.7 3.2 On-Road Mobile ...... 412.9 102.7 ¥310.2 Non-Road Mobile ...... 116.3 107.1 ¥9.2
Total ...... 985.3 406.0 ¥579.3
The demonstration projects that the Southeast Michigan area experienced a matter, and hydrocarbons (HC) for total VOC and NOX emissions will violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in heavy-duty diesel vehicles weighing decrease significantly in the area 2003. Therefore, as required by section over 8,500 pounds (‘‘Heavy Duty Diesel through 2015. The State used 175(A) of the Act, Michigan has Vehicle Standards’’). The Heavy Duty methodologies to calculate these provided contingency measures to Diesel Vehicle Standards will reduce emissions which are consistent with promptly correct this violation, as well pollution from new trucks and buses by EPA estimation techniques. Thus, the as any future ozone air quality 95 percent when compared to today’s plan demonstrates that the 1-hour ozone problems. trucks and buses. standard will be maintained throughout As a contingency measure for the 3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring the second ten-year segment of the years 2004 through 2006, Michigan has maintenance plan, years 2005 through adopted rules to reduce NOX from major Michigan currently operates 8 2015. The full emissions benefits industrial sources. Michigan monitors in and around the Detroit area. obtained from state and federal control promulgated these rules in response to The Michigan Department of measures are included in the table EPA’s NOX SIP call, which EPA issued Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has above. For the demonstration of in 1998 to 22 states to address and committed to continue operating and maintenance, it is necessary to show reduce upwind sources of NOX maintaining an approved ozone monitor only that there is no increase in the emissions. The NOX SIP call has been network throughout the maintenance emissions over the intended time implemented in Michigan since May 31, period and beyond. period. Not only does Michigan meet 2004. EPA believes that these rules will 4. Tracking the Progress of the Plan this test, it has also clearly identified address the 2003 violation and any excess emission reductions. Control violations that may occur through 2006. Continued attainment of the ozone measures used to reduce emissions and As a contingency measure for the NAAQS in Southeast Michigan maintain the standard include years 2004 through 2009, Michigan has depends, in part, on the State’s efforts stationary, mobile, and area source identified the Tier II vehicle standards. toward tracking indicators of continued controls, including emission reductions The Tier II vehicle standards, which attainment during the maintenance from the Federal Motor Vehicle Control will be phased in from 2004 through period. The tracking plan for Southeast Program and from implementation of 2009, require all passenger vehicles, Michigan primarily consists of 7.8 pounds per square inch low-Reid including sport utility vehicles (SUV’s), continued ambient ozone monitoring in Vapor Pressure (RVP) fuel requirements minivans, vans, and pick-up trucks, to accordance with the requirements of 40 for Southeast Michigan. be 77 to 95 percent cleaner overall. For CFR part 58. MDEQ maintains a 2. Contingency Measures the heaviest light-duty vehicles, the Tier comprehensive ambient air quality II program provides a three step phase- monitoring network and air quality Despite an area’s best efforts to in of NOX emission limits through 2009. reporting program, including ozone demonstrate continued compliance with By 2009, all light-duty vehicles will be monitoring sites throughout the state. the NAAQS, the area’s ambient ozone held to a 0.07 grams per mile limit for These are mandated by state statute to concentrations may exceed or violate NOX emissions. EPA believes that this continue through and beyond the the NAAQS. The CAA makes program will be effective in keeping the maintenance period. The state will also allowances for this by establishing a area within the NAAQS after 2006. evaluate future VOC and NOX emissions requirement to submit contingency As a contingency measure for the inventories for increases over the 2000 measures that can be implemented in years 2004 through 2012, Michigan has base year levels. A violation of the one- response to violations of the NAAQS identified EPA’s new combined hour ozone NAAQS (which must be during the maintenance period. The emission standard for NOX, particulate confirmed by the State) will trigger
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29206 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
contingency measures as described 2000. Michigan selected the year 2000 planning assumptions, including above in section 2 (‘‘Contingency for the inventory because no excursion updated vehicle registration data from Measures’’). or violations of the standard occurred in the year 2000, vehicle miles traveled, Southeast Michigan. The State then 5. Emission Inventory and Motor speeds, fleet mix, and SIP control projected emissions to the years 2005, Vehicle Emissions Budgets measures. The MOBILE6.2 emissions 2010, and 2015, and updated the model was used for on-road mobile Michigan prepared an emissions emissions budgets for these years to sources. The emission inventory values inventory for the Southeast Michigan reflect the State’s adoption of low-RVP are shown in the Tables below. maintenance area for the base year of gasoline and also to reflect new
TABLE 3.—SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN VOC EMISSIONS [Tons per day]
Source type 2000 2005 2010 2015
Point ...... 72.1 87.3 102.6 117.8 Area ...... 250.1 269.0 287.7 306.6 On-road mobile ...... 240.9 160.6 105.1 74.6 Off-road mobile ...... 113.2 101.9 90.4 79.0
Total ...... 676.3 618.8 585.8 578.0
TABLE 4.—SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN NOX EMISSIONS [Tons per day]
Source type 2000 2005 2010 2015
Point ...... 422.6 334.9 247.2 159.5 Area ...... 33.5 34.6 35.6 36.7 On-road mobile ...... 412.9 305.1 183.1 102.7 Off-road mobile ...... 116.3 113.2 110.2 107.1
Total ...... 985.3 787.8 576.1 406.0
Michigan has submitted an emissions TABLE 5.—SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN are publishing a separate document that inventory of VOC and NOX for the MOBILE VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS will serve as the proposal to approve the Southeast Michigan maintenance area. [Tons per day] state plan if relevant adverse comments Based upon the updated emissions are filed. This rule will be effective July
inventory, the revised maintenance plan Year VOC NOX 19, 2005, without further notice unless contains new budgets (or limits) for we receive relevant adverse written motor vehicle emissions resulting from 2005 ...... 218.1 412.9 comments by June 20, 2005. If we transportation plans for the Southeast 2015 ...... 172.8 412.9 receive such comments, we will Michigan maintenance area. We have withdraw this action before the effective reviewed the budgets and have found These new budgets are to be used in date by publishing a subsequent all subsequent conformity that the budgets meet all of the document that will withdraw the final determinations concerning adequacy criteria in § 91.118 of the action. We will address all public transportation plans in the Southeast transportation conformity rule. These comments received in a subsequent Michigan maintenance area. We believe criteria include: (1) The SIP was that the motor vehicle emissions final rule based on the proposed action. endorsed by the Governor (or his budgets are consistent with the control The EPA will not institute a second designee) and was the subject of a state measures identified in this maintenance comment period. Any parties interested public hearing; (2) consultation among plan, and that this plan demonstrates in commenting on this action should do federal, state, and local agencies maintenance with the 1-hour ozone so at this time. If we do not receive any occurred; (3) the emissions budget is standard. comments, this action will be effective clearly identified and precisely July 19, 2005. quantified; (4) the motor vehicle What Action Is EPA Taking? Statutory and Executive Order Review emissions budget, when considered We are approving the Southeast together with all other emissions, is Michigan ozone maintenance plan Executive Order 12866; Regulatory consistent with attainment; and (5) the update and the transportation Planning and Review motor vehicle emissions budget is conformity budgets for the Southeast consistent with and clearly related to Michigan 1-hour ozone maintenance Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR the emissions inventory and control area into the Michigan SIP. 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is strategy in the SIP. The EPA is publishing this action not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and without prior proposal because we view therefore is not subject to review by the The new area-wide budgets are shown this as a noncontroversial amendment Office of Management and Budget. in the Table below: and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, we
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29207
Executive Order 13211: Actions That Executive Order 13045 Protection of shall not postpone the effectiveness of Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Children From Environmental Health such rule or action. This action may not Distribution, or Use and Safety Risks be challenged later in proceedings to This rule also is not subject to enforce its requirements. (See section Because it is not a ‘‘significant Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 307(b)(2).) regulatory action’’ under Executive Children from Environmental Health List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, Environmental protection, Air action,’’ this action is also not subject to April 23, 1997), because it is not Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions economically significant. pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Concerning Regulations That Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and Significantly Affect Energy Supply, National Technology Transfer recordkeeping requirements, Volatile Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May Advancement Act organic compound. 22, 2001). In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. role is to approve state choices, Dated: May 11, 2005. Regulatory Flexibility Act provided that they meet the criteria of Norman Niedergang, This action merely approves state law the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. as meeting Federal requirements and for the state to use voluntary consensus I Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code imposes no additional requirements standards (VCS), EPA has no authority of Federal Regulations is amended as beyond those imposed by state law. to disapprove a SIP submission for follows: Accordingly, the Administrator certifies failure to use VCS. It would thus be that this rule will not have a significant inconsistent with applicable law for PART 52—[AMENDED] economic impact on a substantial EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, I 1. The authority citation for part 52 number of small entities under the to use VCS in place of a SIP submission continues to read as follows: Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. et seq.). the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Subpart X—Michigan National Technology Transfer and Because this rule approves pre- Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. I 2. Section 52.1174 is amended by existing requirements under state law 272 note) do not apply. adding paragraph (v) to read as follows: and does not impose any additional Paperwork Reduction Act § 52.1174 Control Strategy: Ozone. enforceable duty beyond that required This rule does not impose an * * * * * by state law, it does not contain any information collection burden under the (v) Approval—On December 19, 2003, unfunded mandate or significantly or provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Michigan submitted an update to the uniquely 1995 (Public Law 104–4). Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Section 175(A) maintenance plan for the Southeast Michigan 1-hour ozone Executive Order 13175 Consultation Congressional Review Act and Coordination With Indian Tribal maintenance area, which consists of The Congressional Review Act, 5 Governments Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne This rule also does not have tribal Business Regulatory Enforcement counties. This update addresses the implications because it will not have a Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides second 10-year period of maintenance of substantial direct effect on one or more that before a rule may take effect, the the ozone standard in Southeast Indian tribes, on the relationship agency promulgating the rule must Michigan, which spans the years 2005 submit a rule report, which includes a between the Federal Government and through 2015. The maintenance plan copy of the rule, to each House of the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of also revises the Motor Vehicle Congress and to the Comptroller General power and responsibilities between the Emissions Budget (MVEB). For the year of the United States. EPA will submit a 2005, the MVEB for VOC is 218.1 tons Federal Government and Indian tribes, report containing this rule and other as specified by Executive Order 13175 per day (tpd), and the MVEB for NOX is required information to the U.S. Senate, 412.9 tpd. For the year 2015, the MVEB (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). the U.S. House of Representatives, and for VOC is 172.8 tpd, and the MVEB for the Comptroller General of the United Executive Order 13132 Federalism NOX is 412.9 tpd. States prior to publication of the rule in This action also does not have the Federal Register. A major rule [FR Doc. 05–10150 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Federalism implications because it does cannot take effect until 60 days after it BILLING CODE 6560–50–P not have substantial direct effects on the is published in the Federal Register. states, on the relationship between the This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as national government and the states, or defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean on the distribution of power and Bureau of Land Management responsibilities among the various Air Act, petitions for judicial review of levels of government, as specified in this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the 43 CFR Part 1600 Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, appropriate circuit by July 19, 2005. August 10, 1999). This action merely [WO–350–2520–24 1B] Filing a petition for reconsideration by approves a state rule implementing a the Administrator of this final rule does RIN 1004–AD57 federal standard, and does not alter the not affect the finality of this rule for the Land Use Planning; Correction relationship or the distribution of power purposes of judicial review nor does it and responsibilities established in the extend the time within which a petition AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management Clean Air Act. for judicial review may be filed, and (BLM), Interior.
VerDate jul<14>2003 14:00 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29208 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
ACTION: Final rule; correcting paragraph (d) introductory text and smoke and emissions from prescribed amendments. adding in its place the phrase ‘‘Field and natural fires; preserve landfill Manager.’’ capacities, reduce the threat of SUMMARY: This document contains catastrophic wildfires to communities corrections to the final regulations that Dated: May 11, 2005. Ian Senio, and public/private utilities; improve were published in the Federal Register watershed and wildlife habitat on Wednesday, March 23, 2005, (70 FR Acting Group Manager, Regulatory Affairs. protection; and improve forest, 14561). The regulations related to [FR Doc. 05–10015 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] woodland, and rangeland health. cooperating agencies and cooperating BILLING CODE 4310–84–P This final rule, while substantially the agency status. same as the interim final rule published DATES: Effective on April 22, 2005. on August 27, 2004, contains minor FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR changes to respond to comments and to Robert Winthrop at (202) 452–6597 or Office of the Secretary improve clarity. It is also reformatted to Mark Lambert at (202) 452–7763. move the required contract clause to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 48 CFR Parts 1437 and 1452 Part 1452 of 48 CFR. Background RIN 1084–AA00 I. Response to Public Comments Need for Correction We received several comments from Woody Biomass Utilization two sources. Our response to each As published, the final regulations comment follows, in order by section. contain errors which may prove to be AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior. The discussion of the comments shows misleading and need to be clarified. The ACTION: Final rule. the former section title and number, final regulations stated the corrections followed by the revised section number in singular form when some of the SUMMARY: This rule converts an interim and (if different) title. actual regulation text was in plural final rule to a final rule, with minor form. We need to make these corrections adjustments in response to public Section 1437.100 General (New so that all of the necessary changes comment. In addition, the numbering § 1437.7200) scheme was revised to conform to the appear in the Code of Federal Comment: The woody biomass should Regulations. existing regulatory structure. As a result of this rulemaking, Department of the stay where it is. Response: The fundamental method List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 1600 Interior will allow service contractors to of addressing forest health and Administrative practice and remove woody biomass generated as a hazardous fuel reduction strategies procedures, Environmental Impact result of land management service under the National Fire Plan and Statements, Indians, Intergovernmental contracts whenever ecologically Healthy Forests Initiative is to remove relations, Public lands. appropriate and in accordance with small diameter trees. Contractors are applicable law. I Accordingly, 43 CFR part 1600 is cutting the trees to meet resource corrected by making the following DATES: Effective Date: May 20, 2005. objectives. The removal is incidental to correcting amendments: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the project. The projects would occur Delia Emmerich, Office of Acquisition whether or not there was an option for PART 1600—PLANNING, and Property Management, Department removal. The Rule simply makes these PROGRAMMING, BUDGETING of the Interior at (202) 208–3348, or e- materials available for removal by _ I 1. The authority citation for part 1600 mail at Delia [email protected]. contractors, rather than disposal continues to read as follows: Individuals who use through burning or other on-site telecommunications devices for the deaf Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1711–1712. disposal methods. (TDD) may call the Federal Information Comment: I oppose allowing the § 1610.1 [Corrected] Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 contractors to damage and destroy this twenty-four hours a day, 7 days a week. I 2. Section 1610.1(a)(1) is amended by area for their own enrichment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: removing the misspelled word ‘‘suct’’ On August Response: Contractors have been and add in its place the word ‘‘such.’’ 27, 2004, the Department published an secured to provide a service to the interim final rule with request for federal agency, which includes the § 1610.1 Resource management planning comments at 69 FR 52607; the interim cutting or destruction of vegetation to guidance [Amended] rule established procedures to allow meet a prescribed management I 3. Amend § 1610.1(a)(1) and (b) by service contractors to remove woody objective, such as thinning small trees to revising the phrases ‘‘resource area’’ and biomass generated as a result of land improve forest growth or clearing of ‘‘resource areas’’ to read ‘‘resource or management service contracts whenever roads and building sites. Projects under field office area’’ and ‘‘resource or field ecologically appropriate and in Rule are developed under the office areas’’, respectively. accordance with applicable law. This requirements of the National publication revises that rule in response Environment Policy Act, which is § 1610.2 [Amended] to public comments. This rule designed to ‘‘prevent or eliminate I 4. Amend § 1610.2(j) by removing the establishes consistent and efficient damage to the environment * * *’’ If phrase ‘‘District or Area Manager’’ and procedures to allow contractors the damage beyond that anticipated in the adding the phrase ‘‘Field Manager’’ and option to remove woody biomass by- NEPA analysis were to occur, by design removing the phrase ‘‘Area or Field products from Department of the this would be accidental. By the nature Manager’’ and adding the phrase ‘‘Field Interior land management activities. of these projects, the removal of the low- Manager.’’ This option, where ecologically value biomass has very little if any appropriate, will provide economic and commercial value. If the biomass had § 1610.3–1 [Amended] social benefits by creating jobs and commercial value, the project would I 5. Amend § 1610.3–1 by removing the conserving natural resources. Removal most likely be a timber/vegetative sales phrase ‘‘District Managers’’ from or use of woody biomass will reduce contract offering unrelated to the
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29209
procurement regulations covered under biomass utilization in each project (3) This rule does not alter the this Rule. where woody biomass utilization is budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, Comment: There does not need to be appropriate and make a determination user fees, or loan programs or the rights any immediate need to rush through of significance for the project.’’ This or obligations of their recipients. The this plundering. I think the rush is to try would include, where appropriate, a contractor will be provided a new to make it escape from public view. The public comment solicitation and a option, if executed,which is exclusive of Administrative procedure act calls for public record of decision. It is not other rights and benefits. public input. I ask for extension of the necessary, nor in the best interest of the (4) This rule does not raise novel legal time for the public to comment instead public, to delay implementation in or policy issues. This policy uses for a 90-day period. order to prepare an environmental existing authorities within existing Response: Urgent and immediate impact statement. policies. actions are called for under the National Fire Plan Hazardous Fuel Reduction Section 1437.104 Definitions (New 2. Regulatory Flexibility Act § 1437.7203) Program. Thousands of projects are The Department of the Interior taking place every year. This Rule will Comment: The definition of certifies that this document will not make the by-products from these ‘‘ecologically appropriate’’ states, have a significant economic effect on a treatments immediately available. ‘‘where the Deciding Officer and/or substantial number of small entities Removal of the biomass, in most cases, Contracting Officer determines it is not under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 is preferable to leaving the material in necessary to retain specific woody U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The scope of the the woods. Removal will reduce the material * * *’’ Only the Deciding action is minor (less than $100 million threat of escaped wildfires from burning Officer (Field Manager or other in economic impact); the benefits of the the material, reduce air pollution, and responsible line officer) will make this rule are to the contractor and may be stimulate jobs for the local economy. decision. exercised at their discretion. Only two comments were received Response: The Responsible Official during the public comment period, one for the NEPA document makes the 3. Small Business Regulatory of which was from a federal agency. The decision to include or not include Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) Rule does not appear to be woody biomass removal. The This rule is not a major rule under 5 controversial, complex, or require procurement Contracting Officer U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business additional analysis such that a 90-day decides whether to include the clause Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. comment period is necessary. No from § 1452.237–71 in the solicitation or This rule: additional comments were received service contract, presumably in a. Does not have an annual effect on after closure of the official public consultation with the Responsible the economy of $100 million or more. comment period. Official. The timber/vegetative sales The woody by-products have limited Comment: There is no ‘‘threat’’. contract, if required, may be executed economic value (small diameter, low Response: The Federal Register of by the timber/vegetative sales August 17, 2001 (66 FR 43435) includes trees and woody material), are unused Contracting Officer with the delegated or underutilized in current market 11,376 communities within the vicinity authority to dispose of forest products, of Federal lands that are at high risk to conditions, and/or are by nature, per Bureau policies. Clarification has incidental by-products. wildfire. This list was jointly developed been included in the final rule. by States, tribes, and Federal agencies. b. Will not cause a major increase in The 2004 wildfire season, as well as the II. Procedural Matters costs or prices for consumers, 2000 and 2002 seasons, are well above individual industries, Federal, State, or 1. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. local government agencies, or the 10-year average for acres burned due 12866) to wildfires. The trend for larger, more geographic regions. The quantities are damaging fires has been increasing, with This document is not a significant small in size and amounts, are widely little relief in sight. The Congress, the rule and the Office of Management and scattered across the nation, and are low- Administration, and the States have Budget has not reviewed this rule under value products. made a national and local priority of Executive Order 12866. c. Does not have significant adverse addressing wildfire threats. (1) This rule will not have an effect of effects on competition, employment, Comment: This rule will have an $100 million or more on the economy. investment, productivity, innovation, or effect of $100 million and therefore has It will not adversely affect in a material the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to a significant economic effect. way the economy, productivity, compete with foreign-based enterprises. Response: Optimistic projections of competition, jobs, the environment, The policy would increase U.S.-based woody biomass removal under the public health or safety, or State, local, economic opportunities, employment, National Fire Plan, the largest and most or tribal communities. The contractors innovation, and conservation of energy active vegetation management program and the general public are not required and resources. to perform services or process materials’ in the Federal government, could 4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act include the removal of approximately 7 woody products will be removed and million green tons per year. At the compensated, if appropriate, at fair This rule does not impose an minimum rate of $0.10 per green ton, or market value as agreed upon. unfunded mandate on State, local, or even an optimistic $0.25 to $0.50 per (2) This rule will not create a serious tribal governments or the private sector green ton, this represents less than $5 inconsistency or otherwise interfere of more than $100 million per year. The million. with an action taken or planned by rule does not have a significant or Comment: NEPA plans must be another agency. This policy only applies unique effect on State local or tribal prepared and the public must be to Department of the Interior Bureaus; governments or the private sector. A allowed to comment. other agencies and governments could statement containing the information Response: As specific in the Interim positively benefit from the development required by the Unfunded Mandates Rule, ‘‘Federal agencies should consider of small-wood markets and any tax or Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not the environmental effects of woody economic rewards. required.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29210 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
5. Takings (E.O. 12630) 48 CFR Part 1452 applicable timber/vegetative sales notice. In accordance with Executive Order Government contracts, Forests and 12630, the rule does not have significant forest products, Wood, Fire prevention, § 1437.7202 When is the biomass takings implications. No rights, property Contract clause. utilization clause required? or compensation has been, or will be Dated: March 22, 2005. (a) The contracting officer must insert taken. A takings implication assessment P. Lynn Scarlett, a clause reading substantially the same is not required. Assistant Secretary—Policy, Management as § 1452.237–71 in each solicitation and Budget. and contract that is expected to generate 6. Federalism (E.O. 13132) I For the reasons given in the preamble, woody biomass that meets the criteria in In accordance with Executive Order the Department of the Interior hereby § 1437.7201(a), unless biomass removal 13132, the rule does not have sufficient amends 48 CFR chapter 14 as set forth is required elsewhere in the contract. federalism implications to warrant the below. (b) In addition, the contract will preparation of a federalism assessment. specify any limitations on types of The rule grants optional rights and PART 1437—[AMENDED] woody biomass that may not be removed and any areas from which increased economic opportunities to I 1. Part 1437 is revised to read as woody biomass must not be removed. individuals, States, local governments, follows: and Tribes, in furtherance of section § 1437.7203 Definitions. 2(h) of E.O. 13132. A federalism PART 1437—SERVICE CONTRACTING assessment is not required. Ecologically appropriate means those Subpart 1437.72—Utilization of Woody situations where the Responsible 7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) Biomass Official determines it is not necessary to retain specific woody material or In accordance with Executive Order Sec. reserve specific areas from woody 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 1437.7200 General. biomass removal to meet ecological determined that this rule does not 1437.7201 When can woody biomass be objectives. For example, it may be unduly burden the judicial system and removed? 1437.7202 When is the biomass utilization necessary to retain snags or small meets the requirements of sections 3(a) woody debris to meet wildlife habitat and 3(b)(2) of the Order. clause required? 1437.7203 Definitions. objectives, or to create specific 8. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. Authority: 30 U.S.C. 601–604, 611, as prescribed burning conditions to 13175) amended; 16 U.S.C. 668dd; 16 U.S.C. 1; 25 stimulate native plant development; U.S.C. 3101 et seq; 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq. therefore it would not be appropriate to In accordance with Executive Order allow removal of the specified woody 13175, we have evaluated this rule and Subpart 1437.72—Utilization of Woody biomass. determined that it has no potential Biomass Responsible Official means the negative effects on federally recognized Secretary of the Interior or designee § 1437.7200 General. Indian tribes. We have fully considered having the delegated authority to tribal views in the final rule. We have This subpart establishes consistent responsibility to: consulted with the appropriate bureaus and efficient procedures to allow (1) Oversee the planning process and and offices of the Department about the contractors the option to remove woody make decisions to carry out a specific potential effects of this rule on Indian biomass by-products from Department planning action; tribes, including the Bureau of Indian of the Interior land management (2) Render a National Environmental Affairs. activities where ecologically Policy Act decision; or appropriate. If the woody biomass has 9. Paperwork Reduction Act (3) Sign the authorizing fair market value and payment is environmental document. This regulation does not require an required, or as required by regulation, Timber/vegetative sales contract and/ information collection from 10 or more Bureau policy or the Mineral Materials or notice means the agency-specific parties and a submission under the Disposal Act of 1947 (30 U.S.C. 601 et authorized contract instrument for the Paperwork Reduction Act is not seq) a separate timber/vegetative sales sale, barter, exchange, billing or other required. An OMB form 83–I is not contract must be executed. compensation for the payment, removal, required. § 1437.7201 When can woody biomass be and/or transportation of woody biomass material. 10. National Environmental Policy Act removed? (a) The Department of the Interior Woody biomass means the trees and This rule does not constitute a major allows and encourages contractors to woody plants, including limbs, tops, Federal action significantly affecting the remove and use woody biomass from needless, leaves, and other woody parts, quality of the human environment. project areas when: grown in a forest, woodland, or Federal agencies should consider the (1) The biomass is generated during rangeland environment, that are the by- environmental effects of woody biomass land management service contract products of management, restoration utilization in each project where woody activity; and and/or hazardous fuel reduction biomass utilization is appropriate and (2) Removal is ecologically treatment. make a determination of significance for appropriate. Woody biomass utilization or use that project. (b) A contractor removing biomass means the harvest, sale, offer, trade, under this part shall: and/or utilization of woody biomass to List of Subjects (1) Do so only within legal limits produce the full range of wood 48 CFR Part 1437 applicable to the contractor, including products, including timber, engineered National Environmental Policy Act lumber, paper and pulp, furniture and Government contracts, Forests and (NEPA) compliance; and value-added commodities, and bio- forest products, Wood, Fire prevention, (2) If required, comply with the terms, energy and/or bio-based products such Service contracting. conditions and special provisions of the as plastics, ethanol and diesel.
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29211
PART 1452—SOLICITATION (a) Project work is progressing as 5. The contractor must treat any woody PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT scheduled; and biomass not removed in accordance with the CLAUSES (b) Removal is completed before contract specifications in the service contract. expiration. 6. The sales contract and service contract are severable; default or termination under I 2. The authority for part 1452 is 2. To execute this option, the contractor must submit a written request to the either contract does not remove the revised to read as follows: Government. contractor from payment or performance Authority: Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390; 40 3. Following receipt of the written request, obligations under the other contract. U.S.C. 486(c); 5 U.S.C. 301; 30 U.S.C. 601– and if appropriate, the Government and the 7. Definitions: 604, 611, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 668dd; 16 contractor will negotiate and execute a Timber/vegetative sales contract and/or U.S.C. 1; 25 U.S.C. 3101, et seq.; 43 U.S.C. separate timber/vegetative sales contract. notice means the agency-specific authorized 1701, et seq., Payment under the timber/vegetative sales contract instrument for the sale, barter, contract must be at a price equal to or greater exchange, billing or other compensation for I 3. A New § 1437–237–71 is added to than the appraised value of the woody the payment, removal, and/or transportation read as follows: biomass. The contractor must make any of woody biomass material. appropriate payment specified in the related Woody biomass means the trees and woody § 1452.237–71 Utilization of Woody timber/vegetative sales contract before plants, including limbs, tops, needles, leaves, Biomass. removal may be authorized. and other woody parts, grown in a forest, As prescribed in § 1437.7202, insert 4. If required by law, regulation or Bureau woodland, or rangeland environment, that are the by-products of management, the following clause: policy, the Government will prepare a timber/vegetative sales notice and/or restoration and/or hazardous fuel reduction Utilization of Woody Biomass prospectus, including volume estimates, treatment. 1. The contractor may remove and utilize appraised value and any appropriate special [FR Doc. 05–10095 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] woody biomass, if: provisions. BILLING CODE 4310–RF–M
VerDate jul<14>2003 12:14 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR1.SGM 20MYR1 29212
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 97
Friday, May 20, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER APHIS, Station 3C71, 4700 River Road United States, but has recently been contains notices to the public of the proposed Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. found only on wheat in the Pacific issuance of rules and regulations. The Please state that your comment refers to Northwest when the seed is sown in late purpose of these notices is to give interested Docket No. 02–058–2. August and early September at depths of persons an opportunity to participate in the • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to more than 2 inches. rule making prior to the adoption of the final http://www.regulations.gov and follow rules. To address the risk presented by the instructions for locating this docket foreign strains of flag smut, the and submitting comments. regulations have prohibited the DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Reading Room: You may read any importation, except by the United States comments that we receive on this Department of Agriculture under a Animal and Plant Health Inspection docket in our reading room. The reading departmental permit, of certain articles Service room is located in room 1141 of the from specified countries and localities. USDA South Building, 14th Street and Specifically, the regulations prohibit the 7 CFR Part 319 Independence Avenue SW., importation of the following articles of Washington, DC. Normal reading room [Docket No. 02–058–2] Triticum spp. (wheat) or Aegilops spp. hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday (barb goatgrass, goatgrass): • Flag Smut; Importation of Wheat and through Friday, except holidays. To be Seeds; • Related Products sure someone is there to help you, Plants; please call (202) 690–2817 before • Straw (other than straw, with or AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health coming. without heads, that has been processed Inspection Service, USDA. Other Information: You may view or manufactured for use indoors, such ACTION: Proposed rule. APHIS documents published in the as for decorative purposes or for use as Federal Register and related toys); SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend information on the Internet at http:// • Chaff; and the regulations regarding the www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/ • Products of the milling process (i.e., importation of wheat and related webrepor.html. bran, shorts, thistle sharps, and articles by removing the prohibitions FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. pollards) other than flour. related to flag smut. Based on a number William D. Aley, Senior Import The regulations also prohibit the of considerations, we have concluded Specialist, Phytosanitary Issues importation of seeds of Melilotus indica that U.S. wheat would not be at risk if Management, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River (annual yellow sweetclover) and seeds those prohibitions were removed. We Road Unit 140, Riverdale, MD 20737– of any other field crops that have been would, however, continue to prohibit 1228; (301) 734–8262. separated from wheat during the the importation of wheat and related SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: screening process. articles from flag smut-affected The countries and localities from countries until a risk evaluation can be Background which the importation of those articles completed to ensure that those articles The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Wheat is prohibited are listed in § 319.59–3(b) do not introduce other plant pests. This Diseases’’ (7 CFR 319.59 through of the regulations. The listed countries action would remove flag smut-related 319.59–4, referred to below as the and localities are: Afghanistan, Algeria, prohibitions that no longer appear to be regulations) prohibit or restrict the Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, necessary while continuing to provide importation of wheat and related Bangladesh, Belarus, Bulgaria, Chile, protection against other potential pests articles into the United States from China, Cyprus, Egypt, Estonia, Falkland or diseases of wheat. certain parts of the world to prevent the Islands, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, DATES: We will consider all comments introduction of foreign strains of flag Hungary, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, that we receive on or before July 19, smut and Karnal bunt. This proposed Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, 2005. rule concerns only the prohibitions on Libya, Lithuania, Moldova, Morocco, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments flag smut. Flag smut is a plant disease Nepal, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, by any of the following methods: caused by a highly infective fungus, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Spain, • EDOCKET: Go to http:// Urocystis agropyri, which attacks wheat Tajikistan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Turkey, www.epa.gov/feddocket to submit or and substantially reduces its yield. Turkmenistan, South Africa, South view public comments, access the index Flag smut was first described in 1868 Korea, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and listing of the contents of the official in Australian wheat fields. Affected Venezuela. public docket, and to access those plants within the growing crop are often On February 7, 2003, we published an documents in the public docket that are severely stunted and produce excessive advanced notice of proposed available electronically. Once you have numbers of tillers. Unlike other bunts rulemaking (ANPR) in the Federal entered EDOCKET, click on the ‘‘View and smuts of wheat, flag smut does not Register (68 FR 6362–6363, Docket No. Open APHIS Dockets’’ link to locate this affect the quality of harvested grain for 02–058–1) in which we announced that, document. feed or flour. Flag smut of wheat was based on a risk assessment,1 we were • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: first discovered in the United States in Please send four copies of your 1919, and a quarantine on wheat from 1 The pest risk assessment, titled ‘‘Evaluation of the need for continued quarantine of foreign strains comment (an original and three copies) countries having flag smut was put in of the wheat flag smut pathogen, Urocystis agropyri to Docket No. 02–058–2, Regulatory effect. Until the 1930s, flag smut was a (Preuss) Schroet,’’ may be viewed on the EDOCKET Analysis and Development, PPD, significant disease of wheat in the Web site (see ADDRESSES above for instructions for
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29213
considering easing restrictions on the Order 12866 and, therefore, has not farms are considered small by SBA importation of wheat and related been reviewed by the Office of standards, and it is reasonable to articles from those countries and Management and Budget. assume that most of the 169,528 wheat solicited comments on whether and We are proposing to amend the farms that could be affected by the how we should amend the regulations. regulations regarding the importation of proposed rule would also qualify as In particular, we asked the public for wheat and related articles by removing small. comments and recommendations the prohibitions related to flag smut. Additionally, there were 157 wheat regarding the current prohibitions Based on a number of considerations, milling establishments reported in the related to foreign strains of flag smut, we have concluded that U.S. wheat census. Of these entities, 153 were whether lesser restrictions or safeguards would not be at risk if those wheat flour (except flour mixes) milling might be necessary if those prohibitions prohibitions were removed. We would, establishments (NAICS code 3112111), were removed, whether we should however, continue to prohibit the with a total of 6,720 employees, and 4 require the completion of risk importation of wheat and related were wheat products (except flour) assessments before allowing wheat or articles from flag smut-affected milling establishments (NAICS code related articles to be imported from countries until a risk evaluation can be 3112114), with a total of 288 employees. countries covered by the flag smut completed to ensure that those articles In the case of these milling regulations and from those countries not do not introduce other plant pests. This establishments, those entities with currently covered by the regulations, action would remove flag smut-related fewer than 500 employees are and the effects that any of these options prohibitions that no longer appear to be considered small by SBA standards. necessary while continuing to provide might have on wheat producers, Therefore, all 157 milling protection against other potential pests consumers, and other related entities in establishments are considered to be or diseases of wheat. the United States. small entities. We solicited comments on the ANPR The Regulatory Flexibility Act for 60 days, ending April 8, 2003. We requires that agencies consider the The United States is the world’s received nine comments by that date. economic impact of their rules on small leading wheat exporter. The average They were from State and Federal businesses, organizations, and annual value of exported U.S. wheat researchers, plant pathologists, wheat governmental jurisdictions and to use over the last 5 years is $4.4 billion. The industry associations, and an flexibility to provide regulatory relief volume of wheat exports from the agricultural import/export company. All when regulations create economic United States has, on average, been 14 of the commenters supported the disparities between different-sized times greater than import volume. removal of the flag smut-related entities. According to the Small Annual costs and benefits that would prohibitions. None of the commenters Business Administration’s (SBA’s) be associated with removing the import supported the imposition of lesser Office of Advocacy, regulations create prohibitions associated with flag smut restrictions or safeguards related to flag economic disparities based on size would depend upon the level of U.S. smut. when they have a significant impact on domestic wheat production as well as Based on our review of the public a substantial number of small entities. on import levels. The lower the import comments and the findings of the pest We expect that this proposed rule level when compared to the level of risk analysis, we are proposing to would affect domestic producers and domestic availability after export, the amend the regulations to eliminate the processors of wheat. It is likely that the lower the potential impact of this flag smut-based prohibition on the entities affected would be small proposed action on the economic importation of wheat and related according to Small Business welfare of domestic wheat importers articles from those countries. We would Administration (SBA) guidelines. As and producers. also remove the definition of foreign detailed below, information available to Nevertheless, the economic impact on strains of flag smut from § 319.59–1. We APHIS indicates that the effects on these U.S. domestic producers and processors are, however, proposing to continue small entities would not be significant. of wheat should be negligible since the Affected U.S. wheat producers and prohibitions on wheat and related percentage of imported wheat has been processors are expected to be small articles from those countries pending relatively low (6 percent of the domestic based on the 2002 Census of Agriculture the completion of an evaluation by data. According to the census, there supply) when compared with the APHIS of the potential risks associated were 169,528 farms in the United States domestic supply levels overall. In with the articles. that sold wheat, collectively valued at particular, domestic wheat producers The amended regulations would should not face competition from provide an address to which the $5.64 billion. SBA guidelines for entities in Wheat Farming and Wheat foreign producers given the small national plant protection organization of Farming, Field, and Seed Production percentage of imported wheat in the each country could write to request that (North American Industry Classification domestic supply. such an evaluation be performed. If System [NAICS] code 111140) classify Given the relatively small amount of supported by the results of the risk producers in these farm categories as wheat in the domestic supply when evaluation, we would then take action small entities if their total annual sales compared to U.S. wheat production and to remove the country from the are no more than $750,000. APHIS does the size of the domestic supply overall ‘‘prohibited pending’’ list. not have information on the size the proposed change would not have Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory distribution of domestic wheat any measurable economic affect on Flexibility Act producers, but according to 2002 Census either domestic producers or processors of wheat. This proposed rule has been reviewed data, there were a total of 2,128,892 under Executive Order 12866. The rule farms in the United States. Of this Under these circumstances, the has been determined to be not number, approximately 97 percent had Administrator of the Animal and Plant significant for the purposes of Executive total annual sales of less than $500,000 Health Inspection Service has in 2002, which is well below the SBA’s determined that this action would not accessing EDOCKET) or on the Internet at http:// small entity threshold for commodity have a significant economic impact on www.cphst.org/docs/FlagSmut.pdf. farms. This indicates that the majority of a substantial number of small entities.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29214 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Executive Order 12988 imported or offered for entry into the the agencies that enforce compliance This proposed rule has been reviewed United States, except as provided in with the standards. The proposed under Executive Order 12988, Civil § 319.59–2(b), pending the completion general principles will establish the Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is of an evaluation by APHIS of the criteria that the agencies will use in adopted: (1) All State and local laws and potential pest risks associated with the considering whether a petition to regulations that are inconsistent with articles. The national plant protection establish, revise, or eliminate a food standard will be the basis for a proposed this rule will be preempted; (2) no organization of any listed country or 1 rule. In addition, each agency may retroactive effect will be given to this locality may contact APHIS to initiate propose to establish, revise, or eliminate rule; and (3) administrative proceedings the preparation of a risk evaluation. If a food standard on its own initiative or will not be required before parties may supported by the results of the risk may propose revisions to a food file suit in court challenging this rule. evaluation, APHIS will take action to remove that country or locality from the standard in addition to those a Paperwork Reduction Act list in paragraph (b) of this section. petitioner has requested. These This proposed rule contains no * * * * * proposed general principles are the agencies’ first step in instituting a information collection or recordkeeping Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day of requirements under the Paperwork process to modernize their standards of May 2005. identity (and any accompanying Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 Elizabeth E. Gaston, et seq.). standards of quality and fill of Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant container) and standards of List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319 Health Inspection Service. composition. [FR Doc. 05–10094 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Honey, DATES: Submit written or electronic BILLING CODE 3410–34–P Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant comments by August 18, 2005. diseases and pests, Quarantine, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Reporting and recordkeeping DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE to FSIS, identified by Docket No. 95– requirements, Rice, Vegetables. 051P, by any of the following methods: Accordingly, we propose to amend 7 Food Safety and Inspection Service • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// CFR part 319 as follows: www.regulations.gov. Follow the 9 CFR Part 410 instructions for submitting comments. PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (For [Docket No. 95–051P] NOTICES paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions): RIN 0583–AC72 Send an original and two copies of 1. The authority citation for part 319 comments to: FSIS Docket Clerk, Docket would continue to read as follows: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND No. 95–051P, rm. 102, Cotton Annex Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450 and 7701–7772; 21 HUMAN SERVICES Bldg., 300 12th St. SW., Washington, DC U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 20250–3700. 371.3. Food and Drug Administration Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and § 319.59–1 [Amended] 21 CFR Part 130 Docket No. 95–051P or regulatory 1. In section 319.59–1, the definition information number (RIN) 0583–AC72. for Foreign strains of flag smut would be [Docket No. 1995N–0294] Other Information: All comments removed. RIN 0910–AC54 submitted in response to this proposal, 2. In section 319.59–2, the as well as research and background introductory text of paragraph (b) would Food Standards; General Principles information used by FSIS in developing be revised to read as set forth below and and Food Standards Modernization this document, will be available for paragraph (b)(3) would be amended by AGENCIES: Food Safety and Inspection public inspection in the FSIS Docket removing the words ‘‘(including foreign Service, USDA; Food and Drug Room at the address listed above strains of flag smut).’’ Administration, HHS. between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. The comments § 319.59–2 General import prohibitions; ACTION: Proposed rule. exceptions. also will be posted on the Agency’s Web SUMMARY: The Food Safety and site at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/ * * * * * Inspection Service (FSIS) and the Food rdad/FRDockets.htm. (b) Triticum spp. plants, articles listed and Drug Administration (FDA) (we, You may submit comments to FDA, in § 319.59–3 as prohibited importation our, the agencies) are proposing to identified by Docket No. 1995N–0294 pending risk evaluation, and articles establish a set of general principles for and/or RIN 0910–AC54, by any of the regulated for Karnal bunt in § 319.59– food standards. The adherence to these following methods: 4(a) may be imported by the U.S. • principles will result in standards that Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Department of Agriculture for will better promote honesty and fair www.regulations.gov. Follow the experimental or scientific purposes if: instructions for submitting comments. dealing in the interest of consumers and • * * * * * protect the public, allow for Agency Web site: http:// 3. In § 319.59–3, the section heading technological advances in food www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments. and the introductory text of the section production, be consistent with Follow the instructions for submitting would be revised to read as follows: international food standards to the comments on the agency Web site. • E-mail: [email protected]. extent feasible, and be clear, simple, and § 319.59–3 Articles prohibited importation Include Docket No. 1995N–0294 and/or easy to use for both manufacturers and pending risk evaluation. RIN 0910–AC54 in the subject line of The articles listed in paragraph (a) of 1 your e-mail message. this section from the countries and Requests should be submitted in writing to • FAX: 301–827–6870. Phytosanitary Issues Management, PPQ, APHIS, • localities listed in paragraph (b) of this 4700 River Road Unit 140, Riverdale, MD 20737– Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (For section are prohibited from being 1236. paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions):
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29215
Division of Dockets Management, I. Background simple, consisting of only a sentence or 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, FSIS and FDA share responsibility for two (e.g., beef stew, 9 CFR 319.304), or MD 20852. ensuring that food labels are truthful a paragraph or two (e.g., deviled ham, 9 Instructions: All submissions received and not misleading. FSIS has the CFR 319.760). Other food standards are must include the agency name and authority to regulate the labeling of meat extremely detailed and prescriptive. For Docket No. 1995N–0294 or RIN 0910– and poultry products, and FDA has the example, the standard for frankfurter, AC54. All comments received will be authority to regulate the labeling of all frank, furter, hotdog, weiner, vienna, posted without change to http:// other foods. Some foods, such as eggs, bologna, garlic bologna, knockwurst and www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ are regulated by both agencies. Food similar products describes the form of default.htm, including any personal standards are used to ensure that the product, the expected ingredients, information provided. For detailed products sold under particular names and the allowable meat and nonmeat instructions on submitting comments have the characteristics expected by ingredients and poultry products that and additional information on the consumers. can be used in these products (9 CFR rulemaking process, see the 319.180). There are more standards for ‘‘Comments’’ heading of the A. FSIS Food Standards meat products than for poultry products SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Meat and poultry product standards because processed meat products have this document. of identity or composition are codified been in existence longer and have been Docket: For access to the docket to in title 9 of the Code of Federal consumed more widely than processed read background documents or Regulations (CFR). FSIS has established poultry products. Although the FMIA comments received, go to http:// by regulation approximately 80 meat and PPIA authorized standards of fill, www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ and poultry product standards of FSIS has not established any standards default.htm and insert the docket identity or composition (9 CFR parts of fill in regulations. number, found in brackets in the 319 and 381, subpart P, for meat and FSIS standards of identity generally heading of this document, into the poultry products, respectively) under its require the presence of certain expected ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts authorities in the Federal Meat ingredients in a food product or and/or go to the Division of Dockets Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Poultry mandate how a product is to be formulated or prepared. For example, a Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 poultry product labeled ‘‘(kind) a la 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. U.S.C. 607(c) and 457(b)). These Kiev’’ is required to be stuffed with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: sections provide: The Secretary [of Agriculture], whenever butter, which may be seasoned (9 CFR FSIS: Robert C. Post, Labeling and 381.161). In the poultry products Consumer Protection Staff, rm. 602, he determines such action is necessary for the protection of the public, may prescribe inspection regulations, the term ‘‘kind’’ Cotton Annex Bldg., 1400 Independence * * * definitions and standards of identity refers to the type of poultry used. In this Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250–3700, or composition for articles subject to [the standard of identity, butter is an 202–205–0279. FMIA and PPIA] and standards of fill of expected ingredient, and the standard FDA: Ritu Nalubola, Center for Food container for such articles not inconsistent also requires that the product be Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS– with any such standards established under prepared by stuffing the butter in the the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 820), Food and Drug Administration, poultry. The standard of identity for 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, [act] (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq. ) and there shall be consultation between the Secretary [of barbecued meats requires that MD 20740, 301–436–2371. Agriculture] and the Secretary of Health and barbecued meats be cooked by the direct SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Human Services prior to the issuance of such action of dry heat resulting from the standards under [the FMIA, PPIA, or act] burning of hard wood or the hot coals Table of Contents relating to articles subject to this chapter to therefrom for a sufficient period to I. Background avoid inconsistency in such standards and assume the usual characteristics of a A. FSIS Food Standards possible impairment of the coordinated barbecued article, which include the effective administration of [the FMIA, PPIA formation of a brown crust on the B. FDA Food Standards and the act]. There shall also be consultation C. Advance Notices of Proposed between the Secretary [of Agriculture] and an surface and the rendering of surface fat Rulemaking appropriate advisory committee provided for (9 CFR 319.80). This standard of D. Comments to the ANPRMs in [21 U.S.C. 454 and 661] prior to the identity specifies exactly how the E. Options in the Food Standards issuance of such standards * * * to avoid, product must be prepared and also Modernization Process insofar as feasible, inconsistency between includes a description of the defining Federal and State standards. characteristics of products that meet the F. Consumer Research Consistent with the statutes, FSIS has II. The Proposed General Principles standard. consulted with FDA regarding the Standards of composition specify the III. FSIS and FDA Requests for proposed general principles. In minimum or maximum amount of Information addition, FSIS consulted with the ingredients in a product. Many of these IV. Executive Order 12866: Cost Benefit National Advisory Committee on Meat standards for meat products establish a Analysis and Poultry Inspection about this minimum amount of meat or a A. Need for the Rule proposed rule in November 2001, and maximum amount of fat in the product. B. Regulatory Options incorporated their comments in this For example, the standards of V. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis document. FSIS’s food standards composition for ground beef, chopped VI. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice regulations cover many different foods. beef, hamburger, and fabricated steaks Reform The contents of individual food require that the product contain no VII. Executive Order 13132: Federalism standards or groups of food standards more than 30 percent fat (9 CFR 319.15). VIII. Environmental Impact are extremely varied, depending on the Several of the poultry standards of IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 complexity of the food and the level of composition specify minimum poultry X. Additional Public Notification detail necessary to define the levels and maximum added liquid XI. Comments characterizing features of the food. levels. For example, canned boned XII. References Some food standards are relatively poultry, labeled, ‘‘boned (kind)’’ must
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29216 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
contain at least 90 percent cooked, name, such as ‘‘pork, water, and soy standards focus on compositional deboned poultry meat of the kind protein concentrate link.’’ characteristics of the food, rather than indicated on the label, with skin, fat and Finally, in addition to its food on the specific ingredients. For seasoning, and may contain no more standards regulations, FSIS has example, the standards of identity for than 10 percent added liquid (9 CFR established numerous informal or milk products (part 131) list the 381.157). The standards of composition ‘‘policy’’ food standards for meat and minimum levels of milkfat and milk for mechanically separated (species) (9 poultry products in the FSIS ‘‘Food solids (excluding fat) that must be CFR 319.5) and mechanically separated Standards and Labeling Policy Book’’ contained in these foods. Still other (kind) (9 CFR 381.173) limit the amount (Policy Book). foods owe their distinctive and size of bone particles that the B. FDA Food Standards characteristics to the manner in which product may contain. they are produced, and the standards for Some FSIS standards require that FDA has established over 280 food these foods reflect this fact. For product be labeled with a specific name, standards of identity, some of which such as ‘‘hamburger’’ (9 CFR 319.15(b)) include standards of quality and fill of example, the standards of identity for or ‘‘(kind) patties’’ (9 CFR 381.160), container, under the authority set forth cheese products (part 133) specify the while other standards provide examples in section 401 of the Federal Food, manufacturing process, in addition to of terms that can be used to label the Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 compositional characteristics, to products but do not prescribe the exact U.S.C. 341). This section provides in distinguish one cheese from another. terms or phrases that must be used to part: Some other foods are defined by their label the product. For example, Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary physical characteristics. For example, numerous phrases may be used in [of Health and Human Services] such action particle size is an important factor in will promote honesty and fair dealing in the distinguishing cracked wheat from labeling fabricated steaks, including interest of consumers, he shall promulgate ‘‘beef steak, chopped, shaped, frozen,’’ regulations fixing and establishing for any crushed wheat, and the standards of ‘‘minute steak, formed, wafer sliced, food, under its common or usual name so far identity for these foods (§ 137.190 and frozen,’’ or ‘‘veal steaks, beef added, as practicable, a reasonable definition and 137.195, respectively) include methods choppedmolded- cubed-frozen, standard of identity, a reasonable standard of of analysis for the determination of the hydrolyzed plant protein, and quality, or reasonable standards of fill of particle size of these foods. Depending flavoring’’ (9 CFR 319.15(d)). Fabricated container. on the level of detail necessary to define The standards of identity, quality, and steaks also may be labeled with other the characteristics of the food, some terms not specified in the regulations. fill of container for foods regulated by FDA are codified in title 21, parts 130 food standards of identity consist of In addition, some FSIS standards only a few paragraphs (e.g., sap sago require specific label information. For to 169 (21 CFR 130 to 169). FDA food standards establish the common or cheese in § 133.186), while others are example, Italian sausage products that longer. For example, the canned tuna are cooked must be labeled with the usual name for a food and define the nature of the food, generally in terms of standard (§ 161.190) covers word ‘‘cooked’’ in the product name (9 approximately eight pages in the CFR CFR 319.145(c)), and cooked sausages, the types of ingredients that it must and prescribes the vegetables that must such as frankfurters, franks, furters, or contain (i.e., mandatory ingredients), be used if the tuna is seasoned with hotdogs, that are prepared with meat and that it may contain (i.e., optional vegetable broth. from a single species of cattle, sheep, ingredients). FDA food standards may swine, or goats must be labeled with the specify minimum levels of the valuable FDA’s food standards of quality set term designating the particular species constituents and maximum levels for minimum specifications for such factors in conjunction with the generic name of fillers and water. They also may as tenderness, color, and freedom from the sausage (9 CFR 319.180(c)). The describe the manufacturing process defects for canned fruits and vegetables. standard for poultry rolls requires that when that process has a bearing on the Such characteristics would not be when binding agents are added in identity of the finished food. Finally, readily apparent to the purchaser of excess of 3 percent for cooked rolls and FDA food standards provide for label these foods because of the nature of the 2 percent for raw rolls, the common declaration of ingredients used in the foods and the manner in which they are name of the agent or the term ‘‘binders food and may require other specific presented to the consumer (inside a added’’ must be included in the name labeling, such as the declaration of the can). FDA food standards of fill of of the product (9 CFR 381.159(a)). form of the food, packing medium, and container set out requirements as to how Under FSIS’s food standards flavorings or other characterizing much food must be in a container. regulations, products that do not ingredients, as part of the name of the These requirements are particularly conform to a standard may not represent food or elsewhere on the principal important when foods are packed in themselves as the standardized food. display panel of the label. liquids and sealed in opaque containers. However, such products still may be Individual FDA food standards vary sold under another name. For example, widely in their content. These variations In a manner similar to the FSIS food a beef stew that contains less than 25 have developed because of the different standard regulations, FDA’s food percent beef can be marketed as ‘‘gravy, aspects of food technology that are standard regulations do not permit vegetables, and beef’’ or ‘‘chunky beef responsible for providing the defining products that do not conform to a soup,’’ but can not be identified as ‘‘beef characteristics of a food. Some foods are standard to be represented as the stew’’ because the food standard for defined and distinguished by their standardized food; such products, meat stew requires that the product ingredients. The standards for these however, may be sold under other contain not less than 25 percent of meat foods set specific limits on the levels of nonstandardized names. For example, a of the species named on the label (9 CFR ingredients that must be used. For fruit product that does not meet the 319.304). A product that does not meet example, the standard of identity for standard of identity for fruit preserves the sausage standard (9 CFR 319.140) fruit preserves and jams (§ 150.160 (21 and jams (§ 150.160), because its fruit because it contains more than 10 CFR 150.160)) lists the minimum content is lower than the standard percent of added water in the finished amount of fruit and sugar that these requires, may be marketed under product may be marketed under another foods must contain. Other food another name, such as ‘‘fruit topping.’’
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29217
C. Advance Notices of Proposed nonstandardized foods; requiring that standards ensure that products meet Rulemaking products declare the percentage of all consumers’ nutritional expectations and In 1995, FSIS and FDA began major ingredients on the label; requiring needs. Several comments from industry, reviewing our regulatory procedures that products declare the percentage of a consumer, and two consumer groups and requirements for food standards to characterizing ingredients in the food stated that nutrition labeling and determine whether food standards were name; identifying ‘‘parent’’ products ingredient declarations cannot still needed, and if so, whether they with minimum compositional substitute for food standards, as reliance should be modified or streamlined. To requirements (for example, creating a on nutrition labeling and ingredient initiate this review, we published standard for jam or jelly that specifies declarations would be a burden to advance notices of proposed rulemaking minimum fruit content requirements) to consumers. avoid misleading use of percentage Several industry comments that (ANPRMs) on food standards (60 FR declaration on the food label; supported food standards also stated 67492, December 29, 1995 (FDA), and establishing generic food standards that the Federal food standards ensure 61 FR 47453, September 9, 1996 (FSIS)). (such as the standards of identity for a level playing field for industry These ANPRMs discussed regulations hard cheeses (§ 133.150) and spiced, because they provide direction to and policy governing food standards, flavored standardized cheeses industry members producing the history of food standards, and the (§ 133.193)); amending the statute to standardized products. Several industry possible need to revise the food allow private organizations to certify comments and one comment from the standards. that food products meet consumer USDA FCS also stated that, in the In the ANPRMs, we identified expectations; and requiring appropriate absence of Federal food standards, the problems with existing food standards. labeling of foods that deviate from States would be able to establish their Specifically, we stated that some food government quality standards (60 FR own food standards and manufacturers standards might impede technological 67492). would be confronted with the challenge innovation in the food industry. FSIS In the ANPRMs, the agencies asked of meeting different States’ stated that the existing food standards for comments on the benefits or lack of requirements. In addition, many also may prevent the food industry from benefits of the food standards industry comments stated that the food producing products that have lower regulations in facilitating domestic and standards provide a basis for amounts of constituents associated with international commerce and on the negotiations related to the international negative health implications, such as benefits of the food standards harmonization of standards and fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and regulations to consumers. We asked facilitate international trade. One sodium (61 FR 47453). FDA stated that how the food standards could be revised comment stated that, without a U.S. manufacturers of nonstandardized foods to grant the flexibility necessary for food standards system, food standards are developing new ingredients and timely development and marketing of development could shift to international plant varieties to enhance a food’s products that meet consumer needs, bodies, which may not be sensitive to organoleptic or functional properties, while at the same time providing the American consumer or industry. alter its nutritional profile, or extend consumer protection. We also asked for Another comment stated that the shelf life. Incorporation of these comments on the alternatives to the absence of food standards could pose a advances into standardized foods may food standards presented in the barrier to exports and international be difficult without the laborious ANPRMs and whether to coordinate markets. amendment of the relevant standard (60 efforts to revise the food standards Although most comments supported FR 67492). regulations. retaining food standards in some form, In the ANPRMs, FDA and FSIS they requested that food standards be presented alternatives to the existing D. Comments to the ANPRMs simplified, be made more flexible, or be food standards. The alternatives FSIS received 28 letters, each clarified. For example, one industry presented by FSIS included permitting containing one or more comments, from comment stated that food standards the use of a lesser amount of meat or industry, consumers, a consumer group, should not include manufacturing poultry in standardized products and the U.S. Department of Agriculture methods, prohibitions regarding classes provided the product’s label contained (USDA) Food and Consumer Service of ingredients, or product-specific a declaration of the percentage of the (FCS) (now known as Food, Nutrition, labeling (other than the acceptable meat or poultry content in the product; and Consumer Services) in response to product name). This comment also establishing a general standard of its ANPRM. FDA received 95 letters, stated that standardized and identity for standardized products that each containing 1 or more comments, nonstandardized food product labeling would provide for deviations from from industry, consumers, consumer should be the same. Similarly, other current ingredient allowances and groups, and the USDA FCS in response industry comments requested that the restrictions (deviations would be to its ANPRM. Most comments to both food standards be made more flexible to highlighted in the ingredient statement ANPRMs strongly supported the allow for alternative safe and suitable on the product label); establishing concept of food standards, while a few ingredients and alternative technologies categories of meat or poultry products requested that standards be eliminated. that do not change the basic nature or and corresponding recommendations for However, very few comments to both basic characteristics of the food. Several expected meat and poultry contents; ANPRMs supported the existing food industry comments recommended amending the statutes to allow private standards as currently written. The limiting food standards to the name of organizations to certify that food types of concerns expressed in the the product and the essential products meet consumer expectations; comments to the ANPRMs follow. characterizing properties of the product. and revoking existing food standards Many of the comments that supported Several industry comments to FSIS’s and regulating all foods as retaining food standards stated that they ANPRM recommended that food nonstandardized foods (61 FR 47453). protect consumers from fraudulent and standards be limited to meat and The alternatives presented by FDA substandard products by establishing poultry content requirements. included revoking existing food the basis upon which similar products Conversely, other industry comments to standards and regulating all foods as are formulated. Others argued that food FSIS’s ANPRM recommended that
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29218 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
industry be given the flexibility to permit reduction of meat and poultry current labeling requirements provide reduce the percentage of meat in content in standardized products. Many sufficient information concerning standardized products. of the industry comments opposed deviation from standards. While two Several industry comments and a private certification that food products industry comments supported private consumer comment to FDA’s ANPRM meet consumer expectations. certification of foods that meet recommended that FDA revise certain Comments to FDA’s alternatives: consumer expectations, most comments specific food standards (e.g., jams, Several comments opposed the opposed this alternative. jellies, preserves, milk chocolate, and alternatives presented in FDA’s sweetened condensed milk) to provide E. Options in the Food Standards ANPRM. One trade association stated Modernization Process more flexibility in food technology and that percentage labeling was not an As noted previously, several ingredient options. adequate substitute for standards. One comments recommended that FDA and In response to FSIS’s and FDA’s industry comment stated that requests for suggestions as to how they FSIS establish general principles or a percentage labeling might be acceptable should revise food standards, several fundamental philosophy for reviewing if it provided for the marketing of comments from industry and from a food standards and revising them. The ‘‘heavily breaded shrimp’’ without consumer group recommended agencies agree with these comments requiring ‘‘imitation’’ labeling but that rescinding or modifying them on a case- supporting the development of general any other use of percentage labeling by-case basis. Some comments from principles for reviewing and revising would be too cumbersome and could industry recommended instituting food standards regulations and also give away proprietary information. The advisory committees, contracting with agree with the comments that stated that USDA FCS comment stated that independent groups, or forming the agencies should work in concert to percentage labeling has merit but does nongovernment groups to revise the develop consistent food standards food standards. Further, several not address all of the factors that could regulations. industry comments recommended make a product inferior in quality. On September 12, 1996, FDA establishing general or ‘‘guiding’’ Another alternative that was presented convened an internal agency task force principles or a fundamental philosophy in conjunction with percentage to discuss the current and future role of for reviewing food standards and characterizing ingredient labeling was to food standards and to draft a set of revising them. Other industry comments identify a ‘‘parent’’ product, for principles for reviewing and revising and a consumer group suggested that example, a standardized jam or jelly that FDA’s food standards regulations. The revisions to standards should be complies with minimum compositional task force agreed that the food standards initiated by petitions and supported by requirements, to avoid misleading use of should protect consumers without adequate data. Finally, several the percentage declaration on a food unduly inhibiting technological comments to both ANPRMs stated that label. In response, one industry advances in food production and FSIS and FDA food standards should be comment stated that this approach marketing. consistent, and that we should attempt might be useful, but would not be To ensure that FSIS and FDA were to harmonize our efforts to revise the adequate to replace all standards. consistent as the food standards reform food standards. Another industry comment stated that process continued, in January 1997, a Comments to FSIS’s alternatives: Few minimal compositional standards are joint FDA and FSIS Food Standards comments supported the alternatives to necessary to provide a benchmark to Work Group (the Work Group) was food standards that FSIS presented in its ensure product integrity and to satisfy convened, chaired by the Director of the ANPRM. A consumer organization was consumer expectations. Comments also FDA’s former Office of Food Labeling opposed to all of the alternatives opposed the alternative of extending the (now incorporated into the Office of presented in the ANPRM. Several trade generic food standard concept (such as Nutritional Products, Labeling, and groups specifically stated their the existing standard of identity for hard Dietary Supplements) and the Director opposition to percentage labeling. One cheeses (§ 133.150) or the generic of the FSIS Labeling and Compounds of these groups stated that products standard for nutritionally modified Review Division (now the Labeling and would be cheapened if this alternative versions of traditional standardized Consumer Protection Staff). The Work were allowed. The USDA FCS comment foods in § 130.10 (21 CFR 130.10)) to Group revised the principles that the stated that percentage labeling had other classes of food standards. Two FDA task force had developed to reflect merit, but that this alternative does not industry comments stated that generic the goals and needs of both agencies. address all the factors that might make food standards should not be used to In addition to developing these a product inferior in quality. The USDA create standards for nonstandardized general principles, the Work Group FCS comment-and several industry foods, while another industry comment considered five options, as the next step comments that generally opposed the stated that the current generic standards in the process of food standards reform, other alternatives presented in the in § 130.10 were adequate. On the other and analyzed the advantages and ANPRM-expressed support for the hand, an industry comment stated that disadvantages of each option. The first general standard alternative that would generic standards in addition to those option the Work Group considered was provide for deviations from current covered in § 130.10 could be beneficial not proceeding any further with the ingredient allowances and restrictions. to maintain product characteristics. review of the food standards These comments stated that this Similarly, the USDA FCS stated that the regulations. The advantage of this approach would allow consumers to generic standards approach has merit. option is that, in the short run, it would discern differences between the With regard to the alternative of require little or no increase in the standardized product and the modified requiring that foods that deviate from agencies’ use of resources. version. One of these comments stated government quality standards be labeled A major disadvantage of this option is that this approach may not allow appropriately, one comment stated that that there is very little industry or enough ingredient deviations in foods that deviate from standards consumer support for it. As noted standardized products. Another of these should be named so that they are readily previously, the majority of comments comments stated that a general distinguishable from the standardized supported revising the existing system standard’s approach should expressly food. Another comment stated that of food standards to simplify them and
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29219
to make them more flexible. In addition, standards which might differ from each the standards failing to promote honesty even if this first option were adopted, other, making compliance by and fair dealing in the interest of we would need to continue to expend manufacturers more difficult. Without consumers or to protect the public. resources interpreting and enforcing Federal food standards, there would be Also, food standards for which industry food standards that may be outdated. no reference point for ensuring was unwilling to commit resources Additionally, a system of food standards consistency of products for national would not be revised. Under this option, that does not allow technological commodity programs or feeding there might be no mechanism for advancement in food production may programs, such as the National School resolving conflict, should it arise, not be in the long-term interest of Lunch Program. In addition, as among industry segments, unless consumers. If we do not revise the food comments stated, without Federal food legislative changes provided such a standards, FDA would need to continue standards, the United States would have mechanism. Furthermore, we to devote resources to temporary no reference point for negotiating determined that food standards marketing permit (TMP) applications, international food standards, or established and maintained by industry which allow companies to sell products facilitating international trade. would be voluntary, not mandatory, that deviate from established food Another disadvantage of this option is unless legislative changes authorized standards while testing the marketplace the loss of enforcement efficiency. industry to establish and maintain the for consumer acceptance of the new Without food standards, we would have standards. product (§ 130.17), and both agencies to rely solely on the general adulteration The fifth option the Work Group would need to devote resources to and misbranding provisions of our considered was to rely on external keeping their respective standards statutes rather than upon the specified groups-consumer, industry, commodity, systems functioning. In the long run, requirements of a food standard to or other groups-to draft recommended demands on each agency’s resources determine if a product were revisions to existing Federal food would likely increase as technological economically adulterated (i.e., standards but retain the agencies’ and marketing advances conflict with adulterated under § 402(b)(1)) or authority to establish the final food the requirements in the existing food misbranded. This would likely require standards. Under this option, we would standards regulations. However, if food more enforcement resources than a food continue to codify the food standards in standards were revised to provide standards system would require. our respective regulations. The external flexibility in manufacturing, the number The third option the Work Group groups would use the general principles of TMP applications would be reduced considered was using our resources to put forward by us to draft new food and agencies’ resources conserved. review and revise food standards to standards and would submit these in Finally, not reviewing or revising food make them internally consistent, more petitions. Similarly, external groups standards to ensure that they are current flexible for manufacturers and would use the general principles to draft with international food standards, as consumers, and easier to administer. revised food standards or to propose appropriate, could create difficulties in The majority of comments supported eliminating existing food standards. We international negotiations and trade. this option and several provided would review any petitions submitted to The second option the Work Group specific suggestions concerning ensure that they were consistent with considered was removing all food regulatory revisions. If we were to revise the general principles. Under this standards from the regulations and the food standards, we would ensure option, if we determined that a petition treating all foods as nonstandardized that the revisions reduced the burden on to establish, revise, or eliminate a foods. One advantage of this option is industry and ensured adequate standard was consistent with the that, in most cases, fewer agency protection of consumers. The general principles, and provided resources would be required to disadvantage of this option is competing adequate data and support for the eliminate food standards than to review priorities would make it unlikely we suggested change, we would more and revise them. Also, under this could do this in a timely manner. quickly propose and, when appropriate, option, we no longer would devote The fourth option the Work Group finalize a new or revised and simplified resources to responding to petitions considered was to request external standard or the elimination of a requesting an amendment to an existing industry groups to review, revise, and standard. standard or the establishment of a new administer the food standards (private One major advantage of this option is food standard. certification). This option would require that it would require the use of fewer of As with the first option, however, little or no use of the agencies’ our agencies’ resources than would be very few comments on the ANPRMs resources. In addition, the revised food required if we were to review and supported eliminating food standards standards would provide the level of propose amendments to the food completely. We agree with the flexibility that industry desires. standards without the benefit of comments that stated that States might However, for private organizations to petitions. In addition, this option allows establish their own food standards in review, revise, and administer the food for the participation of consumer groups the absence of Federal food standards. standards, the act, FMIA, and PPIA and an opportunity for them to express For meat and poultry products, if there would have to be amended, so that these interest through the petition process and were no Federal standards, States with standards would have the force of law. through the submission of comments in their own meat and poultry inspection Although a few industry comments response to proposed rules on new or programs could have State standards for supported private certification of food revised food standards. Because we meat and poultry products and these standards, most comments to the would have ultimate authority and would only apply to products produced ANPRMs opposed private certification. jurisdiction over the final food standard at establishments within the State that In addition, the Work Group determined established or eliminated, we would are distributed within the State. Such that this option might not provide a ensure that consumer interests were food standards for meat and poultry mechanism for consumer input, unless protected. Another advantage of this products could differ from State to required by legislation. Therefore, option is that it would rely largely on State. For FDA-regulated food products, consumers’ interests would not information from those groups that have if there were no Federal food standards, necessarily be reflected in the revised the most interest in, and knowledge of, States would be free to create their own food standards, which might result in the particular food standards being
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29220 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
considered for revision. These groups household grocery shoppers were including the ability of a product to could draw on technical experts with recruited to participate in 8 FGDs held, meet consumers’ expectations, will knowledge of current production 2 each in 4 cities: Raleigh, NC; San determine whether it stays on the practices and marketing trends who Diego, CA; Philadelphia, PA; and St. market. Therefore, they maintained that could suggest which aspects of a Louis, MO. Male and female government oversight over product specific standard are necessary to define participants were selected to represent quality and uniformity was not needed. the essential characteristics of a diversity in age, level of education, and Some of these participants asserted that particular food. This approach would race. The purpose of this research was food standards do not serve consumers also likely result in consistent food to collect the following information on because they do not reflect the diversity standards because the general principles consumers: (1) Attitudes toward of consumer expectations and beliefs, would govern all changes that are made arguments for and against standards of and restrict product choice and to the standards. identity regulations; (2) preferences for innovation. The disadvantage to this fifth option standards of identity regulations for In addition to being asked whether is that, if a consumer, industry, or different types of food products; (3) they support or oppose the need for commodity group does not feel strongly preferences for various types of food standards, participants were asked about revising a particular group of food requirements in standards of identity which food products or characteristics standards, we might not receive a regulations; (4) preferences for possible of food products it was most important petition and would then need to commit alternatives to standards of identity to standardize and monitor. In response, resources to reviewing the food regulations; and (5) attitudes towards participants stated that they considered standards without the benefit of a the standards setting process and food standards to be most necessary for petition. However, comments to the suggestions for improving it. foods with multiple, unrecognizable ANPRMs and informal communications The FGDs revealed that the opinion of ingredients (e.g., cheeses or hot dogs) with external groups following participants on standards of identity and least necessary for foods with a publication of the ANPRMs indicate the varied widely ranging from those who single, recognizable ingredient (e.g., willingness of consumer, industry, and felt that such standards are always milk or canned corn). Many participants commodity groups to submit for our necessary to those who felt that such identified requirements for the types consideration complete and thorough standards are never necessary. However, and amounts of ingredients and the revisions for many food standards. In the FGDs did not generate sufficient quality of a product as the most the event we do not receive a petition data to explain the basis for these important ones of a food standard, while requesting that we revise, revoke, or differences. The majority of participants the physical characteristics of a food establish a food standard, we, on our at these FGDs supported the need for were stated as least important. own initiative, may, when appropriate, food standards to ensure product quality Additionally, several participants propose to revise, revoke, or establish a and protect consumers, and opined that suggested that we review food standards standard. food standards should not be periodically and revise them as needed For the reasons discussed previously, eliminated. Some participants stated on a case-by-case basis to accommodate we have tentatively determined that the that standards were necessary to ensure changes in consumer preferences and fifth option is the most appropriate that products are named and labeled reflect advances in processing and course of action. The Work Group appropriately, and that food standards ingredient technologies. Finally, preliminarily determined that we could would allow consumers to base participants expressed the need for FSIS rely on external groups to suggest new purchase decisions simply on the name and FDA to obtain input from food standards, revisions to existing of the product. Some participants also consumers during the process of food standards, or elimination of certain stated that standards should be based on establishing and revising food standards food standards that are consistent with consumers’ beliefs about minimum so consumers’ preferences and beliefs the proposed general principles. The acceptable levels of product are accurately reflected in food general principles approach would characteristics and were concerned that standards (Refs. 1 and 2). allow us to chart the basic course of a lack of standards would lead to Overall, although the opinion of food standards review and increased shopping time and costs participants on standards of identity modernization. Moreover, it would associated with trying different brands varied widely, some tentative allow consumer and industry groups to of a particular food to find one that conclusions can be drawn. Many participate in the development of new meets their expectations. A majority of participants found standards of identity and revised food standards and to participants also indicated that food to be valuable. Participants stated that identify food standards that should be standards help ensure a certain degree having uniform product names for eliminated. In addition, it would of product uniformity. products with certain defined provide an opportunity for consumer However, some participants did not characteristics makes shopping easier. and industry groups to submit data to support the use of food standards. A few Many participants also felt that support any claims made in petitions participants in the FGDs questioned the standards of identity help ensure a relating to consumer expectations or need for standards. With respect to product has its expected characteristics. beliefs, and hence, protect consumer quality provisions in standards, some Most participants did not agree that interests. participants stated that they prefer standards hinder the variety of products variety over a set standard quality of a available on the market. In general, F. Consumer Research food product; they also felt that some participants felt that it was more To gain a preliminary understanding consumers might value the ability to important for standards to address of current consumer attitudes toward choose a product of lower quality at a characteristics that participants could Federal food standards of identity and reduced price. These participants not readily observe (such as ingredients the usefulness of food standards to believed that standards were not in products with multiple, consumers, we funded a series of focus necessary because consumer unrecognizable ingredients) rather than group discussions (FGDs) that were expectations of essential product characteristics they could observe (such conducted by the Research Triangle characteristics and product quality can as appearance, size, or number). Institute, North Carolina. A total of 64 vary, and normal market forces, Participants also stated that standards of
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29221
identity should be based on consumer The first four general principles state uniformity with respect to certain beliefs and expectations about the the purpose or function of a food significant characteristics of product that are implied by a product’s standard. These principles are the most standardized foods, resulting in the name and its minimum acceptable fundamental principles addressing expectation and belief of consumers that characteristics. In addition, participants consumer protection from an economic all products bearing a particular name believed that standards should be standpoint. Therefore, the agencies are will possess the same essential periodically revised to accommodate proposing to deny a petition to characteristics, irrespective of where changes in consumer beliefs and eliminate a food standard if the petition they are purchased, or by whom they technological advances. Most does not demonstrate how the standard are manufactured or distributed. Thus, participants also expressed the desire proposed to be eliminated is to ensure that consumers are not misled for consumers to play a role in the inconsistent with any one of the first by the name of the food, to meet development or revision of standards four general principles. As stated in consumers’ expectations of product and did not feel that the government section I.B of this document, the act characteristics and uniformity, and, in should rely solely on input from explicitly states that regulations turn, to promote honesty and fair industry. Although tentative, and drawn establishing food standards of identity dealing in the interest of consumers and from the limited focus group research shall be issued when such action will to protect the public, a food standard data that is available, these conclusions ‘‘promote honesty and fair dealing in should, as stated in proposed 9 CFR provide support for the general the interest of consumers’’ (21 U.S.C. 410.1(a)(2) and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(2), principles discussed in section II of this 341). In addition, as stated in section I.A describe the basic nature of the food. document. of this document, the FMIA and PPIA The basic nature of the food is directly related to consumer expectations and II. The Proposed General Principles require that standards of identity or composition established under these beliefs about the food. We are proposing general principles acts be consistent with standards of Also, to promote honesty and fair for establishing new food standards and identity, quality, or fill of container dealing in the interest of consumers and for revising or eliminating existing food established under the act. Also, as stated to protect the public, proposed 9 CFR standards. In the list of proposed previously, the FMIA and PPIA 410.1(a)(3) and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(3) general principles for both of our authorize the Secretary of Agriculture, would state that the food standard agencies, the first four state the purpose after consultation with the Secretary of should reflect the essential or function of a food standard, and the Health and Human Services, to characteristics of the food. While the remaining principles state how the prescribe definitions and standards of basic nature of a food is directly related requirements of a food standard should identity or composition for meat and to consumer expectations and beliefs be written and what should be poultry products whenever he or she about the food, the essential incorporated, in general, in the determines that such action is necessary characteristics are the attributes of a standard. Although the general for the protection of the public. food that make the food what it is even principles have been developed to be Therefore, all of the general principles though they may not be readily apparent consistent between our two agencies, set forth in this proposal have been to the consumer. The essential they are not identical. Because FSIS and designed to achieve the goals of characteristics of a food are those that FDA regulate different products, promoting honesty and fair dealing in define or distinguish a food or describe principles that are specific to a the interest of consumers and protecting the distinctive properties of a food. particular agency were developed to the public. This is further explained as Further, the essential characteristics of a reflect that agency’s regulatory needs each individual or group of general food may contribute to achieving the and perspectives. principles is discussed below. basic nature of the food or may reflect FSIS is proposing to establish 9 CFR Consistent with section 401 of the act, relevant consumer expectations of a 410.1(a) and FDA is proposing to amend section 457(b) of the PPIA, and section food product. Foods may be defined or 21 CFR 130.5(b) to include these new 607(c) of the FMIA, the first four distinguished by their ingredients, general principles. Under this proposed proposed general principles primarily compositional characteristics, physical rule, the agencies will deny a petition to address consumer protection from an characteristics, levels of certain establish a food standard if the proposed economic standpoint. These first four nutrients, or the manner in which they food standard is not consistent with all principles are consistent with the are produced—all of which are the of the general principles that apply to findings of the focus group studies essential characteristics of a food. For the proposed standard. The agencies where a majority of participants example, the essential characteristics of recognize that not all of the general maintained that food standards are a hotdog include a certain fat and principles will be applicable to every needed to ensure product quality and moisture content, and the use of water food standard. The agencies will deny a uniformity and to protect consumers or ice to form an emulsion, whereas the petition to revise an existing standard if from economic deception. The first basic nature of a hotdog is that it is a the proposed revision is inconsistent general principle listed under proposed comminuted, semisolid sausage with any of the general principles that 9 CFR 410.1(a)(1) and 21 CFR prepared from one or more kinds of raw apply to the proposed revision. Under 130.5(b)(1) makes it explicit that FSIS’ skeletal muscle meat and/or cooked this proposed rule, when proposing a purpose for a food standard is to protect poultry meat. Similarly, the essential revision to a standard, petitioners will the public and FDA’s is to promote characteristics of a particular type of not be required to propose all the honesty and fair dealing in the interest cheese may include the bacterial culture revisions that might be needed to of consumers. Food standards would used, the processing method, and the fat modernize the entire existing standard. provide a system by which consumer and moisture content that contribute to Rather, the petitioner may propose only interests are protected and consumer the unique characteristics of that cheese limited changes to existing standards, expectations of a food are met. and the basic nature of that cheese is provided the proposed revisions are Historically, food standards have been that it is a milk-derived food of a certain consistent with the general principles beneficial because they provide form and consistency. Likewise, the that apply to them. assurance to consumers of product essential characteristics of wheat flour
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29222 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
include granulation requirements (the and maximum amounts of fat or other technology to ensure that any percentage of flour that has to pass ingredients a product may contain. requirement of a standard accomplishes through a certain sieve size), its These provisions ensure both the its purpose without impeding moisture content, and its ash content, economic value and nutritional quality technological advances that are not in whereas the basic nature of wheat flour of standard meat and poultry products. conflict with the intent of the is that it is a ground product of cleaned Therefore, proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(4) requirement. For example, in FSIS’s wheat grain. Therefore, although the and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(4) state that the current regulations, the standard for essential characteristics of a food may food standard should ensure that the barbecued meats requires that products contribute to achieving the basic nature food does not appear to be better or of such as ‘‘beef barbecue’’ or ‘‘barbecued of that food or may be relevant to a greater value than it is. Additionally, pork’’ be cooked by the direct action of meeting certain consumer expectations the food standard may be used as a dry heat (9 CFR 319.80). However, there about the food, they differ from the vehicle to improve the overall may be other cooking methods that basic nature of the food in that nutritional quality of the food supply. result in the same product consumers may not be aware of the In addition to protecting the characteristics that the direct action of essential characteristics that make the consumer, the next three proposed dry heat achieves, such as infrared food what it is. general principles would promote clear heating. During FGDs, consumers Preserving the basic nature and and straightforward requirements for expressed the need to revise food essential characteristics of a food would food manufacturers. They would also standards to reflect current advances in promote honesty and fair dealing in the promote, to the extent feasible, food manufacturing technology, and we interest of consumers and protect the flexibility in food technology. believe that this general principle public by ensuring that consumer Regulatory requirements written in provides an avenue to keep food expectations of the economic and plain and simple language facilitate the standards current with technological nutritional value of a food are met. manufacture of foods that comply with advances. Historically, food standards have been the regulations and, thereby, help In addition to addressing flexibility in adopted to protect consumers of reduce manufacturers’ costs of food technology, proposed 9 CFR traditional foods from deceptive, compliance and government costs of 410.1(a)(6) and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(6) inferior quality products of lesser enforcement. Lowered costs of would also state that the food standard economic value. Current food standards producing foods that meet the standards should provide for any suitable, ensure the economic value of a food. For may potentially benefit consumers in alternative manufacturing process that example, the standards of identity for the form of lowered prices of products accomplishes the desired effect and cheeses (part 133) specify milk solids or in the marketplace. Therefore, proposed should describe ingredients as broadly milkfat content requirements to prevent 9 CFR 410.1(a)(5) and 21 CFR and generically as possible. Examples of the substitution of less valuable 130.5(b)(5) state that the food standard standards that would permit flexibility ingredients for more valuable should contain clear and easily in manufacturing processes would be ingredients. understood requirements to facilitate those that provided for any suitable In addition to ensuring the economic compliance by food manufacturers. procedure for removing glucose from value of a food, FDA food standards, on Establishing regulations that do not dried eggs, for instantizing flours, or for occasion, also may serve to ensure the stifle innovations in food technology low-temperature rendering of meat. We nutritional quality of a food by imposing and allow for technological alternatives proposed that any food standard that requirements in addition to the labeling and advancements in food processing includes a specific manufacturing requirements in part 101 (21 CFR part would improve manufacturing process should allow for alternative 101). For example, the requirements for efficiency and lessen costs which may procedures. If the manufacturing mandatory addition of vitamin D to be passed on to the consumer. Improved process specified in a food standard is evaporated milk and of vitamin A to technologies may additionally benefit essential to the character of the food, the margarine are specified within the product quality and diversity. Increased food standard should allow for the use standards of identity for these foods diversity in, and potentially lower costs of any alternative procedure that yields (§§ 131.130 and 166.110, respectively). of, food products in the marketplace a product with the same physical, These nutritional requirements are an that continue to meet consumer nutritional, and sensory characteristics integral part of the standards of identity expectations would promote honesty as the food made according to the of these two foods and are not regulated and fair dealing in the interest of traditional procedure specified in under FDA’s other nutritional quality consumers and protect the public. existing food standards. provisions, such as its nutrient content Therefore, proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(6) To allow for flexibility in ingredients claims regulations (part 101). The use of and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(6) provide that the used to formulate standardized food standards as vehicles to improve food standard should permit maximum products, the ingredients for frozen raw the nutritional quality of the food flexibility in the food technology used breaded shrimp, for example, might be supply has always been based on to prepare the standardized food, so described to be ‘‘batter and breading documented public health need and long as that technology does not alter ingredients’’ (§ 161.175) and those in substantiated with sound science to the basic nature or essential frankfurters, frank, furter, hotdog, ensure that, within the context of the characteristics, or adversely affect the weiner, vienna, bologna, garlic bologna, total diet, the food is suitable for its nutritional quality, or safety of the food. knockwurst, and similar products might intended use with reasonable assurance In addition, these provisions would be described to be ‘‘byproducts and of effectiveness and safety in achieving state that the food standard should variety meats’’ (9 CFR 319.180). If it is the nutritional goals. FDA will continue provide for any suitable, alternative necessary to specify ingredients, the to apply this standard for any future use manufacturing process that standard should specify these of standardized foods or any other food accomplishes the desired effect and ingredients by functional use category, as a vehicle to improve the nutritional should describe ingredients as broadly e.g., ‘‘stabilizers and thickeners’’ or quality of the food supply. and generically as feasible. ‘‘texturizers,’’ rather than by listing Numerous FSIS standards specify the We are proposing the provision specific ingredients. Also, where minimum amounts of meat and poultry concerning flexibility in food appropriate, in accordance with current
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29223
regulations, the specific levels of consistent among all food standards. example, it is necessary to provide for ingredients that can be used may be This proposed principle also states that specific variations of cereal flours (e.g., modified if they reflect safe and suitable food standards should include only flour, bromated flour, instantized flour, levels or those levels that reflect good those elements that are necessary to and phosphated flour (21 CFR part manufacturing practices. define the basic nature and essential 137)). According to this proposed The general principles would also characteristics of a particular food, and principle, the variations for these promote uniformity between Federal that any unnecessary details should be standards should be consolidated into a food standards and any international eliminated. As noted in section I.B of single food standard. Similarly, existing standards for the same food. With the this document, the existing FDA food provisions in FSIS’s food standards for rising trend in globalization and standards vary widely in their content different forms of ham (e.g., chopped, increased accessibility of U.S. goods to and level of detail. In this principle, we ground, flaked, chipped, and pressed for other nations’ markets, efforts to are proposing to make it clear that cured ham products (‘‘ham patties,’’ harmonize U.S. food standards with simplicity in, and consistency among, ‘‘chopped ham,’’ ‘‘pressed ham,’’ international food standards will food standards is essential. This ‘‘spiced ham,’’ and similar products (9 facilitate international trade and foster proposed principle makes it clear that CFR 319.105) and ‘‘deviled ham’’ (9 CFR competition. These efforts may also any unnecessary details, such as details 319.760))) could be simplified or result in lowered costs and the related to manufacturing processes, consolidated. In order to promote food increased diversity of the food supply, ingredients, or variations of different standards that are simple and which in turn would benefit consumers. forms of the same food that are not consistent, proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(10) Therefore, we are proposing necessary to define the basic nature and and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(10) state that, harmonization of U.S. standards with essential characteristics of a food, whenever possible, general international food standards to the should be eliminated from the standards requirements that pertain to multiple extent feasible, while preserving the regulations. For example, in the FSIS food standards of a commodity group integrity, quality, and economic value food standards, the list of curing should be incorporated into general that U.S. consumers expect of the food. ingredients in the corned beef hash regulatory provisions that address the Proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(7) and 21 CFR standard (9 CFR 319.303(a)(3)) is an commodity group. For example, 130.5(b)(7) state that the food standard unnecessary detail because curing enrichment requirements for cereal should be harmonized with agents permitted in meat products are flours and related products might be international food standards to the listed in 9 CFR chapter III, subchapter codified in a new subpart A of part 137 extent feasible. If a food standard E or in 21 CFR chapter I, subchapter A entitled ‘‘General Provisions.’’ Further, presented in a petition is different from or B. Also, in addition to the standard the methods of analysis relevant to the requirements in a Codex standard for corned beef hash, the FSIS different foods within the same for the same food, we are proposing that regulations contain a standard for hash commodity group might be codified the petition should specify the reasons (9 CFR 319.302). It may not be necessary under the general provisions for that for these differences. This principle is to have separate standards for different commodity group. Additionally, the consistent with FDA’s existing forms of hash. An example of regulation, 21 CFR 130.6, which states unnecessary detail in FDA food curing requirements common to cured that food standards adopted by the standards may be the provision for beef products could be codified in a Codex Alimentarius Commission will be nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners in the new section at the beginning of 9 CFR reviewed by FDA, and either will be standard for ‘‘yogurt’’ (§ 131.200), part 319, subpart D. When provisions accepted (with or without change) or ‘‘lowfat yogurt’’ (§ 131.203), and ‘‘nonfat are of a general nature and affect more will not be accepted. This regulation yogurt’’ (§ 131.206), which lists several than one commodity group, we would also states that petitioners who petition sweeteners, because nutritive consider codifying these requirements FDA for a new or amended food sweeteners have been defined in all together in an appropriate CFR standard based on the relevant Codex § 170.3(o)(21) (21 CFR 170.3(o)(21)). section. For example, some fill of food standard shall specify any This provision could be incorporated by container requirements are codified in deviations in the requested standard simply using the functional category 21 CFR part 100, subpart F from those in the Codex standard and ‘‘nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners’’ (‘‘Misbranding for Reasons Other Than the reasons for any such deviations. without listing the different sweeteners. Labeling’’) and apply to a wide array of The next six proposed general This general principle is consistent products. Likewise, § 130.10 principles promote simplicity, brevity, with the findings of FGDs where Requirements for foods named by use of and consistency in food standards. participants expressed the belief that a nutrient content claim and a Providing regulatory requirements that certain characteristics of a food, such as standardized term permits the are simply and concisely stated and are its type and amount of ingredients, are modification of a standardized food to consistent among different foods would the more important elements of a food achieve a nutrition goal, such as a help improve efficiency and reduce the standard than certain other reduction in fat or calories. Such costs of compliance by industry, as well characteristics of a food. modified foods may be named by the as reduce enforcement costs by Proposed sections 9 CFR 410.1(a)(9) use of a nutrient content claim, such as regulatory agencies. Increased industry and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(9) state that the ‘‘reduced fat’’ and a standardized term, efficiency may also result in lowered food standard should allow for such as ‘‘cheddar cheese’’ (i.e., reduced costs of food products. Unnecessary variations in the physical attributes of fat cheddar cheese). To further promote details and requirements in a food the food. Also, this proposed principle consistency among food standards, standard not only burden enforcement states that where it is necessary to proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(11) states that and compliance efforts but also limit provide for specific variations in the any proposed new or revised food manufacturing options and create physical attributes of a food within the standard should take into account inefficiencies. Therefore, proposed 9 food standard, the variations should be whether there are FSIS labeling CFR 410.1(a)(8) and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(8) consolidated into a single food standard. regulations or ingredient regulations state that the food standard provisions Thus, this provision would promote that are affected by, or that cover, the should be simple, easy to use, and simplification of food standards. For new or revised food standard. FSIS is
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29224 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
proposing this principle so that any terms that can be used to name a food product (9 CFR 381.167). Some of the requirements of the standards are and should provide that such terms can existing FSIS food standards are based consistent with other regulatory be used in any order that is not on products as they are formulated for requirements. Similarly, proposed misleading, rather than list every processing, such as when the § 130.5(b)(11) states that any proposed possible combination of terms that may ingredients are assembled for cooking. new or revised FDA food standard be used to name a standardized food For example, the standard for meat should take into account any other (e.g., the nomenclature in the current stews requires that stews such as ‘‘beef relevant regulations. For example, a FDA standard of identity for wheat and stew’’ or ‘‘lamb stew’’ shall contain not proposed new or revised food standard soy macaroni product (21 CFR 139.140) less than 25 percent of meat of the should be consistent with common or and the FSIS standard for species named on the label, computed usual name regulations for related braunschweiger and liver sausage or on the weight of the fresh (that is, commodities or products. FDA is liverwurst (9 CFR 319.182)). uncooked) meat (9 CFR 319.304). proposing this general principle to Proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(13) and 21 Therefore, to assess compliance with the encourage the grouping of similar food CFR 130.5(b)(13) state that the names of standard, FSIS needs to observe the products when changes to food ingredients and functional use product’s formulation or it needs to standards are addressed, so that there is categories in a food standard should be review relevant establishment records. a consistent approach to establishing, consistent with other food standards In these cases, FSIS has traditionally revising, and eliminating food standards and relevant regulations and, when monitored compliance at the point of in the regulations. appropriate, incorporate current formulation, while it is being assembled Separately from FSIS, FDA is further scientific nomenclature. Functional use for cooking. FSIS is considering doing proposing within this general principle categories include, but are not limited more of its consumer protection (§ 130.5(b)(11)) that any specific to, emulsifiers, sweeteners, monitoring on a finished product basis, requirements for foods intended for antioxidants, stabilizers and thickeners, which would include in-distribution further manufacturing should be and texturizers. We are proposing these monitoring for compliance with incorporated within the reference food provisions because some discrepancies standards. standard rather than being established exist in the designated name of FSIS believes that monitoring as a separate food standard. FDA ingredients and the designated name of compliance with standards based on an believes that any specific and important functional use categories in different analysis of the finished product would requirements for foods that are to be food standards written at different protect the public because consumers manufactured further could be times. For example, the standards for purchase products once they are incorporated within the standard for its artificially sweetened canned fruits in finished, not at the point of formulation. particular reference food, and, therefore, 21 CFR part 145, for frozen concentrate By enforcing standards for finished existing FDA standards for foods-for- for artificially sweetened lemonade in products, FSIS could better ensure that further manufacturing should be § 146.121 (21 CFR 146.121), and for products meet consumer expectations. considered for elimination and artificially sweetened fruit jams, In addition, enforcing standards for incorporation within the appropriate preserves, and jellies in part 150 are not finished products would reduce reference food standard. For example, consistent in the designated names of compliance costs for FSIS, because important elements of the requirements artificial sweeteners permitted. Another monitoring for compliance when a stated in the FDA food standard for example is the use of the terms product is in-distribution requires less cocoa with dioctyl sodium ‘‘thickening ingredient’’ in the standard staff time and is, therefore, less sulfosuccinate for manufacturing (21 for frozen concentrate for artificially expensive for FSIS than monitoring CFR 163.117) could be incorporated as sweetened lemonade in § 146.121 and compliance at the point of product a separate paragraph within the ‘‘bulking agents’’ in the standards for formulation. standard for its reference food (i.e., cocoa or sweet and milk chocolates and FSIS requests comment on how it cocoa). Similarly, the requirements vegetable fat coatings in 21 CFR part should determine the compliance of a stated in the FDA food standard, 163. Although these ingredients are food with a standard based on the cheddar cheese for manufacturing designated using different terms, both of finished product. FSIS is interested in (§ 133.114), could be incorporated into them fall into the functional category verification methods that can be used the food standard for cheddar cheese. ‘‘stabilizers and thickeners’’ as when the product is no longer in the This proposed principle also applies to described in § 170.3(o)(28). The food plant. Any such verification methods FDA food standards where the ingredients regulations in 21 CFR will have to be able to measure the differences between a standardized food chapter I, subchapters A and B and in important characteristics of the finished and the same food-for-further- 9 CFR part 424 have specific names for product. manufacturing are minimized by different ingredients and functional use Although FDA food standards processes used to make a finished food categories, which should be establish certain requirements about the from the food-for-further-manufacturing. incorporated into the revised food product formulation, such as the Because FSIS does not have standards standards. ingredients or types of ingredients for foods-for-further-manufacturing, To ensure that it is as easy as possible permitted in the manufacturing of a there is no parallel provision in FSIS’s to monitor compliance with food food, the essential characteristics of the proposed general principle, 9 CFR standards, FSIS is proposing 9 CFR food are based on the finished product, 410.1(a)(11). Proposed 9 CFR 410.1(a)(14), which states that the food rather than at the point of formulation 410.1(a)(12) and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(12) standard should be based on the or at intermediate stages during state that food standards should provide finished product. FSIS can most easily manufacturing. Therefore, FDA does not the terms that can be used to name a assess the compliance with a food believe there is a need for a parallel food and should allow such terms to be standard when it is based on the provision for this principle in the used in any order that is not misleading finished product. For example, FSIS proposed FDA food standards to consumers. could verify that chicken tetrazzini is principles. Thus, under this proposed principle, comprised of 15 percent chicken by FSIS is also proposing 9 CFR the food standard should provide the weighing the poultry in the finished 410.1(a)(15), which states that the food
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29225
standard should identify whether the consistent with all of the general discussions that have been held with product is ready-to-eat or not ready-to- principles that apply to that standard. interest groups. Appropriate weight eat. FSIS is proposing this principle to If a petitioner proposes a revision that would be given to petitions that reflect ensure that manufacturer, consumer, is consistent with the general principles a consensus of different interest groups. and agency expectations for the product that apply to the proposed revision but However, under the present are the same. The existing FSIS food the revision does not include all of the regulations, documentation of the standards do not specifically require the changes that are needed to modernize support of interest groups would not be food conforming to the standard to be the entire standard, the relevant agency an acceptable substitute for the ready-to-eat or not ready-to-eat. As part will review the entire existing standard information or data that is needed to of its consumer focus group research, in light of all of the general principles substantiate statements and claims FSIS is asking whether this information to determine whether revisions in made in the petition. Thus, petitions should be required to appear on the addition to those that the petitioner has that make claims about consumer label of the standardized food. FSIS requested are necessary to modernize expectations or beliefs for the purposes believes that whether a product is the food standard. This process will of defining the basic nature and ready-to-eat or not ready-to-eat is part of ensure that there is a complete and essential characteristics of a food should the basic nature of the food. thorough review of the food standard to also provide information or data that Therefore, this proposed principle address all relevant issues and substantiate those claims. Marketing would protect the public by ensuring incorporate all necessary revisions to data, food formulary compilations, that standardized products meet the standard at one time, rather than studies of restaurant menus, and consumer expectations. Due to the basic through multiple rulemakings. Although consumer survey and focus group nature of standardized foods regulated we would not deny a petition solely research data are potentially acceptable by FDA, FDA does not believe that there because it proposed only limited data sources to substantiate statements is a need for FDA food standards to changes to a standard, provided the and claims made in the petition. proposed changes are consistent with address whether the food is ready to eat Finally, this proposed rule is not the general principles that apply to or not. Therefore, there is no parallel intended to and, when finalized, will them, it is likely that we would more provision for this principle in the not by itself change the existing food quickly publish a proposed and final proposed FDA food standards standards nor result in the complete rule revising the standard, in response principles. modernization of all of the food to a petition, if a petitioner has In proposed 9 CFR 410.1(b), FSIS is considered an entire existing standard standards; rather, it will address the proposing that a petition to establish a in light of all the applicable general submission of petitions to establish, new food standard should include a principles. revise, or eliminate individual food comprehensive statement that explains Finally, under proposed 9 CFR standards and the evaluation of such how the proposed new standard 410.1(c) and 21 CFR 130.5(d), we are petitions by us. The proposed general conforms to the general principles that proposing that petitions seeking to principles are the agencies’ first step in apply to the new standard. In addition, establish or revise a food standard that instituting a process to modernize their FSIS is proposing that a petition to is not consistent with the applicable food standards. In the long term, the revise an existing food standard should general principles will be denied. In agencies expect that all food standards, include a comprehensive statement that addition, we are proposing that including those for which the agencies explains how the proposed revision to petitions seeking to eliminate a food receive no petitions to revise or the existing standard conforms to the standard that do not demonstrate that eliminate, will be modernized or general principles that apply to the the food standard is inconsistent with eliminated. However, as noted in proposed revision. Also in proposed 9 any one of the first four general section I.E of this document (see the CFR 410.1(b), FSIS is proposing that a principles will be denied. The petitioner third option that the Work Group petition to eliminate an existing would be notified of the reason for the considered), limited resources and standard should include a denial. competing priorities make it unlikely comprehensive statement that explains We would encourage organizations or that the agencies could complete a how the standard proposed to be individuals submitting petitions to comprehensive review of all food eliminated does not conform to any one establish, revise, or eliminate a food standards on their own initiative in a of the first four general principles. standard, under these proposed timely manner. A more efficient means Similarly, in proposed § 130.5(c), FDA regulations, to confer with different of modernizing a food standard or a is proposing that, for petitions to FDA, interest groups (consumers, industry, category of food standards is through this comprehensive statement should be the academic community, professional petitions that demonstrate that a food provided as part of the ‘‘Statement of organizations, and others) in standard(s) has been reviewed for Grounds’’ currently required in a FDA formulating them. We would consistency with the proposed citizen petition under 21 CFR 10.30. recommend that petitioners seek out principles. Thus, in the event we do not The agencies are proposing that any and document the support of consumers receive a petition requesting that we revision to a food standard proposed in and industry for any recommended establish, revise, or eliminate a a petition to revise an existing food changes to the standards regulations to particular standard, we may, when standard must be consistent with all of encourage communication with appropriate, propose to establish, revise, the general principles that apply to it. interested groups and to ensure broad or remove a standard on our own Therefore, according to this proposed support for any proposed standards. initiative. We will follow the proposed rule, petitioners could consider Petitioners could document consumer general principles as we review existing proposing limited changes to existing and industry support by including the standards to determine whether a standards. However, we recommend written concurrence of representatives standard should be established, that petitioners consider all of the of various consumer and industry removed, or revised to ensure that all general principles and suggest groups in the petitions submitted. standards are consistent with the appropriate changes to an existing Additionally, petitioners could include relevant statutes and the general standard that make that entire standard a statement of any meetings and principles.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29226 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
The agencies welcome petitions to available regulatory alternatives and, variety and inhibits the introduction of consolidate variations in the physical when regulation is necessary, to select new products because, if search costs attributes in standardized foods within regulatory approaches that maximize increase, then some consumers may be a single food standard. We also welcome net benefits (including potential more willing to settle for familiar petitions to incorporate general economic, environmental, public health products rather than spending requirements that pertain to multiple and safety, and other advantages; additional time comparing products and food standards of a commodity group distributive impacts; and equity). examining ingredient statements to find into general regulatory provisions that Executive Order 12866 classifies a rule a product they prefer. Many new address the commodity group (see as significant if it meets any one of a products are developed specifically to proposed general principles 9 CFR 410.1 number of specified conditions, enhance the healthfulness of traditional (a)(9) and (10) and 21 CFR 130.5(b)(9) including having an annual effect on the products. Therefore, increasing search and (10)). However, the agencies economy of $100 million or more, costs and inhibiting the introduction of recognize that developing these types of adversely affecting in a material way a new products may also generate health petitions may require more time than sector of the economy, adversely costs for consumers because, if search developing petitions that pertain to a affecting competition, or adversely costs increase, then some consumers single food standard. We request affecting jobs. A regulation is also may be more willing to settle for comment on the best way to efficiently considered a significant regulatory familiar products rather than spending and effectively make standards action if it raises novel legal or policy additional time comparing products and consistent with these two general issues. We have determined that this examining ingredient statements to find principles. In particular, we are proposed rule is a significant regulatory similar but healthier products. In interested in recommendations action as defined by Executive Order addition, standards that contain concerning the role we should take and 12866 because it raises novel legal or unnecessary elements or that fail to the role the public should take in policy issues. The Unfunded Mandates provide flexibility in terms of allowable revising the standards to make them Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4), food technology, may generate consistent with these two general requires cost-benefit and other analyses unnecessary production costs, and principles. for significant regulatory actions. impede technological innovation in the FSIS intends to eliminate all informal Section 1532(a) of the Unfunded food industry. Such standards may also or ‘‘policy’’ standards in the Policy Mandates Reform Act of 1995 defines a serve as effective barriers to Book, which address the meat and significant rule as ‘‘any Federal mandate competition, thereby raising product poultry content of certain products or that may result in the expenditure by prices and transferring resources from define methods of processing, for which State, local, and tribal governments, in consumers to producers. Finally, some it does not receive a petition requesting the aggregate, or by the private sector, of standards may be inconsistent with that it adopt the entry as a regulation. $100,000,000 (adjusted annually for international standards, which may FSIS intends to follow this course of inflation) in any 1 year * * *’’ We have impede international trade. Impeding action because few of the standards in determined that this rule is not a international trade may also restrict the Policy Book are consistent with the significant rule under the Unfunded competition and lead to higher product proposed general principles. Mandates Reform Act. prices. III. FSIS and FDA Requests for A. Need for the Rule The benefits of appropriate standards Information Under some conditions, standards of and the costs of inappropriate standards After their submission of comments, a identity may be economically desirable suggest that we need to develop: (1) A number of commenters on the FSIS and because they reduce product search list of principles that will govern our the FDA ANPRMs have informally costs for consumers. Standards can assessment of the standards; and (2) a indicated that they would like another reduce search costs by requiring system to facilitate the timely revision, opportunity to provide comments to us. products that bear certain standardized implementation, and elimination of This proposal provides that names to have the set of characteristics standards regulations, as appropriate. opportunity. that most consumers expect products B. Regulatory Options We request comments both on the bearing that name to have. In this general principles and on how to best document, we call this set of We considered the following implement them. In particular, we characteristics the ‘‘basic nature’’ of a regulatory options: request comments on the usefulness of food. Standards are most effective at 1. Take no action; the general principles for evaluating reducing search costs when most 2. Take the proposed action; consumers’ beliefs about the basic petitions for new food standards and for 3. Eliminate all food standards; revising or eliminating existing food nature of a food are similar, and less standards. We are also seeking effective when many consumers have 4. Establish principles for assessing comments on how to enhance the different beliefs about the basic nature standards (only); and usefulness of the principles as a guide of a food. 5. Establish principles for assessing to external groups or individuals in However, as currently written, some standards, but allow external parties to evaluating and preparing petitions to standards may contain requirements administer those principles. establish, revise, or eliminate food that do not contribute to this useful 1. Option One: Take No Action standards. economic function because they do not correspond to most consumers’ beliefs By convention, we treat the option of IV. Executive Order 12866: Cost Benefit or expectations about the basic nature of taking no new regulatory action as the Analysis those foods. Such standards may base line for determining the costs and We have examined the economic increase, rather than decrease, overall benefits of the other options. Therefore, implications of this proposed rule as search costs because they may cause we associate neither costs nor benefits required by Executive Order 12866. consumers to impute differences to with this option. The consequences of Executive Order 12866 directs agencies products that do not actually exist. taking no action are reflected in the to assess all costs and benefits of Increasing search costs reduces product costs and benefits of the other options.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29227
2. Option Two: Take the Proposed initiating changes to the standards’ forms of cheese would be permitted Action regulations, we are making it clear to because they do not alter the basic The proposed action has two primary interested parties that they should nature of the food. However, this components: (1) The establishment of a submit petitions if they desire changes restriction may also generate certain set of principles that we will use when in the standards, rather than wait for us costs. For example, if we did not require assessing food standards, and (2) a to act on our own initiative. The total that standards preserve the basic nature statement of the system by which we social costs of revising, eliminating, or of the food and its essential intend to revise, eliminate, or establish establishing standards are probably characteristics, the information the standards in response to petitions lower if external parties participate in standards provide for consumers might submitted by external parties or on our the process than if they do not because be reduced. Without such restrictions, a external parties are often in the best own initiative. particular standard might be able to a. Benefits. One benefit of establishing position to identify problem areas. Such cover more diverse compositions of a a set of principles for assessing food a system also transfers some of the costs particular food under a single name and standards is that it simplifies our that we currently bear in assessing thus address a greater variety of assessment of standards. First, it standards to private individuals and consumer health and dietary needs and groups, thereby allowing us to reallocate eliminates the need for us to develop preferences. Under this alternate our resources to issues that may have and explain the basis for accepting or approach, a ‘‘cheese’’ could be made greater public health significance, while rejecting proposed changes to standards with non-milk ingredients to be free of still allowing us to address standards in a piecemeal fashion. Establishing lactose or milk protein, and ‘‘bread’’ reform in a timely fashion. However, principles ensures that we use a could be made using soy flour to this public health benefit is probably consistent and systematic approach improve the protein composition of the small because we have been unable to when assessing standards. food. Under the proposed principles, devote significant resources to standards A second benefit is that the principles such variations of these foods would not reform to date. We do not know the net apprise external parties of the be permitted because they do not effect of this transfer on social costs framework we intend to use when preserve the basic nature of these foods because private expenditures on assessing standards, thereby reducing consistent with consumer expectations standards also displace activity the costs for external parties to petition and beliefs. Such foods, however, can be associated with social benefits. We have us to change standards. In the absence marketed using nonstandardized names insufficient information to quantify of principles, external parties would (although we recognize that, in some these benefits. However, we will also cases, having to market under a need to spend time reviewing past conduct cost-benefit, regulatory rulemakings to piece together the factors nonstandardized name may be costly flexibility, and other relevant analyses and, therefore, may create a disincentive we consider relevant in assessing for all proposed and final regulations standards. Also, in the absence of to create such foods). To the extent the changing the standards regulations. proposed general principles lead to an established principles, external parties b. Costs. One of the potential costs of may expend resources developing increase in the number of foods covered establishing the proposed principles by standards, the costs described here petitions that we would be unable to results from the possibility that we accept, and we would expend resources and other costs associated with might finalize a set of principles that do standards will increase. evaluating such petitions. If the not maximize the net social benefits principles allow external parties to from standards regulations. This could Another potential cost of establishing present more acceptable petitions, then generate costs because we will be a system to revise, eliminate, or we will be able to act on the petitions assessing the standards with respect to establish standards in response to more quickly and make necessary those principles. If the principles in the petitions submitted by external parties changes to the standards regulations final rule do not maximize net social is that the goals and interests of such more quickly. This means that benefits benefits within the statutory framework parties may differ from our goals. For for consumers and industry will take of food standards, then we might deny example, external parties that work for place more quickly than would some changes to the standards that for-profit entities will presumably otherwise have been the case. A third would have net social benefits, or might submit petitions only if they believe that benefit is that establishing the set of accept some changes that would have the changes requested in their petitions principles specified in this proposed net social costs. However, we believe will increase their profits by more than rule ensures that we assess standards that this potential cost is small because the cost of preparing the petitions. Such with respect to their ability to reduce we believe the principles as stated parties might request changes that raise consumers’ search costs, while also maximize net social benefits, and profits in a manner consistent with the reducing the likelihood that standards because we can revise the principles in proposed principles, such as by will impose unnecessary costs, or response to comments or in subsequent eliminating unnecessary or reduce competition and thereby rulemakings, if necessary. inappropriate requirements, or in a increase prices. A second potential cost of manner that is inconsistent with the The proposed rule would establish a establishing the proposed principles proposed principles, such as by system by which we intend to revise, results from the inherent limitations of restricting competition or preventing the eliminate, or establish standards in the approach to standards that we have introduction of new products or response to petitions submitted by adopted in the proposed principles. technology. Similarly, external external parties or on our own initiative Under the proposed principles, a nonprofit (or not-for-profit) groups also and would generate benefits by standard must reflect the basic nature of may have incentives, such as increasing encouraging external parties to submit a food and its essential characteristics. their political visibility or funding, that such petitions. External parties may Standards may accommodate certain cause their goals to diverge from our already submit such petitions, and we variations of a food, provided those goals. In both cases, we think this cost already consider them. However, by variations preserve the basic nature of will probably be small for three reasons. stating that such petitions will the food and its essential characteristics. First, we will be able to identify henceforth be the primary means for For example, shredded, grated, or diced inappropriate recommendations during
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29228 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
the petition review process because they we would have faced. Under these standards. One such cost is our will be inconsistent with the proposed conditions, this rule would cause expenditures, and the expenditures of principles. Second, we do not intend to additional social resources to be external parties, that are currently accept statements about consumer expended on making changes to the devoted to analyzing, developing, beliefs or expectations for the purposes standards regulations. These costs are promulgating, modifying, and enforcing of defining the basic nature of a food probably small because we have no standards. Other social costs that would without data or evidence supporting information suggesting that external be eliminated include compliance costs, such statements. Third, we will publish parties’ costs of submitting petitions is indirect inhibition of new technologies, proposed rules for any prospective significantly different from our costs of and limitations on competition. Finally, changes to the standards regulations. investigating the need for comparable this option would eliminate the ability Other interested parties will be able to changes in the regulations. of standards to perpetuate consumer comment on those changes and help us Based on the preceding discussion of beliefs or expectations that may lead identify any inappropriate why we expect the social costs some consumers to make product recommendations that we may have associated with this rule to be small and choices that are less healthful than they overlooked during our initial review of the benefits to be relatively substantial, might otherwise make (a potential effect the petition. we believe that the benefits of that is significantly reduced by nutrient Another potential cost of establishing establishing the proposed principles content claim regulations). a system that relies primarily on outweigh the costs. The cost of eliminating all standards c. Description of the affected industry. is that many consumers would face petitions submitted by external parties FSIS regulations contain approximately increased search costs because they is that some standards that ought to be 80 standards for meat and poultry would lose the assurances provided by revised, eliminated, or established may products. Most of these standards are for standards that standardized products be difficult for interested external heat-treated products; however, some exhibit the basic nature that those parties to identify as such. This is most are for raw products (such as ground consumers expect those products to likely to be a problem for standards that beef, hamburger, and cuts of raw have. Although we could continue to contain requirements that do not reflect poultry). Therefore, all processing pursue the objective of maintaining the what most consumers believe is the plants may produce at least one type of accuracy of the information conveyed basic nature of those foods, but that also standardized product. According to the by product names through regulations do not generate significant costs for 1999 Report of the Secretary of against adulteration and misbranding, industry. Such standards may increase Agriculture to the U.S. Congress, there enforcing those regulations would consumer search costs, inhibit the are 1,067 meat processing plants, 168 require more agency resources, and introduction of new products, and poultry processing plants, and 3,130 would generally be a less effective indirectly adversely affect consumer meat and poultry processing plants method of pursuing that objective. health. However, the typical consumer (4,347 total processing plants). Most Another cost of eliminating Federal may have insufficient knowledge of the standards are for heat-treated products. standards is that the Federal existing standard or the effects of that Based on the 1997 Census of Government would no longer have a standard and thus not know to submit Manufacturers information, there are reference point for negotiating a petition requesting changes to the 1,630 establishments producing readyto- international food standards for the standard. A similar situation exists with eat and partially heat-treated meat and purpose of facilitating international products that do not currently have a poultry products; FSIS used this trade with countries and organizations standard, but for which a standard estimate in the proposed rule entitled of countries that maintain such would generate potential benefits for ‘‘Production of Processed Meat and standards. consumers. Again, the typical consumer Poultry Products’’ (66 FR 12611). These We have insufficient information to may have insufficient information or plants would produce heat-treated, quantify the costs and benefits of this resources to submit a petition that standardized meat and poultry option or to compare them to those of establishes the case for such a standard. products. the proposed option. However, the We expect these costs to be small for the FDA regulations contain over 280 benefits of this option would be quite following two reasons: (1) Consumer food standards covering a variety of similar to those of the proposed option groups may have sufficient resources different foods. Determining the exact because the proposed principles will and interest to investigate and submit number of affected firms would be time eliminate or significantly reduce the petitions that include information on consuming and would not be justified social costs associated with standards consumer expectations and beliefs in by the significance of that information regulation. However, as explained cases in which individual consumers for this analysis. A significant previously, the expenditure, social, would not, and (2) although we envision proportion of the 26,361 establishments search, and loss of reference point costs that petitions will be the driving force identified under the North American of this option would probably be greater behind most changes in the standards Industry Classification System (NAICS) than the same costs of the proposed regulations, we may, in some cases, classification ‘‘food manufacturing’’ in option. Therefore, this option would continue to propose changes to the the 1997 Economic Census probably probably lead to lower net benefits than standards regulations on our own produce at least some products that are the proposed option. initiative. Finally, involving external governed by FDA food standards. parties in the standards review process 4. Option Four: Establish Principles for would generate social costs if: (1) Those 3. Option Three: Eliminate All Food Assessing Standards (Only) parties would not have prepared Standards We could also establish the proposed petitions in the absence of the proposed Another option would be to eliminate principles for assessing standards but action, (2) we would have assessed the or significantly reduce the number of rely solely on our own resources to need for those changes on our own food standards. The benefit of develop proposals for changing the initiative in the absence of the proposed eliminating all food standards is that it standards regulations. The costs and action, and (3) the costs of the external would also eliminate all of the social benefits of this option would be parties are above and beyond the costs costs potentially generated by those generated solely by the establishment of
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29229
the proposed principles, and would (1) Evaluating data on consumer The social cost generated by correspond in type to the costs and perceptions and beliefs, or on scientific establishing a system by which external benefits we discussed for Option Two. or technical issues, (2) soliciting and parties would administer voluntary However, we believe this option would analyzing comments from consumers standards would be the loss of some of have lower net benefits than Option and other interested parties, (3) the benefits currently generated by Two because it would result in fewer adjudicating conflicts between interest mandatory standards. The benefits of petitions to establish, revise, or groups, (4) analyzing the costs and voluntary standards are likely to be eliminate food standards. If we do not benefits of proposed changes, (5) lower than the benefits of mandatory specify that we are relying on petitions addressing the impact of changes on standards for the following four reasons: to initiate changes to food standards small entities, and (6) assessing the (1) Consumers who find the voluntary regulations, some external parties may impact of changes on international standards useful would need to spend at wait for us to act on our own initiative. trade. Providing this type of additional least some time distinguishing Acting on our own initiative would and more detailed information would standardized products from eliminate the benefit of transferring cost also generate costs, which would reduce nonstandardized products, so any to external parties because we would the benefits of this option. In addition, reduction in search costs from voluntary have to allocate our limited resources if we administer the standards, then standards would be less than that toward revising, eliminating, and there may be situations in which it generated by mandatory standards; (2) establishing new standards without the would be apparent to us that we need external groups would probably not be aid of information from petitions. to revise the principles. External parties able to enforce voluntary standards to the same degree that we can enforce 5. Option Five: Establish Principles for may not have a sufficient appreciation mandatory standards, so standardized Assessing Standards, but Allow External of the overall objectives of standards to designations may become unreliable; (3) Parties to Administer Those Principles recognize such situations. It should also be noted that this voluntary standards would not provide A final option would be for us to option is not legally feasible at this time: a useful reference point for negotiating allow external parties to revise, legislative action would be needed to international food standards for the eliminate, and establish food standards amend the act, FMIA, and PPIA in order purposes of facilitating international using the proposed principles. The for external parties to develop standards trade with countries and organizations benefits and costs of the first component having the force of law. Without such of countries that maintain such of this option, establishing the proposed standards; and (4) in order for principles, would be essentially the changes, standards established by external parties would be voluntary. consumers to know whether the same as the corresponding benefits and information conveyed via voluntary Allowing external parties to costs discussed under Option Two. standards is valuable for them, they administer voluntary standards could The benefit of the second component would need to develop some lead to benefits similar to those of of this option, allowing external parties understanding of the standards. The allowing them to administer mandatory to administer mandatory standards, is costs associated with this activity might standards if the voluntary standards that it would allow us to reallocate be quite high for some consumers. resources to areas that may have greater were combined with a voluntary We do not have sufficient information public health significance than labeling system under which firms that to quantify the costs and benefits of this standards. This reallocation, and its produce products meeting the voluntary option or to compare them to those of potential public health consequences, standard could communicate that fact to the proposed option. However, based on would be greater than that discussed consumers. Setting aside the issue of the the preceding discussion, this option is under Option Two because under this benefits of the proposed principles, unlikely to lead to higher net benefits option we would not devote resources which we have already discussed, the than the proposed option. to reviewing petitions, writing proposed benefit of establishing a system in rules, reviewing public comments, which external parties would 6. Summary writing final rules, or enforcing final administer voluntary standards is that For the reasons discussed previously, rules. such a system would essentially we believe that taking the proposed One of the primary costs of allowing eliminate compliance costs for industry action will generate net social benefits, external parties to administer standards because firms would not participate in and also that the social costs of taking is that their objectives may diverge from the voluntary system unless doing so the proposed action are likely to be ours. This cost would be greater than generated net profits. Although a system small. We found that most of the other the similar cost discussed under Option in which external parties would options were likely to have lower net Two because under Option Five we administer voluntary standards would benefits because they had lower would transfer additional ensure that any activity that firms take benefits, higher costs, or both. responsibilities to external parties. For to comply with such standards would example, although the proposed not generate net social costs (assuming V. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis principles provide general directions for no market failures), it would not We have examined the economic decisionmaking, they do not set forth in eliminate the private costs associated implications of this proposed rule as detail all potentially relevant with that activity. In addition, voluntary required by the Regulatory Flexibility considerations that might need to be standards might eliminate some of the Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612). If a rule has a dealt with. Although we could produce potential social costs of mandatory significant economic impact on a additional and more detailed principles, standards in that they would substantial number of small entities, the we would probably not be able to accommodate at least some degree of Regulatory Flexibility Act requires us to provide principles that are sufficiently consumer variability by allowing analyze regulatory options that would detailed to cover all potentially relevant standards to be used by those lessen the economic effect of the rule on considerations and situations. Among consumers who share the same beliefs small entities. We have made an initial the issues on which we might need to about the basic nature of the relevant determination that this proposed rule provide additional information to products as expressed in the standards, will not have a significant impact on a external parties would be the following: and ignored by those who do not. substantial number of small entities.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29230 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Under the proposed rule, small production of processed meat and products in interstate or foreign entities would only incur direct poultry products, published in the commerce. Therefore, FSIS policy compliance costs when they decide to Federal Register of February 27, 2001 statements and actions affect federalism voluntarily submit a petition using the (66 FR 12590). In addition, there are within the context of these statutory general principles. These entities would approximately 26,361 establishments pre-emptions. only submit a petition when it is clear identified in the 1997 Economic Census States and local jurisdictions are pre- that the benefits generated from as belonging to the NAICS classification empted by the FMIA and PPIA from submitting the petition outweigh the ‘‘food manufacturing.’’ All of these imposing any marking, labeling, costs of developing and submitting one. establishments may produce at least packaging, or ingredient requirements However, this proposed rule could some products that are governed by on federally inspected meat and poultry generate costs other than direct FDA food standards. The vast majority products that are in addition to, or compliance costs to the extent that it of these establishments would qualify as different than, those imposed under the encouraged external parties to submit small businesses under the Small FMIA and the PPIA. States and local petitions, and thereby increased the Business Administration definition of a jurisdictions may, however, exercise number of proposed changes to small business. concurrent jurisdiction over meat and standards that small entities may wish poultry products that are within their VI. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice to analyze. jurisdiction and outside official Although this decision would also be Reform establishments for the purpose of voluntary, the competitive position of FSIS: This proposed rule has been preventing the distribution of meat and small entities could be impaired if they reviewed under Executive Order 12988, poultry products that are misbranded or did not undertake this activity and other Civil Justice Reform. States and local adulterated under the FMIA and PPIA, external parties attempted to use jurisdictions are pre-empted by the or, in the case of imported articles, that standards reform to gain a competitive FMIA and the PPIA from imposing any are not at such an establishment, after advantage. However, this impact would marking, labeling, packaging, or their entry into the United States. probably be minimal because: (1) It ingredient requirements on federally However, under section 301 of the would be difficult or impossible for inspected meat and poultry products FMIA and section 5 of the PPIA, a State external parties to misuse standards that are in addition to, or different than, may administer a State meat and poultry reform because requested changes those imposed under the FMIA or the inspection program provided that it has would need to conform to the principles PPIA. However, States and local developed and is effectively enforcing set forth in this proposed rule, (2) we jurisdictions may exercise concurrent State meat and poultry inspection intend to consider evidence of jurisdiction over meat and poultry requirements at least equal to those consensus within affected industries, products that are outside official imposed under titles I and IV of the including small businesses when establishments for the purpose of FMIA and sections 1 to 4, 6 to 10, and making our decisions in regard to preventing the distribution of meat and 12 to 22 of the PPIA. These titles requested changes, (3) we do not intend poultry products that are misbranded or contemplate continuous ongoing to accept statements about consumer adulterated under the FMIA or PPIA, or, programs. When a State can no longer beliefs or expectations about the basic in the case of imported articles, which effectively enforce meat and poultry nature of a food without data or are not at such an establishment, after inspection requirements at least equal to evidence supporting such statements, their entry into the United States. Federal requirements, it must be and (4) we intend to analyze the impacts The proposed rule is not intended to ‘‘designated’’ by the Secretary of on small entities of any proposed have retroactive effect. If this proposed Agriculture and all plants within that changes to the standards regulations. rule is adopted, administrative State must operate under Federal With respect to the number of affected proceedings will not be required before inspection. When FSIS revises its meat firms that are small entities, the 1999 parties may file suit in court challenging and poultry inspection requirements, Report of the Secretary of Agriculture to this rule. However, the administrative States that administer their own the U.S. Congress identifies 1,067 meat procedures specified in 9 CFR 306.5 and inspection programs may be affected, processing plants, 168 poultry 381.35 must be exhausted before there since they must continue to enforce processing plants, and 3,130 meat and is any judicial challenge of the requirements at least equal to those of poultry processing plants (4,347 total). application of the proposed rule, if the FSIS. To minimize any additional costs The majority of these establishments challenge involves any decision of an States must incur to modify their would qualify as small businesses under FSIS employee relating to inspection inspection programs, FSIS grants the the Small Business Administration services provided under the FMIA and States significant flexibility under the definition of a small business. All of PPIA. 65 ‘equal to’ provisions of the FMIA and these plants may produce at least one PPIA. Further, States are eligible to type of standardized product because VII. Executive Order 13132: Federalism receive up to 50 percent Federal there are both raw and heattreated FSIS: Executive Order 13132, matching funds to cover the costs of standardized products. However, most ‘‘Federalism,’’ requires that agencies their inspection program. of the standards are for heattreated assess the federalism implications of FDA: FDA has analyzed this proposed products. FSIS estimates that there are their policy statements and actions, i.e., rule in accordance with the principles approximately 1,485 small the effects of those statements and set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA establishments producing ready-to-eat actions on the States, on the has concluded that this proposed rule or heat-treated products, and many of relationship between the National does not contain policies that have these products are standardized Government and the States, or on the federalism implications as defined in products. This number is based on data distribution of power and the order and, consequently, a from the 1997 Census of Manufacturers. responsibilities among the various federalism summary impact statement is FSIS used this data to estimate the levels of government. The FMIA and the not required. FDA is interested in number of small businesses that would PPIA pre-empt State and local laws in comments from elected State and local be affected by the proposed rule on regard to the manufacture and government officials and others on: (1) performance standards for the distribution of meat and poultry The need for the proposed guiding
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29231
principles rule to modernize food Copies of this information collection (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, standards; (2) the proposed guiding assessment can be obtained from John and clarity of the information to be principles’ provisions; and (3) any other O’Connell, Paperwork Reduction Act collected; and (4) ways to minimize the issues raised by this proposed rule that Coordinator, Food Safety and Inspection burden of the collection of information possibly affect State laws and Service, USDA, 112 Annex, 300 12th St. on respondents, including through the authorities. SW., Washington, DC 20250. Comments use of automated collection techniques, are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed when appropriate, and other forms of VIII. Environmental Impact collection of information is necessary information technology. FSIS: FSIS has been granted a for the proper performance of the Title: Food Standards; General categorical exclusion from the National functions of the agency, including Principles and Food Standards Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. whether the information will have Modernization 4321 et seq. ) requirements by USDA practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the Description: This proposed rule regulations (7 CFR 1b. 4) unless the agency’s estimate of the burden of the would amend 21 CFR 130.5 to establish Administrator of FSIS determines that proposed collection of information, a list of 13 general principles that we such an action may have a significant including the validity of the would use when establishing, revising, environmental effect. FSIS has methodology and assumptions used; (3) or eliminating standards of identity. We determined that this rule would not ways to enhance the quality, utility, and wish to establish these principles to have a significant environmental effect. clarity of the information to be ensure that we apply consistent criteria FDA: FDA has determined under 21 collected; and (4) ways to minimize the when evaluating petitions relating to CFR 25.30(h) that its part of this action burden of the collection of information standards and to communicate these is of a type that does not individually on those who are to respond, including criteria to potential petitioners. Under or cumulatively have a significant effect through the use of appropriate this proposed rule, parties who petition on the human environment. Therefore, automated, electronic, mechanical, or us to establish a new standard or to neither an environmental assessment other technological collection revise an existing standard would need nor an environmental impact statement techniques or other forms of information to provide a comprehensive statement is required. technology. explaining how the requested new Comments may be sent to John standard or the requested revision is IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 O’Connell, see address above, and the consistent with each of the relevant FSIS: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of general principles, while parties who Title: General Principles and Food Information and Regulatory Affairs, petition us to eliminate a standard Standards Modernization. Office of Management and Budget, would need to provide a comprehensive statement explaining how the standard Type of Collection: New. Washington, DC 20253. Comments are to be eliminated is inconsistent with Abstract: FSIS is proposing to requested by July 19, 2005. To be most any one of the first four principles. In establish a set of general principles for effective, comments should be sent to the Office of Management and Budget addition, we encourage but do not food standards. The proposed general (OMB) within 30 days of the publication require parties who petition us to revise principles will specify the criteria that date. a standard in any way to analyze the the agencies will use in considering FSIS is committed to compliance with entire existing standard with respect to whether a petition to establish, revise, the Government Paperwork Elimination all of the general principles and to or eliminate a food standard will be the Act (GPEA), which requires Government petition us to make all of the revisions basis for a proposed rule. Under this agencies, in general, to provide the that such an analysis might suggest. rule, petitions to establish, revise, or public the option of submitting Description of Respondents: eliminate a standard should include a information or transacting business Individual businesses and industry comprehensive statement that explains electronically to the maximum extent trade groups will probably generate how the proposed new or revised possible. most of the petitions. In addition, standard conforms to the general FDA: consumer advocacy groups might principles or how the standard This proposed rule contains submit petitions, and we might also proposed to be eliminated does not information provisions that are subject receive petitions from private conform to the general principles. to review by OMB under the Paperwork individuals. Estimate of burden: FSIS estimates Reduction act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Burden: that developing a petition to establish, 3520). A description of these provisions Hour Burden Estimate revise, or eliminate a food standard that is given below with an estimate of the In table 1 of this document, we conforms to the general principles and annual reporting burden. Included in present an estimate of the total annual developing the comprehensive the estimate is the time for reviewing hourly burden for the proposed statement that explains how the new or instructions, searching existing data information collection requirements for revised standard conforms to the general sources, gathering and maintaining the petitions that seek to establish new principles or how the standard data needed, and completing and standards or revise existing standards. proposed to be eliminated does not reviewing each collection of The time and cost will vary conform to the general principles will information. considerably depending on the nature of take an average of 40 hours. FDA invites comments on the the suggested changes in food standards, Respondents: Manufacturers of meat following topics: (1) Whether the the nature and complexity of the and poultry products, trade proposed collection of information is standards involved, and the existing organizations, consumer organizations, necessary for the proper performance of information that can be brought to bear or unaffiliated individuals. FDA’s functions, including whether the on the relevant issues. The burden Estimated number of respondents: 6. information will have practical utility; hours in table 1 of this document Estimated number of responses per (2) the accuracy of FDA’s estimate of the include only that portion of the respondent: 1. burden of the proposed collection of compliance burden that goes beyond the Estimated total annual burden on information, including the validity of burden associated with the general respondents: 240 hours. the methodology and assumptions used; requirements that apply to all citizen
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29232 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
petitions under 21 CFR 10.30, because standards. Therefore, we have based our number of petitions. Therefore, we only that portion represents a new burden estimates on those types of assume that we will continue to receive information collection. The burden petitions. We received 10 petitions from three petitions per year. In addition, we would be lower for petitions that seek 2000 through 2004, or approximately assume that each respondent will to eliminate existing standards. three petitions per year. The proposed probably only submit one petition per However, the comments that we rule might either increase or decrease year. Therefore, we estimate three received on the ANPRM suggest that the number of petitions. However, we respondents per year with an annual most petitions would involve revising do not have sufficient information to frequency of one response per year. existing standards or creating new estimate a change in the expected
TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN1
Annual Frequency per Total Annual Re- Hours per 21 CFR Section No. of Respondents Response sponses Response Total Hours
130.5(b) 3 1 3 136 408 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
In table 2 of this document, we list the would simply need to compile existing firms will probably submit most various information collection activities information for the comprehensive petitions. Therefore, we have assumed and burden hours that we used to statement that shows consistency with average burdens near the low end of the estimate the total hours per response the relevant general principles. estimated ranges. We estimate that the that we present in table 1 of this However, smaller firms, industry and total annual hourly burden associated document. In some cases, we present consumer groups, and private with this information collection would our burden estimate in terms of a range individuals may not otherwise be 264 to 1,512 hours. Within this range, and average. The range reflects the fact undertake the activity required for the we estimate that the average total that large firms probably do much of the comprehensive statement. Therefore, annual hourly burden would be 408 required activity as a normal part of the burden for these entities could be hours. product development. These firms significantly higher. We expect large
TABLE 2.—AVERAGE HOURLY BURDEN OF INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES PER PETITION
Information Collection Activity Average Hours
(1) Legal, technical, and scientific interpretation of new information collection requirements (all principles): 8 hours. 8
(2) Social scientific analysis of consumer surveys, focus groups, or market data, or scientific and technical analysis of restaurant menus or food formulary compilations to demonstrate or infer consumer expectations and beliefs relating to product identity, the relationship of observable and non-observable product attributes to product identity, the relationship of product uniformity to product identity, the significance of the order of terms in the name of the food (if the new or revised standard involves a newly standardized product name containing more than one term), and consumer valuation of observable and non-observable product at- tributes and product uniformity (Principles 1 to 4, 6, 7, and 12): 8 to 320 hours, average 40 hours. 40
(3) Plain English editorial review to produce language that is clear, easily understood, simple, and easy to use (Principles 5 and 8): 4 hours. 4
(4) Technical and scientific evaluation of whether the new or revised standard permits the maximum level of flexibility in terms of food technology subject to considerations of consumer expectations, nutritional quality, and safety, including an analysis of other suitable alternative manufacturing processes. We estimate the cost of generating or compiling of some of the necessary information on consumer expectations under an- other activity. The new elements for this activity include the safety and nutritional quality review and the in- vestigation of the impact of flexibility in terms of food technology on product attributes that are related to consumer expectations. Burden: 16 to 120 hours, average 32 hours. 32
(5) Legal and scientific analysis of whether petitioners have described any ingredients featuring in the new standard or revised standard as broadly and generically as possible (Principle 6): 8 hours. 8
(6) Legal, scientific, and technical analysis of relevant Codex standards and preparation of a rationale for any differences between Codex standards and the new or revised standards (Principle 7). In general, the ration- ale for any differences will probably involve referencing consumer expectations and beliefs. We estimate the burden of compiling or generating that information under Activity 2. Burden: 8 hours. 8
(7) Legal, scientific, and technical review of other food standards to establish that the new or revised standard is consistent with existing FDA food standards (Principles 8 and 11): 8 hours. 8
(8) Legal, scientific, and technical analysis of ingredient technology, manufacturing processes, and food com- position to eliminate unnecessary details (Principle 8): 8 hours. 8
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29233
TABLE 2.—AVERAGE HOURLY BURDEN OF INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES PER PETITION—Continued
Information Collection Activity Average Hours
(9) Scientific and technical review to demonstrate that the new or revised standard allows for variation in the physical attributes of the food (Principle 9): 8 hours. 8
(10) Legal and scientific review of existing labeling and ingredient regulations to establish that the new or re- vised standard is consistent with those regulations (Principle 11): 8 hours. 8
(11) Scientific review of existing food standards and current scientific nomenclature reference works to estab- lish if the names of ingredients and functional use categories in new and revised standards are consistent with those used in other food standards and with current scientific nomenclature (Principle 13). Petitioners could review of ingredient names and functional use categories in other food standards as part of the gen- eral review of those standards under Activity 8. However, the review of nomenclature reference works would be an additional activity. Burden: 4 hours 4
Total Time Burden 136
In compliance with the Paperwork communicated via Listserv, a free e-mail Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. subscription service consisting of and may be seen by interested persons 3507(d)), we have submitted the industry, trade, and farm groups, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday information collection provisions of this consumer interest groups, allied health through Friday. proposed rule to OMB for review. professionals, scientific professionals, 1. CFSAN/FSIS, Memo on standards focus Interested persons are requested to fax and other individuals who have groups, May 30, 2001. comments regarding information requested to be included. The update 2. Cates, S.C., Consumer Attitudes Toward collection by June 20, 2005 to the Office also is available on the FSIS Web page. Potential Changes in Food Standards of Identity, volume 1: Final Report to the FDA, of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Through Listserv and the Web page, September 2000. OMB, Attn: Fumie Yokota, Desk Officer, FSIS is able to provide information to a FDA, Fax 202–395–6974. much broader, more diverse audience. List of Subjects In addition, FSIS offers an e-mail X. Additional Public Notification 9 CFR Part 410 subscription service which provides an Public awareness of all segments of automatic and customized notification Food grades and standards, Food rulemaking and policy development is when popular pages are updated, labeling, Frozen foods, Meat inspection, important. Consequently, in an effort to including Federal Register publications Oils and fats, Poultry and poultry ensure that the public and in particular and related documents. This service is products. minorities, women, and persons with available at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ 21 CFR Part 130 disabilities, are aware of this proposed news_and_events/email_subscription/ rule, FSIS will announce it online and allows FSIS customers to sign up Food additives, Food grades and through the FSIS Web page located at for subscription options across eight standards. http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE categories. Options range from recalls to Food Safety and Inspection Service regulations_&_policies/ export information to regulations, _ _ _ 9 CFR Chapter III 2005 Proposed Rules Index/index.asp. directives and notices. Customers can Authority and Issuance The Regulations.gov Web site is the add or delete subscriptions themselves I central online rulemaking portal of the For the reasons discussed in the and have the option to password protect preamble, FSIS is proposing to amend U.S. Government. It is being offered as their account. a public service to increase participation chapter III of title 9 of the Code of Federal in the Federal Government’s regulatory XI. Comments Regulations by adding new part 410 to subchapter E to read as follows: activities. FSIS participates in FSIS: See information under DATES, Regulations.gov and will accept and ADDRESSES, and section X of this PART 410—PRODUCT COMPOSITION comments on documents published on document. the site. The site allows visitors to FDA: Interested persons may submit Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601–695; 21 U.S.C search by keyword or department or to the Division of Dockets Management 451–472; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53; 7 U.S.C. 2219(a). agency for rulemakings that allow for (see ADDRESSES) written or electronic public comment. Each entry provides a comments regarding this document. § 410.1 Procedure for establishing, quick link to a comment form so that Submit a single copy of electronic revising, or eliminating a food standard. visitors can type in their comments and comments or two paper copies of any (a) A food standard proposed in a submit them to FSIS. The Web site is mailed comments, except that petition to establish a new food located at http://www.regulations.gov/. individuals may submit one paper copy. standard in part 319 or part 381, subpart FSIS also will make copies of this Comments are to be identified with the P, of this chapter must be consistent Federal Register publication available docket number found in brackets in the with all of the following general through the FSIS Constituent Update, heading of this document. Received principles that apply to the new which is used to provide information comments may be seen in the Division standard. Any revision to a food regarding FSIS policies, procedures, of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. standard proposed in a petition to revise regulations, Federal Register notices, and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. an existing food standard in part 319 or FSIS public meetings, recalls, and other part 381, subpart P, of this chapter must types of information that could affect or XII. References be consistent with all of the following would be of interest to our constituents The following references have been general principles that apply to the and stakeholders. The update is placed on display in the Division of proposed revision to the existing
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29234 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
standard. The agency will consider a (9) The food standard should allow elimination of a food standard in part petition that proposes eliminating a for variations in the physical attributes 319 or part 381, subpart P, of this food standard if it is demonstrated that of the food. Where necessary to provide chapter that does not demonstrate that the current food standard is not for specific variations in the physical the food standard is inconsistent with consistent with any one of the general attributes of a food within the food any one of the general principles listed principles in paragraphs (a)(1) through standard, the variations should be under paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of (a)(4) of this section. consolidated into a single food standard. this section will be denied, and the (1) The food standard should protect (10) Whenever possible, general petitioner will be notified as to the the public. requirements that pertain to multiple reason for the denial. (2) The food standard should describe food standards of a commodity group DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND the basic nature of the food to ensure should be incorporated into general HUMAN SERVICES that consumers are not misled by the regulatory provisions that address the Food and Drug Administration name of the food and to meet commodity group. 21 CFR Chapter I consumers’ expectations of product (11) Any proposed new or revised Authority and Issuance characteristics and uniformity. food standard should take into account I (3) The food standard should reflect whether there are labeling or ingredient Therefore, under the Federal Food, the essential characteristics of the food. regulations in this chapter that are Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under The essential characteristics of a food affected by, or that cover, the new or authority delegated to the Commissioner are those that define or distinguish a revised food standard, so that any of Food and Drugs, it is proposed that food or describe the distinctive requirements in the standard are part 130 of chapter I of title 21 of the properties of a food. The essential consistent with labeling or ingredient Code of Federal Regulations be amended characteristics of a food may contribute regulations. as follows: to achieving the food’s basic nature or (12) The food standard should PART 130—FOOD STANDARDS: may reflect relevant consumer provide the terms that can be used to GENERAL expectations of a food product. For name a food and should allow such example, foods may be defined or terms to be used in any order that is not I 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR distinguished by their ingredients, misleading to consumers. part 130 continues to read as follows: compositional characteristics, physical (13) Names of ingredients and characteristics, nutrient levels, or the functional use categories in a food Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 336, 341, 343, manner in which they are produced. standard should be consistent with 371. (4) The food standard should ensure other food standards in part 319 or part I 2. Section 130.5 is amended by that the food does not appear to be 381, subpart P, of this chapter, and revising the section head and paragraph better or of a greater value than it is. The relevant regulations in § 424.21 of this (b), redesignating paragraphs (c) and (d) food standard may be used as a vehicle chapter, and, when appropriate, as paragraphs (e) and (f), respectively, to improve the overall nutritional incorporate current scientific and adding new paragraphs (c) and (d) to quality of the food supply. nomenclature. read as follows: (5) The food standard should contain (14) The food standard should be clear and easily understood based on the finished product. § 130.5 Procedure for establishing, revising, or eliminating a food standard. requirements to facilitate compliance by (15) The food standard should food manufacturers. identify whether the product is ready- * * * * * (6) The food standard should permit to-eat or not ready-to-eat. (b) A food standard proposed in a maximum flexibility in the food (b) A petition to establish a new food petition to establish a new food technology used to prepare the standard should include a standard in parts 130 to 169 of this standardized food so long as that comprehensive statement that explains chapter must be consistent with all of technology does not alter the basic how the proposed new standard the following general principles that nature or essential characteristics, or conforms to the general principles that apply to the new standard. Any revision adversely affect the nutritional quality apply to the new standard. A petition to to a food standard proposed in a or safety, of the food. The food standard revise an existing food standard should petition to revise an existing food should provide for any suitable, include a comprehensive statement that standard in parts 130 to 169 of this alternative manufacturing process that explains how the proposed revision to chapter must be consistent with all of accomplishes the desired effect, and the existing standard conforms to the the following general principles that should describe ingredients as broadly general principles that apply to the apply to the proposed revision to the and generically as feasible. proposed revision. A petition to existing standard. The Food and Drug (7) The food standard should be eliminate a food standard should Administration will consider a petition harmonized with international food include a comprehensive statement that that proposes eliminating a food standards to the extent feasible. If the explains how the standard proposed to standard if it is demonstrated that the food standard is different from the be eliminated does not conform to any current food standard is not consistent requirements in a Codex standard for one of the general principles in with any one of the general principles the same food, the petition should paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of specify the reasons for these differences. section. this section. (8) The food standard provisions (c) A petition that proposes the (1) The food standard should promote should be simple, easy to use, and establishment or revision of a food honesty and fair dealing in the interest consistent among all standards. Food standard in part 319 or part 381, subpart of consumers. standards should include only those P, of this chapter, that is not consistent (2) The food standard should describe elements that are necessary to define the with the applicable general principles the basic nature of the food to ensure basic nature and essential listed under paragraph (a) of this section that consumers are not misled by the characteristics of a particular food, and will be denied, and the petitioner will name of the food and to meet any unnecessary details should be be notified as to the reason for the consumers’ expectations of product eliminated. denial. A petition that proposes the characteristics and uniformity.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29235
(3) The food standard should reflect regulations in this chapter. For example, Dated: April 14, 2005. the essential characteristics of the food. a proposed new or revised food Barbara J. Masters, The essential characteristics of a food standard should be consistent with Acting Administrator, FSIS. are those that define or distinguish a common or usual name regulations for Dated: April 8, 2005. food or describe the distinctive related commodities or products. Lester M. Crawford, properties of a food. The essential Further, any specific requirements for characteristics of a food may contribute foods intended for further Acting Commissioner of Food and Drugs. to achieving the food’s basic nature or manufacturing should be incorporated [FR Doc. 05–9958 Filed 5–17–05; 11:25 am] may reflect relevant consumer within the reference food standard BILLING CODE 4160–01–S expectations of a food product. For rather than being provided as a separate example, foods may be defined or food standard. distinguished by their ingredients, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND compositional characteristics, physical (12) The food standard should SECURITY characteristics, nutrient levels, or the provide the terms that can be used to manner in which they are produced. name a food and should allow such Coast Guard (4) The food standard should ensure terms to be used in any order that is not that the food does not appear to be misleading to consumers. 33 CFR Part 165 better or of a greater value than it is. The (13) Names of ingredients and food standard may be used as a vehicle [CGD09–05–010] functional use categories in a food to improve the overall nutritional standard should be consistent with RIN 1625–AA00 quality of the food supply. (5) The food standard should contain other food standards and relevant Safety Zone; Waters of Milwaukee clear and easily understood regulations in this chapter, and, when Harbor, Milwaukee, WI requirements to facilitate compliance by appropriate, incorporate current food manufacturers. scientific nomenclature. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. (6) The food standard should permit (c) As part of the Statement of ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. maximum flexibility in the technology Grounds required by section § 10.30 of SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to used to prepare the standardized food so this chapter, a petition to establish a implement a temporary safety zone for long as that technology does not alter new food standard should include a the basic nature or essential the TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo. This comprehensive statement that explains safety zone is necessary to safeguard the characteristics, or adversely affect the how the proposed new standard nutritional quality or safety, of the food. public from the hazards associated with conforms to the general principles that air shows. This proposed rule would The food standard should provide for apply to the new standard. A petition to any suitable, alternative manufacturing restrict vessel traffic from a portion of revise an existing food standard should process that accomplishes the desired Lake Michigan near Milwaukee Harbor include a comprehensive statement that effect, and should describe ingredients unless authorized by the Captain of the as broadly and generically as feasible. explains how the proposed revision to Port Milwaukee or designated (7) Consistent with § 130.6 of this the existing standard conforms to the representative. general principles that apply to the chapter, the food standard should be DATES: Comments and related material harmonized with international food proposed revision. A petition to must reach the Coast Guard on or before standards to the extent feasible. If the eliminate a food standard should June 20, 2005. include a comprehensive statement that food standard is different from the ADDRESSES: You may mail comments explains how the standard proposed to requirements in a Codex standard for and related material to Commanding be eliminated does not conform to any the same food, the petition should Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety specify the reasons for these differences. one of the general principles in Office Milwaukee (CGD09–05–010), (8) The food standard provisions paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this 2420 South Lincoln Memorial Drive, should be simple, easy to use, and section. Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53207. Marine consistent among all food standards. (d) A petition that proposes the Safety Office (MSO) Milwaukee Food standards should include only establishment or revision of a food maintains the public docket for this those elements that are necessary to standard that is not consistent with the rulemaking. Comments and material define the basic nature and essential received from the public, as well as characteristics of a particular food, and applicable general principles listed documents indicated in this preamble as any unnecessary details should be under paragraph (b) of this section will being available in the docket, will eliminated. be denied, and the petitioner will be become part of this docket and will be (9) The food standard should allow notified as to the reason for the denial. available for inspection or copying at for variations in the physical attributes A petition that proposes the elimination MSO Milwaukee between 7 a.m. and of the food. Where necessary to provide of a food standard that does not 3:30 p.m.(local), Monday through for specific variations in the physical demonstrate that the food standard is Friday, except Federal holidays. attributes of a food within the food inconsistent with any one of the general standard, the variations should be principles listed under paragraphs (b)(1) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: consolidated into a single food standard. through (b)(4) of this section will be Marine Science Technician Chief (10) Whenever possible, general denied, and the petitioner will be Millsap, U.S. Coast Guard MSO requirements that pertain to multiple notified as to the reason for the denial. Milwaukee, at (414) 747–7155. food standards of a commodity group SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: * * * * * should be incorporated into general Request for Comments regulatory provisions that address the commodity group. We encourage you to participate in (11) The food standard should take this rulemaking by submitting into account any other relevant comments and related material. If you
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29236 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
do so, please include your name and The Coast Guard will notify the please submit a comment (see address, identify the docket number for public in advance by way of the Ninth ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it this rulemaking (CGD09–05–010), Coast Guard District Local Notice to qualifies and how and to what degree indicate the specific section of this Mariners, the Broadcast Notice to this rule would economically affect it. document to which each comment Mariners, and, for those who request it, Assistance for Small Entities applies, and give the reason for each from MSO Milwaukee, by facsimile comment. Please submit all comments (fax). Under section 213(a) of the Small and related material in an unbound Business Regulatory Enforcement Regulatory Evaluation format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), suitable for copying. If you would like This proposed rule is not a we want to assist small entities in to know that they reached us, please ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under understanding this proposed rule so that enclose a stamped, self-addressed section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, they can better evaluate its effects on postcard or envelope. We will consider Regulatory Planning and Review, and them and participate in the rulemaking. all comments and material received does not require an assessment of If the rule would affect your small during the comment period. We may potential costs and benefits under business, organization, or governmental change this proposed rule in view of section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office jurisdiction and you have questions them. of Management and Budget has not concerning its provisions or options for reviewed it under that Order. It is not compliance, please contact MSO Public Meeting ‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory Milwaukee (see ADDRESSES). The Coast We do not now plan to hold a public policies and procedures of the Guard will not retaliate against small meeting. But you may submit a request Department of Homeland Security entities that question or complain about for a meeting by writing to MSO (DHS). this proposed rule or any policy or Milwaukee at the address under We expect the economic impact of action of the Coast Guard. ADDRESSES explaining why one would this proposed rule to be so minimal that be beneficial. If we determine that one a full Regulatory Evaluation under the Collection of Information would aid this rulemaking, we will hold regulatory policies and procedures of This proposed rule would call for no one at a time and place announced by DHS is unnecessary. new collection of information under the a later notice in the Federal Register. This determination is based upon the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 size and location of the safety zone U.S.C. 3501–3520). Background and Purpose within the waterway. Recreational This safety zone is necessary to vessels may transit through the safety Federalism protect the public from the hazards zone with permission from the COTP A rule has implications for federalism associated with air shows. Due to the Milwaukee or his designated on-scene under Executive Order 13132, high profile nature and extensive patrol commander. Federalism, if it has a substantial direct publicity associated with this event, the effect on State or local governments and Small Entities Captain of the Port (COTP) expects a would either preempt State law or large number of spectators in confined Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act impose a substantial direct cost of areas adjacent to and on Lake Michigan. (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered compliance on them. We have analyzed As such, the COTP is proposing to whether this proposed rule would have this proposed rule under that Order and establish a safety zone in Milwaukee a significant economic impact on a have determined that it does not have Harbor from July 14 through July 17, substantial number of small entities. implications for federalism. 2005. The safety zone would be The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises Unfunded Mandates Reform Act enforced from 1 p.m. until 4:30 p.m. small businesses, not-for-profit each day and would ensure the safety of organizations that are independently The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act both participants and spectators in these owned and operated and are not of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires areas. dominant in their fields, and Federal agencies to assess the effects of The combination of large numbers of governmental jurisdictions with their discretionary regulatory actions. In inexperienced recreational boaters, populations of less than 50,000. particular, the Act addresses actions congested waterways, boaters crossing The Coast Guard certifies under 5 that may result in the expenditure by a commercially transited waterways, and U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule State, local, or tribal government, in the low flying aircraft could easily result in would not have a significant economic aggregate, or by the private sector of serious injuries or fatalities. impact on a substantial number of small $100,000,000 or more in any one year. This notice of proposed rulemaking entities. Though this proposed rule would not comment period allows the public an This safety zone would not have a result in such expenditure, we do opportunity to comment on the significant economic impact on a discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere proposed safety zone, allowing the substantial number of small entities for in this preamble. Coast Guard to evaluate the proposed the following reasons: The safety zone zone’s affects and consider would be enforced for only a few hours Taking of Private Property modifications. per day on each day of the event and This proposed rule would not effect a vessel traffic can safely pass outside of taking of private property or otherwise Discussion of Proposed Rule the proposed safety zone during the have taking implications under The Coast Guard is proposing a safety event. Before the effective period, we Executive Order 12630, Governmental zone in Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, would issue maritime advisories widely Actions and Interference with Wisconsin from July 14 through July 17, available to users of the lake. Constitutionally Protected Property 2005. The safety zone would be If you think your business, Rights. enforced from 1 p.m. until 4:30 p.m. organization, or governmental each day and would ensure the safety of jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity Civil Justice Reform both participants and spectators in these and that this rule would have a This proposed rule meets applicable areas. significant economic impact on it, standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29237
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice systems practices) that are developed or (b) Enforcement period. This safety Reform, to minimize litigation, adopted by voluntary consensus zone will be enforced from 1 p.m. to eliminate ambiguity, and reduce standards bodies. 4:30 p.m. each day from July 14, 2005, burden. This proposed rule does not use through July 17, 2005. The Captain of technical standards. Therefore, we did Protection of Children the Port Milwaukee or the on scene not consider the use of voluntary Patrol Commander may terminate this We have analyzed this proposed rule consensus standards. event at anytime. under Executive Order 13045, Environment Protection of Children from (c) Regulations. In accordance with Environmental Health Risks and Safety We have analyzed this proposed rule the general regulations in Section Risks. This rule is not an economically under Commandant Instruction 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone significant rule and would not create an M16475.lD, which guides the Coast is subject to the following requirements: environmental risk to health or risk to Guard in complying with the National (1) This safety zone is closed to all safety that might disproportionately Environmental Policy Act of 1969 marine traffic, except as may be (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and affect children. permitted by the Captain of the Port or have made a preliminary determination his duly appointed representative. Indian Tribal Governments that there are no factors in this case that This proposed rule does not have would limit the use of a categorical (2) The ‘‘duly appointed tribal implications under Executive exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the representative’’ of the Captain of the Order 13175, Consultation and Instruction. Therefore, we believe that Port is any Coast Guard commissioned, Coordination with Indian Tribal this rule should be categorically warrant or petty officer who has been Governments, because it would not have excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph designated by the Captain of the Port, a substantial direct effect on one or (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further Milwaukee, Wisconsin to act on his more Indian tribes, on the relationship environmental documentation. behalf. The representative of the Captain between the Federal Government and A preliminary ‘‘Environmental of the Port will be aboard either a Coast Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Analysis Check List’’ is available in the Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. power and responsibilities between the docket where indicated under (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter Federal Government and Indian tribes. ADDRESSES. Comments on this section or operate within the Safety Zone must We invite your comments on how this will be considered before we make the proposed rule might impact tribal final decision on whether to contact the Captain of the Port or his government, even if that impact may not categorically exclude this rule from representative to obtain permission to constitute a ‘‘tribal implication’’ under further environmental review. do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the Safety Zone that Order. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 must comply with all directions given to Energy Effects Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation them by the Captain of the Port or his We have analyzed this proposed rule (water), Reporting and record keeping representative. under Executive Order 13211, Actions requirements, Security measures, Waterways. (4) The Captain of the Port may be Concerning Regulations That contacted by telephone via the For the reasons discussed in the Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Command Duty Officer at (414) 747– preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to Distribution, or Use. We have 7155 during working hours. Vessels determined that it is not a ‘‘significant amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: assisting in the enforcement of the energy action’’ under that order because Safety Zone may be contacted on VHF- it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION under Executive Order 12866 and is not AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS FM channels 16 or 23A. Vessel operators may determine the restrictions likely to have a significant adverse effect 1. The authority citation for part 165 in effect for the safety zone by coming on the supply, distribution, or use of continues to read as follows: energy. The Administrator of the Office alongside a vessel patrolling the Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. perimeter of the Safety Zone. of Information and Regulatory Affairs Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR has not designated it as a significant 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; Pub. L. (5) Coast Guard Group Milwaukee energy action. Therefore, it does not 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of will issue a Marine Safety Information require a Statement of Energy Effects Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170. Broadcast Notice to Mariners to notify under Executive Order 13211. 2. From 1 p.m. on July 14, 2005, the maritime community of the Safety Technical Standards through 4:30 p.m. on July 17, 2005, add Zone and restriction imposed. temporary § 165.T09–010 to read as Dated: May 12, 2005. The National Technology Transfer follows: and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 H.M. Hamilton, U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use § 165.T09–010 Safety Zone; Waters of Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of voluntary consensus standards in their Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. the Port Milwaukee. regulatory activities unless the agency (a) Location. The safety zone includes [FR Doc. 05–10143 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] provides Congress, through the Office of all waters encompassed by the following BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Management and Budget, with an coordinates: starting at 43°01.606′ N, explanation of why using these 087°53.041′ W; then northeast to standards would be inconsistent with 43°03.335′ N, 087°51.679′ W; then applicable law or otherwise impractical. northwest to 43°03.583′ N, 087°52.265′ Voluntary consensus standards are W; then going southwest to 43°01.856′ technical standards (e.g., specifications N, 087°53.632′ W; then returning back of materials, performance, design, or to point of origin, located in Milwaukee operation; test methods; sampling Harbor. These coordinates are based procedures; and related management upon North American Datum 1983.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29238 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION identification number. Follow the on- some information is not publicly AGENCY line instructions for submitting available, i.e., CBI or other information comments. whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 40 CFR Part 52 E-mail: [email protected]. Publicly available docket materials are Fax: (312) 886–5824. available either electronically in RME or [R05–OAR–2004–MI–0004; FRL–7915–9] Mail: You may send written in hard copy at Environmental comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, Approval and Promulgation of Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–18J), Maintenance Plans; Michigan; Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Southeast Michigan Ozone Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Maintenance Plan Update to the State (Please telephone Anthony Maietta at Illinois 60604. Implementation Plan (312) 353–8777 before visiting the Hand delivery: Deliver your Region 5 Office.) comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, AGENCY: Environmental Protection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Agency (EPA). Criteria Pollutant Section (AR–18J), U.S. Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist, Criteria Environmental Protection Agency, ACTION: Proposed rule. Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, (AR–18J), USEPA, Region 5, 77 West SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois Such deliveries are only accepted Agency is proposing to approve a 60604, (312) 353–8777. during the Regional Office’s normal December 19, 2003, request from [email protected]. Michigan to revise the ground level hours of operation. The Regional SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to I. General Information for the Southeast Michigan area. EPA A. Does this action apply to me? originally approved the Southeast 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to B. What should I consider as I prepare my Michigan ozone maintenance plan on comments for EPA? RME ID No. R05–OAR–2004–MI–0004. April 6, 1995. This action proposes to II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? EPA’s policy is that all comments approve an update to the plan prepared III. Where Can I Find More Information received will be included in the public by Michigan to maintain the 1-hour About This Proposal and the docket without change, including any national ambient air quality standard Corresponding Direct Final Rule? personal information provided, unless (NAAQS) for ozone in the Southeast the comment includes information I. General Information Michigan maintenance area through the claimed to be Confidential Business A. Does This Action Apply to Me? year 2015. This update is required by Information (CBI) or other information the Clean Air Act (CAA). In the final This action is non-regulatory in whose disclosure is restricted by statute. rules section of this Federal Register, nature. It updates an earlier plan which Do not submit information that you EPA is approving the SIP revision as a is intended to maintain the 1-hour consider to be CBI or otherwise direct final rule without prior proposal, ozone NAAQS in Southeast Michigan. protected through RME, regulations.gov, because EPA views this as a or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare noncontroversial revision and the federal regulations.gov Web site are My Comments for EPA? anticipates no adverse comments. A ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which detailed rationale for the approval is set RME, regulations.gov or e-mail. means EPA will not know your identity forth in the direct final rule. If we do not Clearly mark the part or all of the or contact information unless you receive any adverse comments in information that you claim to be CBI. provide it in the body of your comment. response to this proposed rule, we do For CBI information in a disk or CD If you send an e-mail comment directly not contemplate taking any further ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the to EPA without going through RME or action in relation to this proposed rule. outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI regulations.gov, your e-mail address If EPA receives adverse comments, we and then identify electronically within will be automatically captured and will withdraw the direct final rule and the disk or CD ROM the specific included as part of the comment that is all public comments in a subsequent information that is claimed as CBI. In placed in the public docket and made final rulemaking. EPA will not institute addition to one complete version of the available on the Internet. If you submit a second comment period on this action. comment that includes information an electronic comment, EPA Any parties interested in commenting claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment recommends that you include your on this action should do so at this time. that does not contain the information name and other contact information in claimed as CBI must be submitted for DATES: Written comments must be the body of your comment and with any inclusion in the public docket. received on or before June 20, 2005. disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA Information so marked will not be ADDRESSES: Submit comments, cannot read your comment due to disclosed except in accordance with identified by Regional Material in technical difficulties and cannot contact procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. EDocket (RME) ID No. R05–OAR–2004– you for clarification, EPA may not be Tips for Preparing Your Comments. MI–0004 by one of the following able to consider your comment. When submitting comments, remember methods: Electronic files should avoid the use of to: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// special characters, any form of a. Identify the rulemaking by docket www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line encryption, and be free of any defects or number and other identifying instructions for submitting comments. viruses. For additional instructions on information (subject heading, Federal Agency Web site: http:// submitting comments, go to Section I of Register date and page number). docket.epa.gov/rmepub/index.jsp. RME, the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section b. Follow directions—The Agency EPA’s electronic public docket and of this document. may ask you to respond to specific comment system, is EPA’s preferred Docket: All documents in the questions or organize comments by method for receiving comments. Once electronic docket are listed in the RME referencing a Code of Federal in the system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ index at http://www.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regulations (CFR) part or section then key in the appropriate RME Docket index.jsp. Although listed in the index, number.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29239
c. Explain why you agree or disagree; EPA dated March 1, 2004 to revise the www.regulations.gov, your e-mail suggest alternatives and substitute Washington SIP to include revisions to address will be automatically captured language for your requested changes. WAC Ch. 173–434, Solid Waste and included as part of the comment d. Describe any assumptions and Incinerator Facilities. The revisions that is placed in the public docket and provide any technical information and/ were submitted in accordance with the made available on the Internet. If you or data that you used. requirements of section 110 of the Clean submit an electronic comment, EPA e. If you estimate potential costs or Air Act (hereinafter the Act). EPA recommends that you include your burdens, explain how you arrived at proposes to approve the revisions to name and other contact information in your estimate in sufficient detail to WAC Ch. 173–434 as part of the SIP, the body of your comment and with any allow for it to be reproduced. with the exception of a couple of disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA f. Provide specific examples to submitted rule provisions which are cannot read your comment due to illustrate your concerns, and suggest inappropriate for EPA approval because technical difficulties and cannot contact alternatives. they are unrelated to the purposes of the you for clarification, EPA may not be g. Explain your views as clearly as implementation plan. able to consider your comment. possible, avoiding the use of profanity DATES: Written comments must be Electronic files should avoid the use of or personal threats. received on or before June 20, 2005. special characters, any form of h. Make sure to submit your ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, encryption, and be free of any defects or comments by the comment period viruses. deadline identified. identified by Docket ID No. R10–OAR– 2005–0004, by one of the following Docket: All documents in the docket II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? methods: are listed in the EDOCKET index at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although EPA is proposing to approve a 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the listed in the index, some information revision to the Southeast Michigan may not be publicly available, such as ozone maintenance plan and the on-line instructions for submitting comments. CBI or other information whose transportation conformity budgets for disclosure is restricted by statute. the Southeast Michigan 1-hour ozone 2. Agency Web site: http:// www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s Certain other material, such as maintenance area. In a separate action copyrighted material, is not placed on in today’s Federal Register, we are electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA’s preferred method for the Internet and will be publicly approving in a direct final rule these available only in hard copy form. revisions to the Michigan SIP. receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. Publicly available docket materials are III. Where Can I Find More Information 3. E-mail: [email protected]. available either electronically in About This Proposal and the 4. Mail: Roylene A. Cunningham, EDOCKET or in hard copy at EPA, Corresponding Direct Final Rule? EPA, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT– For additional information, see the (AWT–107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Direct Final Rule which is located in the Washington 98101. Washington 98101, from 8:30 a.m. to Rules section of this Federal Register. 5. Hand Delivery: EPA, Region 10 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, Copies of the request and the EPA’s Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth excluding legal holidays. Please contact analysis are available electronically at Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. the individual listed in the ‘‘For Further RME or in hard copy at the above Attention: Roylene A. Cunningham, Information Contact’’ section to address. (Please telephone Anthony Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT– schedule your inspection. Maietta at (312) 353–8777 before 107). Such deliveries are only accepted FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: visiting the Region 5 Office.) during EPA’s normal hours of operation, Roylene A. Cunningham, EPA, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT–107), Dated: May 11, 2005. and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553– Norman Niedergang, information. 0513, or e-mail address: Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. Instructions: Direct your comments to [email protected]. [FR Doc. 05–10151 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Docket ID No. R10–OAR–2005–0004. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public Table of Contents docket without change, including any I. Background of Submittal ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION personal information provided, unless II. Requested Sections to be Incorporated by AGENCY Reference into the SIP the comment includes information A. Description of Submittal 40 CFR Part 52 claimed to be Confidential Business B. Key Changes to WAC Ch. 173–434 Information (CBI) or other information C. Air Quality Impact of Ecology’s Changes [R10–OAR–2005–0004; FRL–7915–6] whose disclosure is restricted by statute. D. Summary of Action Do not submit information that you 1. Provisions Approved by EPA and Approval and Promulgation of consider to be CBI or otherwise Incorporated by Reference Implementation Plans; Washington protected through http:// 2. Provisions not Approved by EPA III. Requested Sections to be Removed from AGENCY: Environmental Protection www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal http:// the SIP Agency (EPA). A. Description of Submittal ACTION: Proposed rule. www.regulations.gov Web site are an B. Summary of Action ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which IV. Geographic Scope of SIP Approval SUMMARY: EPA invites public comment means EPA will not know your identity V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews on its proposal to approve revisions to or contact information unless you the State of Washington Implementation provide it in the body of your comment. I. Background of Submittal Plan (SIP). The Director of the If you send an e-mail comment directly On March 1, 2004, the Director of Washington State Department of to EPA without going through Ecology submitted a request to EPA to Ecology (Ecology) submitted a request to EDOCKET or http:// revise the Washington SIP to include
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29240 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
revisions to WAC Ch. 173–434, Solid Act, as required by section 110(l) of the 400–115, which incorporates by Waste Incinerator Facilities. These Act. reference as a matter of State law the changes became effective as a matter of New Source Performance Standards, 40 B. Key Changes to WAC Ch. 173–434 State law on January 22, 2004. EPA last CFR part 60, including subpart Eb. approved WAC Ch. 173–434 into the The docket includes a technical Therefore, deleting the original language SIP on January 15, 1993 [58 FR 4578]. support document which describes in of subsection (1) does not change any more detail the substantive changes to existing requirements. Ecology has II. Requested Sections To Be Ecology’s rules that have been made clear in its submittal that it did Incorporated by Reference Into the SIP submitted by Washington as revisions to not intend in any way, through the A. Description of Submittal the SIP, EPA’s evaluation of the recent amendments to WAC Ch. 173– changes, and the basis for EPA’s action. 434, to trump or supersede the direct Ecology has revised the requirements A summary of key changes to Ecology’s applicability of subpart Eb through of WAC Ch. 173–434 by making minor rules and EPA’s proposed action WAC 173–400–115. changes to the existing requirements for follows: In lieu of the previous language in solid waste incineration facilities and Definition of Solid Waste subsection (1), Ecology has made the adding two new, narrow exemptions to emission control and other requirements existing requirements for the burning of Subsection (3) of the definition of ‘‘solid waste’’ has been revised to, of subpart Eb applicable to new and creosote treated wood and the burning modified sources in Washington that of certain materials at cement plant among other things, clarify that Ecology’s definition of solid waste burn more than 12 tons per day of solid kilns. Revised WAC Ch. 173–434 refers waste, rather than only those that burn to this set of rules and changes as the includes all materials included in EPA’s definitions of ‘‘municipal solid waste’’ more than 250 tons per day of solid ‘‘primary compliance scheme.’’ The waste, as provided in subpart Eb itself. requirements of the primary compliance (MSW) in 40 CFR part 60, subparts Cb, Ea, Eb, AAAA, and BBBB, and WAC 173–434–110(1)(a) and (b) scheme are contained WAC 173–434– incorporate subpart Eb by reference. 090, –130, –160, –170, –190, and –200. ‘‘commercial and industrial solid waste’’ (CISW) in 40 CFR part 60, This is done in two separate subsections At the same time, Ecology has revised subparts CCCC and DDDD), except for to distinguish between those parts of WAC Ch. 173–434 to impose more the four categories of waste that are subpart Eb that relate to criteria stringent requirements on newly specifically excluded from Ecology’s pollutants and are appropriate for constructed and newly modified solid definition even if they are considered inclusion in the SIP under section 110 waste incineration facilities by making MSW or CISW under EPA’s definitions. of the Act and those parts of subpart Eb such facilities subject to the more Two of these exceptions, wood waste that relate to noncriteria pollutants and stringent requirements of 40 CFR part and sludge from waste water treatment thus are not appropriate for inclusion in 60, subpart Eb if they burn 12 tons per plants, were previously excluded from the SIP under section 110 of the Act. day of solid waste (as opposed to 250 Ecology’s definition of solid waste. Two Revised WAC 173–434–110(2) tons per day as provided in subpart Eb). of these exceptions are new. First, WAC identifies the exceptions to The revisions also allow an existing 173–434–030(3)(a) now excludes certain Washington’s incorporation by reference solid waste incineration facility to ‘‘opt creosote-treated wood from the of subpart Eb as applied to sources in’’ to the more stringent provisions of definition of ‘‘solid waste.’’ This new subject to WAC Ch. 173–434. Most subpart Eb in lieu of the ‘‘primary exception is intended to prevent importantly, subsection (2)(a) contains compliance scheme.’’ Revised WAC Ch. creosote-treated wood from being the expanded applicability criteria, 173–434 refers to the provisions included in the amount of solid waste reducing the 250 tons/day threshold in applying the requirements of subpart Eb that would trigger applicability of WAC subpart Eb downward to 12 tons per to new or modified facilities and Ch. 173–434, provided the facility day, the current threshold in WAC Ch. facilities that opt in as an ‘‘an obtains an order of approval or 173–434. As discussed above, the terms alternative compliance scheme.’’ The Prevention of Significant Deterioration ‘‘municipal solid waste,’’ ‘‘municipal requirements of the alternative (PSD) permit issued on or after type solid waste,’’ and ‘‘MSW’’ in compliance scheme are contained in the December 1, 2003, that authorizes the subpart Eb are adjusted to include all new subsection WAC 173–434–110 and burning of such wood. Second, WAC materials that fit the definition of solid WAC 173–434–130(4)(c). 173–434–030(3)(b) also now excludes waste in chapter 434. Subsection (2)(c) Ecology has determined that, prior to from the definition of ‘‘solid waste’’ eliminates the exception for 30% the 2004 revisions to WAC Ch. 173–434, tires or nonhazardous waste oil burned municipal solid waste co-fire in 40 CFR there were five facilities subject to the in cement plant kilns. The potential 60.50b(j). Thus, new and modified requirements of that chapter (although impact on air quality of these two new facilities that would be exempt from several of the sources disputed that exceptions to the definition of solid subpart Eb as provided in 40 CFR WAC Ch. 173–434 applied to them). waste with respect to existing sources is 60.50b(j) will be subject to the Ecology’s submittal includes a discussed below. substantive requirements of subpart Eb. demonstration of the effect of these Finally, in subsection (2)(d) and (4), changes on those five sources. Ecology’s WAC 173–434–110, Standards of Ecology has changed the applicability demonstration shows that the revisions Performance dates in subpart Eb so that those sources as applied to these five existing sources Ecology has revised this section in its that will be subject to the substantive are not less stringent than the version of entirety. First, Ecology repealed the requirements of subpart Eb by virtue of WAC Ch. 173–434 that is currently previous language stating that all WAC these amendments to WAC Ch. 173–434 approved into the SIP, or that, to the Ch. 173–434 sources must comply with will have time to transition to the new extent the revisions are less stringent, ‘‘any applicable provisions of WAC requirements. Again, the changes in the the revisions do not interfere with any 173–400–115,’’ which incorporates by applicability dates in no way changes applicable requirement concerning reference EPA’s New Source the applicability dates for sources that attainment and reasonable further Performance Standards, 40 CFR part 60. are subject to subpart Eb by its terms or progress or any other requirement of the This is already required by WAC 173– as provided in WAC 173–400–115.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29241
In subsection 3(a), Ecology has exemptions to the definition of solid the variance, which is not in the SIP). provided that, except for WAC 173– waste would change the applicability of Ecology has submitted source test data 434–130(4)(c), WAC 173–434–090, WAC Ch. 173–434 to the Spokane from Kimberly-Clark showing that –130, –160, –170, –190, and –200 do not Incinerator, nor have the applicable burning creosote-treated wood at apply to an incinerator facility that emission limits changed. The Spokane Kimberly-Clark did not significantly becomes subject to the federal rule in 40 Incinerator would be subject to the more increase emissions. In addition, in order CFR part 60, subpart Eb through WAC stringent provisions of WAC 173–434– for the burning of creosote-treated wood 173–434–110 (i.e., the alternate 110 (which largely incorporates subpart to be exempt from WAC Ch. 173–434, compliance scheme). Subsection(3)(b) Eb) if it ‘‘opts in’’ to these provisions in Kimberly-Clark must apply for and lieu of the substantive requirements of contains an ‘‘opt in’’ provision that obtain an order of approval or a PSD would allow a facility to choose to be WAC 173–434–090, –130, –160, –170, permit (whichever, is applicable) subject to the alternative compliance –190, and –200. scheme (subpart Eb as modified by allowing it to burn creosote-treated Tacoma Steam Plant WAC 173–434–110) rather than subject wood. In issuing the order of approval/ to most of the remaining requirements The Tacoma Steam Plant (TSP) has PSD permit, Ecology will be required to of chapter 434. In other words, even if been operating as an electric utility determine the amount of creosote- existing facilities (such as Spokane steam generating unit subject to 40 CFR treated wood that the company can burn Waste to Energy Plant or Tacoma Steam part 60, subpart Da. In 2002, the and still assure attainment and Plant) do not become subject to the Washington Pollution Control Hearings maintenance of the NAAQS and PSD expanded applicability of subpart Eb, as Board determined that TSP was subject increments and include a limit at such provided in revised WAC 173–434–110 to WAC Ch. 173–434. The inherent amount. Therefore, to the extent the (i.e., construct/reconstruct/modify after nature of the TSP combustion chambers exemption for creosote-treated wood such applicable date), they can ‘‘opt in’’ rendered it physically impossible for does allow an increase in emissions to the alternative compliance scheme as TSP to burn MSW in compliance with over the current SIP, Ecology has provided in WAC 173–434–110(3)(b). the time and temperature requirements demonstrated that the SIP revision of WAC 173–400–160 while also C. Air Quality Impact of Ecology’s meets the requirements of section 110(l) meeting the emission limits. TSP of the Act. Changes therefore ceased burning MSW. With Section 110(l) of the Act states that the revisions to WAC Ch. 173–434, TSP Ashgrove Cement Company and Lafarge EPA shall not approve a revision to the has the option of continuing to burn North America, Inc. SIP if the revision would interfere with MSW by ‘‘opting in’’ to the more any applicable requirement concerning stringent provisions of WAC 173–434– Ecology has maintained that Ashgrove attainment and reasonable further 110 (which largely incorporate subpart Cement Company and Lafarge North progress or with any other applicable Eb) in lieu of the substantive America, Inc. were subject to the requirement of the Clean Air Act. requirements of WAC 173–434–090, original version of WAC Ch. 173–434, Ecology’s submission shows that, with –130, –160, –170, –190, and –200. None although the companies questioned the respect to new and modified sources, of the recently adopted exemptions to applicability of WAC Ch. 173–434 to the revised rule is a strengthening of the the definition of solid waste would their industry. WAC Ch. 173–434 was existing SIP requirements. These change the applicability of WAC Ch. not identified as a requirement in the amendments prospectively strengthen 173–434 to TSP. If TSP elects to resume existing permits for these companies. controls for incinerators from existing combusting MSW, it will be subject to The revisions to WAC Ch. 173–434 WAC Ch. 173–434 to those of the EPA’s more stringent emission limits than specifically exempt from the definition more stringent waste incinerator rules at under the current SIP. of solid waste the combustion of tires 40 CFR part 60, subpart Eb. Kimberly-Clark and nonhazardous waste oil at cement Ecology’s submission also includes a plant kilns, thus clarifying the demonstration regarding the impact of Kimberly-Clark was subject to the applicability of WAC Ch. 173–434 to the changes on emissions from sources terms of the previous version of WAC these facilities by specifically exempting currently subject to WAC Ch. 173–434. Ch. 173–434, but has been operating Ecology is aware of five facilities that it under a variance issued by Ecology, these facilities as they currently operate. believes were subject to WAC Ch. 173– which allowed it to burn more than 12 Only if these facilities expand the 434 before the changes. In each case, tons per day of creosote-treated wood substances they incinerate to include Ecology has demonstrated that the without meeting the requirements of more than 12 tons per day of ‘‘solid revisions are at least as stringent as the WAC Ch. 1173–434. The variance was waste’’ would these facilities be subject version of WAC Ch. 173–434 currently not submitted to EPA for approval as a to WAC Ch. 173–434. To the extent that approved as part of the SIP or that the SIP revision. The recently adopted these companies were subject to WAC revision will not interfere with exemption to the definition of solid Ch. 173–434 prior to the adoption of the attainment of the NAAQS and waste for creosote-treated wood was exemption for the combustion of certain reasonable further progress or any other intended to allow Kimberly-Clark to waste in cement kilns, the recent requirement of the Act. burn more than 12 tons per day of amendments to this chapter constitute a creosote-treated wood without being relaxation. Ecology has included in its Spokane Incinerator subject to the emission limits in WAC SIP submittal a demonstration, The Spokane Incinerator has been Ch. 173–434. As such the creosote- consistent with the requirements of operating as an electric utility steam treated wood exemption narrows the section 110(l), showing that exempting generating unit subject to 40 CFR part scope of WAC Ch. 173–434 and could these facilities from WAC Ch. 173–434 60, subpart Cb, which is less stringent allow an increase in emissions from will not have a deleterious effect on any than subpart Eb. The Spokane Kimberly-Clark as compared to the NAAQS, PSD increment or visibility in Incinerator has also been subject to requirements of the existing SIP Class I areas and will not interfere with WAC Ch. 173–434 and will continue to (although Kimberly-Clark would not be any other Act requirements. be subject. None of the recently adopted emitting more than it is emitting under
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29242 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
D. Summary of Action unit subject to WAC Ch. 173–434. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations Sources subject to WAC Ch. 173–434 are That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 1. Provisions Approved by EPA and subject to WAC 173–400–110 even Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May Incorporated by Reference without this provision. Therefore, 22, 2001). This proposed action merely EPA has determined that the deleting this section does not change proposes to approve State law as following sections are consistent with any requirements of the SIP. meeting Federal requirements and the requirements of title I of the Act and imposes no additional requirements is proposing to approve them as part of WAC 173–434–070, Prevention of beyond those imposed by State law. the SIP and incorporate them by Significant Deterioration (PSD) (State Accordingly, the Administrator certifies reference into Federal law: Effective October 18, 1990) that this proposed rule will not have a WAC 173–434–020, Applicability and This section is being repealed. It significant economic impact on a Compliance; –030, Definitions; –110, stated that WAC 173–400–141, substantial number of small entities Standards of Performance [except Ecology’s PSD rule, applies to each new under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 (1)(a)]; –130, Emission Standards source or emissions unit subject to WAC U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule [except (2)]; –160, Design and Ch. 173–434. Sources subject to WAC proposes to approve pre-existing Operation; –170, Monitoring and Ch. 173–434 are subject to Ecology’s requirements under State law and does Reporting; –190, Changes in Operation; PSD rule (now codified at WAC 173– not impose any additional enforceable and –200, Emission Inventory, State 400–700 through 750) even without this duty beyond that required by State law, effective January 22, 2004. provision. Therefore, deleting this it does not contain any unfunded 2. Provisions Not Approved by EPA section does not change any mandate or significantly or uniquely requirements of the SIP. affect small governments, as described EPA is proposing not to approve in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act WAC 173–434–100, Requirement of certain provisions, which EPA believes of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). are inconsistent with the requirements BACT (State Effective October 18, 1990) This proposed rule also does not have of the Act or not appropriate for This section is being repealed. It tribal implications because it will not inclusion in a SIP under section 110 of stated that all sources required to file a have a substantial direct effect on one or the Act. notice of construction application are more Indian tribes, on the relationship WAC 173–434–110(1)(a), Standards of required to use Best Available Control between the Federal Government and Performance. This subsection contains Technology (BACT). This is already Indian tribes, or on the distribution of emission standards for cadmium, required by WAC 173–400–112(2)(b) power and responsibilities between the mercury, hydrogen chloride, and and 113(2). Therefore, deleting this Federal Government and Indian tribes, dioxin/furans. These types of provisions section does not change any as specified by Executive Order 13175 are inappropriate for SIP approval requirements of the SIP. (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This because they are not related to the action also does not have Federalism IV. Geographic Scope of SIP Approval criteria pollutants regulated under implications because it does not have section 110 of the Act. This SIP approval does not extend to substantial direct effects on the States, WAC 173–434–130(2), Emission sources or activities located in Indian on the relationship between the national Standards. This section contains Country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. government and the States, or on the emission standards for hydrogen Consistent with previous Federal distribution of power and chloride. These types of provisions are program approvals or delegations, EPA responsibilities among the various inappropriate for SIP approval because will continue to implement the Act in levels of government, as specified in they are not related to the criteria Indian Country in Washington because Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, pollutants regulated under section 110 PS Clean Air did not adequately August 10, 1999). This action merely of the Act. demonstrate authority over sources and proposes to approve a State rule activities located within the exterior III. Requested Sections To Be Removed implementing a Federal requirement, boundaries of Indian reservations and From the SIP and does not alter the relationship or other areas of Indian Country. The one the distribution of power and A. Description of Submittal exception is within the exterior responsibilities established in the Act. Ecology has requested that EPA boundaries of the Puyallup Indian This proposed rule also is not subject to remove certain provisions from the SIP Reservation, also known as the 1873 Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of because they have been previously Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe Children from Environmental Health repealed by the State. of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, WAC 173–434–050, New Source U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly April 23, 1997), because it is not Review (NSR); –070, Prevention of provided State and local agencies in economically significant. Significant Deterioration (PSD); and Washington authority over activities on In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s –100, Requirement of BACT, State non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey role is to approve State choices, effective October 18, 1990. Area. Therefore, EPA’s SIP approval provided that they meet the criteria of applies to sources and activities on non- the Act. In this context, in the absence B. Summary of Action trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area. of a prior existing requirement for the EPA proposes to take the following State to use voluntary consensus V. Statutory and Executive Order action on the provisions which Ecology standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Reviews has requested be removed from the SIP. to disapprove a SIP submission for Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR failure to use VCS. It would thus be WAC 173–434–050, New Source Review 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed inconsistent with applicable law for (NSR) (State Effective October 18, 1990) action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, This section is being repealed. It action’’ and therefore is not subject to to use VCS in place of a SIP submission stated that WAC 173–400–110, review by the Office of Management and that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Ecology’s new source review rule, Budget. For this reason, this action is the Act. Thus, the requirements of applies to each new source or emissions also not subject to Executive Order section 12(d) of the National
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29243
Technology Transfer and Advancement DATES: Comments must be received on of encryption, and be free of any defects Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not or before June 20, 2005. or viruses. apply. This proposed rule does not ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Docket: All documents in the docket impose an information collection identified by Docket ID No. R10–OAR– are listed in the EDOCKET index at burden under the provisions of the 2005–ID–0001, by one of the following http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 methods: listed in the index, some information U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:/ may not be publicly available, such as Authority: U.S.C. 7401 et seq. /www.regulations.gov. Follow the on- CBI or other information whose line instructions for submitting disclosure is restricted by statute. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 comments. Certain other material, such as Environmental protection, Air 2. Agency Web site: http:// copyrighted material, is not placed on pollution control, Carbon monoxide, www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s the Internet and will be publicly Intergovernmental relations, Lead, electronic public docket and comment available only in hard copy form. Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate system, is EPA’s preferred method for Publicly available docket materials are matter, Reporting and recordkeeping receiving comments. Follow the on-line available either electronically in requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile instructions for submitting comments. EDOCKET or in hard copy at EPA organic compounds. 3. E-mail: [email protected]. Region 10, Office of Air Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington, Dated: May 11, 2005. 4. Mail: Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, Environmental Protection from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday Julie M. Hagensen, Agency, Attn: Steve Body, Mailcode: through Friday, excluding legal Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. AWT–107, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, holidays. Please contact the individual [FR Doc. 05–10148 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] WA 98101. listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 5. Hand Delivery: Environmental CONTACT section to schedule your Protection Agency Region 10, Attn: review of these records. Steve Body (AWT–107), 1200 Sixth FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Ave., Seattle, WA 98101, 9th floor mail Steve Body, Office of Air, Waste and AGENCY room. Such deliveries are only accepted Toxics, Region 10, AWT–107, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 during EPA’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be Sixth Ave., Seattle, WA 98101; phone: made for deliveries of boxed (206) 553–0782; fax number: (206) 553– [R10–OAR–2005–ID–0001; FRL–7915–7] information. 0110; e-mail address: [email protected]. Approval and Promulgation of Instructions: Direct your comments to Implementation Plans and Designation Docket ID No. R10–OAR–2005–ID–0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of Areas for Air Quality Planning EPA’s policy is that all comments Purposes: Portneuf Valley, Idaho, Area received will be included in the public Table of Contents docket without change, including any I. General Overview AGENCY: Environmental Protection personal information provided, unless A. What action are we taking? Agency. the comment includes information B. What is the background for this action? 1. Description of Area ACTION: Proposed rule. claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 2. Description of Air Quality Problem 3. Designation History of the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Nonattainment Area Agency (EPA, Agency, or we) proposes Do not submit information that you 4. SIP Submittal History of the to approve revisions to the Idaho State consider to be CBI or otherwise Nonattainment Area Implementation Plan (SIP) for protected through regulations.gov or e- C. What impact does this action have on particulate matter with an aerodynamic mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the the Portneuf Valley community? diameter less than or equal to a nominal Federal regulations.gov website are an II. Review of Nonattainment Area Plan ten micrometers (PM–10) for the ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which A. What criteria did EPA use to review the Portneuf Valley nonattainment area. The means EPA will not know your identity nonattainment area plan? 1. New Source Review Permit Program revisions include a nonattainment area or contact information unless you 2. Demonstration of Attainment plan that brought the area into provide it in the body of your comment. 3. Reasonably Available Control Measures attainment by the applicable attainment If you send an e-mail comment directly (RACM) including Reasonably Available date of December 31, 1996, a to EPA without going through Control Technology (RACT) maintenance plan that will provide for EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e- 4. Major Stationary Sources of PM–10 maintaining the PM–10 national mail address will be automatically Precursors ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) captured and included as part of the 5. Emissions Inventory Requirements ten years into the future, and a request comment that is placed in the public 6. Enforceable Emission Limitations and Other Control Measures to redesignate the Portneuf Valley docket and made available on the 7. Additional Requirements for nonattainment area to attainment for Internet. If you submit an electronic Nonattainment Area Plans PM–10. We are proposing to approve comment, EPA recommends that you B. What do we conclude about the these revisions because we believe the include your name and other contact nonattainment area plan? State adequately demonstrates that the information in the body of your III. Review of Maintenance Plan control measures being implemented in comment and with any disk or CD-ROM A. What criteria did EPA use to review the the Portneuf Valley result in attainment you submit. If EPA cannot read your maintenance plan? and maintenance of the PM–10 National comment due to technical difficulties 1. Attainment Emissions Inventory 2. Maintenance Demonstration Ambient Air Quality Standards and that and cannot contact you for clarification, 3. State Monitoring of Air Quality to Verify all other requirements of the Clean Air EPA may not be able to consider your Continued Attainment Act for redesignation to attainment are comment. Electronic files should avoid 4. Contingency Measures met. the use of special characters, any form 5. Transportation Conformity
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29244 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
6. Additional Requirements for Portneuf Valley empties into the Snake 3. Designation History of the Maintenance Plans River plain. Nonattainment Area B. What do we conclude about the The Portneuf Valley is arid with maintenance plan? On July 1, 1987, (52 FR 24634), the IV. Review of Redesignation Request significant variation in temperature Environmental Protection Agency A. What criteria did EPA use to review the between winter and summer seasons. revised the NAAQS for particulate request for redesignation? Winter average temperature is 24.4 matter with a new indicator that 1. Attainment Determination degrees Fahrenheit. Winter and spring includes only those particles with an 2. Fully Approved Nonattainment Area are characterized by brisk southwest aerodynamic diameter less than or equal Plan winds of 20 to 30 miles per hour (mph) 3. Permanent and Enforceable to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM–10). which often persist for days. Migratory See 40 CFR 50.6. The 24-hour primary Improvements in Air Quality weather disturbances are greatly 4. Other Planning Requirements PM–10 standard is 150 micrograms per 5. Section 110 Requirements influenced by the complex terrain, cubic meter (µg/m3), with no more than 6. Part D Requirements making prediction of wind flow patterns one expected exceedance per year over 7. Section 172(c) Plan Provisions difficult. Periodically, stagnate air a three year period. The annual primary Requirements conditions are established for a period PM–10 standard is 50 µg/m3 expected 8. Subpart 4 requirements of several days that can lead to elevated annual arithmetic mean over a three B. What do we conclude about the request PM–10 levels. July is the warmest year period. The secondary PM–10 for redesignation? month with an average temperature of V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews standards are identical to the primary 69.2 degrees Fahrenheit. Annual rainfall standards. I. General Overview of 12.5 inches is distributed throughout On August 7, 1987, (52 FR 29383), the year with a maximum in the spring. A. What Action Are We Taking? EPA identified a number of areas across Average snow fall is 41.7 inches. the country as PM–10 ‘‘Group I’’ areas We are proposing to approve the State 2. Description of Air Quality Problem of concern, i.e., areas with a 95% or Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for greater likelihood of violating the PM– PM–10 submitted on June 30, 2004, by The highest PM–10 levels in the 10 NAAQS and requiring substantial the State of Idaho Division of Portneuf Valley nonattainment area SIP revisions. What is now known as Environmental Quality (IDEQ) for the occur in the winter. Cold temperature, the Portneuf Valley nonattainment area Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment high relative humidity, and fog are was originally part of a Group I area area. The revision includes a conducive to sulfur dioxide (SO2) called ‘‘Power-Bannock Counties nonattainment area plan, maintenance rapidly reacting with ammonia in the (Pocatello),’’ an area subsequently plan, and a request to redesignate the atmosphere to create ammonium sulfate. designated as a moderate PM–10 Portneuf Valley nonattainment area to Also during these conditions, oxides of nonattainment area by the Act. See also attainment for PM–10. We are proposing nitrogen (NOX) react with ammonia to 56 FR 11101. This original to approve these two plans and the create ammonium nitrate. These winter nonattainment area has gone through request for redesignation because we conditions are also often associated with two boundary changes. First, on June believe the State adequately stagnation episodes. Very little 12, 1995, EPA corrected the ‘‘Power- demonstrates that the control measures ventilation occurs through vertical Bannock Counties (Pocatello)’’ being implemented in the Portneuf mixing or by horizontal transport out of boundaries to more closely represent the Valley result in attainment and the valley. Without a means of air shed in which the City of Pocatello maintenance of the PM–10 National ventilation, PM–10 levels increase day- is located. 61 FR 29667. Second, on Ambient Air Quality Standards to-day from both primary and secondary November 5, 1998, EPA granted a (NAAQS) and that all other formation, and tend to peak by the third request from the State to divide the requirements of the Clean Air Act (the day of a stagnation episode. Sources of nonattainment area (as corrected) into Act) for redesignation to attainment are primary PM–10 are J.R. Simplot, re- two areas separated by the Fort Hall met. entrained dust from paved roads, Indian Reservation boundary. 63 FR B. What Is the Background for This agricultural activity, residential/ 59722. The area consisting of land Action? commercial construction, non- under State jurisdiction is now agricultural windblown dust, and to a identified as the Portneuf Valley 1. Description of Area lesser extent, residential combustion nonattainment area, and the area The Portneuf Valley, Idaho PM–10 and motor vehicles. Sources of consisting of land within the exterior nonattainment area is located in precursor emissions resulting in boundary of the Fort Hall Indian southeastern Idaho and includes the secondary PM–10 formation are from Reservation is now identified as the Fort Cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck. For a one stationary source and to a limited Hall nonattainment area. See 40 CFR legal description of the boundaries, see extent, motor vehicles (cars, trucks, and 81.313. Today’s proposed approval of 40 CFR 81.313. The nonattainment area locomotives). the nonattainment area plan, covers 96.6 square miles and the Secondary PM–10 in the Portneuf maintenance plan, and redesignation combined population of the two cities is Valley has been measured during these request applies only to the Portneuf approximately 76,000. winter stagnation events at more than 50 Valley nonattainment area. The topography of the Portneuf Valley percent of the total PM–10 mass. In area is complex. The City of Pocatello extreme events, snow cover is present 4. SIP Submittal History of the lies in the Portneuf Valley at an for an extended period which increases Nonattainment Area elevation of approximately 4500 feet. radiative cooling and maintains Under the Act, the State of Idaho was The Pocatello Mountain Range, with temperature near or below the freezing required to submit a PM–10 SIP (or elevations reaching 9000 feet above point, heightens the strength and depth ‘‘nonattainment area plan’’) for the mean sea level (MSL), forms the east of the deep stable layer, and promotes Power-Bannock Counties (Pocatello) side of the Valley and the Bannock the formation of valley fog. The breakup nonattainment area for meeting the PM– Mountain Range, reaching 7500 feet of the stagnation episode is usually 10 NAAQS. In March 1993, Idaho above MSL, lies to the west. The accompanied by precipitation. submitted a PM–10 SIP (1993 SIP) to
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29245
meet this requirement. Among other the State. Therefore, our approval of and operation of new or modified major things the 1993 SIP submittal addressed these measures now has little or no stationary sources anywhere in the primary particulate and made a finding additional regulatory impact on the nonattainment area. The Act requires a that PM–10 precursors were an Portneuf Valley community. permit program for the construction and insignificant contributor to violations of operation of new and modified major II. Review of Nonattainment Area Plan the PM–10 standard. Under the Act, stationary sources of PM–10 located in control requirements for major A. What Criteria Did EPA Use To moderate nonattainment areas (known stationary sources of PM–10 also apply Review the Nonattainment Area Plan? as ‘‘nonattainment area NSR’’). EPA to major stationary sources of PM–10 approved nonattainment NSR rules for The air quality planning requirements precursors, except where such sources PM–10 nonattainment areas in Idaho on for moderate PM–10 nonattainment do not contribute significantly to PM–10 July 23, 1993 (58 FR 39445), and areas are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of levels which exceed the standards in the amended provisions were approved by Part D, Title I of the Act. The EPA has area. However, because PM–10 EPA on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2217). issued a ‘‘General Preamble’’ describing precursors were not insignificant in the See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). EPA’s preliminary views on the how area and the 1993 SIP submittal did not Therefore, the State has met this permit EPA intends to review SIP’s and SIP address them, the State was required to program requirement. revisions submitted under Title I of the submit a revised plan. On February 26, 1999, the State Act, including those State submittals 2. Demonstration of Attainment submitted the ‘‘Portneuf Valley containing provisions to implement the Section 189(a)(1)(B) of the Act Particulate Matter (PM–10) Air Quality moderate PM–10 nonattainment area requires either a demonstration Improvement Plan, 1998–1999’’ (1999 SIP requirements. See generally 57 FR (including air quality modeling) that the SIP). In June 2000, EPA informed the 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 plan will provide for attainment by the State that although the 1999 SIP (April 28, 1992). applicable attainment date or a submittal addressed PM–10 precursors, Under section 189(a) of the Act, States demonstration that attainment by such the 1999 SIP submittal was inadequate, containing initial moderate PM–10 date is impracticable. specifically with respect to nonattainment areas are required to The initial attainment date for the transportation conformity and the motor submit an implementation plan that Power-Bannock Counties (Pocatello) vehicle emissions budget. The State was includes the following elements: nonattainment area (and therefore the required to submit a revised plan. 1. An approved permit program for Portneuf Valley nonattainment area) On June 30, 2004, the State submitted construction of new or modified major was established by operation of law as the ‘‘Portneuf Valley PM–10 stationary sources of PM–10. no later than December 31, 1994. See Nonattainment Area State 2. A demonstration that the plan section 189(c)(1) of the Act. Section Implementation Plan, Maintenance provides for attainment by the 189(d) of the Act provides criteria by Plan, and Redesignation Request’’ (June applicable attainment date or that which the Administrator may grant two, 30, 2004 SIP submittal). This submittal attainment by such date is 1-year extensions to the attainment date. contains a nonattainment area plan impracticable. The State met the requirements for (replacing the State’s 1993 and 1999 SIP 3. Provisions to assure that reasonably extending the attainment date and EPA submittals), a maintenance plan, and a available control technology (RACT) is granted two 1-year extensions. 61 FR request for redesignation to attainment. implemented. 20730 and 61 FR 66602. Consequently, We are proposing to approve both plans Below is a discussion of how the the attainment date for the Portneuf and the request for designation to Portneuf Valley nonattainment area plan Valley nonattainment area is December attainment based on our evaluation meets the requirements of section 189(a) 31, 1996. below. See the Technical Support and associated requirements in section To demonstrate attainment, the State Document (TSD) accompanying this 172(c)(1) and (5). We also discuss how relies on a combination of supporting notice for further supporting the nonattainment area plan meets evidence. First it points to ambient air documentation. certain other provisions of section 189 quality monitoring data showing the and Part D (specifically the PM–10 area attained both the 24-hour and C. What Impact Does This Action Have precursor control provision in section annual PM–10 NAAQS as of December on the Portneuf Valley Community? 189(e), the emissions inventory 31, 1996. We published an official EPA’s approval of the State’s June 30, requirement in section 172(c)(3) and the finding of attainment by this date in a 2004, SIP submittal (that is, approval of requirement for enforceable control Federal Register notice on July 5, 2002, the nonattainment area plan, measures in section 110(a)(2)(A)). For 67 FR 48552. Subsequent air monitoring maintenance plan, and redesignation discussion of how other requirements in data shows that the area has continued request) would result in redesignation of section 189, Part D, and section to meet both NAAQS for every three Portneuf Valley to a PM–10 attainment 110(a)(2) are met, see the TSD year period since the attainment date. area. A redesignation to attainment accompanying this document. Thus, monitoring data as of and since would relieve the Portneuf Valley area the attainment date demonstrates 1. New Source Review Permit Program of certain obligations currently in place attainment of the NAAQS. because of its nonattainment status. In Section 189(a)(1)(A) of the Act Second, the State relies on emissions the event of new sources in the area, requires, ‘‘For the purpose of meeting reduction measures from sources minor New Source Review (NSR) and the requirements of section 172(c)(5), a impacting the nonattainment area to Prevention of Significant Deterioration permit program providing that permits bring the area into attainment. These (PSD) requirements would apply. meeting the requirements of section 173 measures include stationary source Although the SIP revision contains are required for construction and controls, residential wood burning emissions reduction control measures operation of new and modified major controls, outdoor burning controls, and that impact residential wood sources of PM–10.’’ road sanding emissions reduction combustion, roadways, and industrial Section 189(a) and section 172(c)(5) measures. With these measures in place, facilities, these control measures are require each nonattainment area plan to there have been no further violations of already in place and are enforceable by provide for permits for the construction the 24-hour or annual PM–10 NAAQS
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29246 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
in the nonattainment area, thus, reasonable. For agricultural area permanently ceased manufacturing providing further support of a sources, control measures qualifying as operations in 2001. demonstration of attainment. Each RACM include best management Based on Appendix C in the General specific control measure is discussed in practices and land conservation Preamble, the State’s evaluation of more detail in the TSD. practices for agricultural activities RACT and RACM for sources Finally, the State relies on speciated under the Federal Food Security Act of contributing to PM–10 concentrations in linear rollback modeling. The rollback 1985 (FSA), as amended in 1996 and the nonattainment area, and the model uses filter analyses, emissions 2002, (see 16 U.S.C. 3801–3862). individual attainment needs of this inventories, and chemical source Control measures for other area sources specific area, we conclude that the State profiles to assess the impacts of sources include a certified wood stove has met the requirements for and source groups on PM–10 ordinance, a mandatory residential implementing RACM and RACT on concentrations. For the Portneuf Valley wood combustion curtailment program, sources of PM–10 and precursor nonattainment area, the model predicts tax and other incentives for non- emissions in the non-attainment area. a 24-hour PM–10 level of 146 µg/m3 in certified wood stove replacements, an 4. Major Stationary Sources of PM–10 2000, then a decrease to 103 µg/m3 by air pollution emergency rule (open Precursors 2005 followed by a gradual increase up burning ban) and city, county and state µ 3 to 111 g/m in 2020. These predicted written agreements to reduce road Section 189(e) of the Clean Air Act levels also demonstrate attainment of sanding emissions. These measures are provides that control requirements for the NAAQS. consistent with measures identified as major stationary sources of PM–10 shall Based on air quality data for the area RACM in Appendix C to the General also apply to major stationary sources of since the attainment date, control Preamble. 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). PM–10 precursors, except where the Administrator determines that such measures that have been implemented Federal area source requirements that sources do not contribute significantly without further violation of the NAAQS were relied on by the State and qualify to PM–10 levels which exceed the and speciated linear rollback modeling as RACM include Tier 2 Federal Motor standards in the area. Secondary showing attainment in the year 2000, we Vehicle Emissions requirements. (65 FR ammonium sulfate and ammonium conclude that the state has adequately 6698, February 10, 2000, as amended on nitrate are a significant fraction of the demonstrated attainment of the PM–10 April 13, 2001, June 3, 2002, and highest PM–10 concentrations reported NAAQS. December 6, 2002). The State did not for the Portneuf Valley nonattainment rely on emissions reductions from the 3. Reasonably Available Control area. J.R. Simplot is the only major Federal non-road motor vehicle rule (69 Measures (RACM) Including Reasonably stationary source of these precursor FR 38958, June 29, 2004) or Available Control Technology (RACT) emissions in the area. Therefore, RACT requirements limiting the sulfur content Section 189(a)(1)(C) of the Act (discussed above) has been established in diesel fuel (66 FR 5002, January 18, requires that moderate area SIPs contain for J.R. Simplot. In light of the control 2001). These measures provide ‘‘reasonably available control measures’’ requirements established for this major additional reductions. (RACM) for the control of PM–10 stationary source of PM–10 precursors, emissions. Section 172(c)(1) of the Act, For industrial sources, the we conclude that the requirements of in turn, provides that RACM for nonattainment area plan contains an Section 189(e) are met. nonattainment areas shall include ‘‘such analysis of RACT for the J.R. Simplot, reductions in emissions from existing Don Plant (J.R. Simplot), the single 5. Emissions Inventory Requirements sources in the area as may be obtained largest industrial source of both primary Section 172(c)(3) requires each plan to through the adoption, at a minimum, of particulate and precursor emissions in include a comprehensive, accurate, reasonably available control the area. This is the only industrial current inventory of actual emissions technology* * *’’. Read together, these source for which Idaho assessed RACT from all sources of the relevant provisions require that moderate area because it is the only major stationary pollutants in such area. From this PM–10 SIPs include RACM and RACT source in the nonattainment area. Based inventory, emissions can be compared for existing sources of PM–10 emissions. on its evaluation, the State determined to measured air quality to estimate The General Preamble provides that construction and installation of emissions reductions needed to attain further guidance on interpretation of the additional control technology is not the standard if violations of the standard requirement for RACM and RACT. required to implement RACT. However, are reported. Where measured air Congress, in enacting the amended Act, for some emission units at J.R. Simplot, quality is below the standard, the did not use the word ‘‘all’’ in the State established more restrictive comparison can be used to estimate how conjunction with RACT. Thus, it is emission limits. These new emission much emissions may be allowed to possible that a State could demonstrate limits are reasonable because the source increase and still protect the ambient air that an existing source in an area should has already demonstrated that it is quality standard. Emissions estimates not be subject to a control technology meeting these limits and require no are also a key component to predicting especially where such a control is additional cost to the source. The State future air quality through use of unreasonable in light of the specific included the new limits in a Tier II dispersion modeling. The inventory area’s individual attainment needs or is operating permit #077–00006 and has should be consistent with EPA’s most infeasible. EPA recommends that submitted the permit as part of the June recent guidance on emissions available control technology be applied 30, 2004 SIP revision. See the TSD inventories for nonattainment areas to those existing sources in the accompanying this notice for additional available at the time and should include nonattainment area that are reasonable discussion of the permit limits. the emissions during the time period to control in light of the feasibility of The State also relies on emissions associated with the monitoring data such controls and the individual reductions from Astaris (FMC), an showing attainment. attainment needs of the specific area. elemental phosphorus facility located in Idaho selected calendar year 2000 for The nonattainment area plan contains the adjacent Fort Hall nonattainment the emissions inventory because it a description of available control area. Astaris (FMC) was a major source represents the most recent year for measures that the State determined to be of PM–10 and PM–10 precursors until it which valid ambient air quality data
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29247
was available. The emissions inventory stove curtailment programs is 2. The State must demonstrate covers all sources within the boundaries implemented through enforceable city maintenance of the NAAQS. of the nonattainment area, and also ordinances in coordination with IDEQ. 3. The State must verify continued includes sources outside the boundaries The stationary source emission limits attainment through operation of an of the nonattainment area for purposes are included in permits issued under a appropriate air quality monitoring of dispersion modeling. The inventory Federally-approved and enforceable network. includes direct sources of PM–10 as operating permit program. Although the 4. The maintenance plan must well as sources of the following winter road sanding and de-icing include contingency provisions to precursors to PM–10: ammonia, agreements with county and municipal promptly correct any violation of the nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and governments are not enforceable, they NAAQS that occurs after redesignation volatile organic compounds. The have been consistently followed in the of the area. sources covered by the inventory fall 10 years since the agreements were first As explained below, Idaho has into four major source categories: Point made in 1993 because of economic complied with each of these sources, area sources, on-road mobile advantages. In light of the regulations, requirements in the PM–10 maintenance sources, and non-road mobile sources. ordinances, and agreements and other plan for the Portneuf Valley The largest contributors of primary things in place to ensure these control nonattainment area. PM–10 and precursor emissions within measures are implemented, we 1. Attainment Emissions Inventory the nonattainment area for 2000 are as conclude that the requirements of follows: section 110(a)(2)(A) have been met. The State should develop an attainment emissions inventory to PM–10: J.R. Simplot, re-entrained dust 7. Additional Requirements for identify the level of emissions in the from paved roads, agricultural Nonattainment Area Plans area which is sufficient to attain the activity, residential/commercial NAAQS. Where the State has made an construction, non-agricultural In addition to the core requirements of section 189(a)(1) discussed above, adequate demonstration that air quality windblown dust has improved as a result of the control NOX: J.R. Simplot, On-road and non- other provisions of the Act in section 172(c) and 110(a) need to be met in measures in the SIP, the attainment road mobile sources (including inventory will generally be an inventory locomotives) order to approve the nonattainment area plan. The additional requirements and of actual emissions at the time the area SOx: J.R. Simplot attained the standards. This inventory NH3: J.R. Simplot how the Portneuf Valley nonattainment area plan meets these requirements is should be consistent with EPA’s most VOC: J.R. Simplot, solvent usage, recent guidance on emissions gasoline marketing, biogenic, discussed in the TSD accompanying this document. inventories for nonattainment areas residential/commercial construction, available at the time and should include on-road and non-road mobile B. What Do We Conclude About the the emissions during the time period We have reviewed the emissions Nonattainment Area Plan? associated with the monitoring data inventory and have found the methods Based on our review of the Portneuf showing attainment. used to develop it are consistent with Valley nonattainment area plan The emissions inventory submitted EPA guidelines. In addition, the submitted by the State on June 30, 2004, for the Portneuf Valley nonattainment assumptions and calculations were we conclude that the requirements for area plan also meets the attainment checked and found to be thorough and an approvable nonattainment area plan inventory requirements for a comprehensive. under the Act have been met. Therefore, maintenance plan. See our evaluation of In summary, the State has adequately we are proposing approval of the the emissions inventory for the developed an emissions inventory for nonattainment area plan submitted for nonattainment area plan in section II. 2000 that identifies the levels of the Portneuf Valley PM–10 The emissions inventory is for the year emissions of PM–10 in the nonattainment area. 2000, a time period associated with the nonattainment area as sufficient to monitoring data showing attainment. attain the NAAQS. Thus, we conclude III. Review of Maintenance Plan (Attainment is associated with all three the inventory meets the inventory A. What Criteria Did EPA Use To periods: 1998–2000, 1999–2001, and requirements for a nonattainment area Review the Maintenance Plan? 2000–2002). We have reviewed this plan. inventory and found the methodology Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act used to develop it is consistent with 6. Enforceable Emission Limitations and stipulates that for an area to be Other Control Measures EPA guidelines. In addition, the redesignated to attainment, EPA must assumptions and calculations were Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires the plan fully approve a maintenance plan which checked and found to be thorough and to include enforceable emission meets the requirements of section 175A. comprehensive. limitations and other control measures Section 175A defines the general In summary, the State has adequately as may be necessary or appropriate to framework of a maintenance plan, developed an attainment emissions meet the applicable requirements of this which must provide for maintenance, inventory for 2000 that identifies the Act. As discussed above, the area is i.e., continued attainment, of the levels of emissions of PM–10 in the using agricultural best management relevant NAAQS in the area for at least nonattainment area as sufficient to practices, motor vehicle fuel emissions ten years after redesignation. The attain the NAAQS. Thus, we conclude standards, residential wood combustion following is a list of core provisions the State has met the attainment ordinances, road sanding agreements, required in an approvable maintenance emissions inventory requirements for and an operating permit for J.R. Simplot plan. the Portneuf Valley PM–10 maintenance to meet RACT/RACM requirements. 1. The State must develop an plan. Agricultural best management practices attainment emissions inventory to and motor vehicle fuel emissions identify the level of emissions in the 2. Maintenance Demonstration standards are called for through Federal area which is sufficient to attain the A State may generally demonstrate legislation or regulations. The wood NAAQS. maintenance of the NAAQS by either
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29248 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
showing that future emissions of a balance source apportionment and two questionable areas identified during pollutant or its precursors will not linear speciated roll forward modeling— the performance evaluation. Therefore, exceed the level of the attainment is appropriate. When viewed together, alternative analytic tools were used to inventory, or by modeling to show that the combined results provide an more fully understand the modeling the future mix of sources or its adequate showing that the area will results and to demonstrate maintenance precursors will not exceed the level of maintain the NAAQS in the future. Our for the entire nonattainment area. the attainment inventory, or by evaluation of each analytical tool and Ambient Air Quality Data modeling to show that the future mix of overall conclusion is summarized sources and emission rates will not below. PM–10 levels have been monitored at cause a violation of the NAAQS. Under several sites across the Portneuf Valley Dispersion Modeling the Act, many areas were required to nonattainment area since the mid-1980s. submit modeled attainment Dispersion modeling in the Portneuf Data from these sites show that the last demonstrations to show that the Valley area is a challenge due to the violation of the 24 hour PM–10 standard proposed reduction in emissions will be complex terrain, meteorology, and the was reported in 1995. sufficient to attain the applicable large number and variety of sources Annual PM–10 trends at all sites in NAAQS. For these areas, the emitting primary particulate and the nonattainment area show a maintenance demonstration should be precursor emissions. In selecting a continuous improvement in PM–10 air based upon the same level of modeling. model, the State appropriately quality since monitoring was initiated. In areas where no such modeling was considered, among other things, There has been a dramatic decrease in required, the state should be able to rely whether the model could simulate PM–10 levels near the industrial on the attainment inventory approach. ambient levels of PM–10 from emissions complex of Astaris (FMC) and J.R. In both instances, the demonstration of primary particulate, atmospheric Simplot with the addition of controls should be for a period of 10 years chemical reactions that form secondary and the shutdown of the Astaris (FMC) following the redesignation. aerosols, complex wind regimes and manufacturing operations. Annual Idaho uses several analytical tools to local scale dispersion and transport. average PM–10 concentrations at a site demonstrate maintenance for the Because of its known capabilities in near the industrial complex have Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment addressing these and other relevant dropped from 54 µg/m3 in the late area. These tools include dispersion factors, CALPUFF, an EPA-preferred 1980’s to 27 µg/m3 in 2001. Air quality modeling, trend analysis, chemical mass model listed in appendix W of 40 CFR has shown continued improvement at balance source apportionment and part 51, was selected. the other monitoring sites decreasing linear speciated roll forward modeling. To assess performance of the model, from approximately 30 µg/m3 in the late Several tools are used because no single the State ran CALPUFF to estimate PM– 1980’s to 20 µg/m3 in the last few years. analytical approach was determined to 10 levels during worst case Average 24 hour PM–10 be appropriate for this area. As meteorological episodes in 1995 and concentrations have shown similar discussed earlier, the air quality 1999 and compared the predictions to dramatic reductions. Peak PM–10 levels problem and atmospheric processes in actual measurements. Model reached 259 µg/m3 at the sewage the Portneuf Valley area are complex. performance was mixed. On one hand, treatment plant (STP) site and 232 µg/ The highest PM–10 levels in the area estimated PM–10 levels were reasonable m3 at the Idaho State University (ISU) occur in the winter, when cold given the uncertainties in the site in the early 1990’s. Peak temperatures, high relative humidity, meteorological data, the emissions concentrations are 74 µg/m3 in 2001 at and fog are conducive to the formation estimates, source characterization and the STP site and 74 µg/m3 in 1999 at the of secondary aerosols. The sources the model’s characterization of ISU site. The G&G site reported a peak contributing to the PM–10 levels are atmospheric phenomena. On the other concentration of 204 µg/m3 in 1993 and primary PM–10 and precursor hand, certain estimates raised questions 79 µg/m3 in 2002. emissions. Sources of primary PM–10 and indicated a need for alternative Ambient data confirms that the are J.R. Simplot, re-entrained dust from analytical techniques to determine control strategies that have been paved roads, agricultural activity, whether maintenance for the area was implemented in the Portneuf Valley residential/commercial construction, demonstrated. PM–10 levels were nonattainment area are effective in non-agricultural windblown dust, and overestimated in the early morning and reducing PM–10 levels. It is anticipated to a lesser extent, residential at night when the inversion was that additional emissions reductions combustion and motor vehicles. established. In addition, the highest from State and Federal motor vehicle Precursor emissions are from primarily predicted values occurred on days control programs will continue to result stationary sources and to a limited different from the days they were in declining PM–10 levels in the valley. extent, motor vehicles (cars, trucks, and observed. Lastly, questionable levels In light of ambient air quality locomotives). The topography of the above the NAAQS in two small areas improvement, we conclude that the Portneuf Valley area greatly influences could not be verified by monitoring ambient air quality data supports a migratory weather disturbances, making data. There was extensive refinement of demonstration of maintenance. prediction of wind flow patterns model inputs to reduce discrepancies Meteorological Data difficult. Periodically, stagnate air but discrepancies still remained. conditions are established for a period Because the dispersion model overall Meteorology analysis shows that of several days, which lead to build-up provided invaluable information in improvement in ambient air quality is in PM–10 emissions and elevated PM– assessing air quality in the area (i.e., by not due to favorable meteorology. The 10 concentrations. Pollutant dispersion providing better understanding of state analyzed days with meteorology during stagnation conditions are sources, transport and fate of PM–10 characterized as having poor dispersion difficult to model. and hot spot locations), the State still conditions. These conditions are In light of the complexity of the area, used the model to predict PM–10 characterized by a cold high pressure the State’s reliance on multiple concentrations for future years. In these system with low pressure gradients, low analytical techniques—dispersion runs, the model showed maintenance of wind speeds, shallow inversions, and modeling, trend analysis, chemical mass the NAAQS in all areas except the same little or no precipitation. Although
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29249
meteorological data show no discernible sources to measured PM–10 levels. CMB of both the annual and 24 hour annual trend since 1984, the greatest analysis of PM–10 filters shows that in standards for all future years out to number of days that met poor dispersion the base year, over 50% of the PM–10 2020. The maximum 24 hour PM–10 conditions criteria occurred in 2001 and mass during high episode days in level of 146 µg/m3 occurs in the base 2002. Since there were no exceedances Portneuf Valley was ammonium sulfate. year, drops to 106 µg/m3 in 2005 and 3 of the NAAQS in 2001 and 2002, this The SO2 emissions, precursors to gradually increases to 111 µg/m in indicates that meteorology has not been ammonium sulfate, have since been 2020. Annual PM–10 levels remain a factor in air quality improvement. In reduced by more than half with the essentially constant at approximately 26 light of no discernible trend in closure of the FMC manufacturing µg/m3 in the base year and 27 µg/m3 in meteorology while air quality has operations. In addition, Federal rules 2020. Because these projected levels are improved, we conclude meteorology regulating sulfur content in diesel fuel below the PM–10 NAAQS, these results data provides further support of a will dramatically reduce future SO2 demonstrate maintenance of the area. demonstration of maintenance for the emissions from mobile sources. In conclusion, dispersion modeling area. Future PM–10 concentrations can be shows that overall the area will meet the estimated using the highest measured PM–10 NAAQS at least 10 years into the Emissions Data PM–10 concentration since 1989 of 177 future, but that further evaluation is An inventory of actual annual µg/m3, applying the fraction warranted in light of questionable levels emissions was prepared for the base apportioned to industry and non- predicted in two areas. This further year of 2000 and projected for future industry, and adjusting for emissions evaluation using trend analysis, years 2010, 2015, and 2020. Calendar reduction or growth. By 2015, industry chemical mass balance, and linear year 2000 represents the base year, 2010 emissions will decrease by an estimated speciated rollback modeling represents an intermediary year, 2015 60% (compared with base year levels). demonstrates maintenance throughout represents the required ten year Emissions from all other sources are the nonattainment area. In light of the maintenance year, and 2020 represents anticipated to increase 18%. Predictions dispersion modeling results and the last year of the area’s 20 year using CMB show the projected plausible reasons for the higher levels in transportation plan for use in long-term maximum PM–10 level will be 133 µg/ two areas, the difficulty of modeling due planning. m3 in the year 2020. This level is below to the complex conditions of the area, Historically the highest levels of PM– the 24-hour PM–10 NAAQS, the results from other analytic tools 10 in the Portneuf Valley nonattainment demonstrating maintenance for the area. demonstrating maintenance, the area occur in winter, and are dominated CMB analysis was also used to better anticipated reductions from Federal by secondary ammonium sulfate and understand the discrepancies identified rules not relied on by the plan, and ammonium nitrate. Therefore, an during evaluation of the dispersion contingency measures, as discussed episodic inventory was prepared for model. The source contributions below, to be implemented in the event winter conditions. Idaho DEQ selected predicted by CMB analysis were PM–10 levels increase, EPA concludes December 20 through December 26, compared to the source contributions that the demonstration by the State 1999, which corresponds to an actual air predicted by the dispersion model. The shows that the Portneuf Valley stagnation episode during which three results suggest that the levels predicted nonattainment area will maintain the exceedences of the standard were above the NAAQS are due to over- PM–10 NAAQS at least through the recorded. The 1999 episodic emissions estimation of the contribution of vehicle maintenance year of 2015. inventory was projected out to future suspended dust. This over-estimation of year week-long episodic inventories for motor vehicle emissions may be due to 3. State Monitoring of Air Quality To 2010, 2015, and 2020. In addition, for under-prediction of wind speeds in Verify Continued Attainment each episodic inventory, weekday and meteorological simulations, thus Once an area has been redesignated, weekend day inventories were prepared artificially enhancing the influence of the State must continue to operate an to account for different levels of activity the urban (mobile) sources. It is also appropriate air quality monitoring depending on the day of the week. plausible that over-predicted network in accordance with 40 CFR part When compared to the 2000 base and concentrations are due to inadequate 58 to verify the attainment status of the 1999 episodic inventories, the State characterization of coarse particulate area. The maintenance plan should predicts the emissions of primary matter removal mechanisms which may contain provisions for continued particulate and precursor pollutants will over-estimate the impact of re-entrained operation of air quality monitors that drop in future years 2010, 2015, and road dust. will provide such verification. In its 2020. This decrease in emissions is due submittal, the State commits to continue in large part to the permanent closure of Linear Speciated Rollback Modeling to operate and maintain the network of the Astaris (FMC) manufacturing Linear speciated rollback modeling is PM–10 monitoring stations necessary to operations that occurred in 2001. In a simple, spatially averaged verify ongoing compliance with the light of this projected decline in overall mathematical model that assumes a PM–10 NAAQS in the Portneuf Valley emissions and our expectation that the linear relationship between ambient nonattainment area. Federal non-road motor vehicle rule and constituents of PM–10 and the area 4. Contingency Measures requirements limiting the sulfur content wide emissions of the corresponding in diesel fuel not accounted for by the constituents. The model dis-aggregates Section 175A(d) of the Act requires State will result in further reductions, the major airborne particulate that a maintenance plan include we conclude that the expected decrease components into chemically distinct contingency provisions, as necessary, to in emissions supports a demonstration groups that are emitted by different correct promptly any violation of the of maintenance out to 2015. source types. The model assumes that NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. ambient PM–10 levels are directly These contingency provisions are Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) Source proportional to emissions. distinguished from those generally Apportionment Anticipated emissions reductions of required for nonattainment areas under CMB analysis is a method used to primary PM–10, SO2 and NOX result in section 172(c)(9), which are discussed apportion the contribution of different predicted PM–10 levels below the level above. At a minimum, the contingency
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29250 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
provisions must include a commitment measures above, and the permanent provisions of the Act need to be met in that the State will implement all reductions resulting from the closure of order to approve the maintenance plan. measures contained in the the Astaris (FMC) manufacturing The additional requirements and how nonattainment area plan prior to operations, we believe the contingency the Portneuf Valley maintenance plan redesignation. measure requirements in the Portneuf meets these requirements is discussed The maintenance plan contains three Valley maintenance plan meet the in the TSD accompanying this notice. contingency provisions. The first would requirements of Section 175A(d) of the revise the permit to operate a boiler at Act. B. What Do We Conclude About the the Idaho State University to require a Maintenance Plan? 5. Transportation Conformity switch of fuel from coal to natural gas Based on our review of the Portneuf during a burn ban. This measure will Under section 176(c) of the Act, Valley PM–10 maintenance plan reduce SO2 emissions and thus reduce transportation plans, programs, and submitted by the State on June 30, 2004, ammonium sulfate levels during periods projects in nonattainment or we conclude that the requirements for of high PM–10. maintenance areas, that are developed, an approvable maintenance plan under The second provision addresses wood funded or approved under title 23 the Act have been met. Therefore, we smoke emissions. Wood smoke from U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws, must are proposing approval of the residential wood stoves has historically conform to the applicable SIPs. In short, maintenance plan submitted for the been a significant contributor to a transportation plan is deemed to Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment wintertime PM–10 levels in the Portneuf conform to the applicable SIP if the area. Valley non-attainment area. The State emissions resulting from IV. Review of Redesignation Request commits to work with the Cities of implementation of that transportation Pocatello and Chubbuck to lower the plan are less than, or equal to the motor A. What Criteria Did EPA Use To trigger point for implementing a vehicle emission budget established in Review the Request for Redesignation? the SIP. residential wood combustion The criteria used to review the curtailment program. The current level In this maintenance plan, procedures µ 3 for estimating motor vehicle emissions maintenance plan and redesignation is 100 g/m PM–10. request are derived from the Act, the Lastly, the State commits to are well documented. Furthermore, the General Preamble, and a policy and conducting additional analyses of the maintenance demonstration modeling guidance memorandum from John causes of future reported violations of results indicated that the estimated Calcagni, September 4, 1992, Procedures the standard. Based on the results of motor vehicle emissions for base and for Processing Requests to Redesignate that analysis the State will consider the future years will not cause or contribute Areas to Attainment. Section following control measures to resolve to an exceedance of the NAAQS. 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act states that the the problem: Accordingly, we propose to approve the • Cover all truck loads that have following motor vehicle emissions EPA can be redesignate an area to potential to emit PM–10. budgets (MVEB) for PM–10 and its attainment if the following conditions • Prevent track-out onto paved roads. precursors for use in conformity are met: • More restrictions on outdoor determinations for PM–10 on future 1. The Administrator has determined burning. Transportation Improvement Programs the area has attained the NAAQS. • Institute a vehicle inspection and and Regional Transportation Plans. 2. The Administrator has fully maintenance program. These mobile source emissions approved the applicable • Expand the residential wood represent a combination of vehicle implementation plan under section combustion curtailment programs to exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and road 110(k). include ‘‘clean burn’’ wood stoves. dust. 3. The Administrator has determined • Prohibit construction of unpaved that the improvement in air quality is private roads, driveways, or parking PORTNEUF VALLEY, IDAHO PM–10 due to permanent and enforceable lots. MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGET reductions in emissions. • Implement transportation control 4. The State has met all applicable VOC measures. Year PM–10 NOX requirements for the area under section • Implement dust control and (t/yr) (t/yr) (t/yr) 110 and Part D. prevention programs including paving 5. The Administrator has fully 2005 ...... 897 1,575 983 dirt roads and alley ways. 2010 ...... 1,120 1,085 716 approved a maintenance plan, including Since the maintenance plan is to 2020 ...... 1,364 514 585 a contingency plan, for the area under cover the 10 year period after Federal section 175A. approval, it is difficult to completely The MVEB was found to be adequate 1. Attainment Determination predict how emissions characteristics for conformity purposes on August 31, will change. This change in the 2004. (69 FR 56052, September 17, As discussed earlier, an area has character of the potential PM–10 2004.) The Plan provides for reductions attained the 24-hour PM–10 NAAQS problem is especially significant toward in residential wood combustion, road when the average number of expected the ‘‘out-years’’ when the ability to sanding, and industrial emissions. exceedances per year is less than or predict the future is difficult. The Control measures required by the equal to one, when averaged over a approach used in the maintenance plan maintenance plan do not directly three year period. To make this is appropriate since the contingency include transportation measures as they determination, three consecutive years measures address sources expected to are not required for the maintenance of complete ambient air quality data cause problems in the near term and demonstration. must be collected in accordance with include a commitment to evaluate Federal requirements (40 CFR part 58, conditions in the long term. 6. Additional Requirements for including appendices). On July 5, 2002, In light of the control measures relied Maintenance Plans EPA published a finding that the on by the nonattainment area plan, the In addition to the core requirements Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment identification of additional contingency of section 175(A) discussed above, other area attained the PM–10 NAAQS by the
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29251
applicable attainment date. Subsequent 5. Section 110 Requirements area plan and maintenance plan. The air monitoring data shows that the area Section 110(a)(2) of the Act contains requirements of the Part D New Source has continued to meet both NAAQS for general requirements for Review (NSR) program will be replaced every three year period since the implementation plans. These by the Part C Prevention of Significant attainment date. requirements include, but are not Deterioration (PSD) program for PM–10 limited to, submission of a SIP that has upon the effective date of this 2. Fully Approved Nonattainment Area redesignation action. The Federally- Plan been adopted by the State after reasonable notice and public hearing; approved PSD regulations for Idaho can States containing initial moderate provisions for establishment and be found at IDAPA 16.01.012,07, as PM–10 nonattainment areas were operation of appropriate apparatus, incorporated by reference by EPA on required to submit a SIP revision which methods, systems and procedures July 28, 1982 (47 FR 32531), and most implements reasonably available control necessary to monitor ambient air recently amended on January 16, 2003 measures (RACM) and demonstrates quality; implementation of a permit (68 FR 2217). attainment of the PM–10 NAAQS by the program; provisions for Part C— 8. Subpart 4 Requirements attainment date. The SIP for the area Prevention of Significant Deterioration Part D, subpart 4, section 189(a), (c) must be fully approved under section (PSD) and Part D—New Source Review and (e) requirements apply to any 110(k) of the Act, and must satisfy all (NSR) permit programs; criteria for moderate nonattainment area before the requirements that apply to the area. In stationary source emissions control area can be redesignated to attainment. this notice we are proposing to fully measures, monitoring and reporting, The requirements which were approve the nonattainment area plan provisions for modeling; and provisions applicable prior to the submission of the submitted by the State for the Portneuf for public and local agency request to redesignate the area must be Valley PM–10 nonattainment area. participation. See the General Preamble fully approved into the SIP before for further explanation of these 3. Permanent and Enforceable redesignating the area to attainment. requirements. 57 FR 13498 (April 16, Improvements in Air Quality These requirements are discussed 1992). below: For purposes of redesignation, review The State must be able to reasonably (a) Provisions to assure that RACM attribute the improvement in air quality of the Idaho SIP shows that the State has satisfied all requirements under the Act. was implemented by December 10, to permanent and enforceable reduction 1993; in emissions. The State provides a Further, in 40 CFR 52.673, EPA has approved Idaho’s SIP for the attainment (b) Either a demonstration that the historical analysis of meteorology in the plan provided for attainment as Pocatello area to show that trends in and maintenance of the national standards under Section 110. expeditiously as practicable but not improving air quality are not the result later than December 31, 1994, or a of meteorological conditions. As 6. Part D Requirements demonstration that attainment by that discussed above, there has been no date was impracticable; discernible trend in meteorology while Part D consists of general (c) Quantitative milestones which air quality has continued to improve. requirements applicable to all areas were achieved every 3 years and which Therefore we conclude that the which are designated nonattainment demonstrate reasonable further progress improvements in air quality are the based on a violation of the NAAQS. The (RFP) toward attainment by December result of emissions reductions from the general requirements are followed by a 31, 1994; and shut down of the Astaris (FMC) series of subparts specific to each (d) Provisions to assure that the manufacturing operations, controls pollutant. All PM–10 nonattainment control requirements applicable to related to road sanding, and the area’s areas must meet the applicable general major stationary sources of PM–10 also wood stove program and not from a provisions of subpart 1 and the specific apply to major stationary sources of change in meteorological conditions. PM–10 provisions in subpart 4, ‘‘Additional Provisions for Particulate PM–10 precursors, except where the Based on the State’s analysis, and our Matter Nonattainment Areas.’’ The Administrator determined that such earlier conclusion that the control following paragraphs discuss these sources do not contribute significantly measures in place in the nonattainment requirements as they apply to the to PM–10 levels which exceed the area are permanent and enforceable, we Portneuf Valley nonattainment area. NAAQS in the area. believe that Idaho has demonstrated air In this document EPA is proposing to quality improvements are the result of 7. Section 172(c) Plan Provisions approve the nonattainment area plan for permanent enforceable emissions Requirements the Portneuf Valley PM–10 reductions. Subpart 1, section 172(c) contains nonattainment area containing the 4. Other Planning Requirements general requirements for nonattainment elements meeting requirements (a) area plans. A thorough discussion of through (d) above. The September 1992 Calcagni these requirements may be found in the States with PM–10 nonattainment memorandum directs states to meet all General Preamble. 57 FR 13538 (April areas were required to submit a permit of the applicable section 110 and Part D 16, 1992). The requirements for program for the construction and planning requirements for redesignation reasonable further progress, operation of new and modified major purposes. Thus, EPA interprets the Act identification of certain emissions stationary sources of PM–10 by June 30, to require state adoption and EPA increases, and other measures needed 1992. States also were to submit approval of the applicable programs for attainment are satisfied in our contingency measures by November 15, under section 110 and Part D that were proposed approval in this notice of the 1993, which become effective without due prior to the submission of a nonattainment area plan for the further action by the State or EPA, upon redesignation request, before EPA may Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment a determination by EPA that the area approve a redesignation request. How area. The requirement for an emissions has failed to achieve RFP or to attain the the State has met these requirements is inventory is satisfied by the completion PM–10 NAAQS by the applicable discussed below. of inventories for the nonattainment statutory deadline. See sections
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29252 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
172(c)(9) and 189(a) and 57 FR 13543– U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule List of Subjects 13544. proposes to approve pre-existing 40 CFR Part 52 Idaho has presented an adequate requirements under state law and does demonstration that it has met the not impose any additional enforceable Environmental protection, Air requirements applicable to the area duty beyond that required by state law, pollution control, Incorporation by under section 110 and Part D. The Part it does not contain any unfunded reference, Intergovernmental relations, D NSR rules for PM–10 nonattainment mandate or significantly or uniquely Particulate matter, Reporting and areas in Idaho were approved by EPA on affect small governments, as described recordkeeping requirements. July 23, 1993 (58 FR 39445) and in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 40 CFR Part 81 amended provisions were approved by of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). EPA on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2217). Environmental protection, Air The Clean Air Act requires that This proposed rule also does not have pollution control, National parks, contingency measures take effect if the tribal implications because it will not Wilderness areas. area fails to meet reasonable further have a substantial direct effect on one or Dated: May 10, 2005. progress requirements or fails to attain more Indian tribes, on the relationship Julie M. Hagensen, the NAAQS by the applicable between the Federal Government and Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. attainment date. The Portneuf Valley Indian tribes, or on the distribution of [FR Doc. 05–10149 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] PM–10 nonattainment area attained the power and responsibilities between the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P NAAQS for PM–10 by the applicable Federal Government and Indian tribes, attainment date of December 31, 1996. as specified by Executive Order 13175 Therefore, contingency measures no (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This longer are required under section FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS action also does not have federalism COMMISSION 172(c)(9) of the Act. Contingency implications because it does not have measures are also required for substantial direct effects on the States, maintenance plans under section 47 CFR Part 76 on the relationship between the national 175A(d). Idaho has provided [MB Docket No. 05–181; FCC 05–92] contingency measures in the government and the States, or on the maintenance plan for the Portneuf distribution of power and Implementation of Section 210 of the Valley PM–10 nonattainment area. The responsibilities among the various Satellite Home Viewer Extension and contingency measures in the levels of government, as specified in Reauthorization Act of 2004 To Amend maintenance plan are discussed in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Section 338 of the Communications section III above. August 10, 1999). This action merely Act proposes to approve a state rule AGENCY: B. What Do We Conclude About the implementing a Federal standard, and Federal Communications Request for Redesignation? Commission. does not alter the relationship or the Based on our review of the distribution of power and ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. nonattainment area plan, the responsibilities established in the Clean SUMMARY: This document corrects a maintenance plan, and the request for Air Act. This proposed rule also is not redesignation request submitted for the Notice of proposed rulemaking subject to Executive Order 13045 summary that was published in the Portneuf Valley PM–10 nonattainment ‘‘Protection of Children from area on June 30, 2004, we conclude that Federal Register at 70 FR 24350, May 9, Environmental Health Risks and Safety 2005. In this document, the Commission all the requirements for redesignation in Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), section 107(d)(3)(E) have been met. corrects the DATES section of the because it is not economically Therefore, we are proposing to preamble to reflect correct comment due significant. redesignate the Portneuf Valley PM–10 dates. nonattainment area to attainment. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s DATES: Comments for this proceeding role is to approve state choices, are due on or before June 6, 2005; reply V. Statutory and Executive Order provided that they meet the criteria of comments are due on or before June 20, Reviews the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 2005. Written comments on the Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR absence of a prior existing requirement proposed information collection 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed for the State to use voluntary consensus requirements contained in this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory standards (VCS), EPA has no authority document must be submitted by the action’’ and therefore is not subject to to disapprove a SIP submission for public, the Office of Management and review by the Office of Management and failure to use VCS. It would thus be Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before July 8, 2005. Budget. For this reason, this action is inconsistent with applicable law for also not subject to Executive Order EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations to use VCS in place of a SIP submission identified by MB Docket No. 05–181, by That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, that otherwise satisfies the provisions of any of the following methods: Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 22, 2001). This proposed action merely www.regulations.gov. Follow the requirements of section 12(d) of the proposes to approve state law as instructions for submitting comments. meeting Federal requirements and National Technology Transfer and • Federal Communications imposes no additional requirements Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Commission’s Web Site: http:// beyond those imposed by state law. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the Accordingly, the Administrator certifies rule does not impose an information instructions for submitting comments. that this proposed rule will not have a collection burden under the provisions • People with Disabilities: Contact significant economic impact on a of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the FCC to request reasonable substantial number of small entities (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). accommodations (accessible format under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 documents, sign language interpreters,
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29253
CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] indicating that listing the pygmy rabbit the information in the petition meets the or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– may be warranted. Therefore, we will ‘‘substantial information’’ threshold. 418–0432. not be initiating a further status review On April 21, 2003, we received a For detailed instructions for in response to this petition. We ask the formal petition, dated April 1, 2003, submitting comments and additional public to submit to us any new from the Committee for the High Desert, information on the rulemaking process, information that becomes available Western Watersheds Project, American see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION concerning the status of the species or Lands Alliance, Oregon Natural Desert section of this document. threats to it. Association, Biodiversity Conservation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For DATES: The finding announced in this Alliance, Center for Native Ecosystems, additional information on this document was made May 20, 2005. You and Mr. Craig Criddle, requesting that proceeding, contact Eloise Gore, may submit new information the pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus [email protected] of the Media concerning this species for our idahoensis) found in California, Idaho, Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418– consideration at any time. Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming be listed as threatened or 2120. For additional information ADDRESSES: The complete file for this endangered in accordance with section concerning the Paperwork Reduction finding is available for public Act information collection requirements 4 of the Act. inspection, by appointment, during Action on this petition was precluded contained in this NPRM, contact Cathy normal business hours at the Nevada by court orders and settlement Williams, Federal Communications Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and agreements for other listing actions that Commission, 445 12th St., SW., Room Wildlife Service, 1340 Financial required nearly all of our listing funds 1–C823, Washington, DC 20554, or via Boulevard, Suite 234, Reno, NV 89502. for fiscal year 2003. On May 3, 2004, we the Internet to [email protected]. Submit new information, materials, received a 60-day notice of intent to sue, If you would like to obtain or view a comments, or questions concerning this and on September 1, 2004, we received copy of this revised information species to us at the above address. a complaint regarding our failure to collection, OMB Control Number 3060– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: carry out the 90-day and 12-month 0980, you may do so by visiting the FCC Robert D. Williams, Field Supervisor, findings on the status of the pygmy PRA web page at: http://www.fcc.gov/ Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see rabbit. On March 2, 2005, we reached an omd/pra. ADDRESSES) (telephone 775/861–6300; agreement with the plaintiffs to submit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. facsimile 775/861–6301). to the Federal Register a completed 90- 05–9290 on page 24350 published in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: day finding by May 16, 2005, and to Federal Register on Monday, May 9, complete, if applicable, a 12-month Background 2005 make the following corrections: On finding by February 15, 2006 (Western page 24350 in the second column, in the Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Watersheds Project et al. v. U.S. Fish DATES section, the first sentence is Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 and Wildlife Service (CV–04–0440–N– corrected to read as follows: Comments U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we BLW)). for this proceeding are due on or before make a finding on whether a petition to This finding does not address our June 6, 2005; reply comments are due list, delist, or reclassify a species prior listing of the Columbia Basin on or before June 20, 2005. presents substantial scientific or distinct population segment (DPS) of the Federal Communications Commission. commercial information to indicate that pygmy rabbit. On November 30, 2001, Marlene H. Dortch, the petitioned action may be warranted. we published an emergency listing and We are to base this finding on concurrent proposed rule to list this Secretary. information provided in the petition. To DPS of the pygmy rabbit as endangered [FR Doc. 05–10227 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] the maximum extent practicable, we are (66 FR 59734 and 66 FR 59769, BILLING CODE 6712–01–P to make this finding within 90 days of respectively). We listed the Columbia our receipt of the petition, and publish Basin DPS of the pygmy rabbit as our notice of this finding promptly in endangered in our final rule dated DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the Federal Register. March 5, 2003 (68 FR 10388). Our standard for substantial Fish and Wildlife Service information within the Code of Federal Species Information Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90- The pygmy rabbit is a member of the 50 CFR Part 17 day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of family Leporidae, which includes rabbits and hares. This species has been Endangered and Threatened Wildlife information that would lead a placed in various genera since its type and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a reasonable person to believe that the specimen was described in 1891 by Petition To List the Pygmy Rabbit as measure proposed in the petition may Merriam (1891), who classified the Threatened or Endangered be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial information was ‘‘Idaho pygmy rabbit’’ as Lepus AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, presented, we are required to promptly idahoensis. Currently, the pygmy rabbit Interior. commence a review of the status of the is generally placed within the ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition species, if one has not already been monotypic genus Brachylagus and finding. initiated under our internal candidate classified as B. idahoensis (Green and assessment process. Flinders 1980a; WDFW 1995); this is the SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and In making this finding, we relied on taxonomy accepted by the Service. The Wildlife Service (Service), announce a information provided by the petitioners analysis of blood proteins (Johnson 90-day finding on a petition to list the and evaluated that information in 1968, cited in Washington Department pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis) accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1995) as threatened or endangered under the process of coming to a 90-day finding suggests that the pygmy rabbit differs Endangered Species Act of 1973, as under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and greatly from species within both the amended. We find the petition does not section 424.14(b) of our regulations is Lepus or Sylvilagus genera. Halanych provide substantial information limited to a determination of whether and Robinson (1997) supported the
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29254 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
separate generic status as Brachylagus in length and usually less than 3.3 ft 1980a; Gahr 1993). Pygmy rabbits for the pygmy rabbit based on (1 m) deep with no distinct chambers maintain a low stance, have a deliberate phylogenetic position and sequence (Bailey 1936; Bradfield 1974; Green and gait, and are relatively slow and divergence values. The pygmy rabbit Flinders 1980a; Gahr 1993). Burrows are vulnerable in more open areas. They can has no recognized subspecies (Grinnell typically dug into gentle slopes or evade predators by maneuvering et al. 1930; Davis 1939; Larrison 1967; mound/inter-mound areas of more level through the dense shrub cover of their Green and Flinders 1980a; Janson 2002). or dissected topography (Wilde 1978; preferred habitats, often along The pygmy rabbit is the smallest Gahr 1993). In general, the number of established trails, or by escaping among North American rabbit. Adult weights active burrows in a colony increases their burrows (Bailey 1936; Severaid range from 0.54 to 1.2 pounds (245 to over the summer as the number of 1950; Bradfield 1974). 553 grams); adult lengths range from 9.1 juveniles increases. However, the Pygmy rabbits tend to have relatively to 12.1 inches (in) (23.1 to 30.7 number of active burrows may not be small home ranges during winter, centimeters) (Dice 1926; Grinnell et al. directly related to the number of remaining within 98 ft (30 m) of their 1930; Bailey 1936; Orr 1940; Janson individuals in a given area because burrows (Janson 1946). Bradfield (1974), 1946; Durrant 1952; Ingles 1965; some individual pygmy rabbits appear Katzner and Parker (1997), and Flath Bradfield 1974; Holt 1975; Campbell et to maintain multiple burrows, while and Rauscher (1995) found pygmy al. 1982). Adult females are generally some individual burrows are used by rabbit tracks in snow indicating larger than adult males. The species can multiple individuals (Janson 1946; Gahr movements of 262 to 328 ft (80 to 100 be distinguished from other rabbits by 1993; Heady 1998). m) or more from their burrows. They its small size, gray color, short rounded Pygmy rabbits occasionally make use have larger home ranges during spring ears, small hind legs, and the absence of of burrows abandoned by other species, and summer (Janson 1946; Gahr 1993). white on the tail (66 FR 59734). such as the yellow-bellied marmot During the breeding season in Pygmy rabbits typically occur in areas (Marmota flaviventris) or badger (Taxida Washington, females tend to make of tall, dense sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) taxus) (Borell and Ellis 1934; Bradfield relatively short movements within a cover, and are highly dependent on 1974; Wilde 1978; Green and Flinders small core area and have home ranges sagebrush to provide both food and 1980a). As a result, they may occur in covering roughly 6.7 acres (ac) (2.7 shelter throughout the year (Dice 1926, areas of shallower or more compact soils hectares (ha)). Males tend to make Grinnell et al. 1930; Orr 1940; Green that support sufficient shrub cover longer movements, traveling among a and Flinders 1980a, b; Janson 1946; (Bradfield 1974). Natural cavities (such number of females, resulting in home Wilde 1978; Katzner et al. 1997). The as holes in volcanic rock), rock piles, ranges covering roughly 49.9 ac (20.2 winter diet of pygmy rabbits is stone walls and around abandoned ha) (Gahr 1993). These home range comprised of up to 99 percent sagebrush buildings may also be used (Janson estimates in Washington are (Wilde 1978; Green and Flinders 1980b), 1946). During winter pygmy rabbits considerably larger than for pygmy which is unique among rabbits (White et make extensive use of snow burrows, rabbit populations in other areas of their al. 1982). During spring and summer in possibly as access to sagebrush forage historic range (Katzner and Parker Idaho, their diet consists of roughly 51 (Bradfield 1974; Katzner and Parker 1997). Pygmy rabbits are known to percent sagebrush, 39 percent grasses 1997), as travel corridors among their travel up to 0.75 mile (mi) (1.2 (particularly native bunch-grasses, such underground burrows, for protection kilometers (km)) from their burrows as Agropyron spp. and Poa spp.), and 10 from predators, and/or as thermal cover (Gahr 1993), and there are a few records percent forbs (Green and Flinders (Katzner and Parker 1997). of individuals moving up to 2.2 mi (3.5 1980b). There is evidence that pygmy Pygmy rabbits begin breeding their km) (Green and Flinders 1979; Katzner rabbits preferentially select native second year (Wilde 1978; Fisher 1979). and Parker 1998). grasses as forage over other available In some parts of the species’ range, A wide range of pygmy rabbit foods during this period. In addition, females may have up to three litters per population densities has been reported. total grass cover relative to forbs and year and average six young per litter Janson (1946) reported an estimated shrubs may be reduced within the (Davis 1939; Janson 1946; Green 1978; pygmy rabbit density of 0.75 to 1.75 per immediate areas occupied by pygmy Wilde 1978). Breeding appears to be ac (1.9 and 4.3 per ha) in Utah. In rabbits as a result of its use during highly synchronous in a given area and another area in Utah, he estimated 3.5 spring and summer (Green and Flinders juveniles are often identifiable to pygmy rabbits per ac (8.6 per ha). Green 1980b). The specific diets of pygmy cohorts (Wilde 1978). No evidence of (1978) reported an estimate of 18.2 rabbit likely vary by region (68 FR nests, nesting material, or lactating pygmy rabbits per ac (45 per ha) in 10388). females with young has been found in Idaho. Gahr (1993) estimated 0.09 The pygmy rabbit is one of only two burrows (Janson 1946; Bradfield 1974; pygmy rabbits per ac (0.22 per ha) in a rabbits in North America that digs its Gahr 1993). Individual juveniles have grazed area and 0.11 per ac (0.27 per ha) own burrows (Nelson 1909; Bailey 1936; been found under clumps of sagebrush, in an ungrazed area in Sagebrush Flat, Janson 1946; Bradfield 1974; Wilde although it is not known precisely Washington. In Montana, Rauscher 1978). Pygmy rabbit burrows are where the young are born in the wild, (1997) estimated pygmy rabbit density typically found in relatively deep, loose nor is it known if they may be routinely as 1.2 per ac (3.0 per ha). soils of wind-borne or water-borne (e.g., hidden at the bases of scattered shrubs The annual mortality rate of adult alluvial fan) origin. Pygmy rabbits, or within burrows (Wilde 1978). Current pygmy rabbits may be as high as 88 especially juveniles, likely use their information on captive pygmy rabbits percent, and more than 50 percent of burrows as protection from predators indicates females may excavate juveniles can die within roughly 5 and inclement weather (Bailey 1936; specialized natal burrows for their weeks of their emergence (Wilde 1978). Bradfield 1974). The burrows frequently litters in the vicinity of their regular However, the mortality rates of adult have multiple entrances, some of which burrows (68 FR 10388). and juvenile pygmy rabbits can vary are concealed at the base of larger Pygmy rabbits may be active at any considerably between years, and even sagebrush plants (Dice 1926). Burrows time of the day or night, and appear to between juvenile cohorts within years are relatively simple and shallow, often be most active during mid-morning (Wilde 1978). Predation is the main no more than 6.6 feet (ft) (2 meters (m)) (Bradfield 1974; Green and Flinders cause of pygmy rabbit mortality (Green
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29255
1979). Predators of the pygmy rabbit activities (e.g., fence rows, roadway Great Basin and Intermountain West, include badgers, long-tailed weasels shoulders, crop margins, abandoned and that populations may currently (Mustela frenata), coyotes (Canis fields) may have also acted as avenues exist in portions of 7 to 8 million ac (2.8 latrans), bobcats (Felis rufus), great of dispersal between local populations to 3.2 million ha) (Committee for the horned owls (Bubo virginianus), long- of pygmy rabbits (Green and Flinders High Desert et al. 2003). It appears these eared owls (Asio otus), ferruginous 1980a; Pritchett et al. 1987). estimates were determined by visually hawks (Buteo regalis), northern harriers comparing the historic geographic range (Circus cyaneus), and common ravens Previous Federal Action map presented in previous Service (Corvus corax) (Borell and Ellis 1934; We added the pygmy rabbit to our list Federal Register documents (66 FR Janson 1946; Gashwiler et al. 1960; of candidate species on November 21, 59734, 68 FR 10388), and a current Green 1978; Wilde 1978; Johnson and 1991, as a category 2 candidate species range map presented in White and Hanson 1979; WDFW 1995). (56 FR 58804). A category 2 candidate Bartels (2002). However beyond Population cycles are not known in species was a species for which we had apparently making a visual comparison pygmy rabbits, although local, relatively information indicating that a proposal to of these two maps to reach their rapid population declines have been list it as threatened or endangered under conclusion the petitioners did not noted in some States (Janson 1946; the Act may be appropriate, but for provide any data to substantiate this Bradfield 1974; Weiss and Verts 1984). which additional information was supposed reduction in pygmy rabbit After initial declines, pygmy rabbit needed to support the preparation of a range. We are unaware of any estimates populations may not have the same proposed rule. In the February 28, 1996, from the scientific literature in our files capacity for rapid increases in numbers Notice of Review (61 FR 7595), we regarding a reduction in range for the in response to favorable environmental discontinued the use of multiple species. Therefore, we conclude that conditions as compared to other rabbit candidate categories and considered the this map comparison is not substantial species. This may be due to their close former category 1 candidates as simply information demonstrating a significant association with specific components of ‘‘candidates’’ for listing purposes. The reduction in the range of the pygmy sagebrush ecosystems, and the relatively pygmy rabbit was removed from the rabbit. limited availability of their preferred candidate list at that time. This species The petition states that there have habitats (Wilde 1978; Green and has no Federal regulatory status. been rangewide declines in pygmy Flinders 1980b; WDFW 1995). No study As stated above, this finding does not rabbit populations and provides the has documented rapid increases in address our prior listing with regard to following State-by-State information to pygmy rabbit numbers in response to the Columbia Basin DPS of the pygmy support this claim. environmental conditions (Gabler 1997). rabbit that was listed as endangered on Idaho. According to the petition, The pygmy rabbit’s current March 5, 2003 (68 FR 10388). Bradfield (1974) speculated that the geographic range, excluding the pygmy rabbit population was declining Columbia Basin DPS, includes most of Threats Analysis in his study area in Bingham County, the Great Basin and some of the adjacent Pursuant to section (4) of the Act, we Idaho, because of the number of intermountain areas of the western may list a species, subspecies, or DPS of abandoned burrows, number of skulls United States (Green and Flinders vertebrate taxa on the basis of any of the indicating death by predation or other 1980a). The northern boundary extends following five factors: (A) present or means, and fewer observed rabbits. In into southeastern Oregon and southern threatened destruction, modification, or her Idaho study area, Gabler (1997) Idaho. The eastern boundary extends curtailment of habitat or range; (B) found 101 burrow sites, of which 26 into southwestern Montana and overutilization for commercial, were active. Gabler also revisited southwestern Wyoming. The recreational, scientific, or educational Wilde’s (1978) three study areas, and southeastern boundary extends into purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) found two collapsed burrows with no southwestern Utah. Central Nevada and inadequacy of existing regulatory sign of occupancy, four active burrows eastern California provide the southern mechanisms; or (E) other natural or that were abandoned 10 months later, and western boundaries (Merriam 1891; manmade factors affecting its continued and 34 abandoned burrows, Nelson 1909; Grinnell et al. 1930; Bailey existence. In making this finding, we respectively. Roberts (2001) covered 1936; Janson 1946; Campbell et al. 1982; evaluated whether threats to the pygmy 583,600 ac (236,175 ha) in three main WDFW 1995). rabbit presented in the petition and river drainages during his 1997–98 Literature indicates that pygmy other information may pose a concern survey in Idaho and found pygmy rabbits were never evenly distributed with respect to its survival. The Act rabbits widely scattered in all three of across their range. Rather, they are these areas. Occupied habitat areas were identifies the five factors to be found in areas within their broader interrupted by cultivation and burn considered, either singly or in distribution where sagebrush cover is areas. He classified habitat value in his combination, to determine whether a sufficiently tall and dense, and where study area as being high (2,000 ac (809 species may be threatened or soils are sufficiently deep and loose to ha)), medium (365,200 ac (147,792 ha)), endangered. Our evaluation of these allow burrowing (Bailey 1936; Green low (175,400 ac (70,982 ha)), and threats, based on information provided and Flinders 1980a; Weiss and Verts nonuse (41,000 ac (16,592 ha)) for in the petition and available in our files, 1984; WDFW 1995). In the past, dense pygmy rabbits. All of the high-value is presented below. vegetation along permanent and habitat was located in one of the intermittent stream corridors, alluvial A. Present or Threatened Destruction, drainages. fans, and sagebrush plains probably Modification, or Curtailment of the As included in the petition, Austin provided travel corridors and dispersal Species’ Habitat or Range (2002) reported that all nine of his study habitat for pygmy rabbits between areas in Idaho showed past presence of appropriate use areas (Green and Geographic Range pygmy rabbit use. Recent or current Flinders 1980a; Weiss and Verts 1984; The petition estimates that the signs of occupancy were found at five WDFW 1995). Since European historic range of the pygmy rabbit individual sites within three of the nine settlement of the western United States, encompassed 100 million ac (40 million study areas in 2001 and 2002. Austin dense vegetation associated with human ha) or more of sagebrush habitat in the (2002) states that though it is recognized
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29256 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
that pygmy rabbits occur in widely occupancy (Weiss and Verts 1984). systematic, comprehensive manner with scattered and/or isolated clumps across Bradfield (1974) also spent time at the goal of determining species the landscape, the large unoccupied Ironside, in Malheur County, Oregon. distribution and abundance. They areas of lands historically used by He found evidence of previous pygmy represent a collection of sightings pygmy rabbits within research areas of rabbit use, but no fresh signs of use or documented through various methods Idaho appear to indicate a decline in rabbits, supporting his belief that they by different individuals over time. populations and numbers. He reported were in decline on a larger geographic Recent surveys (post-1950) have not some level of current land use and scale. Bartels (2003) visited 54 been comprehensive in any State within disturbance in all of his study areas previously known pygmy rabbit sites in the pygmy rabbit’s range. Consistent from the following: grazing, fire, crested 2000 and 2001 in Harney, Malheur, methodologies were not used for those wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum) Lake, and Deschutes Counties, Oregon. previous surveys. Definitions for seedings, weed infestation, residential Results from these visits were: Pygmy historic sites versus previously known construction, communication sites, rabbit occupancy at 12 sites, no sites, methods for determining agriculture and pasture conversion, occupancy at 34 sites, and occupancy, and definitions that would fragmentation, gas pipelines, water undetermined presence at 8 sites clearly distinguish occupied from impoundments, off-highway-vehicle (Bartels 2003). Impacts to unoccupied unoccupied areas, unoccupied suitable (OHV)/off-road vehicle (ORV) use, trails, sites included fire, grazing, flooding, habitat, and the extent of occupied or hunting, gravel pit, utility lines, agriculture, development, and seeding. formerly occupied population sites, are dumping activities, and other human Of the 69,945 ac (28,306 ha) surveyed, inconsistent. influences. 57,485 ac (23,263 ha) were classified as Surveys identified in the petition The petition states that White and unoccupied. A total of 9,589 ac (3,881 have reported occupancy at different Bartels (2002) attempted to check 31 ha) were classified as occupied and landscape scales, ranging from the historic locations for pygmy rabbits in 2,871 ac (1,162 ha) were classified as individual burrow to the broader Cassia, Minidoka, Blaine, Power, and undetermined presence (Bartels 2003). population level. In many cases, survey Oneida Counties, Idaho. Eighteen sites Some of these sites included those areas were not clearly identified, and were too vague to relocate, eight were visited by Weiss and Verts (1984). there is a lack of information on the disturbed due to agriculture, urban Utah. Janson (1946) reported that in distances between adjacent populations, development, wildfire and reseeding the winter of 1946, pygmy rabbits and therefore, on what defines a efforts, and five were potentially appeared more scarce than in 1941 population. The petition does not suitable habitat. No active pygmy rabbit based on two study areas in Utah (near provide substantial scientific burrows were found on any of the 13 Cedar City, Iron County; near information to document the historic or sites visited. Roberts (2003) investigated Tremonton, Box Elder County). Areas current range of pygmy rabbits within 42,000 square mi (108,800 square km) of where he considered pygmy rabbits sagebrush ecosystems. Although limited southern Idaho, including lands drained common in Utah in 1941 were found to data are provided on local population by the Snake River (southern Idaho) and have no pygmy rabbits occupying them declines, particularly in Idaho, the Bear River (southeastern Idaho). He in 1946. Based on the two previous petition does not present substantial found only nine currently active pygmy study areas in Utah between 1938 and scientific information that there is a rabbit burrow systems. Roberts (2003) 1946, and limited observations in Utah downward trend in geographic range or states that the pygmy rabbit in Idaho are (near Clarkston, Cache County; near abundance to a level that threatens the slowly declining based solely on the Snowville and Grouse Creek, Box Elder survival of the pygmy rabbit across all annual loss of habitat. County) in 2001, Janson (2002) wrote or a significant portion of its range. Nor Montana. The petition states that in that recent information indicated pygmy does the petition present substantial Montana, Rauscher (1997) reported that rabbit populations had declined in some information to correlate the changes in several previously occupied sites west areas where they were previously more geographic range and abundance of the of Dillon (near Dutchman, Montana; abundant, mostly as a result of human species to the actual threats to the Frying Pan Basin) were now vacant. He actions. He states that residential and survival of the species. stated that there was no evidence to commercial development, farming, and The Service has worked with the indicate a significant range decrease had range improvements for grazing, States, other Federal agencies, and occurred. Janson (2002) wrote that the especially near Cedar City, had research institutions involved with historical range in Montana continues to impacted the sagebrush habitat. He pygmy rabbit work to create a rangewide support pygmy rabbits, with some found no recent sign of occupancy near communication network to coordinate exceptions based on limited Cedar City, Utah. Pritchett et al. (1987) information and activities relating to observations in Beaverhead County, were unable to locate a population this species. We are aware of continuing Montana, in 2001. studied by Holt (1975) near Otter Creek survey efforts to improve the current Oregon. The petitioners cite Olterman Reservoir. knowledge of pygmy rabbit distribution and Verts (1972) as stating that pygmy Other States. The petition does not across its range, as well as the rabbits appeared to occur over the same provide specific information on development of draft survey guidelines area in Oregon as they did in past population declines for pygmy rabbits (Ulmschneider 2004). However, we are collections. However, Weiss and Verts in California, Nevada, or Wyoming. unaware of any accurate, (1984) found that of 211 sites suspected comprehensive inventories of currently of supporting pygmy rabbits in eastern Evaluation of Information in the Petition occupied pygmy rabbit habitat for any Oregon based on records, aerial The data and information presented State within the range of the species. photographs, soil maps, and interviews, in the petition has limited use in Such information is critical to any only 51 sites showed evidence of determining rangewide distribution and analysis of range and/or population occupancy in 1982. In 1983, only 5 of abundance of the species. Little detail is reductions. Consequently, we conclude 15 sites showed recent pygmy rabbit available from records prior to 1950. that the petitioners do not present activity. Of 51 burrows found at 5 sites These records may not accurately reflect substantial information indicating that a in 1982, 19 burrows were found open in the species’ historic distribution reduction in the species’ numbers or 1983 and only 8 had fresh signs of because they were not collected in a range warrants a status review.
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29257
Habitat have improved, additional land has loss, or cite specific examples of losses The petition claims the pygmy rabbit been irrigated, and more big sagebrush in specific areas, particularly in Idaho has been subject to population losses (Artemisia tridentata) cleared. Shrub- and Oregon. However, they do not and declines due to various land steppe habitat continues to be converted provide substantial information that management practices such as to dry land and irrigated cropland but clearly documents that the areas where conversion of sagebrush habitat to at a much lower rate (Braun 1998). these habitat losses have occurred are Pritchett et al. (1987) reported that a agricultural purposes, sagebrush also the areas where pygmy rabbits are portion of the Sevier River Valley eradication to increase forage for found. Also, the petition does not between Kingston and Otter Creek, livestock, livestock grazing, weed present substantial information on the Utah, containing one of the last large invasions, prescribed burns and magnitude and the extent of degradation patches of sagebrush, had been plowed. and loss of habitat to agriculture such wildfires, urban and rural development, The authors speculated this may have that we can conclude that the continued mining and energy exploration and been a dispersal route for pygmy rabbits existence of the pygmy rabbit development, power lines, fences and from Iron County to Wayne County, throughout all or a significant portion of roads, military facilities, and Utah. Rauscher (1997) thought its range may be threatened. recreational activities. The petition conversion of sagebrush to agriculture states that sagebrush once covered was minimal in southwest Montana Conversion of Sagebrush approximately 270 million ac (109 because of the large expanses of public The petition identifies the conversion million ha) in western North America. land. He documented that the suspected of sagebrush by mechanical and Today, because of various land uses, location for one historic record had been chemical methods (herbicide) primarily about 150 million ac (61 million ha) of converted to irrigated farmland. for rangeland improvement and grazing sagebrush habitat remain (American Williams (1986) indicated that loss of management as a negative impact to Lands Alliance 2001). However, pygmy sagebrush habitat in California to pygmy rabbit habitat, and cites the rabbits do not occur in Arizona, agriculture was less of a concern than following information to support this Colorado, North or South Dakota, or loss of habitat from overgrazing. Bartels claim. Large expanses of sagebrush have New Mexico, and only in the southwest and Hays (2001) indicated that large been removed and seeded with portions of Montana and Wyoming. So portions of the pygmy rabbit range in nonnative grasses, such as crested the amount of suitable sagebrush habitat Oregon and Idaho had been converted to wheatgrass, to increase forage for pygmy rabbits is considerably less agricultural use; they found that production for domestic and wild than the 150 million ac (61 million ha) burning, plowing, and other ungulates. This practice results in the of sagebrush currently distributed across undetermined causes continue to result elimination of many native grasses and western North America. The petitioners in loss of pygmy rabbit habitat. White forbs that were present before the claim that pygmy rabbit populations and Bartels (2002) believe that the seedings. Olterman and Verts (1972) and may occur over 7 to 8 million acres pygmy rabbit historically was impacted Wilde (1978) cautioned that the practice within the sagebrush ecosystem but do by sagebrush removal for agricultural of sagebrush removal from some not present substantial information to purposes in Idaho; they found that 8 of livestock ranges in Oregon and Idaho, substantiate this estimate, nor are we 13 locatable historic pygmy rabbit sites respectively, could be a threat to the aware of any such estimates in the in Twin Falls and Cassio Counties, pygmy rabbit in the future. They note scientific literature. Idaho, were disturbed due to that land changes should be closely Agriculture agriculture, urban development, monitored and adequate ‘‘safeguards’’ wildfire, and seeding efforts. Of the implemented to reduce excessive The petition cites the following 583,600 ac (236,175 ha) Roberts (1998) clearing of large areas. general information on threats of inventoried in Idaho for pygmy rabbit Roberts (1998) calculated that of the agriculture to sagebrush habitat. Large- occupancy, 122,300 ac (49,493 ha) had 583,600 ac (236,175 ha) he inventoried scale conversions of western rangelands been permanently removed due to for pygmy rabbit occupancy in Idaho, to agricultural lands began under the agriculture conversion. 49,000 ac (19,830 ha) were lost due to Homestead Acts of the 1800s (Todd and sagebrush eradication. Rauscher (1997) Elmore 1997, cited in Braun 1998). More Evaluation of Information in the Petition reported that sagebrush removal was a than 70 percent of the sagebrush shrub- The information in the petition ‘‘popular’’ rangeland improvement steppe habitat has been converted to suggests that agricultural production has practice in southwestern Montana. agricultural crops in some States (Braun been responsible for a loss of sagebrush Sagebrush in the Coyote Creek area of 1998). Across the Interior Columbia habitat, including some used by pygmy the Big Sheep Creek basin has been Basin of southern Idaho, northern Utah, rabbits, particularly in certain areas and extensively treated, and only one active northern Nevada, eastern Oregon and in Idaho. However pygmy rabbits are burrow was located. In lower Badger Washington, about 15 million ac (6 not distributed uniformly across the full Gulch, Bureau of Land Management million ha) of shrub-steppe habitat has range of the sagebrush ecosystem in (BLM) lands border private lands. been converted to agricultural cropland western North America. In large areas of Pygmy rabbits are found on public lands (Quigley and Arbelbide 1997, cited in the sagebrush ecosystem, the pygmy but absent on private lands where Committee for the High Desert et al. rabbit does not occur at all, and in those sagebrush had been removed. 2003). Development of irrigation areas where it does occur it is patchily projects to support agricultural distributed (Green and Flinders 1980a; Evaluation of Information in the Petition production also resulted in sagebrush Weiss and Verts 1984). The species only Information in the petition indicates habitat loss (Braun 1998). Reservoirs occurs in areas of the sagebrush that some pygmy rabbit habitat has been have been constructed to facilitate these ecosystem where, at a minimum, the lost to sagebrush eradication for irrigation projects, impacting native habitat has sufficiently dense sagebrush rangeland and grazing management. shrub-steppe habitat adjacent to rivers, and deep, loose soils (Green and However, as mentioned under as well as supporting the conversion of Flinders 1980a; Weiss and Verts 1984). agriculture in the previous section, the more upland shrub-steppe to The petitioners only provide general pygmy rabbit is not distributed agriculture. As irrigation techniques characterizations of sagebrush habitat uniformly across the full range of the
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29258 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
sagebrush ecosystem in western North vegetation is overgrazed, native breeding season compared with an America. It is absent from large areas of perennial grasses can be eliminated, and ungrazed area. Rauscher (1997) and the sagebrush ecosystem, and in those shrubs, such as big sagebrush, tend to Janson (2002) found that areas of tall, areas of the sagebrush ecosystem where form dense monotypic (single species) dense sagebrush inhabited by pygmy it does occur it is patchily distributed stands when the sagebrush-grass rabbits were typically located along (Green and Flinders 1980a; Weiss and vegetation is overgrazed (Blaisdell 1949, streams. Livestock can impact these Verts 1984), in areas where, at a cited in Yensen 1982; Tisdale and areas disproportionately by minimum, there is sufficiently dense Hironaka 1981, cited in Paige and Ritter concentrating in riparian areas where sagebrush and deep, loose soils. The 1999). In addition, the understory trampling and vegetation removal can petitioners only provide general becomes sparse with unpalatable occur (Austin 2002). characterizations of sagebrush habitat perennials (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981, Trampling of burrows by livestock has loss due to conversion, or cite examples cited in Paige and Ritter 1999), and been reported in Montana by Rauscher of losses in specific areas. They do not invasions of annual species like (1997), in Idaho by Austin (2002), and provide substantial information that cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) can occur in Washington by Siegel (2002) and clearly documents that the areas where (Gabler 1997; Rauscher 1997). Herman (2002). This could cause the these habitat losses have occurred are The magnitude of grazing effects is death of young rabbits in natal burrows also the areas where pygmy rabbits are determined by season, timing, duration, or injury or mortality of adults. Austin found. Also, the petition does not and intensity of the event, in addition (2002) reported a burrow system in present substantial information on the to other factors. Overgrazing can break Idaho that was subjected to cattle magnitude and the extent of loss of down individual sagebrush plants, trailing on at least two separate habitat due to sagebrush conversion which opens up interstitial (small, occasions within a period of 2 months such that we can conclude that the narrow) spaces, allowing invasion of or less. After the initial event, only 2 of continued existence of the pygmy rabbit annual grasses and forbs (Daubenmire 10 active burrows were still open. A throughout all or a significant portion of 1970, cited in Rauscher 1997). Livestock second visit showed additional trailing its range may be threatened. grazing can result in sagebrush seedling activities, and no open burrows or trampling and mortality (Connelly et al. recent sign were found, indicating ‘‘that Livestock Grazing 2000). Water developments also domestic livestock can have an The petition identifies livestock influence livestock distribution in immediate and detrimental effect upon grazing as an important factor in sagebrush habitat that would otherwise burrow systems’’ (Austin 2002). sagebrush habitat destruction and not be used. While water developments Evaluation of Information in the Petition alteration in pygmy rabbit habitat. The may provide a more uniform livestock petition mentions not only the direct distribution over the landscape, they The petition describes various loss of vegetation, but habitat may also distribute habitat impacts over impacts associated with livestock and degradation due to associated facilities a larger area. The associated facilities grazing management that could affect or actions such as the construction of (tanks, pipelines, roads) may also allow pygmy rabbits, and cite specific cases in fences, wells, water tanks, and pipelines predators (Braun 1998), OHV/ORV isolated areas where impacts to the which can concentrate livestock or users, and hunters to access new terrain. species have resulted from these redistribute livestock and predators; Livestock can physically damage practices. However, the petitioners did seeding of crested wheatgrass to sagebrush by rubbing, battering, not provide substantial information that increase livestock forage; and weed breaking, and trampling seedlings. clearly documents that areas impacted infestations. The petition also claims Katzner and Parker (1997) state that the by grazing management practices are that grazing disturbs pygmy rabbits, apparent dependence of pygmy rabbits regularly also the areas where pygmy increases their vulnerability to on a dense understory, provided in part rabbits are found. Also, the petition predation, and increases stress during by dead shrubs and extensive canopies, does not present substantial information winter or harsh weather periods. In may explain population declines in the on the magnitude and the extent of addition, the petition claims trampling pygmy rabbit in grazed sagebrush- degradation and loss of habitat to of burrows may cause injury or death of steppe habitat in the western United livestock grazing such that we could pygmy rabbits. The petition cites the States. Lands grazed intensively by conclude that the continued existence of following information to support these domestic herbivores often have the pygmy rabbit throughout all or a claims. relatively low plant structural significant portion of its range may be The pygmy rabbit likely did not complexity and may not support pygmy threatened. evolve with intensive grazing by large rabbit populations adequately. For a Invasive Plants native herbivores such as bison (Bison species that eludes predators in bison), elk (Cervus canadensis), sagebrush habitat, a reduction in canopy The petition claims weed invasions pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), cover would increase the vulnerability pose a threat to pygmy rabbits and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) of pygmy rabbits to predation (Bailey throughout their range and provides the (Mack and Thompson 1982, cited in 1936; Orr 1940; Wilde 1978; Katzner following information to support this Connelly et al. 2000; Belsky and 1994; Siegel 2002). claim. The spread of weeds by several Gelbard 2000). Belsky and Gelbard The physical destruction of dense, factors (recreationists, ORV/OHV users, (2000) and Paige and Ritter (1999) structurally-diverse patches of trucks, logging, road construction, discuss impacts of livestock grazing on sagebrush, and the corridors that wildfire, wild animals, wind, and the arid west. These impacts can connect them, result in fragmented, floods, livestock and associated include selective grazing for native unsuitable big sagebrush habitat for facilities, among others) (Belsky and species, trampling of plants and soil, pygmy rabbits (Katzner and Parker Gelbard 2000) across the range of the damage to soil crusts, reduction of 1997). Siegel (2002) found more active pygmy rabbit results in nonnative plants mycorrhizal fungi, increases in soil burrows in ungrazed areas than grazed replacing native grasses and shrubs used nitrogen, increases in fire frequency, areas. Gahr (1993) found male pygmy by pygmy rabbits. Weed infestations can and contribution to nonnative plant rabbits had longer movements in a also hinder pygmy rabbit movement and introductions. When the sagebrush-grass grazed area in Washington during the increase predator detection. Quigley and
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29259
Arbelbide (1997, cited in Committee for would be used by pygmy rabbits, but (Stewart and Hull 1949; Wright and the High Desert et al. 2003) describe the later found large patches of invasive Britton 1976, cited in Yensen 1982). The effects of weeds in the Interior Columbia cheatgrass on 8 of those sites, and that presence of cheatgrass extends the fire River Basin as able to alter ecosystem the species did not use these sites. Other season and can carry a fire into areas processes, including productivity, factors, such as large amounts of dead where burning would not normally nutrient cycling, decomposition, and sagebrush, and/or sparse, short occur (Yensen 1982; Billings 1994). natural disturbance patterns such as sagebrush, and thick grass cover, may Though it is not known when cheatgrass frequency and intensity of wild fires. have contributed to their nonuse. became so abundant in the sagebrush Altering these processes can result in ecosystem as to allow extensive fires in Evaluation of Information in the Petition the displacement of native plant the western Great Basin, these fires were species, eventually impacting wildlife The petitioners provide information common as early as the mid-1930s and native plant habitats. about weed invasions within the (Billings 1994). Range fire intervals on Paige and Ritter (1999) suggest that sagebrush ecosystem in general, and the Snake River Plain in Idaho may have the most harmful change to sagebrush provide a few specific cases where the been 50 to 100 years (Whisenant 1990, shrub lands has been the invasion of the presence of weeds may have been the cited in Gabler 1997). Whisenant (1990, nonnative grasses and forbs, especially reason why pygmy rabbits were absent cited in Gabler 1997) indicates this cheatgrass. Cheatgrass is a rapid from an area. However, petitioners did interval currently occurs at 3 to 5 years, colonizer of disturbed areas and not provide substantial information that and that the burns are more extensive persistent in replacing native species clearly documents that areas impacted and leave fewer patches of unburned (Mack 1981, Yensen 1981, and by invasive species are regularly also habitat within the burned areas. With Whisenant 1990, cited in Paige and the areas where pygmy rabbits are cheatgrass cover, fire frequency Ritter 1999). Cheatgrass alters fire and found. Furthermore, the petitioners do increases and sagebrush are unable to vegetation patterns in sagebrush habitats not provide substantial information on reestablish (Whisenant 1990, cited in as it creates a continuous fine fuel that the magnitude and the extent of habitat Gabler 1997). easily carries fire (Paige and Ritter impacts by invasive weeds such that we The petition states that numerous and 1999). Where it dominates, it can carry might conclude that they may threaten extensive fires have occurred in States fires over large distances, and burns the continued existence of the pygmy where pygmy rabbits occur. Wildfires more frequently than native vegetation rabbit throughout all or a significant have reduced more than 50 percent of (Paige and Ritter 1999). It also matures portion of its range. sagebrush acreage in some areas in and dries earlier than native vegetation, Fire Idaho and Nevada (BLM 2000). In Idaho increasing the likelihood of a fire earlier a number of fires have occurred during in the season (Young and Evans 1978, The petition contends that fire, either the last decade that have exceeded Whisenant 1990, and Knick and wild or prescribed, can result in long- 100,000 ac (40,469 ha) (Roberts 2003). In Rotenberry 1997, cited in Paige and term habitat loss and fragmentation of Nevada, 1,277 fires in 2001, impacted Ritter 1999). Pellant and Hall (1994) pygmy rabbit habitat across its range. 654,253 ac (264,768 ha) on public and reported on the 1992 distribution of Fire can result in death, increased private lands (BLM 2001a). In 2002, cheatgrass and medusahead wild rye predation, or home range abandonment. BLM reported 771 fires that impacted (Taeniatherum asperum), the primary The petition cites the following 77,551 ac (31,384 ha) on public and alien grass invaders of disturbed and information to support this claim. private lands in Nevada (BLM 2002). fire-altered rangelands in the Fire intervals during presettlement According to Gabler (1997), range Intermountain area of the western times have been estimated at 20 to 25 fires may be a more serious threat to United States. Data indicated that 3.3 years in wetter regions, where fuels pygmy rabbit populations now than in million ac (1.3 million ha) of rangeland (vegetation) are more abundant. In the the past. Roberts (1998) stated that of administered by the BLM in Nevada, arid sagebrush steppe of Idaho, intervals the 583,600 ac (236,175 ha) he Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Idaho have been estimated at 60 to 110 years inventoried in Idaho, about 2,500 ac were dominated by these two species. because fuels are less abundant (Tisdale (1,012 ha) had been temporarily Another 76.1 million ac (30.8 million and Hironaka 1981 and Whisenant removed due to fire (a loss of 0.4 ha) of public rangeland were classified 1990, cited in Paige and Ritter 1999). percent). White and Bartels (2002) as infested or susceptible to infestation Burning typically kills big sagebrush indicated that of the 133,067 ac (53,851 by these two species. The petition states (Artemisia tridentata tridentata, A. t. ha) surveyed, 23,660 ac (9,575 ha) had that this distribution corresponds to vaseyana, A. t. wyomingensis) been affected by wildfire within the last areas of the pygmy rabbit’s range. (Pechanec et al. 1954, cited in Yensen 15 years. Gabler (1997) mentions that The petition provides the following 1982), fire it and does not resprout after 12.5 percent of her predicted pygmy specific information on the threat of burning (Wright et al. 1979, cited in rabbit habitat in Idaho was destroyed by invasive weeds to pygmy rabbits and Braun 1998; Paige and Ritter 1999). As fires during 1994–1996. their habitat. In Oregon, 2 of 51 sites a result, big sagebrush habitat takes a The petition cites several instances of occupied by pygmy rabbits in 1982 long time to recover following burns. fire impacting pygmy rabbit populations contained appreciable stands of Depending on the species, sagebrush locally across its range. In Idaho, Austin cheatgrass (Weiss and Verts 1984). This can reestablish itself within 5 years of (2002) indicated a burrow system was led the authors to suspect that pygmy a burn, but it may take 15 to 30 years no longer occupied by pygmy rabbits rabbits avoid areas containing annual to return to preburn densities (Bunting following an escaped BLM controlled grasses because it can restrict their 1984; Britton and Clark 1984, cited in burn. White and Bartels (2002) discuss movements or vision, especially when Paige and Ritter 1999). Billings (1994) that wildfires in the 1990s at INEEL they are attempting to escape predators. documented slow shrub succession severely affected the pygmy rabbit Weeds were reported for all nine study following a burn in western Nevada, population, though some individuals areas investigated by Austin (2002) in with little sagebrush recovery after 45 remained. Gates and Eng (1984, cited in Idaho. Gabler (1997) predicted 10 sites years. Tesky 1994) reported that 2 months on Idaho National Environmental Burning can also damage perennial following a fire in big sagebrush- Engineering Laboratory (INEEL) lands grasses, allowing cheatgrass to increase grassland community in Idaho, only 3 of
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29260 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
11 located radio-collared pygmy rabbits provide substantial information to (Braun 1998). Immediate impacts were alive. Of the eight lost, seven were document how much of the sagebrush include direct loss from mining and due to predation. They speculated that ecosystem where pygmy rabbits occur construction of associated facilities, the loss of big sagebrush from their has been impacted by fire. Therefore, we roads, and power lines (Braun 1998). In home ranges probably increased conclude that the petition has not western North America, development of vulnerability to predation. Some of the presented substantial information that mines and energy resources began surviving pygmy rabbits abandoned fire in the sagebrush ecosystem is a before 1900 (Robbins and Wolf 1994, their home ranges and moved to new factor that may threaten the continued cited in Braun 1998). Mining occurs home ranges in adjacent unburned sites. existence of the pygmy rabbit across large areas in northern Nevada Of the six rabbits remaining on the burn throughout all or a significant portion of where pygmy rabbits are known to site, only one survived the winter. its range. occur (Nevada Natural Heritage Program Pygmy rabbit habitat in Benton County, 2002). In California, pygmy rabbits have Urban and Suburban Development Washington, was destroyed by fire soon been observed in the area around Bodie, after its discovery in 1979 (WDFW The petition identifies habitat loss a mining town that was abandoned in 1995). The population at the Coyote from rural and urban development as a the mid-1930s (Severaid 1950). Canyon site in Washington showed a negative impact to pygmy rabbits and Evaluation of Information in the Petition dramatic decline in 1999 following a their habitat. This includes the fire (WDFW 2001). infrastructure that accompanies such Though the petition provides general Roberts (2003) suggests that sagebrush development. (i.e., roads, powerlines, information on mining activities where habitat can be regenerated within 30 to pipelines). Historic destruction of pygmy rabbit habitat may occur, it does 50 years but how long it takes for pygmy sagebrush habitat for urban not present substantial information that rabbits to recolonize is unknown. development has occurred (Braun 1998). correlates mining activities with the Roberts (2001) mentions a 1966 burn More recent expansion into rural areas direct loss of pygmy rabbits or their near Gilmore Summit, Idaho, that has is resulting in additional sagebrush habitat, nor does it quantify the extent not regenerated to suitable habitat and habitat loss (Braun 1998), as well as of this effect across the range of the which pygmy rabbits have not introducing nonnative predators such as species. domestic pets to these areas (Connelly et recolonized. White and Bartels (2002) Energy Development state that after the removal of sagebrush al. 2000). Janson (2002) discovered that habitat along the Snake River Plain, the one of his 1940s pygmy rabbit study The petition contends that energy area from Jerome to Idaho Falls, Idaho, areas was impacted by residential and development and associated facilities became important pygmy rabbit habitat. commercial development near Cedar threaten sagebrush habitats thereby This area was recently burned and City, Utah, when revisited in 2001. negatively impacting pygmy rabbits. reseeded with crested wheatgrass. White and Bartels (2002) also found that The petition identifies habitat loss from Rauscher (1997) reported that a urban development had impacted energy development (i.e., oil, gas, and prescribed burn in 1980 near Badger historic pygmy rabbit locations in Idaho. geothermal energy) as a negative impact Pass, Montana, had been recolonized by to the pygmy rabbit. Millions of acres of Evaluation of Information in the Petition pygmy rabbits. He did not know how western lands are in production for oil long this process had taken or if pygmy The petition indicates that some and gas energy. Other western lands rabbit densities had reached pre-burn sagebrush habitat has been lost due to have been developed for geothermal levels. White and Bartels (2002) suggest development, and that in some specific energy, but the number of acres is much that the current low abundance and instances pygmy rabbits have been lower than for oil and gas. Energy populations of the species is likely due impacted locally. With the exception of development involves construction of to recent wildfires and slow rate of these few local examples, the petitioners well pads, roads, pipelines, and other habitat recovery. do not provide substantial information associated facilities. The petitioners to document that the areas impacted by specifically mention concerns with oil, Evaluation of Information in the Petition development are the same as those gas, and coal bed methane development The information in the petition where the pygmy rabbit occurs, nor do in Wyoming and they cite proposals for indicates that fire has impacted they provide any documentation that energy production in sagebrush habitats sagebrush ecosystems, that there have indicates how much pygmy rabbit in this State. The Jack Morrow Hills been increased numbers of fires in this habitat has been lost to urban and Supplemental Draft Environmental system, and that pygmy rabbits have suburban development across its range. Impact Statement (DEIS) (2002, cited in been negatively affected in some local Therefore, we conclude that the petition Committee for the High Desert et al. areas within their range due to fire. But has not presented substantial 2003) proposes oil, gas, and coalbed pygmy rabbits are not distributed information that urban and suburban methane production in sagebrush uniformly across the full range of the development in the sagebrush habitats north of Rock Springs, sagebrush ecosystem in the western ecosystem is a factor that may threaten Wyoming. The scoping notice for the United States, and only occur in areas the continued existence of the pygmy South Piney Natural Gas Development where, at a minimum, dense sagebrush rabbit throughout all or a significant Project (2002, cited in Committee for the and deep, loose soils are found (Green portion of its range. High Desert et al. 2003) proposes the and Flinders 1980a; Weiss and Verts possible development of 210 new 1984). The petitioners did not provide Mining natural gas wells on 31,000 ac (12,545 substantial information that The petition contends that mining ha) in southwestern Wyoming. The demonstrates that the areas of the and associated facilities threaten Pinedale Anticline DEIS (2002, cited in sagebrush ecosystem impacted by fires, sagebrush habitats, thereby negatively Committee for the High Desert et al. and those subject to increased fire impacting pygmy rabbits. The petition 2003) indicates that large areas of frequency, are also the areas occupied provides the following information to Lincoln, Uinta, Sublette and Sweetwater by pygmy rabbits, with the exception of support this claim. Sagebrush habitat Counties with existing and potential oil a limited number of cases, mostly from throughout the west has been impacted and gas development are planned. The Idaho. Also, the petition does not by gold, coal, and uranium mining Upper Green River Valley Coalition
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29261
(2003, cited in Committee for the High pygmy rabbit throughout all or a habitat. The information in the petition Desert et al. 2003) predicts that the significant portion of the range. does not directly implicate that Green River Valley will be a major activities related to power lines, fences, Power Lines, Fences, and Roads natural gas production region in the and roads are threatening pygmy United States. In addition, BLM’s The petition contends that the rabbits; the information provided is Kemmerer Field Office contains a log of construction of power lines, fences, and ‘‘anecdotal’’ and/or speculative in 100 oil, gas, and other energy related roads results in direct sagebrush habitat nature, and not comprehensive. actions, and the Rock Springs Field loss, provides raptor perches that Therefore, we conclude that the petition Office contains a register of over 70 oil, facilitate predation, facilitates the has not presented substantial gas, coal, and other energy related spread of weeds, disrupts pygmy rabbit information that power lines, fences, actions (Committee for the High Desert dispersal corridors, and increases and roads in the sagebrush ecosystem et al. 2003). human access for recreational activities, are factors that may threaten the The petition contends that wind all of which impact pygmy rabbits and continued existence of the pygmy rabbit their habitat. Sagebrush habitat contains energy and geothermal energy throughout all or a significant portion of power lines, fences, and roads development threaten sagebrush their range. associated with urban and rural habitats and, therefore, pygmy rabbits in development, grazing, mining and Activities on Military Facilities Idaho and Nevada. The petition cites a energy development, and recreation. Military facilities occur within the proposed wind power project to be Power poles and fences can provide range of the pygmy rabbit. The petition located west of Salmon Falls Reservoir, hunting and roosting perches, and claims that impacts of military Idaho (Jarbidge BLM Environmental nesting support, for many raptor species operations could involve direct Assessment (EA) 2003, cited in that can prey upon pygmy rabbits. mortality to pygmy rabbits and cause Committee for the High Desert et al. These power lines and fences are often loss and degradation of sagebrush 2003). On adjacent BLM lands, along the accompanied by maintenance roads that habitats. The U.S Air Force (USAF) has Nevada/Idaho border, meteorlogical may serve as travel corridors for constructed roads and an electronic towers have been installed to determine predators, spread weeds, and offer training range site and other facilities in the feasibility of these areas for wind access for hunters and recreationists. Owyhee County, Idaho (USAF 1998, energy development. Both White and Power lines occur throughout occupied cited in Committee for the High Desert Bartels (2002) and Roberts (2003) found pygmy rabbit habitat, such as through et al. 2003). According to the petition, pygmy rabbit populations in this region. the Big Lost Valley and INEEL lands in one emitter site and access road is The petition cites a Battle Mountain Idaho (Committee for the High Desert et located less than 2.0 mi (3.2 km) from Geothermal environmental assessment al. 2003). occupied pygmy rabbit habitat reported (2002, cited in Committee for the High The petition also contends roads by Roberts (2003). These facilities Desert et al. 2003) which could disrupt the dispersal capabilities of increase pygmy rabbit habitat authorize geothermal leasing and pygmy rabbits, and it provides the degradation and fragmentation by exploration on 4.3 million (1.7 million following information to support this facilitating weed invasion and increased ha) of BLM lands in Nevada, including claim. Bradfield (1974) suggested that fire potential. Noise levels due to areas of occupied pygmy rabbit habitat. pygmy rabbits were reluctant to cross training exercises may also impact Nielsen et al. (2002) indicates open areas based on the lack of highway pygmy rabbits. geothermal development sites located in mortality (Gordon 1932, Sperry 1933, big sagebrush habitats in all western Smith 1943, cited in Bradfield 1974). Evaluation of Information in the Petition states in portions of pygmy rabbit Others (Weiss and Verts 1984; Roberts The petition does not provide habitat except in Wyoming. 2001) have reiterated this comment. substantial information that documents Evaluation of Information in the Petition Rauscher (1997) reported use of a the actual loss of pygmy rabbits and subnivian (layer between snow and soil their habitat by military activities, and While the petition provides some surface) tunnel that extended across a how this may threaten the survival of information regarding oil, gas, and coal back country road near Badger Pass, the species across its range. bed methane production in Wyoming, it Montana. Jones (1957) mentions a Recreational Activities does not present substantial information pygmy rabbit winter road kill in that this development has resulted in California north of Crowley Lake, Mono The petition contends that recreation, losses of large amounts of pygmy rabbit County. Rauscher (1997) found pygmy especially ORV/OHV and snowmobile habitat. Much of the information in the rabbits crossed relatively small open use, threatens pygmy rabbit and petition identifies potential impacts areas (1,500 ft (457 m)) to reach suitable sagebrush habitats by disturbing rather than actual impacts. And while habitat in Montana. Katzner and Parker individuals, damaging sagebrush, information in the petition indicates (1998) report a pygmy rabbit traveling damaging burrows or subnivian tunnels, that wind power and geothermal energy long distance (2.2 mi (3.5 km)) through increasing the spread of weeds, and development projects are occurring or open habitat likely unsuitable for long- increasing human presence and pets in planned in areas of pygmy rabbit term habitation. This suggests that the area. Much of the sagebrush habitat habitat, the petition does not present fragmented populations may not be as occupied by pygmy rabbits is open to substantial information to correlate this isolated as previously suggested and has recreational use. Bradfield (1974) development with reductions in pygmy implications for recolonization of suggested that the pygmy rabbit rabbit habitat that may affect their nearby areas. depends on its hearing for predator reproduction and survival throughout detection, and may be less active during all or a significant portion of their range. Evaluation of Information in the Petition windy periods when predator detection Therefore, we conclude that the petition The petition does not provide may be reduced. Thus, passing vehicle has not presented substantial substantial information that directly noise may make the pygmy rabbit more information that habitat degradation and relates the actual and potential impacts vulnerable to predation. The petition loss due to energy development may of power lines, fences, and roads to the cites a BLM document indicating that a threaten the continued existence of the significant loss of pygmy rabbits or their proposed OHV/ORV race in Idaho could
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29262 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
damage pygmy rabbit burrows (Jarbidge do not believe that substantial 1959; Jackman and Long 1965), there is Field Office BLM 2003, cited in information is available indicating that little documentation on the impacts to Committee for the High Desert et al. the present or threatened destruction, pygmy rabbits. Bacon et al. (1959) 2003). Austin (2002) found weed modification, or curtailment of habitat collected rabbits, mostly by organized infestation highest in areas of greatest or range may, either singularly or in drives of hunters who shot them, to disturbance, which included ORV use combination with other factors, rise to gather ectoparasitic (parasite on outer areas in his Idaho study areas. the level of a threat to the continued surface of an animal) information on existence of the species throughout all wild rabbits and rodents in eastern and Evaluation of Information in the Petition or a significant portion of the species’ central Washington between 1951 and As presented in the petition, the range. 1956. Of the 1,040 rabbits collected, information on recreational impacts is representing four species, only one was speculative. We conclude that the B. Overutilization for Commercial, a pygmy rabbit. It is unknown if the petition does not provide substantial Recreational, Scientific, or Educational single collection indicates pygmy information that describes how Purposes rabbits are less vulnerable to drives, or recreation activities threaten pygmy Hunting if numbers were reduced in that area at rabbits and their habitats. the time. The petition contends that pygmy Currently, only three (California, Habitat Manipulations for Other Species rabbit populations at low levels could Montana, and Nevada) of the eight Connelly et al. (2000) recommend be harmed due to hunting mortality and States where the pygmy rabbit occurs managing sagebrush canopy cover for research activities. The petition also allow hunting. For those States that sage grouse habitat at 10 to 25 percent notes the difficulty in distinguishing allow hunting of pygmy rabbits, the for brood-rearing, 15 to 25 percent for pygmy rabbits from other rabbit species, State Wildlife Boards of Commissioners breeding habitat and 10 to 30 percent for especially cottontails (Sylvilagus spp.) set hunting regulations yearly. In winter habitat. Pygmy rabbits, in (Garber and Beauchaine 1993), and California the hunting season extends general, prefer taller, denser sagebrush claims that this difficulty could lead to from July 1 to the last Sunday in January cover relative to the surrounding accidental shootings. The petition with a bag limit of 5 per day and 10 in landscape, which can be greater than contends that road networks associated possession (Pat Lauridson, California the 10 to 30 percent range (Green and with energy, pipeline, powerline, Department of Fish and Game, pers. Flinders 1980b; Weiss and Verts 1984) mining, and development provide travel comm. 2005). The 2004 pygmy rabbit suggested for various sage grouse corridors for hunters, increasing the hunting season in Nevada opened habitats. Reducing dense sagebrush likelihood of pygmy rabbit mortality. October 9 and closed February 28 with cover to benefit sage grouse may be in The following information from the a daily limit of 10 and a possession limit conflict with the needs of pygmy petition summarizes potential impacts of 20 (Sandy Canning, Nevada rabbits. to the species from hunting. Williams Department of Wildlife, pers. comm. (1986) stated that although hunting 2005). For Montana, information on Evaluation of Information in the Petition impacts were not known in California, hunting seasons is more limited. Based While we share a concern that large he thought that hunters probably did on the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks scale vegetation manipulations to not kill many because the species was webpage pygmy rabbits can be hunted benefit sage grouse may negatively quite secretive and rarely left dense year round and there is no bag limit. For impact pygmy rabbit habitat, the brush. Rauscher (1997) reported pygmy the three States that allow hunting of petition does not provide substantial rabbit hunting in southwestern this species, harvest data are collected information to document the magnitude Montana, but stated that hunting did not through hunter surveys but the various and extent of this concern for pygmy appear to be a significant mortality rabbit species are not distinguished rabbits throughout their range. factor. Fisher (1979) recommended that from one another so the number of bag limits be monitored in Idaho, Summary of Habitat Threats pygmy rabbits harvested in these States especially where habitat was declining, per year is not known. While a variety of anthropogenic because with the pygmy rabbit’s lower activities that affect sagebrush (e.g., reproductive potential as compared to Evaluation of Information in the Petition agriculture, grazing, mining) are other rabbits, fewer surplus animals The petition did not provide, nor are occurring across the range of the pygmy may be available to hunters. Pritchett et we aware of, any long-term historic or rabbit, the petition does not provide al. (1987) reported that, according to recent hunting data that would clarify substantial information that these locals near Loa, in Wayne County, Utah, past or current hunting pressure on the activities, either singly or in pygmy rabbits have been ‘‘extensively pygmy rabbit across its range. This combination with one another, are hunted’’ along with black-tailed includes a lack of information related to destroying or modifying pygmy rabbit jackrabbits (Lepus californicus) and poaching and accidental shootings. The habitat over all or a significant portion cottontails. Where he was able to access petition does not provide substantial of the species’ range. Also, with limited portions of his previous study area information indicating that hunting may exceptions, the petition fails to provide outside Cedar City, Utah, Janson (2002) threaten the continued existence of the scientific documentation to demonstrate found spent shotgun shells. He thought species across all or a significant portion that the areas where sagebrush habitat it was probable that some pygmy rabbits of its range. loss and degradation are occurring are were shot because most hunters do not also the areas where pygmy rabbit distinguish between pygmy rabbits and Research populations occur. Additionally, the cottontails. The petition presents the following petition does not provide substantial The petition also contends that information on the threat of research information to document what the shooting or poisoning likely caused activities to pygmy rabbits. Research effects of these anthropogenic changes pygmy rabbit population declines in the activities on the species that involve are on pygmy rabbit population past even though jackrabbits were trapping, handling, and holding them numbers across the range of the species. primarily taken. While we are aware for a period of time can result in Based on the preceding discussion, we that rabbit drives occurred (Bacon et al. mortality from exposure, injury, trap
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29263
predation, intraspecific fighting, and severe disease epidemics occurring in predation on some populations. capture stress (Wilde 1978; Gahr 1993; pygmy rabbits (68 FR 10388). Parasites However, the petition does not Rauscher 1997). Mortality rates reported and disease have not been regarded as adequately describe how the species’ for captured pygmy rabbits have been 3 a major threat to pygmy rabbits (Wilde continued survival over all or a percent (Gahr 1993), 5 percent (Wilde 1978; Green 1979, cited in 68 FR 10388). significant portion of its range is 1978), and 19 percent (Rauscher 1997). Gahr (1993) found bot flies only on threatened by disease and predation. Investigations may also involve digging pygmy rabbits located in the grazed area The information presented indicates out of burrows, stepping on burrows of her study, indicating that cattle may that these potential threats have not accidentally, measuring vegetation and act as a vector for spreading parasites been evaluated, and that further other site characteristics near burrows, and possibly disease. She only had two research is needed to determine actual and other general disturbance in the rabbits with bot flies. She commented impacts to pygmy rabbits. Thus the study area (Janson 1946; Bradfield 1974; that parasitism by bot flies is not petition does not provide substantial Green 1978; Wilde 1978; Gahr 1993; necessarily detrimental to the rabbit, information to indicate that disease or Katzner 1994; Gabler 1997; Rauscher and additional study is needed to predation may threaten pygmy rabbits 1997). Katzner (1994) reported that all of determine if cattle presence increases over all or a significant portion of its his radio-collared rabbits (10) died. He the incidence of ectoparasites for pygmy range. suggested the weight of the radiocollars, rabbits. Siegel (2002) and Austin (2002) D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory and increased grooming as a result of also expressed concern that disease Mechanisms their presence, may have increased a transport and transmission by domestic rabbits’ vulnerability to predation. livestock to pygmy rabbits could be a The petition contends that State and threat. Austin (2002) raised the concern Federal agencies have failed to conduct Evaluation of Information in the Petition that a calicivirus, such as Rabbit monitoring for the species in most of its While these actions can be of concern Hemorrhagic Disease, could explain range and to protect it from numerous for small populations such as in declines in pygmy rabbit populations direct and indirect impacts associated Washington (66 FR 59734, 68 FR and suggests additional research is with livestock grazing, prescribed and 10388), the petition did not adequately needed. Janson (2002) reported that no wild fires, energy exploration and describe how conducting research obviously diseased pygmy rabbits were development, vegetation manipulation, activities within pygmy rabbit habitats seen in his earlier work in the 1940s. He weed invasion, roads, and OHV/ORV may threaten the continued existence of thought it may be likely that disease proliferation (see Factor A). The petition the species. Therefore, we conclude that reduced pygmy rabbit populations contends that mechanisms to regulate the petition does not present substantial periodically when they reached high and control these various activities have information to indicate that conducting densities. failed to prevent harm to pygmy rabbit research activities within pygmy rabbit Predation is the main cause of pygmy habitat in a significant portion of its habitat threatens the existence of pygmy rabbit mortality (Wilde 1978; Green range. The petition cites the following rabbits throughout all of a significant 1979, cited in 68 FR 10388). As information to support these claims. portion of their range. discussed in the background section, A large portion of pygmy rabbit pygmy rabbits have numerous predators habitat occurs on BLM lands. BLM has C. Disease or Predation and have adapted to their presence designated the pygmy rabbit as a special The petition contends that disease (Janson 1946; Gashwiler et al. 1960; status species/bureau assessment likely poses a serious threat to Green 1978; Wilde 1978). The petition species in five of the seven States in remaining pygmy rabbit populations. A contends that habitats degraded by which it occurs (Idaho, Montana, lack of adequate food or an increase in grazing and its associated facilities, or Nevada, Oregon, and Wyoming). Special stress associated with altered sagebrush other actions can damage the structural status species management is discussed habitat throughout its range, could components of the sagebrush habitat as in BLM’s 6840 Manual, ‘‘Special Status increase the species’ susceptibility to well as increase or redistribute Species Management’’ (BLM 2001b). disease. It also states predation may not predators, thus increasing the pygmy This manual provides agency policy and represent a significant threat to rabbit’s vulnerability to predation. guidance for the conservation of special relatively large well-distributed Weiss and Verts (1984) thought that use status plants and animals and the populations, but may have an impact on of denser and taller sagebrush habitats ecosystems on which they depend, but small pygmy rabbit populations in by pygmy rabbits was related to it is not a regulatory document. degraded habitats. The petition also predator avoidance. Katzner (1994) Currently, there are no regulations mentions West Nile Virus as a growing documented that raptors were a cause of requiring BLM land use plans to address concern for all native wildlife including mortality and denser sagebrush cover the conservation needs of special status pygmy rabbits. The petition cites the deterred these avian predators. The species (BLM 2003). following information to support these petition also includes vertical According to the petition, the U.S. claims. structures, such as fences and Forest Service (USFS) does not include Pygmy rabbits can harbor high powerlines, as features providing raptor the pygmy rabbit as a Management parasite loads (Janson 1946; Wilde 1978; perches and possibly impacting pygmy Indicator Species in any of the States Gahr 1993; WDFW 1995; 66 FR 59734). rabbit populations, as discussed earlier. where the pygmy rabbit occurs These parasites include ticks, fleas, lice, Siegel (2002) suggested that artificial (Committee for the High Desert et al. and bot flies (Dice 1926; Janson 1946; livestock watering possibly increased 2003) on USFS lands. Pygmy rabbit Larrison 1967; Wilde 1978; Gahr 1993; coyote numbers in Washington. habitat also occurs on lands managed by Rauscher 1997), which can be vectors of other Federal agencies such as the disease. Reports of episodes of plague Evaluation of Information in the Petition Service and National Park Service. and tularemia from these vectors in Disease and predation may be Currently, hunting of pygmy rabbits is populations of other leporid species significant threat factors to small pygmy allowed in three of the eight States indicate they often spread rapidly and rabbit populations. Habitat degradation within the species’ range (Committee for can be fatal (Quan 1993, cited in 68 FR and fragmentation may increase the the High Desert et al. 2003). Hunting of 10388). There have been no reports of effects of disease, parasites, and pygmy rabbits is not allowed in Idaho
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29264 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
or Wyoming, where they are considered under environmental stress such as inhospitable lands (Austin 2002; White a species of special concern, or in Utah drought. The petition also contends and Bartels 2002; Roberts 2003). Habitat where they are considered a sensitive interspecific competition with other fragmentation can influence size, species. Hunting is also not allowed in herbivores for sagebrush such as stability, and success of pygmy rabbit Oregon, where the pygmy rabbit is jackrabbits (Wilde 1978), pronghorn, populations because of their low protected from take. In Montana, the and mule deer, could occur. Large dispersal capabilities (Katzner and pygmy rabbit is also considered a populations of jackrabbits from past Parker 1997). Bartels (2003) suggested species of concern, but there is no decades are likely gone, but as that pygmy rabbit distribution may be protection from take. According to the sagebrush is reduced across the range, more fragmented than previously petition, Wyoming is the only state that they may compete with pygmy rabbits at thought due to the limited availability of has a management plan for the pygmy lower population levels. Conde (1982) suitable habitat and their absence from rabbit (Committee for the High Desert et compared pygmy rabbit and black-tailed large areas of sagebrush. Bartels (2003) al. 2003). In Washington, the pygmy jackrabbit use in sagebrush-greasewood suggested other disturbances, such as rabbit was listed as threatened in 1990 habitat in Cassia County, Idaho. She habitat fragmentation, seeding after by the Washington Wildlife Commission found in summer that pygmy rabbits wildfires, improper range (Commission). In 1993, the Commission selected areas with abundant grass improvements, sagebrush removal, reclassified the species as endangered while jackrabbits selected areas with development, agriculture, sagebrush (WDFW 1995). A recovery plan for the abundant forbs. During the fall-winter diseases, and floods, are all contributing species was completed in 1995, and an period, shrubs played an important role factors. addendum to the plan was prepared in for both species, but pygmy rabbits fed The petition claims that because most 2001 (WDFW 1995, 2001). on sagebrush leaves and young stems of the remaining pygmy rabbit (Johnson 1979, cited in Conde 1982) and populations are small, they are Evaluation of Information in the Petition jackrabbits on 2-year old woody stems vulnerable to environmental and Based on the information in the (Currie and Goodwin 1966, cited in demographic stochasticity. Natural petition, the primary concern expressed Conde 1982). Spatial distribution and stochastic events can significantly by the petitioners regarding the exploitation of different vegetation in impact local populations if they result inadequacy of existing regulatory the summer allow a sympatric in high mortality, habitat loss, or little mechanisms is related to pygmy rabbit relationship to occur between these two or no possibility of recolonization. They habitat conservation. Sagebrush habitat species (Conde 1982). are most significant for small or degradation and loss, discussed under Siegel (2002) at Sagebrush Flat, fragmented populations. Small, isolated Factor A, is due mostly to human Washington, found cottontails inhabited populations are also at a greater risk to activities as opposed to natural events. burrows dug by pygmy rabbits, but it is the deleterious effects of demographic However, the petition does not provide unclear if cottontails were displacing and genetic problems (Schaffer 1981). substantial scientific information that pygmy rabbits. Cottontails may use The petition cites a concern with quantifies impacts to pygmy rabbit burrows after they are abandoned by flooding which may cause burrow habitat rangewide, or the level of pygmy rabbits, because 60 percent of the abandonment, mortality, and erosion of significance of these threats to pygmy burrows used by cottontails had not deep soils. Pygmy rabbits are known to rabbit populations. Thus, we conclude shown pygmy rabbit use on the date the use deeper soils found along drainages that the petition does not present burrow was last checked. Siegel (2002) for burrows (Flath and Rauscher 1995). substantial information to indicate that found pygmy rabbits reused burrows in Bartels and Hays (2001) state that pygmy rabbits are threatened by the summer that had been occupied by historic pygmy rabbit habitat was lost in inadequacy of existing regulatory cottontails the previous winter. Oregon and Idaho due to flooding. mechanisms across all or a significant Grazing competition with livestock White and Bartels (2002) reported that portion of its range. will depend on the range conditions and uncontrolled floods at the Sagebrush grazing practices that vary across the Flat site in Washington were a major E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors range of the pygmy rabbit. At Sagebrush reason for loss of individuals during Affecting the Species Continued Flat, Washington, Siegel (2002) 1996 to 1997. Bartels (2003) mentions a Existence determined that livestock grazing large flood event in pygmy rabbit habitat The petition contends that several seasonally reduced the quantity of in the Harney Basin, Oregon, in 1984. other factors, not discussed above, preferred vegetation by pygmy rabbits as Natural stochastic events have not been negatively impact pygmy rabbit well as reduced the nutritional quality reported as types of events that have populations. These include: intra- and of the forage. By spring, fewer played a significant role in population interspecific competition, habitat differences were noted, likely reflecting abundance and/or trends for the pygmy fragmentation, natural stochastic the new spring growth. Other impacts of rabbit range wide, nor did the petition (random) events such as floods and cattle grazing in pygmy rabbit habitat provide substantial scientific drought; mortality caused by collisions have been previously discussed under information that current pygmy rabbit with OHV/ORV, snowmobiles, and Factor A. In Montana, there is spatial populations are small or isolated. automobiles; and life history traits. The overlap between big game winter range, Because the pygmy rabbit is a habitat petitioners are also concerned that other sagebrush winter ranges, and the specialist, and its climax-type habitat is habitat manipulations taken to benefit range of pygmy rabbits. Hence, highly fragmented and occurs across the sage grouse may negatively impact interspecific competition may result landscape, the petition contends the pygmy rabbit. Lastly, the petition claims (Janson 2002). No substantial scientific species’ life history traits could affect that predator control to benefit livestock information regarding the effects of population viability. Pygmy rabbits have may have a negative impact on pygmy intra- and interspecific competition on small home ranges, are not evenly rabbits. pygmy rabbits has been provided. distributed across the species’ range, The petition suggests that because The petition identifies habitat and appear to have poor dispersal and pygmy rabbits are extreme habitat fragmentation as a threat to pygmy low reproduction capabilities. Pygmy specialists, intraspecific competition rabbits as it results in small, isolated rabbits do not respond to abundant among individuals may be exacerbated populations surrounded by vast areas of spring food supply by producing
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29265
additional litters like other rabbits Dated: May 12, 2005. • Mail: Comments should be sent to (Wilde 1978). These factors may explain Marshall P. Jones, Jr., Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional the slow recolonization of vacated Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. Administrator, National Marine habitat even under normal conditions [FR Doc. 05–10056 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Fisheries Service, One Blackburn Drive, (Heady et al. 2001). However, though BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside the pygmy rabbit is a habitat specialist, of the envelope: ‘‘Comments on Fr Adj the petition does not present substantial 1 to the Red Crab FMP.’’ • information on how the pygmy rabbit’s DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Fax: (978) 281–9135. natural history characteristics have Copies of supporting documents, limited the species across its range. National Oceanic and Atmospheric including the Environmental Lastly, the petition does not provide Administration Assessment (EA), Regulatory Impact supporting documentation that supports Review (RIR), and the Initial Regulatory the claim that predator control for 50 CFR Part 648 Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are livestock benefits increases predation on available from Paul J. Howard, pygmy rabbits. [Docket No. 050510127–5127–01; I.D. Executive Director, New England Based on the foregoing discussion, we 050305D] Fishery Management Council, 50 Water do not believe that the petition has RIN 0648–AS35 Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. presented substantial scientific The EA/RIR/IRFA is also accessible via information to indicate that natural or Fisheries of the Northeastern United the Internet at http:// manmade factors threaten the continued States; Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab www.nero.nmfs.gov. Fishery; Framework Adjustment 1 to existence of pygmy rabbits throughout FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E. the Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab all or a significant portion of the Martin Jaffe, Fishery Policy Analyst, Fishery Management Plan species’ range. (978) 281–9272. Finding AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and We have reviewed the petition and Background literature cited in the petition, and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), evaluated that information in relation to Commerce. The Red Crab FMP was implemented other pertinent literature and ACTION: Proposed rule; request for on October 21, 2002. Regulations information available in our files. After comments. implementing the Red Crab FMP require the New England Fishery Management this review and evaluation, we find the SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to petition does not present substantial Council (Council) to review annually implement Framework Adjustment 1 to the red crab specifications. The information to indicate that listing the the Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab (Red pygmy rabbit may be warranted at this Council’s Red Crab Plan Development Crab) Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Team (PDT) meets at least annually to time. Although we will not be This proposed rule would modify the commencing a status review in response review the status of the stock and the existing annual review and specification fishery. Based on this review, the PDT to this petition, we will continue to process to allow specifications to be set monitor the species’ population status reports to the Council’s Red Crab for up to a 3–year timeframe. The Committee any necessary adjustments to and trends, potential threats, and proposed action would allocate for ongoing management actions that might the management measures and fishing year (FY) 2006 and FY2007 the recommendations for the specifications. be important with regard to the current (FY2005) target total allowable conservation of the pygmy rabbit across Specifications may include the catch (TAC) and fleet days-at-sea (DAS) specification of optimum yield (OY), the its range. We encourage interested of 5.928 million lb (2.69 million kg) and parties to continue to gather data that setting of a target TAC, allocation of 780 fleet DAS, respectively. The DAS, and/or adjustments to trip/ will assist with the conservation of the primary purpose of this proposed action species. If you wish to provide possession limits. In developing the is to conserve and manage the red crab management measures and information regarding the pygmy rabbit, resource, reduce the staff resources you may submit your information or recommendations for the annual necessary to effectively manage this specifications, the PDT reviews the materials to the Field Supervisor, fishery by reducing the frequency with Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see following data, if available: Commercial which Stock Evaluation and Fishery catch data; current estimates of fishing ADDRESSES section above). Evaluation (SAFE) Reports, mortality and catch-per-unit-effort; References Cited specification packages, and rule-making stock status; recent estimates of A complete list of all references cited documents need to be prepared and recruitment; virtual population analysis herein is available, upon request, from processed, and provide consistency and results and other estimates of stock size; the Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see predictability to the industry. sea sampling, port sampling, and survey ADDRESSES section). DATES: Comments must be received (see data or, if sea sampling data are ADDRESSES) on or before 5 p.m., local unavailable, length frequency Author time, on June 20, 2005. information from port sampling and/or The primary author of this notice is ADDRESSES: Written comments on the surveys; impact of other fisheries on the Marcy Haworth, U.S. Fish and Wildlife proposed framework adjustment may be mortality of red crabs; and any other Service, Nevada Fish and Wildlife submitted by any of the following relevant information. The regulations Office (see ADDRESSES). methods: also require the Council to prepare a • E-mail: [email protected]. Include biennial SAFE Report. Recommended Authority in the subject line the following specifications are subsequently The authority for this action is section identifier: ‘‘Comments on Fr Adj 1 to the presented to the Council for adoption 4 of the Endangered Species Act of Red Crab FMP.’’ and recommendation to NMFS. 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et • Federal e-Rulemaking portal: This process has proven to be seq.). http://www.regulations.gov. administratively burdensome given that
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29266 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
the overall specifications have not direct social or economic impact on the maximum sustainable yield, while changed since the FMP was red crab fishery. All potential impacts harvesting the target TAC. Therefore, if implemented. on the resources associated with this DAS are adjusted, the level of red crab fishery would derive from the harvest would be expected to adjust Proposed Action additional level of risk to these accordingly, assuming a constant This action includes two basic resources that could occur if the harvest rate. For example, under the determinations by the Council. First, the specifications were set at too high a proposed alternative 780 DAS would be Council decided that the annual review level. If specifications were set too high, allocated compared to 741 DAS as and specification process should be then there could be a greater risk of considered under another of the modified (Decision 1). Second, since the overfishing. However, the annual review alternatives. If a constant harvest rate is Council elected to modify the annual required under the proposed action assumed, then the subject non-preferred review and specification process, it would reduce the risk of specifications alternative would result in an determined the proposed specifications being set at an inappropriate level. approximate 5 percent decrease in red for FY2006 and FY2007 (Decision 2). crab landings, relative to the proposed FY2006 and FY2007 Specifications Multi-year Specifications alternative. Therefore, the difference The proposed action would maintain, between the alternatives in terms of This proposed rule would establish for FY2006 and FY2007, the current biological impacts is very small. multi-year specifications. Three years (FY2005) TAC and fleet DAS of 5.928 In terms of the biological impacts on was identified as an appropriate length million lb (2.69 million kg) and 780 fleet other non-target species and the of time to reduce the administrative DAS, respectively. Because the fleet, ecosystem, based on analysis in the burden associated with an annual which is small and closely-managed, FMP/EIS, it is unlikely that any of the review cycle without increasing the risk has neither exceeded the TAC nor used alternatives in the EA/RIR/IRFA would of over-harvesting the red crab resource. all its allocated DAS since have an impact. There is very little The appropriate environmental and implementation of the FMP, its landings known about the interactions of the regulatory reviews required under the would not be expected to exceed deep-sea red crab with other species and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery predicted amounts. their associated communities. The FMP Conservation and Magnuson Act The Council previously decided to explains that initial reports from (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the National recommend maintaining the status quo industry members indicate that there is Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and specifications for FY2005, which very little, if any, bycatch of other other applicable laws would be maintained the same TAC and DAS species in the directed red crab fishery. completed during the year in which 3– allocation as implemented in FY2003 According to the recent SAFE Report year specifications are set. The Red Crab and FY2004. The impact of maintaining (October 2004), there are no records of PDT would accomplish an updated these specifications would not be observed red crab trips in the observer SAFE Report every 3 years, as well as expected to negatively impact the database, and the trips that are recorded recommend specifications for the resource in FY2006 and FY2007, in the Vessel Trip Report (VTR) following 3 fishing years, provided that provided there are no major unforeseen database have very little bycatch it continues to undertake an annual environmental changes that cause the information. The FMP did identify that evaluation of the red crab stock and red crab resource to dramatically the bycatch of red crab in other fisheries fishery status. The PDT would not decrease or increase. Further, the may be a more significant issue. Section evaluate other aspects of the fishery measures implemented under the FMP 3.1.2.1 of the SAFE Report describes the every year, but would concentrate on are expected to continue to protect the bycatch of red crab in other fisheries the most recent fishery-dependent resource from overexploitation and from the data available. There is some information including, but not limited maintain a sustainable fishery. Because anecdotal information that there may be to, DAS used and red crab landings. this action proposes to maintain the considerable bycatch of red crab in the More comprehensive analyses would be status quo, it would be expected to have offshore monkfish fishery, but there are conducted in the SAFE Report every 3 the same effect. not sufficient data to conclude that red years. The Council would retain the The only measure evaluated in this crab bycatch is a significant concern for flexibility to set specifications for less action that could vary from the impacts that fishery at this time. than 3 years based on new information already assessed in the FMP would be and/or recommendations from the PDT. DAS limits. The FMP describes that Classification Multi-year specifications would singularly, DAS allocation is unlikely to This proposed rule has been provide the industry with greater have any direct effects on the red crab determined to be not significant for regulatory consistency and resource. However, because there are purposes of Executive Order 12866. predictability and would simplify the only a certain number of vessels that The Council prepared an IRFA, as overall process by reducing the participate in the directed red crab required by section 603 of the frequency of Council decision-making fishery, the amount of red crab Regulatory Flexibility Act, which has and NMFS rulemaking. However, the harvested is constrained. Therefore, by been adopted by NMFS and that maximum 3–year specification process limiting the amount of time a red crab describes the economic impact this would not curtail the Council from vessel may harvest red crab, the DAS proposed rule, if adopted, would have setting specifications during the interim program is the principal fishing effort on small entities. A description of the years if information obtained during the control program. reasons why this action is being annual review indicates that the red Because the FMP is managed under a considered, and the objectives of and crab specifications warrant a change, target TAC, rather than a hard TAC, legal basis for this action are contained e.g., to comply fully with the Magnuson- there is no guarantee that the fishery at the beginning of this section in the Stevens Act. will not exceed the quota; however, the preamble. There are no new This action, which is primarily DAS management program recordkeeping or reporting requirements administrative in terms of the frequency implemented under the FMP was proposed in this rule. It would not with which specifications are set, would designed to manage the red crab duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any not be expected to have any substantial resource at a level that produces the other Federal rules. All of the affected
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29267
vessels are considered small entities lb/2.69 million kg) and fleet DAS processor has worked with the industry under the standards described by the allocation (780) as proposed under the and its clients to reduce costs. For Small Business Administration because FMP in FY2004 and FY2005. The non- example, it has developed a creative they have annual returns (revenues) that preferred alternative would continue the way to change the packing of red crab, do not exceed $3.5 million annually same TAC but would allocate a total which has reduced costs and enabled and, therefore, there are no fleet DAS allocation 5 percent less than the processor to pay the vessels disproportionate impacts between large the DAS allocation proposed for approximately 10 cents more per lb. and small entities. A summary of the FY2005. This allocation would be the analysis follows: same for FY2006 and FY2007. Industry reported that fishing costs As stated in the preamble, this action Therefore, under the non-preferred have increased during the past FY. Fuel- includes two basic decisions of the alternative, the DAS allocation for both and oil-based products are more Council. First, the Council determined fishing years would be 741. A complete expensive, and insurance rates have whether the annual review and description and discussion of the increased by about 50 percent. These specification process should be alternatives may be seen in Section 5.0 increases have been somewhat offset by modified (Decision 1), as opposed to the of the EA/RIR/IRFA. an increase in price paid for red crab. No Action alternative, which, if The continuing requirement that a The average price is about 10 cents per selected, would maintain the status quo vessel must declare its intent to lb higher this FY than in 2003. Vessel and require that specifications be set participate in the fishery 6 months prior owners reported that they are receiving annually. Since the Council elected to to the start of the next FY means that, about 94 cents per lb for red crab (whole modify the annual review and because of the small number of vessels and butchered product) versus specification process, it then decided to in the fishery, each vessel’s approximately 84 cents per lb during propose the specifications for FY2006 participation has a large impact on the FY2003. and FY2007 (Decision 2). appropriate number of DAS that the Decision 1 of the proposed action, fleet could utilize in catching the target It is not possible to quantify the net which deals primarily with the 3–year TAC. The advance knowledge and benefits of each of the alternatives, but review and specification cycle for the planning for efficient harvest have it is possible to determine the alternatives considered, has two economic benefits from harvesting to comparable net benefits of each of these options. Option 1 would not require an processing to marketing. two alternatives. The most important annual review of the status of the red Given the proposed action of 780 fleet issue with which to evaluate the crab resource and fishery, while Option DAS for FY2006 and FY2007, the alternatives is the number of DAS 2 (the proposed action) would require economic impacts would not be allocated to limited access vessels. The such review. expected to differ from those identified higher number of DAS of 780 Decision 1 of the proposed action in the FMP or from the FY2005 (Alternative 2.1) would allow the would not be expected to have a direct specifications. If one vessel continues to industry the potential to generate greater economic impact on the four active opt out of the fishery, as one did in economic benefits than the alternative vessels in the fishery and/or associated FY2004 and FY2005, the four remaining of 741 DAS (Alternative 2.3). businesses and port communities. vessels would receive more individual Multi-year specifications could DAS than originally allocated under the Costs are expected to continue to improve business planning for the red FMP. Therefore, the economic impacts increase in FY2006 and FY2007, as has crab industry. For example, vessel of this action would be expected to be been the pattern in the past. The owners and processors could plan better positive for the vessels declaring their industry has managed to adjust to when they know their minimum intent to remain in the fishery, assuming changing cost conditions in the past, individual DAS allocation several years they utilize the additional individual and adjustments are expected to in advance. The single red crab DAS awarded, as compared to the DAS continue. The close relationship processor involved in the red crab allocated to each vessel under the FMP. between the harvest sector and the industry explained that multi-year There would be no adverse impacts processing sector contributes to the specifications could improve its ability associated with a fleet allocation of 780 industry’s ability to adjust to changing to sell red crab. Because there is only DAS. Since the implementation of the price structures. Employment is not one processor in this fishery, if the TAC FMP, the fleet has not utilized its full expected to be affected by the and fleet DAS are specified for several allocation, so that no barriers have alternative selected. years, instead of only one, buyers could existed to prevent vessels from have more confidence in the supply of increasing their landings and revenue. The analysis in the IRFA indicates this product. Red crab vessels, in The potential exists for vessels to that there are no significant alternatives general, have lower crew turnover than increase their profitability over and considered that would increase in most other fisheries. The improved above that which existed under the economic benefits relative to the business planning that could occur FMP. proposed alternative in this proposed under multi-year specifications could Aside from the number of DAS that rule. This action is not expected to alter have indirect benefits to crew members each vessel would be allocated, there the fishing practices of the four vessels as well, offering more confidence in the are other recent developments that participating in the fishery. Thus, this future of the industry. could alter the efficiency of the action is not expected to have a Decision 2 of the proposed action, industry. During 2004, all vessels began significant economic impact on a which deals with the specifications for landing in Fall River, Massachusetts, substantial number of small entities. FY2006 and FY2007, originally and the processor reported that though identified three alternatives. Two of it is more convenient, overall costs are List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648 these essentially became the same probably the same. Generally, the Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and alternative so that the remaining two are processor sends one or two trucks to recordkeeping requirements. considered in the economic analysis. Fall River to pick up the red crab The preferred alternative would product after each trip. Since maintain the same TAC (5.928 million implementation of the FMP, the
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29268 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Dated: May 16, 2005. present to the Council recommended and specifications, the PDT will review Rebecca Lent, specifications for up to 3 fishing years. the following data, if available: Deputy Assistant Administrator for The PDT will meet at least once Commercial catch data; current Regulatory Programs, National Marine annually during the intervening years to estimates of fishing mortality and catch- Fisheries Service. review the status of the stock and the per-unit-effort (CPUE); stock status; For the reasons stated in the fishery. Based on such review, the PDT recent estimates of recruitment; virtual preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed will provide a brief report to the Council population analysis results and other to be amended as follows: on any changes or new information estimates of stock size; sea sampling, about the red crab stock and/or fishery, port sampling, and survey data or, if sea PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE and it will recommend whether the sampling data are unavailable, length NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES specifications for the upcoming years frequency information from port need to be modified. The annual review 1. The authority citation for part 648 sampling and/or surveys; impact of continues to read as follows: will be limited in scope and will concentrate on the most recent fishery- other fisheries on the mortality of red Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. dependent information including, but crabs; and any other relevant 2. Section 648.260 is amended by not limited to, days-at-sea (DAS) used information. revising the section heading and and red crab landings. In the event that paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b) (1) The Red Crab PDT, after its review the PDT recommends an adjustment to introductory text, and (b)(1) to read as of the available information on the follows: the specifications, the PDT will prepare status of the stock and the fishery, may a supplemental specifications package recommend to the Council any § 648.260 Specifications. for a specific time duration up to 3 measures necessary to assure that the (a) Process for setting specifications. years. Specifications include the specifications will not be exceeded, as The Council’s Red Crab Plan specification of OY, the setting of any well as changes to the appropriate Development Team (PDT) will prepare a target TACs, allocation of DAS, and/or specifications. Stock Evaluation and Assessment adjustments to trip/possession limits. * * * * * (SAFE) Report at least every 3 years. * * * * * Upon completion of, and based on, the (b) Development of specifications. In [FR Doc. 05–10130 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] SAFE Report, the PDT will develop and developing the management measures BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate jul<14>2003 15:24 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1 29269
Notices Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 97
Friday, May 20, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER to Docket No. 05–002–1, Regulatory the public for review and comment. We contains documents other than rules or Analysis and Development, PPD, will consider all comments that we proposed rules that are applicable to the APHIS, Station 3C71, 4700 River Road receive on or before the date listed public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. under the heading DATES at the committee meetings, agency decisions and Please state that your comment refers to beginning of this notice. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency Docket No. 05–002–1. The environmental assessment may statements of organization and functions are Reading Room: You may read any be viewed on the Internet on the examples of documents appearing in this comments that we receive on the EDOCKET Web site (see ADDRESSES section. environmental assessment in our above for instructions for accessing reading room. The reading room is EDOCKET) or on the APHIS Web site at located in room 1141 of the USDA http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/ DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE South Building, 14th Street and enviro_docs/index.html. You may Independence Avenue, SW., request paper copies of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Washington, DC. Normal reading room environmental assessment by calling or Service hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday writing to the person listed under FOR [Docket No. 05–002–1] through Friday, except holidays. To be FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please sure someone is there to help you, refer to the title of the environmental Interstate Movement of Garbage From please call (202) 690–2817 before assessment when requesting copies. The Hawaii; Availability of an coming. environmental assessment is also Environmental Assessment Other Information: You may view available for review in our reading room APHIS documents published in the (information on the location and hours AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Federal Register and related of the reading room is listed under the Inspection Service, USDA. information on the Internet at http:// heading ADDRESSES at the beginning of ACTION: Notice of availability and www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/ this notice). request for comments. webrepor.html. The environmental assessment has been prepared in accordance with: (1) SUMMARY: We are advising the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. The National Environmental Policy Act that the Animal and Plant Health Susan Dublinski, Import Specialist, of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. Inspection Service has prepared an Permits, Registrations, and Imports, 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the environmental assessment relative to a PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133, Council on Environmental Quality for request to allow the interstate Riverdale, MD 20737–1236; (301) 734– implementing the procedural provisions movement of garbage from Hawaii. The 8758. of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3) document contains a general assessment SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USDA regulations implementing NEPA of the potential environmental effects Background (7 CFR part 1), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA associated with moving garbage Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part interstate from Hawaii to the mainland The importation and interstate 372). United States subject to certain pest risk movement of garbage is regulated by the mitigation measures. The environmental Animal and Plant Health Inspection Done in Washington, DC, this 16th day of assessment documents our review and Service (APHIS) under 7 CFR 330.400 May 2005. analysis of environmental impacts and 9 CFR 94.5 (referred to below as the Kevin Shea, associated with, and alternatives to, the regulations) in order to protect against Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant proposed action. We are making this the introduction into and dissemination Health Inspection Service. environmental assessment available to within the United States of plant and [FR Doc. 05–10101 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] animal pests and diseases. the public for review and comment. BILLING CODE 3410–34–P APHIS is advising the public that we DATES: We will consider all comments have prepared an environmental that we receive on or before June 20, assessment relative to a request to allow DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 2005. the interstate movement of garbage from ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Hawaii to the mainland United States. Animal and Plant Health Inspection by either of the following methods: The environmental assessment, titled Service • EDOCKET: Go to http:// ‘‘Movement of Plastic-Baled Municipal www.epa.gov/feddocket to submit or Solid Waste from Hawaii to the [Docket No. 05–015–2] view public comments, access the index Continental United States (May 2005)’’ National Animal Identification System; listing of the contents of the official examines the potential environmental Draft Strategic Plan and Draft Program public docket, and to access those effects associated with moving garbage Standards documents in the public docket that are interstate from Hawaii to the continental available electronically. Once you have United States subject to certain pest risk AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health entered EDOCKET, click on the ‘‘View mitigation measures. The environmental Inspection Service, USDA. Open APHIS Dockets’’ link to locate this assessment documents our review and ACTION: Notice of availability; extension document. analysis of environmental impacts of comment period. • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: associated with, and alternatives to, the Please send four copies of your proposed action. We are making this SUMMARY: We are extending the comment (an original and three copies) environmental assessment available to comment period for our notice of
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29270 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
availability of a Draft Strategic Plan and comment and review. The Draft supporting information so that the a Draft Program Standards document for Strategic Plan describes the process of United States Department of Agriculture the National Animal Identification developing the NAIS, in particular the (USDA) can make the required System. This action will allow timeline for full implementation, while determination as to the area’s interested persons additional time to the Draft Program Standards document unemployment rate or sufficiency of prepare and submit comments. presents our current view of how the available jobs. This collection of DATES: We will consider all comments system would work when fully information is therefore necessary in that we receive on or before July 6, implemented. order to obtain waivers of the food 2005. The notice of availability also stamp time limit. included questions intended to solicit DATES: Written comments must be ADDRESSES: You may submit comments comments on various aspects of the two received on or before July 19, 2005. by either of the following methods: documents on which we were • EDOCKET: Go to http:// ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: particularly interested in receiving (a) Whether the proposed collection of www.epa.gov/feddocket to submit or feedback from the public. In the notice, view public comments, access the index information is necessary for the proper we solicited comments for 30 days, performance of the functions of the listing of the contents of the official ending June 6, 2005. public docket, and to access those agency, including whether the In this document, we are extending information shall have practical utility; documents in the public docket that are the comment period for Docket No. 05– available electronically. Once you have (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 015–1 for an additional 30 days, until of the burden of the proposed collection entered EDOCKET, click on the ‘‘View July 6, 2005. This action will allow Open APHIS Dockets’’ link to locate this of information including the validity of interested persons additional time to the methodology and assumptions used; document. prepare and submit comments. • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22, and clarity of the information to be Please send four copies of your 2.80, and 371.4. comment (an original and three copies) collected; (d) ways to minimize the to Docket No. 05–015–1, Regulatory Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of burden of the collection of information Analysis and Development, PPD, May 2005. on those who respond, including APHIS, Station 3C71, 4700 River Road Elizabeth E. Gaston, through the use of appropriate Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant automated, electronic, mechanical, or Please state that your comment refers to Health Inspection Service. other technological collection Docket No. 05–015–1. [FR Doc. 05–10102 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] techniques or other forms of information Reading Room: You may read any BILLING CODE 3410–34–P technology. Comments may be sent to comments that we receive on Docket Patrick Waldron, Chief, Certification No. 05–015–1 in our reading room. The Policy Branch, Program Development reading room is located in room 1141 of DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Division, Food and Nutrition Service, the USDA South Building, 14th Street U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 Food and Nutrition Service and Independence Avenue, SW., Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA Washington, DC. Normal reading room 22302. Comments may also be faxed to Agency Information Collection the attention of Mr. Waldron at (703) hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday Activities: Proposed Collection; through Friday, except holidays. To be 305–2486. The Internet address is: Comment Request; Waivers Under [email protected]. All sure someone is there to help you, Section 6(o) of the Food Stamp Act please call (202) 690–2817 before written comments will be open for coming. AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service. public inspection at the office of the Other Information: You may view ACTION: Notice. Food and Nutrition Service during APHIS documents published in the regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 Federal Register and related SUMMARY: In accordance with p.m., Monday through Friday) at 3101 information on the Internet at http:// Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia, www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/ notice invites the general public and 22302, Room 812. webrepor.html. other public agencies to comment on All responses to this notice will be proposed information collections. summarized and included in the request FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Section 6(o) of the Food Stamp Act of for OMB approval. All comments will Neil Hammerschmidt, Animal 1977, as amended by Section 824 of the be a matter of public record. Identification Officer, Eradication and Personal Responsibility and Work FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surveillance Team, National Center for Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Requests for additional information Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS, establishes a time limit for the receipt of should be directed to Mr. Waldron at 4700 River Road Unit 43, Riverdale, MD food stamp benefits for certain able- (703) 305–2495. 20737–1231; (301) 734–5571; or Dr. bodied adults who are not working. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: John F. Wiemers, National Animal provision authorizes the Secretary of Title: Waiver Guidance for Food Identification Staff, VS, APHIS, 2100 S. Agriculture, upon a State agency’s Stamp Time Limits. Lake Storey Road, Galesburg, IL 61401; request, to waive the provision for any OMB Number: 0584–0479. (309) 344–1942. group of individuals if the Secretary Form Number: N/A. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 6, determines ‘‘that the area in which the Expiration Date: 8/31/05. 2005, we published in the Federal individuals reside has an Type of Request: Revision of a Register (70 FR 23961–23963, Docket unemployment rate of over 10 percent, previously approved collection. No. 05–015–1) a notice advising the or does not have a sufficient number of Abstract: Section 824 of the Personal public that a Draft Strategic Plan and a jobs to provide employment for the Responsibility and Work Opportunity Draft Program Standards document for individuals.’’ As required in the statute, Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), the National Animal Identification in order to receive a waiver the State Pub. L. 104–193, 110 Stat. 2323 System (NAIS) were available for public agency must submit sufficient amended Section 6(o) of the Food
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29271
Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)) to Dated: May 13, 2005. Forest Web page at http://www.fs.fed.us/ establish a time limit for the receipt of Roberto Salazar, r9/cnnf/ click on ‘‘Natural Resources’’, food stamp benefits for certain able- Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. then ‘‘Fishbone Project’’. bodied adults who are not working. The [FR Doc. 05–10051 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: provision authorizes the Secretary of BILLING CODE 3410–30–P Purpose and Need for Action: The Agriculture, upon a State agency’s purpose and need for the project is to: request, to waive the provision for any (1) Restore forest health and improve group of individuals if the Secretary DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE the economic value in older, decadent, determines ‘‘that the area in which the and/or diseased oak and aspen stands individuals reside has an Forest Service by promoting younger growth, reducing unemployment rate of over 10 percent, competition, improving crown Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, condition, or increasing species or does not have a sufficient number of WS; Fishbone Project jobs to provide employment for the diversity, (2) Improve the vigor, health, individuals.’’ As required in the statute, AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. and future economic value of red pine in order to receive a waiver the State ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an plantations by reducing tree agency must submit sufficient environmental impact statement. competition, (3) Restore small, open supporting information so that USDA areas and ‘‘pocket barrens’’ as a can make the required determination as SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service, component of the overall landscape, (4) to the area’s unemployment rate or Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, Provide an efficient and safe road sufficiency of available jobs. This Washburn, Ranger District intends to system that meets the long term collection of information is therefore prepare an environmental impact transportation needs, and (5) Provide necessary in order to obtain waivers of statement (EIS) to disclose the timber to meet local and/or regional the food stamp time limit. During the environmental consequences of the demands for wood products. Proposed Action: The proposed last three years, the Food and Nutrition ‘‘Fishbone Project’’ vegetation project consists of approximately 5,200 Service (FNS) has received on average management proposal. In the EIS the acres of forest management activities. 48 requests for waivers from an average Forest Service will address the potential Briefly, the objectives of the proposal of 45 State agencies. Each request environmental impacts associated with are to maintain and enhance the forest submitted by a State agency to exempt timber harvest (including clearcut harvest with reserve trees, shelterwood, health and vigor of trees within the individuals residing in specified areas is project area while providing a variety of considered by FNS to be a separate and thinning), restoring small, open areas and ‘‘pocket barrens’’ as a wood products; and, to restore and request, since the requested exemptions improve various aspects of the may be based on different criteria, are component of the overall landscape, and providing a safe road system that meets terrestrial ecosystem and transportation submitted at different times, and require system. A brief summary of the separate analysis. Although State the long term transportation needs. The Fishbone Project Area is approximately proposed activities follows: (1) Clearcut agencies have submitted significantly (with reserve trees) 1,500 acres, (2) thin fewer multiple requests since the last 22,000 acres in size and is located approximately 6 miles east of Iron River, 2,100 acres, (3) shelterwood harvest time that this reporting burden was 1,600 acres, (4) maintain 50 acres of extended, in order to ensure that all Wisconsin. DATES: Comments concerning the scope wildlife openings by brushing and/or areas that potentially qualify for prescribed burning, (5) restore 200 acres exemptions are included in their waiver of the analysis should be received by June 15, 2005 to receive timely of ‘‘pocket barrens’’ by thinning and/or requests, State agencies are employing a prescribed burning (pocket barrens are more sophisticated analysis covering consideration in the preparation of the draft EIS. The draft environmental small areas of rare plant communities multiple timeframes and multi-county dominated by grass, low shrubs, small geographical and labor market areas, impact statement is expected by Janaury, 2006, and the final trees, and scatttered large trees), and (6) requiring more time for the preparation manage for an efficient road system. and evaluation of each request. In environmental impact statement is expected by April, 2006. Road activities would construct 6 miles addition, the number of State agencies of new permanent roads and 4 miles of ADDRESSES: requesting waivers has risen from an Send written comments to temporary roads to facilitate timber annual average of 40 to an annual the responsible official care of: Jennifer harvest. In addition, 35 miles of roads average of 45. Since these waivers must Maziasz, Project Leader; Chequamegon- that the Forest Service has determined be renewed on an annual basis and new Nicolet National Forest, Washburn is not needed for the long term ones may be submitted to reflect Ranger District; P.O. Box 578, management would be changing labor market conditions, FNS Washburn, WI 54891. Send electronic decommissioned. anticipates receipt of approximately the comments to: comments-eastern- Responsible Official: Anne Archie, same number of waiver requests every chequamegon-nicolet- Forest Supervisor; Chequamegon- year. [email protected]. See Nicolet National Forest, 1170 4th SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for Affected Public: State and local Avenue South, Park Falls, WI 54552. information on how to send electronic governments. Nature of Decision To Be Made: The comments. decision will be limited to answering Estimated Number of Respondents: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the following three questions based on 45. Jennifer Maziasz, Project Leader, the environmental analysis: (1) What Estimated Number of Responses: 48. Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, actions would be used to address the Estimated Number of Responses per Washburn Ranger District, USDA Forest purpose and need, (2) where and when Respondent: 1.1. Service; telephone: 715–373–2667. See these actions would occur, and (3) what address above under ADDRESSES. Copies mitigation measures and monitoring Estimated Time per Response: 35 of the documents may also be requested requirements will be required. hours. at the same address. Another means of Scoping Process: The Chequamegon- Estimated Total Burden: 1680 hours. obtaining the information is to visit the Nicolet National Forest plans to scope
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29272 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
for information by contacting persons action participate by the close of the 45 Nine Mile, Powell Mountain, Rough and organizations on the District’s day comment period so that substantive Creek, Whiskey Flat, and Wild Horse mailing list, by publishing a notice the comments and objections are made Allotments would continue to have local newspapers, and by posting flyers available to the Forest Service at a time authorized grazing. Squaw Creek at key locations within and nearby the when it can meaningfully consider them Allotment would continue to be vacant. Fishbone project area. No public and respond to them in the final DATES: Comments concerning the scope meetings are planned at this time. environmental impact statement. of the analysis must be received within Electronic Access to Information: To assist the Forest Service in 30 days from the date this notice is Information is available electronically identifying and considering issues and published in the Federal Register. The on the Forest Web page: http:// concerns on the proposed action, draft environmental impact statement is www.fs.fed.us/r9/cnnf/—click on comments on the draft environmental expected in September, 2005 and the ‘‘Natural Resources’’, then ‘‘Fishbone impact statement should be as specific final environmental impact statement is Project’’. Send electronic comments to: as possible. It is also helpful if expected in December, 2005. comments-eastern-chequamegon- comments refer to specific pages or [email protected]. When chapters of the draft statement. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to sending electronic comments, please Comments may also address the District Ranger, Bridgeport Ranger reference the Fishbone Project in the adequacy of the draft environmental District, HCR 1 Box 1000, Bridgeport, subject line. In addition, include your impact statement or the merits of the California 93517. name and address. alternatives formulated and discussed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comment Requested: This notice of the statement. Reviewers may wish to Dave Loomis, Project Manager, Carson intent initiates the scoping proces refer to the Council on Environmental Ranger District, 1536 S. Carson Street, which guides the development of the Quality Regulations for implementing Carson City, Nevada 89701. environmental impact statement. the procedural provisions of the Although comments are welcome National Environmental Policy Act at 40 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: throughout the analysis process, your CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. Purpose and Need for Action comments would be most useful if Comments received, including the received by June 15, 2005. Everyone names and addresses of those who There is a need to maintain or who provides comments will be comment, will be considered part of the improve the overall health of the periodically updated during the course public record on this proposal and will rangeland in the project area. The of the Fishbone Project regarding its be available for public inspection. purpose of this project is to determine development, as well as receive a copy the management direction for livestock of the Draft Environmental Impact (Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section grazing needed to move existing Statement in order to review the results 21) resource conditions within the project of our analysis. area towards desired conditions. Early Notice of Importance of Public Dated: May 10, 2005. Participation in Subsequent Anne F. Archie, Proposed Action Environmental Review: A draft Forest Supervisor, Chequamegon-Nicolet The Bridgeport Ranger District, environmental impact statement will be National Forest. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, is prepared for comment. The comment [FR Doc. 05–10078 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] proposing to authorize continued cattle period on the draft environmental BILLING CODE 3410–11–P grazing on the 410,000 acre Great Basin impact statement will be 45 days from South area under updated grazing the date the Environmental Protection management direction in order to move Agency publishes the notice of DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE existing rangeland resource conditions availability in the Federal Register. The Forest Service within the project area toward desired Forest Service believes, at this early condition. The updated direction will stage, it is important to give reviewers Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest; be incorporated in attendant grazing notice of several court rulings related to California and Nevada; Great Basin permits and allotment management public participation in the South Rangeland Project Analysis plans to guide grazing management environmental review process. First, within the project area during the reviewers of draft environmental impact AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. coming decade, or until amendments statements must structure their ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an are warranted based on changed participation in the environmental environmental impact statement. condition. review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the SUMMARY: The Bridgeport Ranger Possible Alternatives reviewer’s position and contentions. District, Humboldt-Toiyabe National In addition to the proposed action, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Forest will prepare an environmental two additional alternatives have been NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, impact statement (EIS) on a proposal to tentatively identified for analysis in the environmental objections that could be authorize continued livestock grazing EIS: raised at the draft environmental impact on National Forest System lands east of statement stage but that are not raised Bridgeport, California. The project area 1. No Action Alternative: Continue until after completion of the final is located in portions of Mineral and current grazing management. environmental impact statement may be Lyon counties, Nevada, and portions of 2. No Grazing Alternative: Do not waived or dismissed by the courts. City Mono County, California. The analysis issue new grazing permits when existing of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, will determine if a change in permits expire. 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin management direction for livestock Responsible Official Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. grazing is needed to move existing 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of resource conditions towards desired Forest Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe these court rulings, it is very important conditions. The Conway, East Walker, National Forest, 1200 Franklin Way, that those interested in this proposed Huntoon, Larkin Lake, Masonic, Aurora, Sparks, NV 89431.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29273
Nature of Decision To Be Made Also, environmental objections that DATES: The meeting will be held June Based on the environmental analysis could be raised at the draft 27–29, 2005. in the EIS, the Forest Supervisor will environmental impact statement stage, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at decide whether or not to continue but that are not raised until after the Hyatt Regency Hotel, 330 Tijeras, grazing on the allotments within the completion of the final environmental NW., Albuquerque, NM 87102. Great Basin South Project area in impact statement, may be waived or Individuals who wish to speak at the accordance with the standards in the dismissed by the courts (City of Angoon meeting or to propose agenda items proposed action or as modified by v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 [9th Cir. must send their names and proposals to additional mitigation measures and 1986] and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Suzanne M. del Villar, Executive monitoring requirements. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 [E.D. Assistant, National Urban and Wis. 1980]). Because of these court Community Forestry Advisory Council, Scoping Process rulings, it is very important that those P.O. Box 1003, Sugarloaf, CA 92386– The Forest Service will mail interested in this proposed action 1003. Individuals may fax their names information to interested parties. Public participate by the close of the 45 day and proposed agenda items to (909) involvement will be ongoing throughout comment period so that substantive 585–9527. the analysis process and at certain times comments and objections are made FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: public input will be specifically available to the Forest Service at a time Suzanne M. del Villar, Urban and requested. There are currently no when it can meaningfully consider them Community Forestry Staff, (909) 585– scoping meetings planned. and respond to them in the final 9268. environmental impact statement. Preliminary Issues To assist the Forest Service in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The The following are some potential identifying and considering issues and meeting is open to the public. Council issues identified through internal Forest concerns on the proposed action, discussion is limited to Forest Service Service scoping based on our experience comments on the draft environmental staff and Council members; however, with similar projects. The list is not impact statement should be as specific persons who wish to bring urban and considered all-inclusive, but should be as possible. It is also helpful if community forestry matters to the viewed as a starting point. We are comments refer to specific pages or attention of the Council may file written asking you to help us further refine the chapters of the draft statement. statements with the Council staff before issues and identify other issues or Comments may also address the or after the meeting. Public input concerns relevant to the proposed adequacy of the draft environmental sessions will be provided. project. impact statement, or the merits of the • Dated: May 10, 2005. Continued livestock grazing has the alternatives formulated and discussed in Robin L. Thompson, potential to adversely affect the health the statement. Reviewers may wish to Associate Deputy Chief, State and Private of riparian vegetation. refer to the Council on Environmental Forestry. • Continued livestock grazing has the Quality Regulations for implementing [FR Doc. 05–10084 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] potential to adversely affect the health the procedural provisions of the of rangeland vegetation. BILLING CODE 3410–11–P • National Environmental Policy Act at 40 Continued livestock grazing has the CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. potential to adversely affect sage grouse Comments received, including the DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE habitat. names and addresses of those who Comment Requested comment, will be considered part of the Forest Service public record on this proposal and will This notice of intent initiates the be available for public inspection. Trinity County Resource Advisory scoping process which guides the Committee development of the environmental (Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; impact statement. Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 21) Early Notice of Importance of Public ACTION: Notice of meeting. Participation in Subsequent Dated: May 12, 2005. Environmental Review: A draft Randall M. Sharp, SUMMARY: The Trinity County Resource environmental impact statement will be Natural Resources Staff Officer. Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet at prepared for comment. The comment [FR Doc. 05–9878 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] the Trinity County Office of Education period on the draft environmental BILLING CODE 3410–11–P in Weaverville, California, June 13, impact statement will be 45 days from 2005. The purpose of this meeting is to the date the Environmental Protection discuss proposed projects under Title II Agency publishes the notice of DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE of the Secure Rural Schools and availability in the Federal Register. Community Self-Determination Act of The Forest Service believes, that at Forest Service 2000. this early stage, it is important to give DATES: June 13, 2005. reviewers notice of several court rulings National Urban and Community related to public participation in the Forestry Advisory Council ADDRESSES: Trinity County Office of environmental review process. First, Education, 201 Memorial Drive, AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Weaverville, California. reviewers of draft environmental impact ACTION: Notice of meeting. statements must structure their FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: participation in the environmental SUMMARY: The National Urban and Michael R. Odle, Assistant Public review of the proposal so that it is Community Forestry Advisory Council Affairs Officer and RAC Coordinator. meaningful and alerts an agency to the will meet in Albuquerque, New Mexico, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reviewer’s position and contentions June 27–29, 2005. The purpose of the meeting is open to the pubic. Public (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. meeting is to discuss emerging issues in input sessions will be provided and v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 [1978]). urban and community forestry. individuals will have the opportunity to
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29274 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
address the Trinity County Resource than the small organizations that will substantial number of small entities. Advisory Committee. furnish the services to the Government. The major factors considered for this Dated: May 16, 2005. 2. If approved, the action will result certification were: in authorizing small entities to furnish 1. If approved, the action may result J. Sharon Heywood, the services to the Government. in additional reporting, recordkeeping Forest Supervisor. 3. There are no known regulatory or other compliance requirements for [FR Doc. 05–10077 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] alternatives which would accomplish small entities. BILLING CODE 3410–11–M the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- 2. If approved, the action may result O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in in authorizing small entities to furnish connection with the services proposed the products to the Government. COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM for addition to the Procurement List. 3. There are no known regulatory PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR Comments on this certification are alternatives which would accomplish SEVERELY DISABLED invited. Commenters should identify the the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- statement(s) underlying the certification O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in Procurement List; Proposed Additions on which they are providing additional connection with the products proposed and Deletions information. for deletion from the Procurement List. AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From End of Certification End of Certification People Who Are Blind or Severely The following services are proposed The following products are proposed Disabled. for addition to Procurement List for for deletion from the Procurement List: ACTION: Proposed additions to and production by the nonprofit agencies deletions from procurement list. listed: Products Belt, Automobile, Safety NSN: 2540–00–894– SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing Services 1273—Belt, Automobile, Safety to add to the Procurement List services Service Type/Location: Custodial Services NSN: 2540–00–894–1275—Belt, to be furnished by nonprofit agencies Automobile, Safety (At the following locations), Desert NSN: 2540–00–894–1276—Belt, employing persons who are blind or Chemical Depot, Utah, Tooele Army Automobile, Safety have other severe disabilities, and to Depot, Tooele, Utah. NSN: 2540–00–894–1274—Belt, delete products previously furnished by NPA: Pioneer Adult Rehabilitation Center Automobile, Safety such agencies. Davis County School District, Clearfield, NPA: Arizona Industries for the Blind, Utah. Comments Must Be Received On Or Phoenix, Arizona. Contracting Activity: U.S. Army Field Before: June 19, 2005. Contracting Activity: Defense Supply Center Support Command, Rock Island, Illinois. ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase Columbus, Columbus, Ohio. From People Who Are Blind or Severely Service Type/Location: Custodial Services, Tray, Desk Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, William R. Burke Courthouse, Third NSN: 7520–00–232–6828—Tray, Desk. Street and Lufkin Avenue, Lufkin, Texas. 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, NPA: Opportunity Workshop of Lexington, NPA: Burke Center, Inc., Lufkin, Texas. Inc., Lexington, Kentucky. Arlington, Virginia, 22202–3259. Contracting Activity: GSA, Public Buildings Contracting Activity: GSA/Office Supplies & FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT Service, Central Area—7PCD, Dallas, Paper Products Acquisition Center New COMMENTS CONTACT: Sheryl D. Kennerly, Texas. York, NY. Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: Service Type/Location: Document Sheryl D. Kennerly, (703)603–0655, or e-mail Destruction, Department of Agriculture, [email protected]. Farm Service Agency, 6501 Beacon Director, Information Management. Drive, Kansas City, Missouri. [FR Doc. E5–2531 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This NPA: Independence and Blue Springs BILLING CODE 6353–01–P notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C Industries, Inc., Independence, Missouri. 47(a) (2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its purpose Contracting Activity: Department of is to provide interested persons an Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM opportunity to submit comments on the Kansas City, Missouri. PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR proposed actions. Service Type/Location: Mail Delivery SEVERELY DISABLED Services (At the following locations at Additions Fort Hood, Texas), Procurement List; Additions and If the Committee approves the 11 Army Secure Operating Systems, Deletions proposed additions, the entities of the Building 22019, 22019 53rd Street, 712 Army Secure Operating Systems, AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From Federal Government identified in this Building 22020, 22020 53rd Street, notice for each product or service will People Who are Blind or Severely 9 Army Secure Operating Systems & 3 WS, Disabled. be required to procure the services Building 90042, 90042 Clarke Road, listed below from nonprofit agencies Dormitory, Building 91220, Headquarters ACTION: Additions to and Deletions from employing persons who are blind or Avenue, Room C104, Procurement List. have other severe disabilities. III Corps Building, 1001 761st Tank Battalion Avenue, Fort Hood, Texas. SUMMARY: This action adds to the Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification NPA: Professional Contract Services, Inc., Procurement List a product and services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies I certify that the following action will Austin, Texas. Contracting Activity: 2nd Contracting employing persons who are blind or not have a significant impact on a Squadron/LGC, Barksdale AFB, have other severe disabilities, and substantial number of small entities. Louisiana. deletes from the Procurement List The major factors considered for this services previously furnished by such certification were: Deletions 1. If approved, the action will not agencies. result in any additional reporting, Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification DATES: Effective Date: June 19, 2005. recordkeeping or other compliance I certify that the following action will ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase requirements for small entities other not have a significant impact on a From People Who Are Blind or Severely
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29275
Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 51–2.4(a)(1). This regulation provides two businesses (less than one percent 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, that a proposed addition to the each). Even when the impact of earlier Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259. Procurement List must demonstrate a Procurement List additions on one of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT potential to generate employment for the businesses (the commenter), and COMMENTS CONTACT: Sheryl D. Kennerly, people with severe disabilities. The that company’s long history as a Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703) requirement is stated in this way supplier of the vegetable oil to USDA is 603–0655, or e-mail because until a nonprofit agency considered, as provided in the [email protected]. actually produces a product in response Committee’s impact assessment to Government orders, it is impossible regulation, at 41 CFR 51–2.4(a)(4), the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to know with certainty how much labor impact on any of the contractors USDA Additions the production will create, to say identified to the Committee did not rise nothing of which individuals will to the level which the Committee On December 10, 2004, February 4, perform the labor. In addition, the considers to constitute severe adverse and March 25, 2005, the Committee for Committee only requires a nonprofit impact. Purchase From People Who Are Blind agency to indicate the quantity of direct The commenter provided several or Severely Disabled published notice labor estimated to be created, not the scenarios under which it claimed (69 FR 71777/78, 70 FR 5963, and individuals who will provide it or their impact on various suppliers could be 15288) of proposed additions to the current employment status. The greater, depending on the types of liquid Procurement List. nonprofit agency involved in this oil which the designated nonprofit After consideration of the material proposed addition has provided that provided in its one-gallon bottles, and presented to it concerning capability of information concerning the amount of on possible variations in USDA’s qualified nonprofit agencies to provide labor that will be created. The nonprofit contract awards for the part of the the products and services and impact of agency also indicated that this labor domestic vegetable oil not covered by the additions on the current or most includes both new and current the Procurement List. However, the recent contractors, the Committee has employees. commenter provided no factual support determined that the products and In both current and earlier comments, for these speculations, which involve services listed below are suitable for the commenter has taken issue with the actions by USDA which are not within procurement by the Federal Government Committee’s practice of adding a the Committee’s ability to predict or under 41 U.S.C. 46–48c and 41 CFR 51– percentage of the U.S. Department of control by its addition process. 2.4. Agriculture (USDA)’s overall The commenter also claimed other The following comments pertain to requirement for vegetable oil for impacts on its business, including plant Vegetable Oil (Domestic) 10% of USDA domestic programs to the Procurement closures, based on earlier comments Requirement: List. The commenter noted that the reacting to the initial projected addition, Comments were received from one of various types and package sizes are which was four times the size of the the current contractors for this vegetable provided by different contractors. As a Procurement List addition the oil. The commenter also provided result, the commenter claimed, the fact Committee eventually proposed. The comments on an earlier version of this that the designated nonprofit agency response from the other small business proposed addition to the Procurement will be providing the ten percent of the to the Committee’s request for sales data List, notice of which appeared in the overall USDA domestic requirement by also based its impact claims on this December 10, 2004 Federal Register (69 providing liquid vegetable oil in one- larger addition plan. The Committee FR 71777), and on an earlier gallon bottles will have a larger impact believes that reduction of the proposed unpublished version of the proposed on contractors providing vegetable oil in addition to its current level will prevent addition. The commenter in its most this same manner than the percentage any severe impacts from occurring, as recent comments asked the Committee would seem to indicate. Specifically, indicated in the above paragraph on for Purchase From People Who Are the commenter claimed that this impact calculation. Blind or Severely Disabled to consider Procurement List addition represents Finally, the commenter claimed that all of these previous comments to the about thirteen percent of the the proposed addition would harm extent they remain applicable. The requirement for this oil and package USDA’s domestic feeding programs, as Committee considered these earlier type, and that it is provided by three the ‘‘contracting premium’’ associated comments as they were intended, and small businesses. with the Committee’s program would reduced or clarified the quantities being The Committee begins its assessment limit the amount of food USDA could proposed for addition to the of impact on contractors affected by provide with its current budget. Procurement List at the two stages of the potential Procurement List additions by However, USDA has informed the addition process to which the earlier sending a certified letter to each Committee that it supports the proposed comments applied. contractor requesting sales data, and addition to the Procurement List of ten The commenter claimed in its most stating that if the contractor does not percent of its requirement for vegetable recent comments that this proposed reply, the Committee will consider the oil for domestic programs. addition does not meet the Committee’s lack of a reply as an indication the The following material pertains to all regulatory requirement that a contractor does not consider the impact of the items being added to the Procurement List addition create of the potential addition to be severe. Procurement List. employment for people with severe For this proposed addition to the disabilities because the Committee has Procurement List, the Committee wrote Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification not demonstrated that jobs will be to several current contractors, including I certify that the following action will created for people who are not currently the three small businesses identified by not have a significant impact on a employed, as opposed to additional the commenter. Two of these businesses substantial number of small entities. hours for the current work force. responded and provided sales data. This The major factors considered for this However, this claim does not accurately information showed that the value of certification were: reflect the Committee’s regulatory the proposed addition represents a very 1. The action will not result in any requirement, which appears at 41 CFR small percentage of the sales of these additional reporting, recordkeeping or
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29276 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
other compliance requirements for small (70 FR 15288) of proposed deletions to 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), entities other than the small the Procurement List. the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the organizations that will furnish the After consideration of the relevant Board) adopts the following Order: product and services to the Government. matter presented, the Committee has Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones Act 2. The action will result in determined that the services listed provides for ‘‘* * * the establishment authorizing small entities to furnish the below are no longer suitable for * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of product and services to the Government. procurement by the Federal Government entry of the United States, to expedite 3. There are no known regulatory under 41 U.S.C. 46–48c and 41 CFR 51– alternatives which would accomplish 2.4. and encourage foreign commerce, and the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- for other purposes,’’ and authorizes the Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant to connection with the product and I certify that the following action will qualified corporations the privilege of services proposed for addition to the not have a significant impact on a establishing foreign-trade zones in or Procurement List. substantial number of small entities. adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry; The major factors considered for this End of Certification Whereas, the Board’s regulations (15 certification were: CFR Part 400) provide for the Accordingly, the following product 1. The action may result in additional establishment of special-purpose and services are added to the reporting, recordkeeping or other subzones when existing zone facilities Procurement List: compliance requirements for small cannot serve the specific use involved, entities. Product and when the activity results in a 2. The action may result in significant public benefit and is in the Vegetable Oil (Domestic) 10% of USDA authorizing small entities to furnish the public interest; Requirement services to the Government. NSN: 8945–00–NSH–0002—Vegetable Oil 3. There are no known regulatory Whereas, the New London Foreign (Domestic) 10% of USDA Requirement alternatives which would accomplish Trade Zone Commission, grantee of NPA: Advocacy and Resources Corporation, the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- Foreign-Trade Zone 208, has made Cookeville, Tennessee application to the Board for authority to Contracting Activity: USDA, Farm Service O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in Agency, Washington, DC connection with the services deleted establish a special-purpose subzone at from the Procurement List. the manufacturing facilities of Pfizer, Services: Inc., located in Groton, Connecticut End of Certification Service Type/Location: Custodial Services, (FTZ Docket 45–2004, filed 10/20/2004); Transportation Security Administration, Accordingly, the following services Whereas, notice inviting public Pittsburgh International Airport, are deleted from the Procurement List: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. comment was given in the Federal NPA: ARC—Allegheny, Pittsburgh, Services Register (69 FR 64434, 10/26/2004); Pennsylvania. Service Type/Location: Janitorial/Custodial, and, Contracting Activity: GSA, PBS—Pittsburgh, U.S. Army Reserve Center, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Whereas, the Board adopts the 4200 Michaud Boulevard, New Orleans, findings and recommendations of the Service Type/Location: Custodial Services, Louisiana. Williams Gateway Airport, 6416 examiner’s report, and finds that the NPA: Goodworks, Inc., New Orleans, requirements of the FTZ Act and the Sossamon Road, Mesa, Arizona. Louisiana. NPA: Goodwill Community Services, Inc., Contracting Activity: Department of the Board’s regulations are satisfied, and Phoenix, Arizona. Army. that approval of the application is in the Contracting Activity: Department of Service Type/Location: Mailroom Operation, public interest; Homeland Security, Indianapolis, New Orleans Strategic Petroleum Indiana. Now, therefore, the Board hereby Reserve (SPR) Site, New Orleans, Service Type/Location: Dormitory grants authority for subzone status for Louisiana. activity related to pharmaceutical/ Management Services, Department of NPA: Goodworks, Inc., New Orleans, Homeland Security, Federal Law Louisiana. animal health products at the Enforcement Training Center (Artesia Contracting Activity: DnyMcDermott manufacturing facilities of Pfizer, Inc., Facility), 1300 W. Richey , Building 25, Petroleum Operation Company— located in Groton, Connecticut (Subzone Artesia, New Mexico. Department of Energy. 208A), at the location described in the NPA: Adelante Development Center, Inc., application, and subject to the FTZ Act Albuquerque, New Mexico. Sheryl D. Kennerly, Contracting Activity: Department of Director, Information Management. and the Board’s regulations, including § 400.28. Homeland Security (FLETC), Artesia, [FR Doc. E5–2542 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] New Mexico. BILLING CODE 6353–01–P Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of Service Type/Location: Janitorial/Custodial, May, 2005. Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, 700 Joseph A. Spetrini, Maritime Street, Oakland, California. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for NPA: The Independent Way, Oakland, Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, California. Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board. Contracting Activity: Department of ATTEST: Homeland Security, Indianapolis, [Order No. 1391] Indiana. Dennis Puccinelli, Grant of Authority for Subzone Status, Executive Secretary. Deletions Pfizer, Inc. (Pharmaceuticals/Animal [FR Doc. 05–10030 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Health Products), Groton, CT On March 25, 2005, the Committee for BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Purchase From People Who Are Blind Pursuant to its authority under the or Severely Disabled published notice Foreign-Trade Zones Act, of June 18,
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29277
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Board) adopts the following Order: Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board Whereas, the Greater Baton Rouge [Order No. 1390] Port Commission, grantee of Foreign- [Docket 20–2005] Trade Zone (FTZ) 154, submitted an Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 22, application to the Board for authority to Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone, Fargo, Chicago, IL, Area expand FTZ 154 to include a site (120 North Dakota; Application and Pubic Hearing Pursuant to its authority under the acres) within the 155-acre St. Martin Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, Parish Industrial Park located near St. An application has been submitted to 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), Martinville, Louisiana (Site 5), adjacent the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the to the Baton Rouge Customs port of Board) by the Municipal Airport Board) adopts the following Order: entry (FTZ Docket 29–2004; filed 7/28/ Authority of the City of Fargo, North Whereas, the Illinois International 04); Whereas, notice inviting public Dakota, to establish a general-purpose Port District, grantee of Foreign-Trade comment was given in the Federal foreign-trade zone at sites in Fargo, Zone 22, submitted an application to the Register (69 FR 47865, 8/6/04) and the North Dakota, within and adjacent to Board for authority to expand FTZ 22 to application has been processed the Fargo, North Dakota, Customs port include a site (317 acres, Site 6) within pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s of entry. The application was submitted the 371-acre Rock Run Business Park regulations; and, pursuant to the provisions of the FTZ located in Joliet (Will County), Illinois, Act, as amended, (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), Whereas, the Board adopts the and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR within the Chicago Customs port of findings and recommendations of the entry (FTZ Docket 32–2004; filed part 400). It was formally filed on May examiner’s report, and addendum 11, 2005. The applicant is authorized to 8/5/04); report, and finds that the requirements Whereas, notice inviting public make the proposal under Chapter 103, of the FTZ Act and Board’s regulations Section 83 of the North Dakota Century comment was given in the Federal would be satisfied, and that the Register (69 FR 48842, 8/11/04), and the Code. proposal would be in the public The proposed zone would consist of application has been processed interest; pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s 6 sites covering 1,026 acres in the Fargo, regulations; and, Now, therefore, the Board hereby North Dakota, area: Site 1—270 acres Whereas, the Board adopts the orders: within the 1,546-acre Airport, Science findings and recommendations of the and Technology Complex, Hector The application to expand FTZ 154 to International Airport, 2801 32nd examiner’s report, and finds that the include a site (designated as FTZ 154— requirements of the FTZ Act and Avenue, Fargo; Site 2—392 acres within Site 5) is approved, subject to the Act the 1,074-acre Midtown Industrial Board’s regulations are satisfied, and and the Board’s regulations, including that the proposal is in the public Complex, 3301 1st Avenue, Fargo; Site Section 400.28, and subject to the 3—222 acres within the 395-acre West interest; conditions and restrictions listed below: Now, therefore, the Board hereby Fargo Industrial Complex, 1262 Main orders: 1. The approval for FTZ 154—Site 5 Avenue, Fargo; Site 4—27 acres within The application to expand FTZ 22 is is for an initial period of five years (to the 31-acre Heartland Industrial approved, subject to the Act and the April 30, 2010) subject to extension Complex, 310 Industrial Boulevard, Board’s regulations, including Section upon review. Casselton; Site 5 (100 acres)—Mapleton 400.28, and further subject to the 2. The applicant is required to submit Industrial Complex, intersection of 164th Avenue Southeast and Karl Olson Board’s standard 2,000-acre activation annually special reports on Street, Fargo; and, Site 6 (15 acres)— limit for the overall zone project. developments at FTZ 154—Site 5, Swanson Industrial Complex, 4055 40th including information relating to Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of Avenue South, Fargo. The sites are May, 2005. changes in the site status or plans, owned by a number of public and Joseph A. Spetrini, changes in ownership, new activity private corporations. Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for under zone procedures, and other The application indicates a need for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, relevant information as directed by the zone services in the Fargo, North Foreign-Trade Zones Board. FTZ Board’s Executive Secretary. Dakota, area. Several firms have ATTEST: 3. The site will be subject to special indicated an interest in using zone Dennis Puccinelli, monitoring visits by the FTZ staff. procedures for warehousing/distribution Executive Secretary. 4. Activation at the general-purpose activities for such products as medical [FR Doc. 05–10031 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] zone project overall is subject to the products, automotive components, and production equipment. Specific BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Board’s standard 2,000-acre limit. manufacturing requests are not being Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of sought at this time. Requests would be DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE May, 2005. made to the Board on a case-by-case Joseph A. Spetrini, basis. Foreign-Trade Zones Board Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for In accordance with the Board’s regulations, a member of the FTZ staff [Order No. 1389] Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board. has been designated examiner to Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 154, ATTEST: investigate the application and report to Baton Rouge, LA, Area the Board. Dennis Puccinelli, As part of the investigation, the Pursuant to its authority under the Executive Secretary. Commerce examiner will hold a public Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, [FR Doc. 05–10029 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] hearing on June 14, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P at the Fargo Municipal Airport
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29278 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Authority Board Room, 2801 32nd Commerce (the Department) published SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Avenue North, Fargo, North Dakota in the Federal Register the preliminary (the Department) received no comments 58102. results of the administrative review of in response to its preliminary Public comment on the application is the antidumping duty order on certain determination that Jindal Poly Films invited from interested parties. cased pencils from the People’s Limited (Jindal Poly Films) is the Submissions (original and 3 copies) Republic of China. See Certain Cased successor–in-interest to Jindal Polyester shall be addressed to the Board’s Pencils from the People’s Republic of Limited (Jindal Polyester). In these final Executive Secretary at one of the China; Preliminary Results of results of review, we have continued to following locations: Antidumping Duty Administrative find Jindal Poly Films to be the 1. Submissions via Express/Package Review and Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 successor–in-interest to Jindal Polyester. Delivery Services: Foreign-Trade Zones FR 2115 (January 12, 2005). Pursuant to EFFECTIVE DATE: May 20, 2005. Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of Franklin Court Building-Suite 4100W, 1930, as amended (the Act), the final FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1099—14th Street, NW., Washington, results are currently due on May 12, Jeffrey Pedersen or Kavita Mohan, AD/ DC 20005; or 2005. CVD Operations, Office 4, Import 2. Submissions via the U.S. Postal Administration, International Trade Service: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Extension of Time Limit for Final Administration, U.S. Department of U.S. Department of Commerce, FCB— Results Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Suite 4100W, 1401 Constitution Avenue Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Trade Act Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; NW., Washington, DC 20230. as amended (the Act) provides that the telephone (202) 482–2769 and (202) The closing period for their receipt is Department may extend the time limit 482–3542, respectively. July 19, 2005. Rebuttal comments in for completion of the final results of an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: response to material submitted during administrative review to a maximum of the foregoing period may be submitted 180 days if it determines that it is not Background during the subsequent 15-day period (to practicable to complete the final results On April 22, 2005, the Department August 3, 2005). within the statutory time limit of 120 published a notice of preliminary A copy of the application and days from the date on which the results of its changed circumstances accompanying exhibits will be available preliminary results were published. The review of the antidumping duty order for public inspection at the Office of Department has determined that, due to on polyethylene terephthalate film, Foreign-Trade Zones Board’s Executive the complexity of the issues arising from sheet and strip (PET film) from India in Secretary at the first address listed the calculation of surrogate values, it is which it preliminarily determined that above, and at the Hector Airport not practicable to complete this review Jindal Poly Films is the successor–in- Passenger Terminal Administration within the time limits mandated by interest to Jindal Polyester. See Notice Office, 2801 32nd Avenue North, Fargo, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and of Preliminary Results of Antidumping North Dakota 58102. section 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1) of the Duty Changed Circumstances Review: Department’s regulations. Therefore, the Dated: May 11, 2005. Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet Department is extending the time limit Dennis Puccinelli, and Strip from India 70 FR 20863 (April for the completion of these final results Executive Secretary. 22, 2005) (Preliminary Results). We until no later than July 11, 2005, which [FR Doc. 05–10028 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] invited interested parties to comment on is 180 days from the date on which the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P these findings. On April 19, 2005, and notice of the preliminary results was April 20, 2005, Jindal Poly Films and published. petitioners,1 respectively, submitted This notice is published in DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE letters in which they notified the accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of Department that they would not file the Act and section 19 CFR International Trade Administration comments on the Preliminary Results. 351.213(h)(2) of the Department’s [A–570–827] regulations. Scope of the Order Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Dated: May 12, 2005. The products covered by this order the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Barbara E. Tillman, are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or Administrative Review: Certain Cased Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import primed PET film, whether extruded or Pencils from the People’s Republic of Administration. coextruded. Excluded are metallized China [FR Doc. E5–2560 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] films and other finished films that have AGENCY: Import Administration, BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S had at least one of their surfaces International Trade Administration, modified by the application of a Department of Commerce. performance–enhancing resinous or DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 EFFECTIVE DATE: May 20, 2005. inches thick. Imports of PET film are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul International Trade Administration classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Stolz or Erin Begnal, AD/CVD [A–533–824] Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) Operations, Office 8, Import under item number 3920.62.00. HTSUS Administration, International Trade Notice of Final Results of Antidumping subheadings are provided for Administration, U.S. Department of Duty Changed Circumstances Review: convenience and customs purposes. The Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet written description of the scope of this Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; and Strip from India order is dispositive. telephone: (202) 482–4474 and (202) 482–1442, respectively. AGENCY: Import Administration, 1 The petitioners are Dupont Teijin Films, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On International Trade Administration, Mitsubishi Polyester Film of America, and Toray January 12, 2005, the Department of Department of Commerce. Plastics (America), Inc.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29279
Final Results of Changed ADDRESSES: U.S. Department of ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place Circumstances Review Commerce, Room 4832, 1401 at the Doubletree Hotel and Executive Given that we received no comments Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, Meeting Center, 1750 Rockville Pike, from interested parties on the DC 20230. This program will be Rockville, Maryland. physically accessible to people with Preliminary Results, and for the reasons Agenda stated in the Preliminary Results, we disabilities. Requests for sign language find Jindal Poly Films to be the interpretation or other auxiliary aids —Welcome and Overview successor–in-interest to Jindal Polyester should be submitted no later than May 16, 2005, to J. Marc Chittum, President’s —Customer Relations Management for antidumping duty cash deposit (CRM) Work Project purposes. We will instruct U.S. Customs Export Council, Room 4043, and Border Protection to suspend Washington, DC 20230 (telephone: 202– —Briefing on Supervisory Controls and shipments of subject merchandise made 482–1124). Seating is limited and will Data Acquisition (SCADA) be on a first come, first served basis. by Jindal Poly Films, entered, or —Role of the Chief Privacy Officer withdrawn from warehouse, for Attendees must RSVP prior to the meeting for security reasons. —National Information Assurance consumption on or after the date of Credentialing Strategy publication of the final results of this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. changed circumstances review at Jindal Marc Chittum, President’s Export —Policy Framework for Privacy and Polyester’s antidumping duty cash Council, Room 4043, Washington, DC Security deposit rate. See Granular 20230 (phone: 202–482–1124), or visit —Briefing on Security Line of Business Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy; the PEC Web site, http:// Initiative Final Results of Antidumping Duty www.ita.doc.gov/td/pec. —Agenda Development for September Changed Circumstances Review, 68 FR Dated: May 16, 2005. 2005 ISPAB Meeting 25327 (May 12, 2003). This deposit rate J. Marc Chittum, —Wrap-Up shall remain in effect until publication Staff Director and Executive Secretary, of the final results of the next President’s Export Council. Note that agenda items may change antidumping duty administrative review [FR Doc. 05–10169 Filed 5–17–05; 4:12 pm] without notice because of possible in which Jindal Poly Films participates. BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P unexpected schedule conflicts of We are issuing and publishing this presenters. determination and notice in accordance Public Participation: The Board with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and agenda will include a period of time, section 351.216(e) of the Department’s National Institute of Standards and not to exceed thirty minutes, for oral regulations. Technology comments and questions from the Dated: May 12, 2005. public. Each speaker will be limited to Announcing a Meeting of the five minutes. Members of the public Joseph A. Spetrini, Information Security and Privacy who are interested in speaking are asked Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Advisory Board Administration. to contact the Board Secretariat at the telephone number indicated below. In [FR Doc. E5–2523 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] AGENCY: National Institute of Standards addition, written statements are invited BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S and Technology. and may be submitted to the Board at ACTION: Notice of meeting. any time. Written statements should be DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal directed to the ISPAB Secretariat, Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., Information Technology Laboratory, 100 International Trade Administration notice is hereby given that the Bureau Drive, Stop 8930, National Information Security and Privacy Institute of Standards and Technology, President’s Export Council: Meeting of Gaithersburg, MD 20899–8930. It would the President’s Export Council Advisory Board (ISPAB) will meet Tuesday, June 7, 2005, from 8:30 a.m. be appreciated if 35 copies of written AGENCY: International Trade until 5 p.m., Wednesday, June 8, 2005, material were submitted for distribution Administration, U.S. Department of from 8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m., and to the Board and attendees no later than Commerce. Thursday, June 9, 2005, from 8:30 a.m. June 3, 2005. Approximately 15 seats ACTION: Notice of an open meeting. until 12 p.m. All sessions will be open will be available for the public and to the public. The Advisory Board was media. SUMMARY: The President’s Export established by the Computer Security Council (PEC) will hold a full Council Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100–235) and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. meeting to discuss topics related to amended by the Federal Information Joan Hash, Board Secretariat, export expansion. The meeting will Security Management Act of 2002 (Pub. Information Technology Laboratory, include discussion of trade priorities L. 107–347) to advise the Secretary of National Institute of Standards and and initiatives, PEC subcommittee Commerce and the Director of NIST on Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop activity and proposed letters of security and privacy issues pertaining to 8930, Gaithersburg, MD 20899–8930, recommendation. The PEC was federal computer systems. Details telephone: (301) 975–3357. regarding the Board’s activities are established on December 20, 1973, and Dated: May 16, 2005. reconstituted May 4, 1979, to advise the available at http://csrc.nist.gov/ispab/. Richard F. Kayser, President on matters relating to U.S. DATES: The meeting will be held on June trade. It was most recently renewed by 7, 2005, from 8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m., Acting Deputy Director. Executive Order 13316. June 8, 2005, from 8:30 a.m. until 5 [FR Doc. 05–10097 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] DATES: May 25, 2005. p.m., and June 9, 2005, from 8:30 a.m. BILLING CODE 3510–CN–P Time: 10 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. (e.d.t.). until 12 p.m.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29280 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE to Ralph Cantral, Chief, National Policy DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE and Evaluation Division, Office of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ocean and Coastal Resource National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Management, NOS/NOAA, 1305 East- Administration West Highway, 10th Floor, Silver Evaluation of State Coastal Damage Assessment and Restoration Spring, Maryland 20910. When the Management Programs and National Program; Indirect Cost Rates (2003 FY) Estuarine Research Reserves evaluation is completed, OCRM will place a notice in the Federal Register AGENCY: National Oceanic and AGENCY: National Oceanic and announcing the availability of the Final Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Evaluation Findings. Commerce. ACTION: Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Notice is hereby given of the Notice of Indirect Cost Rates for the Damage Assessment and Restoration Management, National Ocean Service, availability of the final evaluation Commerce. Program for Fiscal Year 2003. findings for the Virgin Islands Coastal ACTION: Notice of Intent to Evaluate and Management Program (CMP); and the SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Notice of Availability of Final Findings. South Slough (Oregon) and Guana- Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) SUMMARY: The NOAA Office of Ocean Tolomato-Matanzas (Florida) National Damage Assessment and Restoration and Coastal Resource Management Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs). Program (DARP) is announcing new (OCRM) announces its intent to evaluate Sections 312 and 315 of the Coastal indirect cost rates on the recovery of the performance of the Pennsylvania Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), indirect costs for its component Coastal Management Program. as amended, require a continuing organizations involved in natural The Coastal Zone Management review of the performance of coastal resource damage assessment and Program evaluation will be conducted states with respect to approval of CMPs restoration activities for fiscal year (FY) pursuant to section 312 of the Coastal and the operation and management of 2003. The indirect cost rates for this Zone Management Act of 1972, as NERRs. fiscal year and dates of implementation amended, (CZMA) and regulations at 15 are provided in this notice. More The territory of the Virgin Islands was information on these rates and the CFR Part 923, Subpart L. found to be implementing and enforcing The CZMA requires continuing DARP policy can be found at the DARP its federally approved coastal Web site at: www.darp.noaa.gov. review of the performance of states with management program, addressing the respect to coastal program FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: national coastal management objectives Brian Julius at 301–713–3038, ext. 199, implementation. Evaluation of Coastal identified in CZMA Section 303(2)(A)– Zone Management Programs requires by fax at 301–713–4387, or e-mail at (K), and adhering to the programmatic [email protected]. findings concerning the extent to which terms of its financial assistance awards. a state has met the national objectives, South Slough (Oregon) and Guana- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The adhered to its Coastal Management Tolomato-Matanzas (Florida) NERRs mission of the DARP is to restore Program document approved by the were found to be adhering to natural resource injuries caused by Secretary of Commerce, and adhered to releases of hazardous substances or oil programmatic requirements of the NERR the terms of financial assistance awards under the Comprehensive System. funded under the CZMA. Environmental Response, The evaluation will include a site Copies of these final evaluation Compensation, and Liability Act visit, consideration of public comments, findings may be obtained upon written (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), the and consultations with interested request from: Ralph Cantral, Chief, Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) (33 Federal, state and local agencies and National Policy and Evaluation U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), and support members of the public. A public Division, Office of Ocean and Coastal restoration of physical injuries to meeting will be held as part of the site Resource Management, NOS/NOAA, National Marine Sanctuary resources visit. 1305 East-West Highway, 10th Floor, under the National Marine Sanctuaries Notice is hereby given of the date of Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, or Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.). the site visit for the listed evaluation, [email protected], (301) 713– The DARP consists of three component and the date, local time, and location of 3155, extension 118. organizations: The Damage Assessment the public meeting during the site visit. Center (DAC) within the National Ocean The Pennsylvania Coastal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Service; the Restoration Center within Management Program evaluation site Ralph Cantral, Chief, National Policy the National Marine Fisheries Service; visit will be held July 11–15, 2005. One and Evaluation Division, Office of and the Office of the General Counsel public meeting will be held during the Ocean and Coastal Resource for Natural Resources (GCNR). The week. The public meeting will be held Management, NOS/NOAA, 1305 East- DARP conducts Natural Resource on Wednesday, July 13, 2005, at 7 p.m. West Highway, 10th Floor, Silver Damage Assessments (NRDAs) as a basis at the Philadelphia Water Works, 640 Spring, Maryland 20910, (301) 713– for recovering damages from responsible Water Works Drive, Philadelphia, 3155, extension 118. parties, and uses the funds recovered to Pennsylvania. Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog 11.419 restore injured natural resources. Copies of a state’s most recent Coastal Zone Management Program Consistent with Federal accounting performance reports, as well as OCRM’s Administration. requirements, the DARP is required to notification and supplemental request account for and report the full costs of Dated: May 13, 2005. letters to the state, are available upon its programs and activities. Further, the request from OCRM. Written comments Eldon Hout, DARP is authorized by law to recover from interested parties regarding this Director, Office of Ocean and Coastal reasonable costs of damage assessment Program are encouraged and will be Resource Management. and restoration activities under accepted until 15 days after the public [FR Doc. 05–10161 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] CERCLA, OPA, and the NMSA. Within meeting. Please direct written comments BILLING CODE 3510–08–P the constraints of these legal provisions
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29281
and their regulatory applications, the indirect rates for FY 2002 was published Dated: May 16, 2005. DARP has the discretion to develop on October 6, 2003 (68 FR 57672). Mitchell Luxenberg, indirect cost rates for its component Cotton’s reports on the FY 2002 DARP Acting Director, Management and Budget, organizations and formulate policies on indirect rates can also be found on the National Ocean Service, National Oceanic the recovery of indirect cost rates DARP Web site at: http:// and Atmospheric Administration. subject to its requirements. www.darp.noaa.gov. [FR Doc. 05–10162 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] The DARP’s Indirect Cost Effort Cotton reaffirmed that the Direct BILLING CODE 3510–JE–P In December 1998, the DARP hired Labor Cost Base is the most appropriate the public accounting firm Rubino & indirect allocation method for the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE McGeehin, Chartered (R&M), to: development of the FY 2003 indirect Evaluate the cost accounting system and cost rates. National Oceanic and Atmospheric allocation practices; recommend the Administration appropriate indirect cost allocation The DARP’s Indirect Cost Rates and [I.D. 051305D] methodology; and determine the Policies indirect cost rates for the three The DARP will apply the indirect cost Endangered and Threatened Species; organizations that comprise the DARP. rates for FY 2003 as recommended by Take of Anadromous Fish A Federal Register notice on R&M’s Cotton for each of the DARP component effort, their assessment of the DARP’s AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries organizations as provided in the cost accounting system and practice, Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and following table: and their determination regarding the AtmosphericAdministration, most appropriate indirect cost Commerce. FY 2003 methodology and rates for FYs 1993 indirect ACTION: Notice of availability of decision through 1999 was published on DARP component organization rate and analysis documents for incidental December 7, 2000 (65 FR 76611). The (percent) take permit. notice and report by R&M can also be found on the DARP Web site at: Damage Assessment Center SUMMARY: This notice advises the public http://www.darp.noaa.gov. (DAC) ...... 261.96 that an incidental take permit to the R&M continued its assessment of Restoration Center (RC) ...... 223.74 Idaho Department of Fish and Game DARP’s indirect cost rate system and General Counsel for Natural Re- (IDFG), pursuant to the Endangered structure for FYs 2000 and 2001. A sources (GCNR) ...... 206.47 Species Act of 1973 (ESA), has been second federal notice specifying the issued and that the decision documents DARP indirect rates for FYs 2000 and These rates are based on the Direct are available upon request. 2001 was published on December 2, Labor Cost Base allocation methodology. DATES: Permit 1481 was issued on 2002 (67 FR 71537). March 30, 2005, subject to certain In October 2002, DARP hired the The FY 2003 rates will be applied to all damage assessment and restoration conditions set forth therein. The permit accounting firm of Cotton and Company expires on May 31, 2010. LLP (Cotton) to review and certify DARP case costs incurred between October 1, ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the costs incurred on cases for purposes of 2003 and September 30, 2004. DARP decision documents or any of the other cost recovery and to develop indirect will use the FY 2003 indirect cost rates associated documents should be rates for FY 2002 and subsequent years. for future fiscal years until subsequent directed to the Salmon Recovery As in the prior years, Cotton concluded year-specific rates can be developed. Division, National Marine Fisheries that the cost accounting system and For cases that have settled and for Service, 10095 W. Emerald, Boise, Idaho allocation practices of the DARP cost claims paid prior to the effective 83704. The documents are also available component organizations are consistent date of the fiscal year in question, the on the Internet at www.nwr.noaa.gov. with Federal accounting requirements. DARP will not re-open any resolved Consistent with R&M’s previous FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: matters for the purpose of applying the analyses, Cotton also determined that Herb Pollard, Boise, Idaho, at phone revised rates in this policy for these the most appropriate indirect allocation number: (208) 378–5614, e-mail: method continues to be the Direct Labor fiscal years. For cases not settled and [email protected]. cost claims not paid prior to the Cost Base for all three DARP component SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This effective date of the fiscal year in organizations. The Direct Labor Cost notice is relevant to the following question, costs will be recalculated Base is computed by allocating total species and evolutionarily significant indirect cost over the sum of direct labor using the revised rates in this policy for units (ESUs): dollars plus the application of NOAA’s these fiscal years. Where a responsible Spring/summer chinook salmon leave surcharge and benefits rates to party has agreed to pay costs using (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): direct labor. Direct labor costs for previous year’s indirect rates, but has threatened Snake River; contractors from the Oak Ridge Institute not yet made the payment because the Fall chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus for Science and Education (ORISE) also settlement documents are not finalized, tshawytscha): threatened Snake River; were included in the direct labor base the costs will not be recalculated. Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus because Cotton determined that these The DARP indirect cost rate policies nerka): endangered Snake River; and costs have the same relationship to the and procedures published in the Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): indirect cost pool as NOAA direct labor Federal Register on December 7, 2000 threatened Snake River. costs. ORISE provides on-site support to (65 FR 76611), on December 2, 2002 (67 Permits the DARP in the areas of injury FR 71537), and October 6, 2003 (68 FR assessment, natural resource economics, Permit 1481 was issued to IDFG on 57672) remain in effect except as restoration planning and March 31, 2005. Permit 1481 authorizes updated by this notice. implementation, and policy analysis. A IDFG annual incidental take of naturally third federal notice specifying the DARP produced and artificially propagated
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29282 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
ESA-listed anadromous fish associated DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus with the operation of recreational tshawytscha): threatened Snake River fisheries that target non-listed, hatchery- National Oceanic and Atmospheric (SR) fall. origin anadromous fish and resident Administration Steelhead (O. mykiss): threatened SR. game fish species. Permit 1481 expires Scientific research and enhancement May 31, 2010. [I.D. 051305E] permits are issued in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. Permit 1481 authorizes IDFG’s Endangered and Threatened Species; 1531 et seq.) and regulations governing recreational fishing programs, including Take of Anadromous Fish listed fish and wildlife permits (50 CFR the following activities: (1) Resident 222–226). NMFS issues permits based recreational fishing in waters that also AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries on findings that such permits: (1) are support ESA-listed chinook and sockeye Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and applied for in good faith; (2) if granted salmon under the IDFG General Fishing Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and exercised, would not operate to the Regulations, including kokanee and Commerce. disadvantage of the listed species that trout fisheries in Redfish, Alturas, and ACTION: Application for a scientific are the subject of the permit; and (3) are Pettit Lakes; (2) chinook salmon research/enhancement permit. consistent with the purposes and policy recreational fishing in the Clearwater of section 2 of the ESA. The authority River, Snake River, Salmon River, Little SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that to take listed species is subject to Salmon River, and South Fork Salmon NMFS has received a scientific research conditions set forth in the permit. River under the IDFG Anadromous and enhancement permit application Anyone requesting a hearing on an Salmon Fishing Regulations; and (3) relating to Pacific salmon. Permit 1530 application listed in this notice should summer steelhead fishing during the fall would be issued jointly to the set out the specific reasons why a and spring seasons under the IDFG Washington Department of Fish and hearing on that application would be Steelhead Fishing Regulations. The Wildlife, Nez Perce Tribe through the appropriate (see ADDRESSES). The Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Idaho permit constitutes authorization for holding of such a hearing is at the Department of Fish and Game implementation of the IDFG General discretion of the Assistant (Applicants) to operate the adult fish Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA. Fishing Regulations, the IDFG trap at Lower Granite Dam. The Anadromous Salmon Fishing proposed actions are intended to Applications Received Regulations, and the IDFG Steelhead increase knowledge of species listed Permit 1530 Fishing Regulations. Recreational under the Endangered Species Act fisheries are monitored in a manner that (ESA) and to help guide management The Applicants are requesting a 5– allows evaluation of the effectiveness of and conservation efforts. It is also year permit to take SR fall chinook protective regulations and conservation intended to facilitate collection of salmon and SR steelhead during the strategies. broodstock to supply an artificial course of operating an adult fish trap at Lower Granite Dam on the Columbia NMFS’ conditions in the permit will propagation program designed to enhance the propagation and survival of River. ensure that the take of ESA-listed The proposed action is designed to threatened Snake River fall chinook anadromous fish will not jeopardize the address two purposes. The trapping salmon. continued existence of the listed activity is intended to capture a random species. In issuing the permits, NMFS DATES: Comments or requests for a sample of Snake River fall chinook determined that IDFG’s Conservation public hearing on the application must salmon and collect the necessary Plan provides adequate mitigation be received at the appropriate address or biological data and observations to measures to avoid, minimize, or fax number (see ADDRESSES) no later statistically generate a ‘‘run compensate for take of ESA-listed than 5 p.m. Pacific daylight time on reconstruction’’, or description of anadromous fish. June 20, 2005. composition of the entire fall chinook Issuance of this permit, as required by ADDRESSES: Written comments on the salmon migration, as it passes Lower the ESA, was based on a finding that the application should be sent to Salmon Granite Dam, according to age, sex, and permit: (1) was applied for in good faith; Recovery Division, NMFS, 10095 W. origin (hatchery or natural). The second (2) will not operate to the disadvantage Emerald, Boise, ID 83704. Comments purpose is to collect additional adult fall chinook salmon for broodstock of the listed species which are the may be submitted by e-mail. The needed to support enhancement actions subject of the permit; and (3) is mailbox address for providing e-mail comments is [email protected]. at Lyons Ferry Hatchery and Nez Perce consistent with the purposes and Tribal Hatchery. Incidental to the policies set forth in section 2 of the Include in the subject line of the e-mail comment the following identifier: primary purposes, the program will help ESA. This permit was issued in managers simultaneously monitor accordance with, and is subject to, 50 Comments on trapping at Lower Granite Dam. Comments may also be submitted several ongoing activities in the basin CFR part 222, the NMFS regulations via facsimile (fax) to (208) 378–5614. (e.g., natural production of listed governing listed species permits. species and the operation of the Federal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Columbia River hydropower system) as Dated: May 17, 2005. Herb Pollard, Boise, Idaho, at phone well as stray rates and population health Phil Williams, number: (208) 378–5614, e-mail: for the two listed species. Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office [email protected]. To achieve its purposes, the project of Protected Resources, National Marine SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fisheries Service. includes four objectives: First, to capture SR fall chinook salmon so that [FR Doc. 05–10128 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Species Covered in This Notice they may be used for mitigation, BILLING CODE 3510–22–S The following listed species and compensation, and natural production. evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) Second, to remove hatchery-origin fall are covered in this notice: chinook originating from projects other
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29283
than those in the Snake River Basin so meets the requirements of section 10(a) fishery ecosystems; and review the that they do not spawn in the Snake of the ESA and Federal regulations. The project’s role in the development of an River above Lower Granite Dam. Third, final permit decisions will not be made ecosystem based approach to fisheries to facilitate research efforts including until after the end of the 30–day management. The SSC will also review the capture of fish to measure the comment period. NMFS will publish the findings of a workshop by ecosystem relative reproductive success of notice of its final action in the Federal scientists that was held in February on hatchery fish being used for natural Register. ecosystem-based decision support tools supplementation and thereby monitor Dated: May 17, 2005. for fisheries management. They will the success of that program. Fourth, to Phil Williams, review a NMFS report titled Strategies monitor the status of steelhead for Incorporating Ecosystem populations in the Snake River basin. Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office Fish species will benefit in several of Protected Resources, National Marine Considerations in Fisheries Fisheries Service. ways: by providing broodstock for Management and review an interim Lyons Ferry Hatchery and Nez Perce [FR Doc. 05–10129 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] report of an ad hoc working group on Tribal Hatchery, the program will BILLING CODE 3510–22–S guidelines for fishery ecosystem plans. continue its efforts in directly increasing The SSC will then meet with the the abundance of the listed stocks. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Council’s ecosystem workshop Removing salmon that stray from other facilitator and provide advice on issues hatchery programs will reduce adverse National Oceanic and Atmospheric to include in an upcoming series of ecological and genetic interactions and Administration public workshops on ecosystem based preserve the listed stock. Information fisheries management. The SSC will [I.D. 051705B] from the captured steelhead is essential review its role in identification of to monitor the status and productivity of technical needs, establishing an the listed populations, to help managers Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management inventory of existing information, and make decisions about how best to Council; Public Meetings synthesizing public input on ecosystem operate the hydropower system, and to AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries goals and objectives. gauge the effectiveness of a number of Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and recovery efforts. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), A copy of the agenda and related The fish would be captured at the Commerce. materials can be obtained by calling the Lower Granite Dam adult trap. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. Council office at 813.228.2815. Electronic controls direct fish passing Although other non-emergency issues through the ladder into a trap holding SUMMARY : The Gulf of Mexico Fishery not on the agendas may come before the facility for small portions of each day. Management Council (Council) will Ecosystem SSC for discussion, in When not directed into the trap, most convene its Ecosystem Scientific and accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens fish pass the ladder unimpeded. Statistical Committee (SSC). Fishery Conservation and Management Trapped fish are anesthetized, DATES: The meeting will be held from 1 Act (M-SFCMA), those issues may not examined, biological samples are taken, p.m. to 5 p.m. on Thursday, June 9, be the subject of formal action during and the fish are either (1) returned to the 2005, and from 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. on this meeting. Actions of the Ecosystem ladder to continue their upstream Friday, June 10, 2005. SSC will be restricted to those issues migration (all of the steelhead and most ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at specifically identified in the agendas of the chinook salmon), (2) selected for the DoubleTree Guest Suites Tampa and any issues arising after publication broodstock (in the case of a portion of Bay, 3050 North Rocky Point Drive, the hatchery-origin and natural-origin Tampa, FL 33607. of this notice that require emergency chinook salmon), or (3) removed from Council address: Gulf of Mexico action under Section 305(c) of the M- the population (all hatchery-origin Fishery Management Council, 3018 SFCMA, provided the public has been chinook salmon that are identified by North U.S. Highway 301, Suite 1000, notified of the Council’s intent to take tags or marks as strays from other Tampa, FL 33619. action to address the emergency. hatcheries). Transport to one of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. hatchery facilities of fish collected for Special Accommodations Steven Atran, Population Dynamics broodstock occurs daily during peak run Statistician, Gulf of Mexico Fishery These meetings are physically periods. Some natural-origin Snake Management Council; telephone: River fall chinook salmon would be accessible to people with disabilities. 813.228.2815. collected to integrate into the Requests for sign language broodstock. Scale sampling may occur SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf interpretation or other auxiliary aids on-site prior to transport to the of Mexico Fishery Management Council should be directed to Dawn Aring at the hatcheries. In addition, up to 250 more (Council) will convene the first meeting Council (see ADDRESSES) by May 31, scale samples from natural origin fish of its newly formed Ecosystem 2005. are needed to provide an accurate Scientific and Statistical Committee Dated: May 17, 2005. (SSC) in Tampa, FL on June 9–10, 2005. description of run composition. Once Tracey Thompson, sampled, fish not collected for The SSC will receive a presentation on broodstock are allowed to recover in EcoGIS, a pilot project that brings the Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. small tanks and then returned to the fish National Marine Fisheries Service ladder to continue their upstream (NMFS), National Ocean Service (NOS), [FR Doc. E5–2528 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] migration. and the eight regional fishery BILLING CODE 3510–22–S This notice is provided pursuant to management councils together to build section 10(c) of the ESA. NMFS will on existing regional geographic evaluate the application, associated information systems (GIS) capabilities; documents, and comments submitted to more fully develop GIS tools for determine whether the application managing and researching marine
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29284 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE public has been notified of the Council’s reauthorization of the Magnuson- intent to take action to address the Stevens Fishery Conservation and National Oceanic and Atmospheric emergency. Management Act in 2005. Positions Administration developed by the Council Chairmen this Special Accommodations [I.D. 051705D] year will be reviewed along with past These meetings are physically Council comments. Recommendations Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management accessible to people with disabilities. will be updated and forwarded to the Council; Public Meetings Requests for sign language full Council for their consideration at its interpretation or other auxiliary aids June 21-23 meeting in Portland, ME. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries should be directed to Dawn Aring at the Although non-emergency issues not Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Council (see ADDRESSES) by May 31, contained in this agenda may come Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2005. before this group for discussion, those Commerce. Dated: May 17, 2005. issues may not be the subject of formal ACTION: Notice of public meeting. Tracey Thompson, action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically SUMMARY: Acting Director, Office of Sustainable The Gulf of Mexico Fishery listed in this notice and any issues Management Council (Council) will Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E5–2530 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] arising after publication of this notice convene its Socioeconomic Panel (SEP). that require emergency action under BILLING CODE 3510–22–S DATES: The meeting will be convene at section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 9 a.m. on Thursday, June 9, 2005, and Act, provided the public has been conclude no later than 2 p.m. on Friday, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE notified of the Council’s intent to take June 10, 2005. final action to address the emergency. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Special Accommodations the Ramada Inn & Suites New Orleans Administration Airport, 110 James Drive East, St. Rose, This meeting is physically accessible LA. [I.D. 051705E] to people with disabilities. Requests for Council address: Gulf of Mexico New England Fishery Management sign language interpretation or other Fishery Management Council, 3018 Council; Public Meetings auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul North U.S. Highway 301, Suite 1000, J. Howard (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 Tampa, FL 33619. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries days prior to the meeting dates. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Dated: May 17, 2005. Assane Diagne, Economist, Gulf of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Tracey Thompson, Commerce. Mexico Fishery Management Council; Acting Director, Office of Sustainable telephone: 813.228.2815. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf [FR Doc. E5–2565 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The New England Fishery of Mexico Fishery Management Council BILLING CODE 3510–22–S (Council) will convene its Management Council (Council) is Socioeconomic Panel (SEP) to review scheduling a public meeting of its Magnuson-Stevens Committee in June, the Red Snapper Stock Assessment and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE discuss data requirements for 2005 to consider actions affecting New socioeconomic evaluations of individual England fisheries in the exclusive National Oceanic and Atmospheric fishing quota (IFQ) programs. In economic zone (EEZ). Administration Recommendations from this group will addition, the SEP will hear a [I.D. 051705C] presentation on policy implications of be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate. alternative modeling approaches for North Pacific Fishery Management DATES: recreational fishing activities. The SEP The meeting will be held on June Council; Notice of Public Meetings will prepare a report containing their 6, 2005. See SUPPLEMENTARY conclusions and recommendations. This INFORMATION for specific time and AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries report will be presented to the Council location of the meeting. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and at its meeting on July 11–14, 2005, in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Fort Myers Beach, FL. J. Howard, Executive Director, New Commerce. A copy of the agenda and related England Fishery Management Council ACTION: Meetings of the North Pacific materials can be obtained by calling the (978) 465–0492. Requests for special Fishery Management Council and its Council office at 813.228.2815. accommodations should be addressed to advisory committees. Although other non-emergency issues the New England Fishery Management not on the agendas may come before the Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery SEP for discussion, in accordance with Newburyport, MA 01950; telephone: Management Council (Council) and its the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery (978) 465–0492. advisory committees will hold public Conservation and Management Act SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: meetings June 1 through June 9, 2005. (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues DATES: The Council’s Advisory Panel may not be the subject of formal action Monday, June 6, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. will begin at 8 a.m., Wednesday, June 1 during this meeting. Actions of the SEP Magnuson-Stevens Committee Meeting and continue through Sunday June 5, will be restricted to those issues Location: New England Fishery 2005. The Scientific and Statistical specifically identified in the agendas Management Council, 50 Water Street, Committee will begin at 8 a.m. on and any issues arising after publication Newburyport, MA 01950; telephone: Wednesday, June 1, 2005, and continue of this notice that require emergency (978) 465-0492. through Friday, June 3, 2005. action under section 305(c) of the The Magnuson-Stevens Committee The Council will begin its plenary Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the will discuss issues relevant to session at 8 a.m. on Friday June 3
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29285
continuing through Thursday June 9. 8. Improved Retention/Improved DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE All meetings are open to the public Utilization (IR/IU): Initial Review of except executive sessions. The Amendment 80 Environmental National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ecosystem Committee will meet Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/ Administration Thursday, June 2, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis The Enforcement Committee will meet (EA/RIR/IRFA) (Head & Gut [I.D. 050905E] Thursday, June 2, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Cooperatives) ADDRESSES: Alyeska Prince Hotel, 9. Observer Program Restructuring: Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Seward Highway, Girdwood, AK. Update of on Fair Labor Standard Act (HMS); Notice of Sea Turtle Release/ Council address: North Pacific issues and discussion with Department Protocol Workshops Fishery Management Council, 605 W. of Labor. Preliminary Review of EA/ AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, AK RIR/IRFA. Review of Observer Advisory Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 99501–2252. Committee report Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 10. Groundfish Management: GOA Commerce. Council staff, Phone: 907–271–2809. Other Species calculation: Final Action ACTION: Notice of public workshops. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Council 11. Crab: Crab Plan Team report, action Plenary Session: The agenda for the as necessary SUMMARY: NMFS is announcing Council’s plenary session will include workshops that will demonstrate proper 12. Ecosystem Management: Review sea turtle handling, resuscitation, and the following issues. The Council may Aleutian Island Area-specific take appropriate action on any of the release techniques for vessel operators management discussion paper, action as using bottom longline (BLL) gear to issues identified. appropriate; review discussion paper on 1. Reports catch sharks in the Atlantic Ocean, the Council’s role in Ecosystem Executive Director’s Report including the Gulf of Mexico. The Approach Management, action as NMFS Management Report (includes workshops will also summarize the appropriate comment on proposed rule language for current regulations pertaining to safe Bering Sea Aleutian Island (BSAI) 13. Staff Tasking: Review tasking and handling and release protocols and Amendment 79 and Vessel Monitoring committees and initiate action as requirements for possession and use of System (VMS) requirements for Gulf of appropriate. Programmatic mitigation equipment for sea turtles and Alaska (GOA) and Essential Fish Habitat Supplemental Environmental Impact other protected resources. (EFH) measures and possible Statement (PSEIS) Priorities, review DATES: The workshops will be held in Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) objectives and develop workplan June 2005. For specific dates and times for specifications process) 14. Other Business see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION U.S. Coast Guard Report Scientific and Statistical Committee section of this notice. NMFS Enforcement Report (SSC): The SSC agenda will include the ADDRESSES: The workshops will be held Alaska Department of Fish & Game following issues: in Galveston and Port Isabel, TX; (ADF&G) Report (GHL issues delayed to GOA Rockfish Demonstration Project Venice, LA; Panama City, Madeira October) BS/AI Salmon Bycatch Beach, Key West, and Cocoa Beach, FL; U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Report Charleston, SC; and Manteo, NC. For North Pacific Research Board (NPRB) Bairdi Crab Split specific locations see the Report IR/IU SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Alaska Fishery Science Center (AFSC) Observer Program this notice. Fishery Interaction research Protected Species Report (includes North Pacific Research Board Report FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: update on Council/Board of Fisheries AFSC Fishery Research Charlie Bergmann, 3209 Frederic St., Pascagoula, MS 39567 or by phone at Committee and Marine Mammal Protected Species Report Protection Act (MMPA) listing) 228–762–4591 (office phone) or 228– AOOS Report Alaska Ocean Observing System 623–0748 (cellular phone). (AOOS) Crab Additional information on Highly 2. Community Development Quota Ecosystem Management Migratory Species (HMS) management can be found online at: http:// (CDQ) Management of Reserves: Status Advisory Panel: The Advisory Panel www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms or by Report and action as necessary to refine will address the same agenda issues as calling the Highly Migratory Species alternatives the Council. 3. GOA Groundfish Rationalization: Management Division at 301–713–2347. Receive Community Committee report. Special Accommodations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Atlantic Review Preliminary Alternatives for These meetings are physically tuna, swordfish, shark, and billfish Tanner Crab Bycatch. Review other accessible to people with disabilities. fisheries are managed under the information and refine alternatives Requests for sign language authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 4. GOA Rockfish Demonstration Project: interpretation or other auxiliary aids Fishery Conservation and Management Final action should be directed to Gail Bendixen at Act and the Atlantic Tunas Convention 5. BSAI Pacific Cod Allocations: Review 907–271–2809 at least 7 working days Act (ATCA), which authorizes discussion paper on seasonal allocation prior to the meeting date. rulemaking as may be necessary and issues and refine alternatives as appropriate to implement necessary. Review discussion paper on Dated: May 17, 2005. recommendations of the International alternative in-season management Tracey L. Thompson, Commission for the Conservation of measures and refine alternatives as Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). Implementing necessary Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. regulations for the Fishery Management 6. BSAI Salmon Bycatch: Initial Review [FR Doc. E5–2529 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and 7. Bairdi Crab Split: Initial Review BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Sharks and the Billfish Fishery
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29286 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Management Plan are at 50 CFR part directed to Charlie Bergmann (see FOR Meeting Dates 635. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 5 1. Joint Snapper Grouper Committee On October 29, 2003, a Biological days before the meeting. and Advisory Panel Meeting: June 13, Opinion (BiOp) for Amendment 1 to the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 2005, 1:30 p.m. 5 p.m. and June 14, Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic et seq. 2005, 8:30 a.m.–12 noon Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks concluded that the measures in the Dated: May 17, 2005. The Snapper Grouper Committee will Amendment were not likely to Galen R. Tromble, meet jointly with the Snapper Grouper jeopardize the continued existence of Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Advisory Panel (AP) to review the any listed species under NMFS’ Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. results of the updated black sea bass purview. Pursuant to the 2003 BiOp, [FR Doc. 05–10127 Filed 5–17–05; 3:54 pm] assessment and receive a report from the NMFS is conducting workshops for BLL BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Scientific and Statistical Committee fishermen to provide information (SSC). In addition, the Committee and regarding gear handling techniques and AP will review the draft of Amendment protocols that demonstrate ways to DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 13B to the Snapper Grouper Fishery reduce the potential for serious injury or Management Plan regarding mandates National Oceanic and Atmospheric under the Sustainable Fisheries Act to mortality should incidental capture of Administration sea turtles or other protected resources address overfishing and discuss the via hooking or entanglement occur. potential for Interim Rule. The NMFS has scheduled nine workshops [I.D. 051705A] Committee and AP will also discuss for June 2005 to ensure that shark BLL species to be considered in future stock South Atlantic Fishery Management fishermen are aware of gear handling assessments through the Southeast Data, Council; Public Meetings and release protocols and are proficient Assessment and Review (SEDAR) at using equipment available to reduce AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries process and receive a presentation from post-release mortality of protected Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and NOAA Fisheries, Southeast Regional resources that are caught with BLL gear. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office regarding linking permits and Additionally, fishermen who use BLL Commerce. landings databases. for other species such as grouper are Note: A public scoping meeting on the ACTION: Notice of public meetings. also invited to attend these workshops. Fishery Ecosystem Plan and Comprehensive Amendment will be Dates, Times, and Locations SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will held June 13, 2005 beginning at 6:00 The dates, times, and locations of hold a joint meeting of its Snapper p.m. The Council will also accept public these workshops are scheduled as Grouper Committee and Advisory Panel, comment on Council consideration of follows: a meeting of its Snapper Grouper an Interim Rule addressing overfishing 1. June 1, 2005, NMFS Laboratory, Committee, Joint Executive and Finance for snapper grouper species 4700 Avenue U, Galveston, TX, from 1 Committees, Protected Resources immediately following the scoping to 5 p.m. (409) 766–3500. Committee, Joint Ecosystem and Habitat meeting. 2. June 3, 2005, Coast Guard Station, Committees, and a meeting of the full 436 Coast Guard Road, Venice, LA, from 2. Snapper Grouper Committee Meeting: Council. In addition, there will be a June 14, 2005, 1:30 p.m.–5 p.m. and 1 to 5 p.m. (985) 534–2332. public scoping meeting addressing the 3. June 6, 2005, Sea Grant Office/ June 15, 2005, 8:30 a.m.–12 noon Fishery Ecosystem Plan and County Extension Office, Panama City, The Snapper Grouper Committee will Comprehensive Amendment and public FL, from 1 to 5 p.m. (850) 874–6105. review Amendment 13B to the Snapper comment will be taken on Council 4. June 8, 2005, Harvey Government Grouper Fishery Management Plan and consideration of an Interim Rule Center, 1200 Truman Ave., 2nd Floor, finalize for public hearings. The addressing overfishing for snapper Key West, FL, from 1 to 5 p.m. (305) Committee will also discuss the grouper species. 292–4431. potential for Interim Rule and discuss 5. June 10, 2005, City Hall, 300 DATES: The meeting will be held in June species for future SEDAR assessments. Municipal Drive, Madeira Beach, FL, 2005. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION from 1 to 5 p.m. (727) 391–9951 x 228. for specific dates and times. 3. Joint Executive Committee and Finance Committee Meeting: June 15, 6. June 13, 2005, Sea Grant Building, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 2005, 1:30 p.m.–5 p.m. 3695 Lake Drive, Cocoa Beach, FL, from the Radisson Resort at the Port, 8701 1 to 5 p.m. (321) 952–4536. Astronaut Boulevard, Cape Canaveral, The Committees will develop the 7. June 15, 2005, Marine Resources FL 32920; Telephone: (1–800) 333–3333 Council’s positions on reauthorization Institute, 217 Fort Johnson Road, or 321/ 784–0000, FAX 321/783–7718. of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Charleston/James Island, SC, from 1 to Copies of documents are available Conservation and Management Act, 5 p.m. (843) 953–9300. from Kim Iverson, Public Information review NOAA’s Ocean Action Plan, the 8. June 17, North Carolina Aquarium– Officer, South Atlantic Fishery Office of Management and Budget’s Roanoke Island, Airport Road, Manteo, Management Council, One Southpark (OMB) Peer Review Bulletin, and NOAA NC, from 1 to 5 p.m. (252) 473–3494. Circle, Suite 306, Charleston, SC 29407– Fisheries’ Report to Congress. 9. June 30, Port Isabel Community 4699. 4. Protected Resources Committee Center, 213 Yturria, Port Isabel, TX, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Meeting: June 16, 2005, 8:30 a.m. 10:30 from 1 to 5 p.m. (956) 943–9991. Iverson, Public Information a.m. Special Accommodations Officer; telephone: 843/571–4366 or The Protected Resources Committee These meetings are physically toll free at 866/SAFMC–10; fax: 843/ will discuss a proposal for installation accessible to people with disabilities. 769–4520; email: of a wind farm in the Exclusive Request for sign language interpretation [email protected]. Economic Zone (EEZ) off the coast of or other auxiliary aids should be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Georgia. The Committee will receive
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29287
updates on the Atlantic Large Whale Documents regarding these issues are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Take Reduction Program’s Proposed available from the Council office (see Authority: The African Growth and Rule and plan, the Bottlenose Dolphin ADDRESSES). Opportunity Act (Title I of the Trade and Take Reduction Program, Acropora Although non-emergency issues not Development Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106- (coral) species proposed listing under contained in this agenda may come 200) (AGOA) provides preferential tariff the Endangered Species Act, and before this Council for discussion, those treatment for imports of certain textile and Biological Opinions for both issues may not be the subjects of formal apparel products of beneficiary sub-Saharan Amendment 6 to the Shrimp Fishery Council action during this meeting. African countries, including hand-loomed, handmade, or folklore articles, of a Management Plan and Amendment 15 Council action will be restricted to those beneficiary country that are certified as such to the Coastal Migratory Pelagics issues specifically listed in this notice by the competent authority in the beneficiary (mackerel) FMP. The Committee will and any issues arising after publication country. In Executive Order 13191, the also discuss any protected resources of this notice that require emergency President authorized CITA to consult with concerns, if necessary, for Amendment action under section 305 (c) of the beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries 13B to the Snapper Grouper FMP with Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the and to determine which, if any, particular regards to the Biological Opinion. public has been notified of the Council’s textile and apparel goods shall be treated as being hand-loomed, handmade, or folklore intent to take final action to address the 5. Joint Ecosystem and Habitat articles. See Implementation of the African emergency. Growth and Opportunity Act and the United Committees Meeting: June 16, 2005, Except for advertised (scheduled) 10:30 a.m.–3 p.m. States-Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership public hearings and public comment, Act published on January 22, 2001, (66 FR The Ecosystem and Habitat the times and sequence specified on this 7272). Committees will meet jointly to review agenda are subject to change. In a letter to the Commissioner of and approve the Council’s Energy Special Accommodations Customs dated January 18, 2001, the Policy. The Committees will also review United States Trade Representative and approve an Outline for the Fishery These meetings are physically directed Customs to require that Ecosystem Plan and discuss issues accessible to people with disabilities. importers provide an appropriate export relevant to Sargassum management. Requests for sign language visa from a beneficiary sub-Saharan interpretation or other auxiliary aids African country to obtain preferential 6. Council Session: June 16, 2005, 3 p.m. should be directed to the Council office treatment under section 112(a) of the 5 p.m. and June 17, 2005, 8:30 a.m.–12 (see ADDRESSES) by June 10, 2005. AGOA (66 FR 7837). The first digit of noon Dated: May 17, 2005. the visa number corresponds to one of From 3 p.m.–3:30 p.m., the Council Tracey Thompson, nine groupings of textile and apparel will call the meeting order, make Acting Director, Office of Sustainable products that are eligible for preferential introductions and roll call, adopt the Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. tariff treatment. Grouping ‘‘9’’ is meeting agenda, and approve earlier reserved for handmade, hand-loomed, [FR Doc. E5–2527 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] meeting minutes. or folklore articles. BILLING CODE 3510–22–S From 3:30 p.m.–4 p.m., the Council CITA has consulted with Senegalese will hear a report from the Joint authorities, and has determined that Executive/Finance Committee and take hand-loomed fabrics, hand-loomed COMMITTEE FOR THE action as appropriate. articles (e.g., hand-loomed rugs, scarves, IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE From 4 p.m.–4:15 p.m., the Council place mats, and tablecloths), handmade AGREEMENTS will receive a report from the Protected articles made from hand-loomed fabrics, if produced in and exported from Resources Committee and take action as Determination Under the African Senegal, are eligible for preferential appropriate. Growth and Opportunity Act From 4:15 p.m.–4:30 p.m., the tariff treatment under section 112(a) of Council will hear a report from the Joint May 17, 2005. the AGOA. In the letter published Ecosystem and Habitat Committees and AGENCY: Committee for the below, CITA directs the Commissioner, take action as appropriate. Implementation of Textile Agreements Bureau of Customs and Border From 4:30 p.m.–5 p.m., the Council (CITA) Protection to allow duty-free entry of such products under U.S. Harmonized will receive a briefing from NOAA ACTION: Directive to the Commissioner Tariff Schedule subheading 9819.11.27 General Counsel on litigation. (CLOSED of Customs. SESSION). if accompanied by an appropriate AGOA visa in grouping ‘‘9’’. No eligible Council Session: June 17, 2005, 8:30 SUMMARY: The Committee for the folklore articles were included in a.m. 12 noon. Implementation of Textile Agreements Senegal’s submission. CITA may extend From 8:30 a.m.–10:30 a.m., the (CITA) has determined that certain this treatment to additional products Council will receive a report from the textile and apparel goods from Senegal following consultations with the Snapper Grouper Committee and shall be treated as ‘‘hand-loomed, Government of Senegal. approve Amendment 13B to the handmade, or folklore articles’’ and Snapper Grouper FMP for public qualify for preferential treatment under James C. Leonard III, hearings and/or take other action as the African Growth and Opportunity Chairman, Committee for the Implementation appropriate. Act. Imports of eligible products from of Textile Agreements. From 10:30 a.m.–11 a.m., the Council Senegal with an appropriate visa will qualify for duty-free treatment. Committee for the Implementation of Textile will hear status reports from NOAA Agreements EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 2005. Fisheries’ Southeast Regional Office and May 17, 2005. the Southeast Fishery Science Center. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commissioner, From 11 a.m.–12:00 noon, the Council Anna Flaaten, International Trade Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, will receive agency and liaison reports, Specialist, Office of Textiles and Washington, DC 20229. discuss other business and upcoming Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, Dear Commissioner: The Committee for the meetings. (202) 782-3400. Implementation of Textiles Agreements
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29288 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
(CITA), pursuant to Sections 112(a) of the Public comments are particularly DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE African Growth and Opportunity Act (Title I invited on: Whether this collection of of Pub. L. No. 106-200) (AGOA) and information is necessary for the proper Office of the Secretary Executive Order 13191 of January 17, 2001, performance of functions of the FAR, has determined, effective on June 6, 2005, Defense Science Board that the following articles shall be treated as and whether it will have practical ‘‘hand-loomed, handmade, and folklore utility; whether our estimate of the AGENCY: Department of Defense. articles’’ under the AGOA: (a) Hand-loomed public burden of this collection of ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee fabrics, hand-loomed articles (e.g., hand- information is accurate, and based on meetings. loomed rugs, scarves, placemats, and valid assumptions and methodology; tablecloths), (b) and hand-made articles made ways to enhance the quality, utility, and SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board from hand-loomed fabrics, if made in Senegal clarity of the information to be Task Force on Nuclear Capabilities will from fabric hand-loomed in Senegal. Such collected; and ways in which we can meet in closed session on May 26–27, articles are eligible for duty-free treatment minimize the burden of the collection of 2005 (at IDA; general theme is the world only if entered under subheading 9819.11.27 information on those who are to environment); June 17, 2005 (at IDA; and accompanied by a properly completed general theme is the complex, visa for product grouping ‘‘9’’, in accordance respond, through the use of appropriate with the provisions of the Visa Arrangement technological collection techniques or manufacturing, and systems between the Government of Senegal and the other forms of information technology. engineering); July 21–22, 2005 (location TBD); August 1–12, 2005 (summer study Government of the United States Concerning DATES: Submit comments on or before session in Irvine, CA); August 30–31, Textile and Apparel Articles Claiming July 19, 2005. Preferential Tariff Treatment under Section 2005 (in addition to time in Irvine, 112 of the Trade and Development Act of ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding location TBD) and September 13–14, 2000. No eligible folklore articles were this burden estimate or any other aspect 2005 (location TBD). The Institute for included in Senegal’s submission. After of this collection of information, Defense Analysis (IDA) is located at additional consultations with Senegalese including suggestions for reducing this 4850 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, authorities, CITA may determine that other burden to the General Services VA. The Task Force will review DoD textile and apparel goods shall be treated as Administration, FAR Secretariat (VIR), hand-loomed, handmade, or folklore articles. needs and specific requirements for Sincerely, 1800 F Street, NW, Room 4035, nuclear capabilities. James C. Leonard III, Washington, DC 20405. In accordance with Section 10(d) of Chairman, Committee for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Implementation of Textile Agreements. Jeritta Parnell, Contract Policy Division, Public Law 92–463, as amended (5 [FR Doc. E5–2559 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] GSA (202) 501–4082. U.S.C. App. II), it has been determined BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that these Defense Science Board Task Force meetings concern matters listed in A. Purpose 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, accordingly, the meetings will be closed DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE This certification and copies of authorizations are needed to determine to the public. GENERAL SERVICES that the offeror has obtained all DATES: May 26–27, 2005 (at IDA; general ADMINISTRATION authorizations, permits, etc., required in theme is the world environment); June connection with transporting the 17, 2005 (at IDA; general theme is the NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND material involved. The contracting complex, manufacturing, and systems SPACE ADMINISTRATION officer reviews the certification and any engineering); July 21–22, 2005 (location documents requested to ensure that the TBD); August 1–12, 2005 (summer study [OMB Control No. 9000–0053] offeror has complied with all regulatory session in Irvine, CA); August 30–31, requirements and has obtained any 2005 (in addition to time in Irvine, Federal Acquisition permits, licenses, etc., that are needed. location TBD); and September 13–14, Regulation;Information Collection; 2005 (location TBD). Permits, Authorities, or Franchises B. Annual Reporting Burden ADDRESSES: The Institute for Defense Certification Respondents: 1,106. Analysis (IDA) is located at 4850 Mark AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), Responses Per Respondent: 3. Center Drive, Alexandria, VA. General Services Administration (GSA), Annual Responses: 3,318. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and National Aeronautics and Space Hours Per Response: .094. LtCol David Robertson, USAF, Defense Administration (NASA). Total Burden Hours: 312. Science Board, 3140 Defense Pentagon, ACTION: Notice of request for public Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Room 3D865, Washington, DC 20301– comments regarding an extension to an Requesters may obtain a copy of the 3140, via e-mail at existing OMB clearance. information collection documents from [email protected], or via phone the General Services Administration, at (703) 695–4158. SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the FAR Secretariat (VIR), Room 4035, 1800 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 F Street, NW, Washington, DC 20405, mission of the Defense Science Board is U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal telephone (202) 501–4755. Please cite to advise the Secretary of Defense and Acquisition Regulation (FAR) OMB Control No. 9000–0053, Permits, the Under Secretary of Defense for Secretariat will be submitting to the Authorities, or Franchises Certification, Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on Office of Management and Budget in all correspondence. scientific and technical matters as they (OMB) a request to review and approve affect the perceived needs of the an extension of a currently approved Dated: May 13, 2005 Department of Defense. At these information collection requirement Julia B. Wise, meetings, the Defense Science Board concerning permits, authorities, or Director,Contract Policy Division. Task Force will: Assess the current plan franchises certification. The clearance [FR Doc. 05–10052 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] for sustaining the nuclear weapons currently expires on July 31, 2005. BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S stockpile and make recommendations
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29289
for ensuring the future reliability, safety, DATES: June 21–22, 2005, and July 26– Iraqi Freedom (OIF). The Task Force security, and relevance of the nuclear 27, 2005. should examine ways to counter the use weapons stockpile for the 21st century; ADDRESSES: SAI, 3601 Wilson as well as mitigate the consequences of examine the DoD role in defining needs Boulevard, Arlington, VA. IEDs. The Task Force should examine in the nuclear weapons stockpile and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC ways to counter the use as well as recommend changes in institutional Scott Dolgoff, USA, Defense Science mitigate the consequences of IEDs. arrangements to ensure an appropriate Board, 3140 Defense Pentagon, Room DoD role; assess progress towards the DATES: June 23–24, 2005, and July 26– 3D865, Washington, DC 20301–3140, 27, 2005. goal of an integrated new triad of strike via e-mail at [email protected], or capabilities (nuclear, advanced via phone at (703) 695–4158. ADDRESSES: Strategic Analysis, Inc., conventional, and non-kinetic) within SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 3601 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA. the new triad of strike, defense and mission of the Defense Science Board is infrastructure; examine a wide range of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC to advise the Secretary of Defense and alternative institutional arrangements Scott Dolgoff, USA, Defense Science the Under Secretary of Defense for that could provide for more efficient Board, 3140 Defense Pentagon, Room Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on management of the nuclear enterprise; 3D865, Washington, DC 20301–3140, scientific and technical matters as they examine approaches to evolving the via e-mail at [email protected], or affect the perceived needs of the stockpile with weapons that are simpler via phone at (703) 695–4158. Department of Defense. Specifically, the to manufacture and that can be Task Force’s focus will be to evaluate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: sustained with a smaller, less complex, The force protection in the context of post less expensive design, development, mission of the Defense Science Board is major combat operations that have been certification and production enterprise; to advise the Secretary of Defense and conducted in Iraq and Afghanistan. In and examine plans to transform the the Under Secretary of Defense for the operations, loss of national nuclear weapons production complex to Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on treasure—military and civilian, U.S. and provide a capability to respond scientific and technical matters as they other nations—has resulted from actions promptly to changes in the threat affect the perceived needs of the executed by non-state and rogue actors. environment with new designs or Department of Defense. At these The threat and capabilities these designs evolved with previously tested meetings, the Defense Science Board insurgent, terrorist and criminal actions nuclear components. Task Force will consider the entire Due to scheduling difficulties, there is present post a most serious challenge to spectrum of intervention objects, our ability to achieve unified action. insufficient time to provide timely including deterrence, dissuasion, notice required by Section 10(a) of the In accordance with section 10(d) of remote predetonation, remote Federal Advisory Committee Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, disarming, elimination of sources and/ Subsection 102–3.150(b) of the GSA Pub. L. 92–463, as amended (5 U.S.C. or manufacturing facilities, discovery App. 2), it has been determined that Final Rule on Federal Advisory and remove of critical personnel, these Defense Science Board Task Force Committee Management, 41 CFR part discovery and removal of employed meetings concern matters listed in 5 102–3.150(b), which further requires devices, or anything else that has the U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, accordingly, publication at least 15 calendar days end effect of either lowing the value or prior to the meeting. these meetings will be closed to the public. raising the cost of employing IEDs as an Jeanette Owings-Ballard, insurgent or terrorist weapons of choice. Dated: May 17, 2005. OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, The Task Force will have four primary Department of Defense. Jeannette Owings-Ballard, objectives: assess the current state of the [FR Doc. 05–10155 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, art of allied forces in countering Department of Defense. BILLING CODE 5001–06–P adversary use of IEDs in operations such [FR Doc. 05–10156 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] as OIF; recommend a mid-to-long term BILLING CODE 5001–06–P set of integrated activities aimed at DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE improving the state of the art in Office of the Secretary DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE reducing the effect of IEDs over the next three to ten years; provide Defense Science Board Office of the Secretary recommendations on short term (over the next six months to three years) AGENCY: Department of Defense. Defense Science Board incremental improvements in U.S. ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee forces’ ability to counter or reduce the AGENCY: Department of Defense. meeting. effectiveness of IEDs, and identify any ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee synergies that may exist between SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board meeting. Task Force on Force Protection in Urban current counter-IED and countermine and Unconventional Environments will SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board efforts. meet in closed session on SAI, 3601 Task Force on Improvised Devices In accordance with section 10(d) of Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA. June (IEDs) will meet in closed session on the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 21–22, 2005; and July 26–27, 2005, at June 23–24, 2005; July 26–27, 2005, at Public Law 92–463, as amended (5 SAI, 3601 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Strategic Analysis, Inc., 3601 Wilson U.S.C. App. 2), it has been determined VA. This Task Force will review and Boulevard, Arlington, VA. The Task that these Defense Science Board Task evaluate force protection capabilities in Force will explore methods and Force meetings concern matters listed in urban and unconventional techniques to significantly reduce the 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, environments and provide effects of IEDs on U.S. and coalition accordingly, these meetings will be recommendations to effect change to the forces in operations such as are closed to the public. future Joint Force. currently being conducted in Operation
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29290 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Dated: May 17, 2005. section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or Jeannette Owings-Ballard, Committee Act and subsection 102– reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 3.150(b) of the GSA Final Rule on the collection; (4) Description of the Department of Defense. Federal Advisory Committee need for, and proposed use of, the [FR Doc. 05–10157 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Management, 41 CFR 102–3.150(b), information; (5) Respondents and BILLING CODE 5001–06–M which further requires publication at frequency of collection; and (6) least 15 calendar days prior to the Reporting and/or Recordkeeping meeting. burden. OMB invites public comment. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Dated: May 17, 2005. Dated: May 16, 2005. Office of the Secretary Jeannette Owings-Ballard, Angela C. Arrington, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Leader, Information Management Case Defense Science Board Department of Defense. Services Team, Regulatory Information [FR Doc. 05–10158 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Management Services, Office of the Chief AGENCY: Department of Defense. BILLING CODE 5001–06–P Information Officer. ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Office of Elementary and Secondary meeting. Education DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Type of Review: Extension. Task Force on Manufacturing Submission for OMB Review; Title: Annual Report of Children in Technology will meet in open session Comment Request State Agency and Locally Operated on May 24–25, 2005; July 26–27, 2005; Institutions for Neglected and September 21–22, 2005; and November AGENCY: Department of Education. Delinquent Children. 2–3, 2005, at SAI, 3601 Wilson SUMMARY: The Leader, Information Frequency: Annually. Boulevard, Arlington, VA. This Task Management Case Services Team, Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Force will review the Department of Regulatory Information Management Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. Defense Manufacturing Technology Services, Office of the Chief Information Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour (ManTech) Program. Officer invites comments on the Burden: DATES: May 24–25, 2005; July 26–27, submission for OMB review as required Responses: 3,052. 2005; September 21–22, 2005; by the Paperwork Reduction Act of Burden Hours: 4,224. November 2–3, 2005. 1995. Abstract: An annual survey is ADDRESSES: SAI, 3601 Wilson DATES: Interested persons are invited to conducted to collect data on (1) the Boulevard, Arlington, VA. submit comments on or before June 20, number of children enrolled in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC 2005. educational programs of State-operated Scott Dolgoff, USA, Defense Science ADDRESSES: Written comments should institutions for neglected or delinquent Board, 3140 Defense Pentagon, Room be addressed to the Office of (N or D) children, community day 3D865, Washington, DC 20301–3140, Information and Regulatory Affairs, programs for N or D children, and adult via e-mail at [email protected], or Attention: Carolyn Lovett, Desk Officer, correctional institutions and (2) the via phone at (703) 695–4158. Department of Education, Office of October caseload of N or D children in local institutions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Management and Budget, 725 17th Requests for copies of the submission mission of the Defense Science Board is Street, NW., Room 10235, New for OMB review; comment request may to advise the Secretary of Defense and Executive Office Building, Washington, be accessed from http:// the Under Secretary of Defense for DC 20503 or faxed to (202) 395–6974. edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section ‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and scientific and technical matters as they 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of by clicking on link number 2716. When affect the perceived needs of the 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires you access the information collection, Department of Defense. At these that the Office of Management and click on ‘‘Download Attachments ‘‘to meetings, the Defense Science Board Budget (OMB) provide interested view. Written requests for information Task Force will review the extent to Federal agencies and the public an early should be addressed to U.S. Department which ManTech investments and opportunity to comment on information of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, funding plans for each Military Service collection requests. OMB may amend or SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, and the Defense Logistics Agency waive the requirement for public Washington, DC 20202–4700. Requests support near-term, warfighting consultation to the extent that public may also be electronically mailed to the operations, the industrial base, and participation in the approval process Internet address [email protected] or long-range/revolutionary technologies. would defeat the purpose of the faxed to 202–245–6621. Please specify Assess the adequacy of technical information collection, violate State or the complete title of the information investments across manufacturing Federal law, or substantially interfere collection when making your request. with any agency’s ability to perform its process disciplines and support for both Comments regarding burden and/or statutory obligations. The Leader, Joint Warfighting Capabilities and the collection activity requirements Information Management Case Services revolutionary technologies. The Task should be directed to Kathy Axt at her Team, Regulatory Information Force will also appraise funding for e-mail address [email protected]. Management Services, Office of the manufacturing research and Individuals who use a Chief Information Officer, publishes that development, including mechanisms to telecommunications device for the deaf notice containing proposed information support both Service/Agency (TDD) may call the Federal Information collection requests prior to submission requirements and cross-cutting Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– of these requests to OMB. Each initiatives. 8339. Due to scheduling and work burden proposed information collection, difficulties, there is insufficient time to grouped by office, contains the [FR Doc. 05–10085 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] provide timely notice required by following: (1) Type of review requested, BILLING CODE 4000–01–U
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29291
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Dated: May 16, 2005. Officer, invites comments on the Angela C. Arrington, proposed information collection Submission for OMB Review; Leader, Information Management Case requests as required by the Paperwork Comment Request Services Team, Regulatory Information Reduction Act of 1995. Management Services, Office of the Chief DATES: Interested persons are invited to Information Officer. AGENCY: Department of Education. submit comments on or before July 19, SUMMARY: The Leader, Information Department of Education 2005. Management Case Services Team, Type of Review: Extension. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Regulatory Information Management Title: Master Plan for Customer 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of Services, Office of the Chief Information Surveys and Focus Groups. 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires Officer invites comments on the Frequency: One-time. that the Office of Management and submission for OMB review as required Affected Public: Individuals or Budget (OMB) provide interested by the Paperwork Reduction Act of household; businesses or other for- Federal agencies and the public an early 1995. profit; not-for-profit institutions; State, opportunity to comment on information Local, or Tribal Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. collection requests. OMB may amend or DATES: Interested persons are invited to Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour waive the requirement for public submit comments on or before June 20, Burden: consultation to the extent that public 2005. Responses: 55,000. participation in the approval process Burden Hours: 25,000. ADDRESSES: Written comments should would defeat the purpose of the Abstract: Customer satisfaction be addressed to the Office of information collection, violate State or surveys and focus group discussions Federal law, or substantially interfere Information and Regulatory Affairs, will be conducted by the Principal with any agency’s ability to perform its Attention: Carolyn Lovett, Desk Officer, Offices of the Department of Education statutory obligations. The Leader, Department of Education, Office of to measure customer satisfaction and Information Management Case Services Management and Budget, 725 17th establish and improve customer service Team, Regulatory Information Street, NW., Room 10235, New standards as required by Executive Management Services, Office of the Executive Office Building, Washington, Order 12862. Chief Information Officer, publishes that DC 20503 or faxed to (202) 395–6974. Requests for copies of the submission notice containing proposed information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section for OMB review; comment request may collection requests prior to submission 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of be accessed from http:// of these requests to OMB. Each edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires proposed information collection, ‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and that the Office of Management and grouped by office, contains the by clicking on link number 2717. When Budget (OMB) provide interested following: (1) Type of review requested, you access the information collection, Federal agencies and the public an early e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or click on ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to reinstatement; (2) title; (3) summary of opportunity to comment on information view. Written requests for information the collection; (4) description of the collection requests. OMB may amend or should be addressed to U.S. Department need for, and proposed use of, the waive the requirement for public of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, information; (5) respondents and consultation to the extent that public SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, frequency of collection; and (6) participation in the approval process Washington, DC 20202–4700. Requests reporting and/or recordkeeping burden. would defeat the purpose of the may also be electronically mailed to the OMB invites public comment. _ information collection, violate State or Internet address OCIO [email protected] or The Department of Education is Federal law, or substantially interfere faxed to 202–245–6621. Please specify especially interested in public comment with any agency’s ability to perform its the complete title of the information addressing the following issues: (1) Is statutory obligations. The Leader, collection when making your request. this collection necessary to the proper Information Management Case Services Comments regarding burden and/or functions of the Department; (2) will Team, Regulatory Information the collection activity requirements this information be processed and used Management Services, Office of the should be directed to Kathy Axt at her in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate Chief Information Officer, publishes that e-mail address [email protected]. of burden accurate; (4) how might the notice containing proposed information Individuals who use a Department enhance the quality, utility, collection requests prior to submission telecommunications device for the deaf and clarity of the information to be of these requests to OMB. Each (TDD) may call the Federal Information collected; and (5) how might the proposed information collection, Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– Department minimize the burden of this grouped by office, contains the 8339. collection on the respondents, including following: (1) Type of review requested, [FR Doc. 05–10086 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] through the use of information e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or BILLING CODE 4000–01–P technology. reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of Dated: May 17, 2005. the collection; (4) Description of the Angela C. Arrington, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION need for, and proposed use of, the Leader, Information Management Case information; (5) Respondents and Notice of Proposed Information Services Team, Regulatory Information frequency of collection; and (6) Collection Requests Management Services, Office of the Chief Reporting and/or Recordkeeping Information Officer. burden. OMB invites public comment. AGENCY: Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences SUMMARY: The Leader, Information Management Case Services Team, Type of Review: New. Regulatory Information Management Title: Evaluation of States’ Monitoring Services, Office of the Chief Information and Improvement Practices Under the
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29292 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Individuals with Disabilities Education DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION program, the Secretary considers this Act. requirement to be met if the LEA [CFDA No. 84.358A] Frequency: One time. submitted an SRSA application for any prior year, even if the LEA has not Affected Public: State, local, or tribal Small, Rural School Achievement Program previously received SRSA funds. In this gov’t, SEAs or LEAs; Federal circumstance, unless the LEA advises government. AGENCY: Office of Elementary and the Secretary by the application Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Secondary Education, Department of deadline that it is withdrawing its Burden: Education. application, the Secretary deems the ACTION: Responses: 102. Notice announcing application application that the LEA previously deadline. submitted to remain in effect for FY Burden Hours: 306. 2005 funding, and the LEA does not Abstract: States’ monitoring and SUMMARY: Under the Small, Rural have to submit an additional improvement practices under the School Achievement (SRSA) program, application. All other eligible LEAs we award grants on a formula basis to Individuals with Disabilities Education must submit a new application to eligible local educational agencies Act (IDEA) are vital to ensuring that receive a FY 2005 grant award. (LEAs) to address the unique needs of We have provided a list of LEAs students with disabilities receive a free small, rural school districts. In this appropriate public education and that eligible for FY 2005 funds on the notice, we establish the deadline for Department’s Web site at http:// infants and toddlers with disabilities submission of the fiscal year (FY) 2005 and their families receive early www.ed.gov/programs/reapsrsa/ SRSA grant applications. eligibility.html. The Web site also intervention services. The purpose of As discussed in this notice, if an this study is to evaluate states’ indicates which of these eligible LEAs eligible LEA submitted an application must submit a new application to the monitoring and related improvement for SRSA grant funds for a prior year, Department to receive their FY 2005 practices under IDEA. This study will the LEA is considered to have met the SRSA grant award, and which eligible describe the nature and scope of FY 2005 application requirement based LEAs are considered already to have monitoring as implemented by the 50 on its previously submitted application met the application requirement. states and the District of Columbia for and does not have to submit a new Eligible LEAs that must submit a new Parts B and C of IDEA, assess the effect application to the Department to receive application in order to receive FY 2005 of the quality of states’ monitoring and its FY 2005 SRSA grant award. SRSA funding must do so electronically related improvement practices on key Application Deadline: June 17, 2005, by the deadline established in this outcomes of Parts B and C of IDEA, and 4:30 p.m. eastern time. notice. identify and develop recommendations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Submission of for potential best practices in Which LEAs Are Eligible for An Award Applications: Unless it is listed on the monitoring and identify areas for Under the SRSA Program? Department’s Web site as not required to ongoing technical assistance. submit a new application, an eligible An LEA is eligible for an award under LEA that seeks FY 2005 SRSA funding Requests for copies of the proposed the SRSA program if — must submit an electronic application information collection request may be (a) The total number of students in by June 17, 2005, 4:30 pm eastern time. accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, average daily attendance at all of the Submission of an electronic application by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending schools served by the LEA is fewer than involves the use of the Department’s Collections’’ link and by clicking on 600, or each county in which a school Electronic Grant Application System (e- link number 2772. When you access the served by the LEA is located has a total Application) available through the information collection, click on population density of fewer than 10 Department’s e-Grants system. persons per square mile; and ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. You can access the electronic Written requests for information should (b) All of the schools served by the LEA are designated with a school locale application for the SRSA Program at: be addressed to U.S. Department of http://e-grants.ed.gov. Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., code of 7 or 8 by the Department’s National Center for Education Statistics, Once you access this site, you will Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, receive specific instructions regarding DC 20202–4700. Requests may also be or the Secretary has determined, based on a demonstration by the LEA and the information to include in your electronically mailed to the Internet application. address [email protected] or faxed to concurrence of the SEA, that the LEA is located in an area defined as rural by a The regular hours of operation of the 202–245–6621. Please specify the governmental agency of the State. e-Grants Web site are 6 a.m. Monday complete title of the information The SRSA spreadsheets on the until 7 p.m. Wednesday; and 6 a.m. collection when making your request. Department’s Web site at http:// Thursday until midnight, Saturday Comments regarding burden and/or www.ed.gov/programs/reapsrsa/ (Washington, DC time). Please note that the collection activity requirements eligibility.html identify the LEAs that the system is unavailable on Sundays should be directed to Sheila Carey at her meet these requirements and are eligible and Federal holidays. e-mail address [email protected]. to participate in the SRSA program. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Eric Schulz or Mr. Robert Hitchcock. Individuals who use a Which Eligible LEAs Need Not Submit telecommunications device for the deaf Telephone: (202) 401–0039 or via an Additional Application To Receive a Internet: [email protected]. (TDD) may call the Federal Information FY 2005 SRSA Grant Award? Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– If you use a telecommunications 8339. Under the regulations in 34 CFR device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 75.104(a), the Secretary makes a grant the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1– [FR Doc. 05–10087 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] only to an eligible party that submits an 800–877–8339. BILLING CODE 4000–01–P application. Given the limited purpose Individuals with disabilities may served by an application under this obtain this notice in an alternative
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29293
format (e.g., Braille, large print, Historically Black Colleges and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY audiotape, or computer diskette) on Universities Capital Financing Program, request to the contact person listed 1990 K Street, NW., Washington, DC Federal Energy Regulatory under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 20006; telephone (202) 502–7555; fax: Commission CONTACT. (202) 502-7862; e-mail: Electronic Access to This Document: [email protected]. [Docket No. RP99–301–131] You may view this document, as well as Individuals who use a other Department of Education telecommunications device for the deaf ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of documents published in the Federal (TDD) may call the Federal Information Negotiated Rate Filing Register, in text or Adobe Portable Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339, Document Format (PDF) on the Internet between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., eastern time, May 13, 2005. at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/ Monday through Friday. Take notice that on May 10, 2005, news/fedregister. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) tendered To use PDF you must have Adobe Historically Black Colleges and for filing and approval a negotiated rate Acrobat Reader, which is available free Universities Capital Financing Advisory service agreement between ANR and at this site. If you have questions about Board (Board) is authorized by Title III, Wisconsin Power and Light Company. using PDF, call the U.S. Government Part D, Section 347 of the Higher Printing Office (GPO), toll-free, at 1– Education Act of 1965, as amended in ANR requests that the Commission 888–293–6498; or in the Washington, 1998 (20 U.S.C. 1066F). The Board is accept and approve the subject DC area at (202) 512–1530. established within the Department of negotiated rate agreement to be effective June 1, 2005. Note: The official version of this document Education to provide advice and is the document published in the Federal counsel to the Secretary and the Any person desiring to intervene or to Register. Free Internet access to the official designated bonding authority as to the protest this filing must file in version of the Federal Register and the Code most effective and efficient means of accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of of Federal Regulations is available on GPO implementing construction financing on the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ historically black college and university index.html. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and campuses and to advise Congress 385.214). Protests will be considered by Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7345– regarding the progress made in the Commission in determining the 7345b. implementing the program. Specifically, appropriate action to be taken, but will the Board will provide advice as to the not serve to make protestants parties to Dated: May 16, 2005. capital needs of Historically Black Raymond Simon, the proceeding. Any person wishing to Colleges and Universities, how those become a party must file a notice of Assistant Secretary for Elementary and needs can be met through the program, Secondary Education. intervention or motion to intervene, as and what additional steps might be appropriate. Such notices, motions, or [FR Doc. 05–10139 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] taken to improve the operation and protests must be filed in accordance BILLING CODE 4000–01–P implementation of the construction with the provisions of Section 154.210 financing program. The purpose of this meeting is to of the Commission’s regulations (18 CFR DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION review current program activities and to 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention make recommendations to the Secretary or protest must serve a copy of that The Historically Black Colleges and on the current capital needs of document on the Applicant. Anyone Universities Capital Financing Historically Black Colleges and filing an intervention or protest on or Advisory Board Universities. before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or AGENCY: The Historically Black Colleges Individuals who will need protests on persons other than the and Universities Capital Financing accommodations for a disability in order Applicant. Board, Department of Education. to attend the meeting (e.g., interpreting ACTION: Notice of Meeting. services, assistance listening devices, or The Commission encourages materials in alternative format) should electronic submission of protests and DATE AND TIME: The meeting will be held notify DaShawn Biddy at (202) 502– interventions in lieu of paper using the from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., Thursday, May 7786 no later than May 23, 2005. We ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. 26, 2005. will attempt to meet requests for Persons unable to file electronically LOCATION: The U.S. Department of accommodations after this date but should submit an original and 14 copies Education, OPE’s Eight Floor cannot guarantee their availability. The of the protest or intervention to the Conference Center, 1990 K Street, NW., meeting site is accessible to individuals Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20006. with disabilities. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Records are kept of all Board SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the 20426. proceedings and are available for public schedule and proposed agenda of an This filing is accessible on-line at inspection at the Office of the upcoming meeting of the Historically http://www.ferc.gov, using the Historically Black Colleges and Black Colleges and Universities Capital ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Universities Capital Financing Program, Financing Advisory Board. The notice 1990 K Street, NW., Washington, DC review in the Commission’s Public also describes the functions of the 20006, from the hours of 9 a.m. to 5 Reference Room in Washington, DC. Board. Notice of this meeting is required p.m., Monday through Friday. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the by Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Web site that enables subscribers to Advisory Committee Act and is Sally L. Stroup, receive e-mail notification when a intended to notify the public of their Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary document is added to a subscribed opportunity to attend. Education. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 05–10154 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Online service, please e-mail Steven Pappas, Executive Director, BILLING CODE 4000–01–M [email protected], or call
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29294 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Commission, 888 First Street, NE., (202) 502–8659. Washington, DC 20426. Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at This filing is accessible on-line at Magalie R. Salas, http://www.ferc.gov, using the http://www.ferc.gov, using the Secretary. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for [FR Doc. E5–2543 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] review in the Commission’s Public review in the Commission’s Public BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Reference Room in Washington, DC. Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the the web site that enables subscribers to Web site that enables subscribers to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY receive e-mail notification when a receive e-mail notification when a Federal Energy Regulatory document is added to a subscribed document is added to a subscribed Commission docket(s). For assistance with any FERC docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail Online service, please e-mail [Docket No. RP95–408–063] [email protected], or call [email protected], or call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Columbia Gas Transmission (202) 502–8659. (202) 502–8659. Corporation; Notice of Sharing Profit Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Report May 20, 2005. on June 3, 2005. May 13, 2005. Magalie R. Salas, Magalie R. Salas, Take notice that on May 10, 2005, Secretary. Secretary. Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation [FR Doc. E5–2554 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. E5–2544 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] (Columbia) filed to report on the sharing BILLING CODE 6717–01–P BILLING CODE 6717–01–P with its customers of a portion of the profits from the sale of certain base gas as provided in Columbia’s Docket No. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RP95–408 rate case settlement. See Stipulation II, Article IV, sections A Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory through E, in Docket No. RP95–408 Commission Commission approved at Columbia Gas [Docket No. CP03–342–003] [Docket Nos. RP04–251–006 and RP04–248– Transmission Corp., 79 FERC ¶ 61,044 005] (1997). Sales of base gas have generated Discovery Gas Transmission LLC; additional profits of $8,389,803 (above a Notice of Compliance Filing El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice $41.5 million threshold) requiring a of Allocated Path Report sharing of 50 percent of the excess May 13, 2005. profits with customers in accordance Take notice that on May 6, 2005, May 13, 2005. with Stipulation II, Article IV, section C. Discovery Gas Transmission LLC, Take notice that on May 6, 2005, El Columbia states that $4,244,796, (Discovery) tendered for filing its initial Paso Natural Gas Company (EPNG) inclusive of interest, has been allocated rates and terms and conditions for submitted two Summary of Allocated to affected customers and credited to service on its Market Expansion Path reports pursuant to Article VI, their March invoices, and that these facilities as set forth in the tariff sheets Pathing and Segmentation, of the credits remain subject to Commission in its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume Stipulation and Agreement filed with acceptance of this filing. No. 1, listed on the attachment to the the Commission in Docket Nos. RP04– Columbia states that copies of the filing, to be effective June 15, 2005. 251–000 and RP04–248–000. filing have been served on its affected Discovery further states that copies of EPNG states that copies of the reports customers, affected state commission’s the filing have been mailed to all the were served on parties on the official and those parties on the official service parties listed on the official service list service list in the above-captioned list in this proceeding. in this proceeding. proceedings. Any person desiring to protest this Any person desiring to protest this Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule filing must file in accordance with Rule filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission’s Rules of 211 of the Commission’s Rules of 211 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR Practice and Procedure (18 CFR Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be 385.211). Protests to this filing will be 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in considered by the Commission in considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be determining the appropriate action to be determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make taken, but will not serve to make taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. protestants parties to the proceeding. protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed on or before Such protests must be filed on or before Such protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone the date as indicated below. Anyone the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that filing a protest must serve a copy of that filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the document on all the parties to the document on all the parties to the proceeding. proceeding. proceeding. The Commission encourages The Commission encourages The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu electronic submission of protests in lieu electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the ‘‘eFiling’’ link at of paper using the ‘‘eFiling’’ link at of paper using the ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an file electronically should submit an file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest to original and 14 copies of the protest to original and 14 copies of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory the Federal Energy Regulatory the Federal Energy Regulatory
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29295
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY days from the date of publication of this Washington, DC 20426. notice in the Federal Register. Federal Energy Regulatory This filing is accessible on-line at Commission Magalie R. Salas, http://www.ferc.gov, using the Secretary. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for [FR Doc. E5–2538 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] [Docket No. EL05–77–000] review in the Commission’s Public BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Reference Room in Washington, DC. Florida Power Corporation, Carolina There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Power & Light Company; Notice of Web site that enables subscribers to Institution of Proceeding and Refund DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY receive e-mail notification when a Effective Date document is added to a subscribed Federal Energy Regulatory docket(s). For assistance with any FERC May 12, 2005. Commission Online service, please e-mail On May 5, 2005, the Commission [Docket No. ER05–744–000] [email protected], or call issued an order that instituted a (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call proceeding in Docket No. EL05–77–000, Major Lending, LLC; Notice of (202) 502–8659. pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Issuance of Order Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. § 824e, to May 12, 2005. May 20, 2005. determine whether Florida Power Major Lending LLC (Major Lending) Corporation and Carolina Power & Light filed an application for market-based Magalie R. Salas, Company may continue to charge rate authority, with an accompanying Secretary. market-based rates. Florida Power rate tariff. The proposed rate tariff [FR Doc. E5–2549 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Corporation and Carolina Power & Light provides for the sales of capacity and BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Company, 111 FERC ¶ 61,154 (2005). energy at market-based rates. Major The refund effective date in Docket Lending also requested waiver of No. EL05–77–000, established pursuant various Commission regulations. In DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be 60 particular, Major Lending requested that days from the date of publication of this the Commission grant blanket approval Federal Energy Regulatory notice in the Federal Register. under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future Commission issuances of securities and assumptions Magalie R. Salas, of liability by Major Lending. [Docket No. EL05–105–000] Secretary. On May 11, 2005, pursuant to [FR Doc. E5–2536 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] delegated authority, the Director, Entergy Services, Inc.; Notice of BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Division of Tariffs and Market Institution of Proceeding and Refund Development—South, granted the Effective Date request for blanket approval under Part DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 34. The Director’s order also stated that May 12, 2005. the Commission would publish a Federal Energy Regulatory separate notice in the Federal Register On May 5, 2005, the Commission Commission issued an order that instituted a establishing a period of time for the proceeding in Docket No. EL05–105– filing of protests. Accordingly, any [Docket No. EL05–99–000] 000, pursuant to section 206 of the person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. LG&E Energy Marketing Inc., Louisville securities or assumptions of liability by 824e, to investigate whether Entergy Gas & Electric Company, Kentucky Major Lending should file a motion to Services, Inc. satisfies the Commission’s Utilities Company, WKE Station Two intervene or protest with the Federal transmission market power and affiliate Inc., Western Kentucky Energy Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 abuse or reciprocal dealing standards for Corporation; Notice of Institution of First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, the grant of market-based rate authority. Proceeding and Refund Effective Date in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Entergy Services, Inc., 111 FERC May 12, 2005. of the Commission’s Rules of Practice ¶ 61,145 (2005). and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 The refund effective date in Docket On May 5, 2005, the Commission (2004). No. EL05–105–000, established issued an order that instituted a Notice is hereby given that the pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, proceeding in Docket No. EL05–99–000, deadline for filing motions to intervene will be 60 days from the date of pursuant to section 206 of the Federal or protest is June 10, 2005. Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e, to publication of this notice in the Federal Absent a request to be heard in determine whether LG&E Energy Register. opposition by the deadline above, Major Marketing Inc., Louisville Gas & Electric Lending is authorized to issue securities Magalie R. Salas, Company, Kentucky Utilities Company, and assume obligations or liabilities as Secretary. WKE Station Two Inc., and Western a guarantor, indorser, surety, or [FR Doc. E5–2535 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Kentucky Energy Corporation (LG&E otherwise in respect of any security of Parties) may continue to charge market- BILLING CODE 6717–01–P another person; provided that such based rates pursuant to the provisions of issuance or assumption is for some section 206. LG&E Energy Marketing lawful object within the corporate Inc., et al., 111 FERC ¶ 61,153 (2005). purposes of Major Lending, compatible The refund effective date in Docket with the public interest, and is No. EL05–99–000, established pursuant reasonably necessary or appropriate for to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be 60 such purposes.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29296 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
The Commission reserves the right to On May 9, 2005, the Commission copy of that document on the Applicant. require a further showing that neither issued another notice to establish a Anyone filing an intervention or protest public nor private interests will be common comment due date for further on or before the intervention or protest adversely affected by continued filings that had been submitted that date need not serve motions to intervene approval of Major Lending’s issuances relate to the March 31, 2005 filing by the or protests on persons other than the of securities or assumptions of liability. Midwest ISO Applicants. Applicant. Copies of the full text of the Director’s Subsequently, Midwest ISO The Commission encourages Order are available from the Applicants’ anticipated filing to Commission’s Public Reference Room, incorporate lost revenue information electronic submission of protests and 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC that was submitted by the PJM interventions in lieu of paper using the 20426. The Order may also be viewed transmission owners, was submitted on ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. on the Commission’s Web site at May 4, 2005, as amended on May 5, Persons unable to file electronically http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary 2005. A notice for this filing was issued should submit an original and 14 copies link. Enter the docket number excluding on May 12, 2005, with a comment due of the protest or intervention to the the last three digits in the docket date of May 26, 2005. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, number filed to access the document. Accordingly, in order to ensure 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Comments, protests, and interventions consistent comment deadlines on these 20426. may be filed electronically via the related filings, notice is hereby given This filing is accessible on-line at internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR that the due date for comments on the http://www.ferc.gov, using the 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions filings submitted in the above captioned ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for on the Commission’s Web site under the dockets is extended to and including review in the Commission’s Public ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission May 26, 2005. Reference Room in Washington, DC. strongly encourages electronic filings. Magalie R. Salas, There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. web site that enables subscribers to Secretary. [FR Doc. E5–2545 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] receive e-mail notification when a [FR Doc. E5–2540 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P document is added to a subscribed BILLING CODE 6717–01–P docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [email protected], or call DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Federal Energy Regulatory (202) 502–8659. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Commission Intervention and Comment Date: 5 [Docket No. RP05–339–000] p.m. eastern time on May 19, 2005. [Docket Nos. ER05–6–017, –018, –019, –020, –021, –022; EL04–135–019, –020, –021, North Baja Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Magalie R. Salas, –022, –023, –024; EL02–111–037, –038, Limited Case-Specific Waiver Secretary. –039, –040, –041, –042; EL03–212–033, May 13, 2005. [FR Doc. E5–2552 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] –034, –035, –036, –037, –038] Take notice that on May 10, 2005, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Midwest Independent Transmission North Baja Pipeline, LLC (NBP), Sempra System Operator, Inc.; Midwest Energy LNG Marketing Corp. (Sempra DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Independent Transmission System Marketing) and Termoelectrica de Mexicali, S. de R.L. de C.V. (TDM) Operator, Inc. and PJM Federal Energy Regulatory Interconnection, LLC, et al.; Midwest tendered for filing a joint petition for Commission Independent Transmission System limited case-specific waiver. Operator, Inc. and PJM NBP, TDM and Sempra Marketing are Interconnection, LLC, et al.; Ameren requesting a limited case-specific waiver [Docket No. EL05–95–000] Services Company, et al.; Notice of the Commission’s capacity release Establishing Common Comment Date regulations in order to allow an PacificCorp and PPM Energy, Inc.; assignment of TDM’s firm capacity and Notice of Institution of Proceeding and May 13, 2005. its negotiated rate contract to Sempra Refund Effective Date On April 19, 2005, the Commission Marketing. issued a Notice of Extension of Time Any person desiring to intervene or to May 12, 2005. establishing a common due date to file protest this filing must file in On May 9, 2005, the Commission comments on the March 31, 2005, filing accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of issued an order that instituted a by the Midwest Independent the Commission’s Rules of Practice and proceeding in Docket No. EL05–95–000, Transmission System Operator, Inc. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and pursuant to section 206 of the Federal (Midwest ISO) and the Midwest ISO 385.214). Protests will be considered by Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e, to Transmission Owners (collectively, the Commission in determining the determine whether PacifiCorp and PPM Midwest ISO Applicants). The comment appropriate action to be taken, but will Energy, Inc. may continue to charge due date was extended to coincide with not serve to make protestants parties to market-based rates in the PacifiCorp the comment date established for an the proceeding. Any person wishing to East and Idaho control areas. PacifiCorp anticipated filing that was to be become a party must file a notice of and PPM Energy, Inc. 111 FERC submitted by Midwest ISO Applicants intervention or motion to intervene, as ¶ 61,205 (2005). to incorporate lost revenue information appropriate. Such notices, motions, or that was to be filed by the PJM protests must be filed on or before the The refund effective date in Docket Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) date as indicted below. Anyone filing an No. EL05–95–000, established pursuant transmission owners. intervention or protest must serve a to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be 60
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29297
days from the date of publication of this reasonably necessary or appropriate for publication of this notice in the Federal notice in the Federal Register. such purposes. Register. The Commission reserves the right to Magalie R. Salas, require a further showing that neither Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. public nor private interests will be Secretary. [FR Doc. E5–2537 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] adversely affected by continued [FR Doc. E5–2534 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P approval of San Joaquin’s issuances of BILLING CODE 6717–01–P securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director’s DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Order are available from the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission’s Public Reference Room, Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Commission Commission 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission’s Web site at [Docket No. EL05–102–000] [Docket Nos. ER05–698–000 and ER05–698– http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary 001] link. Enter the docket number excluding Southern Company Services, Inc.; the last three digits in the docket Notice of Institution of Proceeding and San Joaquin Cogen, L.L.C.; Notice of number filed to access the document. Refund Effective Date Issuance of Order Comments, protests, and interventions May 12, 2005. May 12, 2005. may be filed electronically via the On May 5, 2005, the Commission San Joaquin Cogen, L.L.C. (San internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR issued an order that instituted a Joaquin) filed an application for market- 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions proceeding in Docket No. EL05–102– based rate authority, with an on the Commission’s Web site under the 000, pursuant to section 206 of the accompanying rate tariff. The proposed ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. rate tariff provides for the sales of strongly encourages electronic filings. 824e, to examine alleged affiliate abuse 1 capacity, energy, and ancillary services Magalie R. Salas, within the Southern Companies. at market-based rates. San Joaquin also Secretary. Southern Company Services, Inc., et al., requested waiver of various Commission 111 FERC ¶ 61,146 (2005). [FR Doc. E5–2539 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] regulations. In particular, San Joaquin The refund effective date in Docket requested that the Commission grant BILLING CODE 6717–01–P No. EL05–102–000, established blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be 60 days from the date of of all future issuances of securities and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY assumptions of liability by San Joaquin. publication of this notice in the Federal On May 11, 2005, pursuant to Federal Energy Regulatory Register. delegated authority, the Director, Commission Magalie R. Salas, Division of Tariffs and Market [Docket No. EL05–104–000] Secretary. Development—South, granted the [FR Doc. E5–2533 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] request for blanket approval under Part Southern Companies Energy BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 34. The Director’s order also stated that Marketing, Inc. and Southern the Commission would publish a Companies Services, Inc.; Notice of separate notice in the Federal Register Institution of Proceeding and Refund DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY establishing a period of time for the Effective Date filing of protests. Accordingly, any Federal Energy Regulatory person desiring to be heard or to protest May 12, 2005. Commission the blanket approval of issuances of On May 5, 2005, the Commission [Docket No. RP05–340–000] securities or assumptions of liability by issued an order that instituted a San Joaquin should file a motion to proceeding in Docket No. EL05–104– TransColorado Gas Transmission intervene or protest with the Federal 000, pursuant to section 206 of the Company; Notice of Filing of Request Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. for Waiver of Tariff Provisions First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 824e, to investigate whether Southern in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Companies 1 satisfies three parts of the May 13, 2005. of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Commission’s market-based rate Take notice that on May 11, 2005, and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 analysis, namely, transmission market TransColorado Gas Transmission (2004). power, barriers to entry, and affiliate Company (TransColorado) tendered for Notice is hereby given that the abuse or reciprocal dealing standards. filing a request for waiver of its tariff deadline for filing motions to intervene Southern Companies Energy Services provisions. or protest is June 10, 2005. Marketing, Inc. and Southern Absent a request to be heard in Companies Services, Inc. 111 FERC 1 Southern Companies include Southern Company Services, Inc., Alabama Power Company, opposition by the deadline above, San ¶ 61,144 (2005). Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Joaquin is authorized to issue securities The refund effective date in Docket Mississippi Power Company, Savannah Electric and and assume obligations or liabilities as No. EL05–104–000, established Power Company and Southern Power Company. a guarantor, indorser, surety, or pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, Southern Power Company is an affiliated merchant generator that does not have retail load or a otherwise in respect of any security of will be 60 days from the date of franchised service territory. Southern Company another person; provided that such Services, Inc. is the service company for the issuance or assumption is for some 1 Southern Companies include Southern Southern system. All of these companies are owned lawful object within the corporate Companies Services, Alabama Power Company, by Southern Company, Inc. a registered public Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, utility holding company. The holding company and purposes of San Joaquin, compatible Mississippi Power Company, Savannah Electric and affiliates are referred to collectively as Southern with the public interest, and is Power Company, and Southern Power Company. Companies.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29298 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
TransColorado states that it filed the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Web site that enables subscribers to above-referenced request to petition the receive e-mail notification when a Commission to allow TransColorado to Federal Energy Regulatory document is added to a subscribed waive certain force majeure provisions Commission docket(s). For assistance with any FERC of section 14 of the general terms and [Docket No. RP05–337–000] Online service, please e-mail conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff. [email protected], or call Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call TransColorado states that copies of its (202) 502–8659. filing have been served upon all of its Corporation; Notice of Proposed customers and effected state Changes in FERC Gas Tariff Magalie R. Salas, commissions. May 13, 2005. Secretary. Any person desiring to intervene or to Take notice that on May 10, 2005, [FR Doc. E5–2550 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] protest this filing must file in Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line BILLING CODE 6717–01–P accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, the Commission’s Rules of Practice and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Third Revised Volume No. 1, the 385.214). Protests will be considered by following tariff sheets to become Federal Energy Regulatory the Commission in determining the effective June 9, 2005: Commission Third Revised Sheet No. 120 appropriate action to be taken, but will [Docket No. RP05–338–000] not serve to make protestants parties to Fourth Revised Sheet No.122 the proceeding. Any person wishing to Second Revised Sheet No. 122D Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line become a party must file a notice of Second Revised Sheet No. 122E Third Revised Sheet No. 122F Corporation; Notice of Proposed intervention or motion to intervene, as Changes in FERC Gas Tariff appropriate. Such notices, motions, or Transco states that the purpose of the protests must be filed in accordance instant filing is to update and clarify May 13, 2005. Take notice that on May 10, 2005, with the provisions of Section 154.210 certain provisions included in Rate Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line of the Commission’s regulations (18 CFR Schedule LG–A and Rate Schedule LNG of Transco’s Tariff. Corporation (Transco) tendered for 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, or protest must serve a copy of that Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in Third Revised Volume No. 1, the document on the Applicant. Anyone accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of following tariff sheet, to become filing an intervention or protest on or the Commission’s Rules of Practice and effective June 9, 2005: before the intervention or protest date Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Third Revised Sheet No. 3740.01 need not serve motions to intervene or 385.214). Protests will be considered by Transco states that the purpose of the protests on persons other than the the Commission in determining the Applicant. instant filing is to revise certain appropriate action to be taken, but will provisions included in section 48 of the The Commission encourages not serve to make protestants parties to General Terms and Conditions of electronic submission of protests and the proceeding. Any person wishing to Transco’s Tariff, Right of First Refusal interventions in lieu of paper using the become a party must file a notice of Procedures to clarify the procedures to ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. intervention or motion to intervene, as be followed in the event no bids are Persons unable to file electronically appropriate. Such notices, motions, or received (or accepted by Transco) in should submit an original and 14 copies protests must be filed in accordance response to a posting under section 48. of the protest or intervention to the with the provisions of Section 154.210 Any person desiring to intervene or to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, of the Commission’s regulations (18 CFR protest this filing must file in 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of 20426. or protest must serve a copy of that the Commission’s Rules of Practice and document on the Applicant. Anyone Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and This filing is accessible on-line at filing an intervention or protest on or 385.214). Protests will be considered by http://www.ferc.gov, using the before the intervention or protest date the Commission in determining the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for need not serve motions to intervene or appropriate action to be taken, but will review in the Commission’s Public protests on persons other than the not serve to make protestants parties to Reference Room in Washington, DC. Applicant. the proceeding. Any person wishing to There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the The Commission encourages become a party must file a notice of web site that enables subscribers to electronic submission of protests and intervention or motion to intervene, as receive e-mail notification when a interventions in lieu of paper using the appropriate. Such notices, motions, or document is added to a subscribed ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. protests must be filed in accordance docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Persons unable to file electronically with the provisions of Section 154.210 Online service, please e-mail should submit an original and 14 copies of the Commission’s regulations (18 CFR [email protected], or call of the protest or intervention to the 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or protest must serve a copy of that (202) 502–8659. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC document on the Applicant. Anyone 20426. filing an intervention or protest on or Magalie R. Salas, This filing is accessible on-line at before the intervention or protest date Secretary. http://www.ferc.gov, using the need not serve motions to intervene or [FR Doc. E5–2553 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for protests on persons other than the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P review in the Commission’s Public Applicant. Reference Room in Washington, DC. The Commission encourages There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the electronic submission of protests and
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29299
interventions in lieu of paper using the (Bonneville), PacifiCorp, and Idaho Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Power Company, pursuant to Rule on May 26, 2005. Persons unable to file electronically 207(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of 7. PPL University Park, LLC should submit an original and 14 copies Practice and Procedures, 18 CFR of the protest or intervention to the 385.207(a)(2), filed a petition for a [Docket No. ER02–1327–003] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, declaratory order on a conceptual Take notice that on May 9, 2005, PPL 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC proposal in reference to certain issues of University Park, LLC (PPL University 20426. importance to the further development Park) submitted an updated market This filing is accessible on-line at of Grid West. power analysis and updated tariff sheets http://www.ferc.gov, using the Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time to incorporate the change in status ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for on May 27, 2005. reporting requirement adopted by the review in the Commission’s Public Commission in Order No. 652, Reference Room in Washington, DC. 3. Coral Power, L.L.C.; Coral Energy Management, LLC Reporting Requirement for Changes in There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Status for Public Utilities With Market- Web site that enables subscribers to [Docket Nos. ER96–25–027, ER01–1363–005] Based Rate Authority, 70 FR 8253 (Feb. receive e-mail notification when a Take notice that on May 4, 2005, 18, 2005), FERC Stats. & Regs., document is added to a subscribed Coral Power, L.L.C. (Coral Power) and Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,175 (2005). docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Coral Energy Management, LLC (Coral PPL University Park states that copies Online service, please e-mail EM) (together, Coral Entities) submitted of the filing were served on parties on [email protected], or call a notice of change in status describing the official service list in the above- (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call a change in the upstream ownership of captioned proceeding. (202) 502–8659. the Coral Entities. In addition, Coral Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Magalie R. Salas, Power and Coral EM each submitted a on May 31, 2005. revised market-based rate tariff sheet Secretary. 8. Mirant Oregon, LLC which incorporates the Commission’s [FR Doc. E5–2551 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] change in status reporting requirement [Docket No. ER02–1331–007] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P set forth in Order No. 652. Coral Power Take notice that on May 5, 2005, and Coral EM requests an effective date Mirant Oregon, LLC submitted a of March 21, 2005. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY compliance filing pursuant to the Coral Power and Coral EM state that Commission’s letter order issued April Federal Energy Regulatory copies of the filing were served upon all 5, 2005 in Docket Nos. ER99–1435–007 Commission persons listed on the official service and ER02–1331–005. lists compiled by the Secretary in the Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time [Docket No. EC05–43–000, et al.] above-captioned dockets. on May 26, 2005. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Exelon Corporation, et al.; Electric on May 25, 2005. 9. Chehalis Power Generating Limited Rate and Corporate Filings Partnership 4. Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. May 13, 2005. [Docket No. ER03–717–002] The following filings have been made [Docket No. ER98–4289–004] Take notice that on May 5, 2005, with the Commission. The filings are Take notice that on May 9, 2005, Chehalis Power Generating Limited listed in ascending order within each Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. (Montana- Partnership (Chehalis) filed a docket classification. Dakota) submitted for filing an notification of change in status. amendment to its updated market power Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 1. Exelon Corporation, Public Service analysis filed on October 18, 2004 in on May 26, 2005. Enterprise Group Incorporated Docket No. ER98–4289–003. 10. Pacific Gas and Electric Company [Docket No. EC05–43–000] Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Take notice that on May 10, 2005, on May 31, 2005. [Docket No. ER04–242–002] Exelon Corporation and its subsidiaries 5. Puget Sound Energy, Inc. Take notice that on May 5, 2005, that are PUBLIC utilities subject to the Pacific Gas and Electric Company Commission’s jurisdiction (collectively, [Docket No. ER99–845–009] submitted a compliance filing pursuant Exelon) and Public Service Enterprise Take notice that on May 4, 2005, to the Commission’s order issued April Group Incorporated and its subsidiaries Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (Puget) 27, 2005 in Docket No. ER04–115–002, that are public utilities subject to the submitted a compliance filing pursuant et al., 111 FERC ¶ 61,125 (2005). Commission’s jurisdiction (collectively, to the Commission’s order issued April Pacific Gas and Electric Company PSEG) submitted an answer to various 13, 2005 in Docket No. ER99–845–003, states that copies of the filing were motions to intervene, protests and et al., 111 FERC ¶ 61,020 (2005). served on parties on the official service requests for hearing which provides Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time list in the above-captioned proceeding. certain additions to their proposal filed on May 25, 2005. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 26, 2005. on February 4, 2005 as supplemented on 6. Indigo Generation, LLC; Larkspur February 9, 2005. Energy LLC; Wildflower Energy LP 11. California Independent System Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Operator Corporation on May 27, 2005. [Docket No. ER01–1822–004] Take notice that on May 5, 2005, [Docket No. ER05–224–002] 2. Bonneville Power Administration, Indigo Generation LLC, Larkspur Energy Take notice that on May 9, 2005, the PacifiCorp, Idaho Power Company LLC and Wildflower Energy LP California Independent System Operator [Docket No. EL05–106–000] submitted a compliance filing pursuant Corporation (ISO) submitted a Take notice that on April 29, 2005, to the Commission’s order issued April compliance filing pursuant to the Bonneville Power Administration 5, 2005 in Docket No. ER01–1822–003. Commission’s April 8, 2005 order in
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29300 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Docket Nos. ER05–224–000 and 001, AEPSC states that copies of the filing the Commission a Fifth Informational 111 FERC ¶ 61,015. The ISO states that were served on all parties on the official Filing to Golden Spread Rate Schedule the filing also contains clean-up changes service list in the above-captioned No. 35. Golden Spread states that the to ISO Tariff sheets. proceedings. Fifth Informational Filing updates the The ISO states that it has served Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time formulary fixed costs associated with copies of this filing upon the California on May 31, 2005. replacement energy sales by Golden Public Utilities Commission, the Spread to Southwestern Public Service 15. Midwest Independent Transmission California Energy Commission, the Company (Southwestern). System Operator, Inc. California Electricity Oversight Board, Golden Spread states that a copy of all parties with effective Scheduling [Docket No. ER05–944–000] this filing has been served upon Coordinator Service Agreements under Take notice that on May 9, 2005, the Southwestern. the ISO Tariff, and all parties on the Midwest Independent Transmission Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time official service list for the captioned System Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) on May 31, 2005. docket. In addition, the ISO is posting submitted revisions to the Midwest this filing on the ISO Home Page. 18. Southern California Edison ISO’s Open Access Transmission and Company Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Energy Markets Tariff, Attachment L on May 31, 2005. (Credit Policy). The Midwest ISO [Docket No. ER05–947–000] 12. Hot Spring Power Company, LP requested an effective date of July 8, Take notice that on May 9, 2005, 2005. Southern California Edison Company [Docket No. ER05–570–003] The Midwest ISO states that it has (SCE) submitted the Bear Valley Project Take notice that on May 5, 2005, Hot electronically served a copy of this Distribution System Facilities Spring Power Company, LP (Hot Spring) filing on all Midwest ISO Members, Agreement (Facilities Agreement) filed a notification of change in status. Member representatives of Transmission between SCE and the Southern Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Owners and Non-Transmission Owners, California Water Company (SCWC). SCE on May 26, 2005. the Midwest ISO Advisory Committee states that the Facilities Agreement 13. American Electric Power Service participants, and all state commissions specifies the terms and conditions Corporation within the region. In addition, the pursuant to which SCE will engineer, [Docket No. ER05–758–001] Midwest ISO states that the filing has design, construct, install, own, operate, been electronically posted on the and maintain, and SCWC will pay for, Take notice that on May 6, 2005, Midwest ISO’s Web site at http:// the Distribution System Facilities as American Electric Power Service www.midwestiso.org under the heading described in Exhibit A to the Facilities Corporation (AEPSC) on behalf of the ‘‘Filings to FERC’’ for other interested Agreement such that the Bear Valley AEP operating companies in its East parties in this matter. Zone, (namely Appalachian Power Project can operate in parallel with Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Company, Columbus Southern Power SCE’s electric system on a permanent Company, Indiana Michigan Power on May 31, 2005. basis. SCE states that copies of the filing Company, Kentucky Power Company, 16. ISO New England Inc. and New were served upon the Public Utilities Kingsport Power Company, Ohio Power England Power Pool Participants Commission of the State of California Company, and Wheeling Power Committee Company) submitted an amendment to and SCWC. [Docket No. ER05–945–000] its March 30, 2005 filing in Docket No. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time ER05–758–000 regarding an Take notice that on May 9, 2005, ISO on May 31, 2005. Interconnection and Local Delivery New England Inc. (the ISO) and the New 19. StratErgy, Inc. Service Agreement between AEP and England Power Pool (NEPOOL) Hooiser Energy Rural Electric Participants Committee submitted a [Docket No. ER05–948–00] Cooperative, Inc. one-year modification of the rating Take notice that on May 6, 2005, AEPSC states that copies of the filing requirement for the insurance company StratErgy, Inc. (StratErgy) filed a notice were served on all parties on the official providing credit insurance under the of cancellation of its market-based rate service list in the above-captioned ISO Financial Assurance Policy for electric tariff, Rate Schedule FERC No. proceeding. Market Participants, which constitutes 1. StratErgy has requested an effective Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time section IA of the ISO’s Transmission, date of May 6, 2005. on May 31, 2005. Markets and Services Tariff, FERC StratErgy states that copies of the Electric Tariff No. 3. filing were not served upon any party, 14. American Electric Power Service The ISO and NEPOOL state that paper because such cancellation affects no Corporation copies of said filing were sent to the purchasers under StratErgy’s Rate [Docket No. ER05–824–001] New England state governors and Schedule FERC No. 1. Take notice that on May 6, 2005, regulatory agencies, and electronic Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time American Electric Power Service copies were sent to all NEPOOL on May 31, 2005. Participants, which constitute the ISO’s Corporation (AEPSC) on behalf of the 20. Midwest Independent Transmission Governance Participants. AEP operating companies in its East System Operator, Inc. Zone, (namely Appalachian Power Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Company, Columbus Southern Power on May 31, 2005. [Docket No. ER05–949–000] Company, Indiana Michigan Power 17. Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Take notice that on May 9, 2005, the Company, Kentucky Power Company, Inc. Midwest Independent Transmission Kingsport Power Company, Ohio Power System Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) Company, and Wheeling Power [Docket No. ER05–946–000] submitted a Large Generator Company) submitted an amendment to Take notice that on May 9, 2005, Interconnection Agreement among the its April 13, 2005 filing in Docket No. Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc. Power Partners Midwest, LLC, the ER05–824–000. (Golden Spread) tendered for filing with Midwest ISO and Northern Indiana
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29301
Public Service Company. Midwest ISO DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Comment Date—This item will requests an effective date of April 18, indicate the comment date for the 2005. Federal Energy Regulatory particular filing. Commission Midwest ISO states that a copy of this The ‘‘Combined Notice of Filings’’ will be indexed in eLibrary as follows, filing was served on Power Partners Combined Filing Notices; Notice for example: ‘‘Combined Notice of Midwest, LLC and Northern Indiana Announcing New Combined Notice of Filings, May 20, 2005: This notice Public Service Company. Filings contains information concerning Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time May 13, 2005. multiple filings received by FERC.’’ The on May 31, 2005. Effective May 17, 2005, the Commission may issue more than one ‘‘Combined Notice of Filings’’ on any Standard Paragraph Commission will use a new method, Combined Notice of Filings, to issue given day. In this case, the eLibrary Any person desiring to intervene or to notices of filings. Initially, this new index will read as follows, for example: protest this filing must file in method will apply only to electric rate ‘‘Combined Notice of Filings; May 20, accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of filings. In time, the Commission expects 2005 #2: This notice contains the Commission’s Rules of Practice and to issue the majority of notices of filings information concerning multiple filings Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and using the new method. In the future, the received by FERC.’’ The Commission first announced the 385.214). Protests will be considered by Office of the Secretary will announce by new ‘‘Combined Notice of Filings’’ the Commission in determining the public notice the start-up date for the during the April 13, 2004 open meeting. appropriate action to be taken, but will new notice method with respect to other The ‘‘Combined Notice of Filings’’ is not serve to make protestants parties to types of filings. As a result of this initiative, the Office similar to the electric rate group notices the proceeding. Any person wishing to that the Commission currently become a party must file a notice of of the Secretary is making the following changes to the filing procedures for publishes in the Federal Register. By intervention or motion to intervene, as this initiative, the Commission seeks to appropriate. Such notices, motions, or electric rate filings: 1. Filers are no longer required to simplify the manner in which the protests must be filed on or before the include draft notices in floppy disk Commission’s staff prepares notices and comment date. Anyone filing a motion format with the filing. thereby expedite the public issuance of to intervene or protest must serve a copy 2. Filers requesting a short comment notices. of that document on the Applicant and period for the filing must clearly state A sample ‘‘Combined Notice of all parties to this proceeding. such request in the ‘‘Re:’’ section of the Filings’’ is attached. The Commission encourages filing, for example: Magalie R. Salas, electronic submission of protests and Re: Hot Spring Power Company Secretary. interventions in lieu of paper using the ___ Docket No. ER05– Attachment ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Request for shortened comment Persons unable to file electronically period. SAMPLE should submit an original and 14 copies The notices issued under the new United States of America Federal Energy of the protest or intervention to the method will be added to eLibrary and Regulatory Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, will be published in the Federal Notice of Filings (Thursday, May 12, 2005) 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Register under the name ‘‘Combined Take notice that the Commission received 20426. Notice of Filings.’’ These new notices the following electric rate filings. will list between 10 and 20 filings This filing is accessible on-line at Docket Numbers: ER00–2603–003. already incorporated into eLibrary. Each http://www.ferc.gov, using the Applicants: Trigen-Syracuse Energy filing will be listed with its identifying Corporation. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for details as follows: Description: Trigen-Syracuse Energy Corp review in the Commission’s Public Docket Number—This item will advises FERC of the changes to the Triennial Reference Room in Washington, DC. contain a hyperlink to the eLibrary Market Power Update under ER00–2603. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the docket sheet for the docket number. Filed Date: 05/10/2005. Web site that enables subscribers to Name of Applicant(s)—This item will Accession Number: 20050511–0295. receive e-mail notification when a Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on show the applicant name as it appears Tuesday, May 31, 2005. document is added to a subscribed on the filing. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Docket Numbers: ER05–952–000. Description—This item will contain a Applicants: Western Systems Power Pool. Online service, please e-mail basic description of the filing and a Description: Western Systems Power Pool, [email protected], or call hyperlink that will open the filed Inc requests for FERC to amend the WSPP (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call document in eLibrary, as stored in Agreement to include the City of Corona (202) 502–8659. eLibrary. Department of Water and Power et al as Filing Date—This item will show the members under ER05–952. Linda Mitry, date on which the document was filed Filed Date: 05/10/2005. Deputy Secretary. with the Commission. Accession Number: 20050511–0293. [FR Doc. E5–2566 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Accession Number—This item will Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2005. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P contain a hyperlink that will open the ‘‘Info’’ area of eLibrary for the filed Docket Numbers: ER05–953–000. document. There may be instances in Applicants: Phelps Dodge Power Marketing, LLC. which the accession number for the Description: Application for market-based particular filing changes after issuance rate authorization, certain waivers and of the combined notice. In this case, the blanket authorizations re Phelps Dodge user will have to search eLibrary to Power Marketing, LLC under ER05–953. access the document. Filed Date: 05/10/2005.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29302 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Accession Number: 20050511–0291. call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, may affect the responsibilities of a Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on call (202) 502–8659. particular resource agency, they must Tuesday, May 31, 2005. [FR Doc. E5–2546 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] also serve a copy of the document on Docket Numbers: ER05–954–000. that resource agency. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Applicants: USGen New England, Inc. l. This application has been accepted Description: USGen New England, Inc for filing, but is not ready for submits a notice of cancellation of its FERC DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY environmental analysis at this time. Electric Rate Tariff, Original Volume 1 under m. The proposed project would ER05–954. Federal Energy Regulatory consist of two developments, West Filed Date: 05/10/2005. Commission Valley A and West Valley Alternative Accession Number: 20050511–0298. B–1. Alternative B–2 has been deleted Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Notice of Site Visit, Scoping Meetings, from the proposed project (applicant’s Tuesday, May 31, 2005. and Soliciting Scoping Comments response to deficiencies, filed October 25, 2004). Any person desiring to intervene or to May 12, 2005. West Valley A run-of river protest in any of the above proceedings Take notice that the following development would have a capacity of must file in accordance with Rules 211 hydroelectric exemption application has 1.0 MW and consists of: (1) An existing and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of been filed with the Commission and is concrete diversion structure; (2) an Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 available for public inspection. existing intake structure; (3) 11,600 feet and 385.214) on or before 5 pm Eastern a. Type of Application: Exemption of of open canal; (4) a proposed concrete time on the specified comment date. It a Major Hydropower Project 5 MW or overflow structure; (5) a proposed 2,800 is not necessary to separately intervene Less. feet of new canal; (6) a proposed again in a subdocket related to a b. Project: West Valley A&B Hydro penstock; (7) a proposed powerhouse; compliance filing if you have previously Project No. 12053–001. (8) a proposed tailrace pipe; (9) a intervened in the same docket. Protests c. Date Filed: July 18, 2003. proposed transmission line; and (10) will be considered by the Commission d. Applicant: Mr. Nicholas Josten. appurtenant facilities. The applicant in determining the appropriate action to e. Location: On the South Fork of the estimates that the total average annual be taken, but will not serve to make Pit River in Modoc County, California. generation would be 3,300,000 kWh. protestants parties to the proceeding to The project would be located on West Valley Alternative B–1 run-of- the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion approximated 31 acres of federal lands, river development would have a to intervene or protest must serve a copy managed by Forest Service (FS) and capacity of 1.36 MW and consists of: (1) of that document on the Applicant. For Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The existing West Valley Dam and filings on or before the comment f. Filed Pursuant to: Public Utility outlet works; (2) a new bypass valve deadline, it is not necessary to serve Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, 16 attached to the existing dam outlet pipe; copies on persons other than the U.S.C. §§ 2705, 2708. (3) a proposed penstock; (4) a proposed Applicant. g. Applicant Contact: Mr. Nicholas powerhouse; (5) a proposed tailrace The Commission encourages Josten, (208) 528–6152, canal; (6) a proposed transmission line; electronic submission of protests and [email protected], 2742 St Charles and (7) appurtenant facilities. The interventions in lieu of paper, using the Ave, Idaho Falls, ID 83404. applicant estimates that the total FERC Online links at http:// h. FERC Contact: Susan O’Brien, (202) average annual generation would be www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic 502–8449 or [email protected]. 4,730,000 kWh. service, persons with Internet access i. FS Contact: Jayne Biggerstaff, (530) n. A copy of the application is who will eFile a document and/or be 283–7768 or [email protected]. available for review at the Commission listed as a contact for an intervenor j. BLM Contact: Phil Rhinehart, (530) in the Public Reference Room or may be _ must create and validate an 233–7907 or phil [email protected]. viewed on the Commission’s Web site at eRegistration account using the k. Deadline for filing scoping http://www.ferc.gov using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling comments: July 11, 2005. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket line to log on and submit the All documents (original and eight number excluding the last three digits in intervention or protests. copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. the docket number field to access the Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy document. For assistance, contact FERC Persons unable to file electronically Regulatory Commission, 888 First Online Support at should submit an original and 14 copies Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. [email protected] or toll- of the intervention or protest to the Scoping comments may be filed free at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, electronically via the Internet in lieu of (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC paper. The Commission strongly for inspection and reproduction at the 20426. encourages electronic filings. See 18 address in item g. above. The filings in the above proceedings CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the You may also register online at are accessible in the Commission’s instructions on the Commission’s Web http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ eLibrary system by clicking on the site (http://www.ferc.gov) through the esubscription.asp to be notified via e- appropriate link in the above list. They Commission’s eLibrary using the mail of new filings and issuances are also available for review in the ‘‘Documents & Filing’’ link. related to this or other pending projects. Commission’s Public Reference Room in The Commission’s Rules of Practice For assistance, contact FERC Online Washington, DC. There is an require all intervenors filing documents Support. eSubscription link on the Web site that with the Commission to serve a copy of o. By Letter of Understanding enables subscribers to receive e-mail that document on each person on the executed on April 18, 2005, the Forest notification when a document is added official service list for the project. Service (FS) and Bureau of Land to a subscribed docket(s). For Assistance Further, if an intervenor files comments Management (BLM) will be cooperating with any FERC Online service, please e- or documents with the Commission agencies regarding the Commission’s mail [email protected] or relating to the merits of an issue that actions on the West Valley Project,
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29303
including consultation, submission of at (202) 502–8449 or www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link additional information requests, and [email protected] by June 9, 2005. [see item (n.) above]. The Scoping cooperation in the preparation of The time and location of the site visit is meetings and site visit are posted on the scoping and environmental documents. as follows: Commission’s calendar located on the The FS and BLM will make Internet at http://www.ferc.gov/ Public Site Visit independent decisions to determine EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along whether, and under what conditions, to Date: Tuesday, June 14, 2005. with other related information. authorize the construction, operation Time: 9 a.m.–3 p.m. (PDT). Objectives: At the scoping meetings, and maintenance of the hydropower Place: Meet at Likely Fire Hall (in staff will: (1) Summarize the project on Federal lands. parking lot), Route 395, Likely, environmental issues tentatively This scoping process will also satisfy California. identified for analysis in the EA; (2) the scoping responsibilities of the FS Scoping Meetings: Commission staff solicit from the meeting participants all and BLM, as required by National will hold two scoping meetings in the available information, especially Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and project area to ensure all interested empirical data, on the resources at issue; the agencies’ regulations. The FS and parties have an opportunity to attend. (3) encourage statements from experts BLM will conduct ongoing consultation All interested resource agencies, non- and participants on issues that should with the affected and interested Indian governmental organizations, Native be analyzed in the EA, including Tribes in order to meet FS and BLM American tribes, and individuals are viewpoints in opposition to, or in consultation commitments. invited to attend one or both of the support of, the staff’s preliminary view; p. Scoping Process: The Commission meetings. The times and locations of (4) determine the resource issues to be intends to prepare a single these meetings are as follows: addressed in the EA; and (5) identify environmental document in accordance those issues that do not require a with NEPA. The environmental Daytime Public Scoping Meeting detailed analysis. assessment (EA) will consider both site- Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2005. specific and cumulative environmental Time: 10 a.m. (PDT). Procedures: The meetings will be effects and reasonable alternatives to the Place: Likely Fire Hall, Route 395, recorded by a stenographer and become proposed action. Likely California. part of the formal record of the Site Visit: Commission staff, along Commission proceeding on the project. with FS, BLM, and the applicant will Evening Pubic Scoping Meeting Individuals, organizations, resource conduct a site visit to the proposed Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2005. agencies, and Indian tribes with project area on Wednesday, June 15, Time: 6:30 p.m. (PDT). environmental expertise and concerns 2005. All interested parties and Place: Likely Fire Hall, Route 395, are encouraged to attend the meetings individuals are invited to attend. Please Likely California. and to assist Commission staff in note that the site visit may involve Copies of the Scoping Document (SD) defining and clarifying the issues to be extensive walking. Participants in the outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the EA. site visit will need to provide their own addressed in the EA were mailed to all q. Procedural schedule: The transportation (carpooling will be parties on the Commission’s mailing list application will be processed according encouraged) and bring their own lunch/ and will be available at the scoping to the following Hydro Exemption water. Anyone planning to attend the meetings. Copies may also be viewed on Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will site visit needs to contact Susan O’Brien the Commission’s Web site at http:// be made as appropriate.
Major milestone Target date
Issue Scoping Document ...... May 2005. Site visit and Scoping Meetings ...... June 14–15, 2005. Scoping Comments due ...... July 11, 2005. Additional Information Request (AIR) ...... August 2005. AIR Response due from Applicant ...... November 2005. Notice that application is ready for environmental analysis ...... November 2005. Comments, Terms and Conditions due ...... January 2006. Reply Comments due ...... March 2006. Environmental Assessment Issued ...... April 2006. Ready for Commission’s decision on the application ...... June 2006.
Magalie R. Salas, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY with the Commission and is available Secretary. for public inspection. [FR Doc. E5–2532 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory a. Type of Application: New Major License. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Commission b. Project No.: 2219–020. Notice of Application Tendered for c. Date Filed: April 29, 2005. Filing With the Commission, and d. Applicant: Garkane Energy Establishing Procedural Schedule for Cooperative, Inc. (Garkane). Relicensing and a Deadline for e. Name of Project: Boulder Creek Submission of Final Amendments Hydroelectic Project. f. Location: On Boulder Creek about 6 May 13, 2005. miles north of the town of Boulder in Take notice that the following Garfield County, Utah. About 31.74 hydroelectric application has been filed acres are located on the Dixie National Forest.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29304 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power located at the downstream end of the date of the notice of ready for Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). penstock with an installed capacity of environmental analysis. h. Applicant Contact: John 1,400 kW; (7) an afterbay re-regulating Magalie R. Salas, Spendlove, P.E., Jones and DeMille pool formed by a 12-foot-high earth- Engineering, 1535 South 100 West, filled dam with gates and ditches; (8) a Secretary. Richfield, UT 84710; (435) 896–8266. 35,000-foot-long, 7.2-kilovolt (kV) [FR Doc. E5–2547 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] i. FERC Contact: Dianne Rodman distribution and communication line BILLING CODE 6717–01–P (202) 502–6077, E-mail: from the West Fork dam to the East Fork [email protected]. dam and on to the Peterson Plant j. Cooperating agencies: We are asking powerhouse; (9) a 4,725-foot-long, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies 12.47/7.2-kV distribution and with jurisdiction and/or special Federal Energy Regulatory communication line from the Peterson Commission expertise with respect to environmental Plant powerhouse to the Boulder Plant issues to cooperate with us in the substation; (10) a 100-foot-long, 2,400- [Docket No. AD05–11–000 and ER02–1656– preparation of the environmental volt transmission line connecting the 000] document. Agencies who would like to Boulder Plant powerhouse with the Energy Infrastructure and Investment request cooperating status should follow Boulder Plant substation; and (11) other in California, California Independent the instructions for filing comments appurtenant structures and equipment. System Operator Corporation; Notice described in item l below. Garkane proposes to reconstruct the of Technical Conference k. Deadline for requests for West Fork dam to provide storage for cooperating agency status: June 28, fishery enhancement. Garkane would May 13, 2005. 2005. increase the height of the dam by 12.5 All documents (original and eight Take notice that the Federal Energy feet to a new height of 36.5 feet, copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Regulatory Commission in conjunction resulting in a surface area of about 4.8 Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy with California state agencies, will host acres and a storage capacity of 54.2 acre- Regulatory Commission, 888 First a technical conference on Thursday, feet. Garkane would continue to operate Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. June 2, 2005, to discuss energy The Commission’s Rules of Practice the project in run-of-river mode. infrastructure and investment in require all intervenors filing documents n. A copy of the application is California. The conference will be held with the Commission to serve a copy of available for review at the Commission in San Francisco, California. The that document on each person on the in the Public Reference Room or may be conference is scheduled to begin at 9 official service list for the project. viewed on the Commission’s Web site at a.m. (PST) and end at approximately 3 Further, if an intervenor files comments http://www.ferc.gov using the p.m. A separate notice will be issued by or documents with the Commission ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket the Commission to announce the exact relating to the merits of an issue that number excluding the last three digits in location and final agenda. FERC may affect the responsibilities of a the docket number field to access the Commissioners will attend and particular resource agency, they must document. For assistance, contact FERC participate. also serve a copy of the document on Online Support at The purpose of the conference is for that resource agency. [email protected] or toll- the Commission and state officials to Requests for cooperating agency status free at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, discuss with industry representatives may be filed electronically via the (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available the current and future state of Internet in lieu of paper. The for inspection and reproduction at the infrastructure development and Commission strongly encourages address in item h above. investment in California. We look electronic filings. See 18 CFR You may also register online at forward to an informative discussion of 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ the issues to clarify how we can on the Commission’s Web site (http:// esubscription.asp to be notified via facilitate and enhance a comprehensive www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. email of new filings and issuances collaborative approach to energy l. This application is not ready for related to this or other pending projects. infrastructure development and environmental analysis at this time. For assistance, contact FERC Online reliability for California. m. The existing project consists of: (1) Support. The Commission is now soliciting The West Fork rock-filled 20-foot-high, o. Procedural schedule and final nominations for speakers at the 30-foot-long diversion dam with amendments: The application will be technical conference. Persons wishing ungated spillway and gates on the West processed according to the following to nominate themselves as speakers Fork of Boulder Creek; (2) a buried Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to should do so using this electronic link: 17,600-foot-long, 27-inch-diameter the schedule will be made as http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/ concrete conduit running from the West appropriate. registration/infra-06-02-speaker- Fork dam to the East Fork of Boulder Issue Acceptance or Deficiency form.asp. Such nomination must be Creek; (3) the East Fork earth-filled 29- Letter—June 2005. made before the close of business on foot-high, 630-foot-long forebay dam Request Additional Information—June May 20, 2005, so that a final agenda for with an ogee concrete spillway on the 2005. the technical conference can be drafted East Fork of Boulder Creek; (4) a 22,200- Notice Soliciting Final Terms and and published. foot-long, 31.5 to 34-inch-diameter steel Conditions—September 2005. Although registration is not a strict penstock running from the East Fork Notice of the Availability of the EA— requirement, in-person attendees are dam to the Boulder Plant powerhouse; February 2006. asked to register for the conference on- (5) the seasonally-operated Peterson Ready for Commission’s Decision on line by close of business on May 31, Plant powerhouse located about 17,000 the Application—April 2006. 2005 at http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/ feet below the East Fork dam with an Final amendments to the application registration/infra-06-02-form.asp. installed capacity of 100 kilowatts (kW); must be filed with the Commission no Transcripts of the conference will be (6) the Boulder Plant powerhouse later than 30 days from the issuance immediately available from Ace
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29305
Reporting Company (202–347–3700 or This event is posted on the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 1–800–266–6646) for a fee. They will be Commission’s calendar located at AGENCY available for the public on the http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/ [OAR–2005–0118, FRL–7915–3] Commission’s eLibrary system and on EventsList.aspx along with other related the calendar page posting for this event information. For additional information Agency Information Collection seven calendar days after FERC receives and site visit itinerary, please contact Request Activities: Proposed the transcript. Additionally, Capitol the Commission’s Office of External Collection and Comment Request for Connection offers the opportunity for Affairs at 202–502–8004. the Outer Continental Shelf Air remote listening of the conference via Regulation; EPA ICR Number 1601.06, Real Audio or a Phone Bridge Magalie R. Salas, OMB Control Number 2060–0249 Connection for a fee. Persons interested Secretary. in making arrangements should contact [FR Doc. E5–2541 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). David Reininger or Julia Morelli at BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Capitol Connection (703–933–3100) as ACTION: Notice. soon as possible or visit the Capitol SUMMARY: In compliance with the Connection Web site at http:// DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY www.capitolconnection.org and click on Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. ‘‘FERC.’’ Federal Energy Regulatory 3501 et seq.), this document announces As mentioned above, additional Commission that EPA is planning to submit a details on the conference, including the proposed and continuing Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of agenda, will be included in a [Docket No. PR05–8–000] supplemental notice to be issued at a Management and Budget (OMB). This is later date. You are encouraged to watch a request to renew an existing approved Northwest Natural Gas Company; collection which is scheduled to expire for additional notices. Notice of Technical Conference For additional information, please on June 30, 2005. Before submitting the contact Sarah McKinley at 202–502– May 13, 2005. ICR to OMB for review and approval, 8004, [email protected]. EPA is soliciting comments on specific Take notice that a technical aspects of the proposed information Magalie R. Salas, conference will be held on Tuesday, collection as described below. Secretary. May 24, 2005 at 1 p.m., Eastern Time, DATES: Comments must be submitted on [FR Doc. E5–2555 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] in a room to be designated at the Federal or before July 19, 2005. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. referencing docket ID number OAR– The purpose of the conference is to 2005–0118, to EPA online using DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY address Northwest Natural Gas EDOCKET (our preferred method), by e- Federal Energy Regulatory Company’s (Northwest) section 311 mail to [email protected], or by Commission petition for rate approval filed on mail to: EPA Docket Center, January 18, 2005. Northwest should be Environmental Protection Agency, Air [Docket No. CP05–92–000] prepared to discuss return on equity and and Radiation Docket, 6102T, 1200 operating statements issues. Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, Liberty Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of DC 20460. Site Visit for the Proposed Liberty Gas FERC conferences are accessible FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Storage Project under section 508 of the Rehabilitation David Sanders, Ozone Policy and Act of 1973. For accessibility May 12, 2005. Strategies Group, Mail Drop C539–02, accommodations please send an e-mail Environmental Protection Agency, 109 The staff of the Federal Energy to [email protected] or call toll free Regulatory Commission is issuing this T.W. Alexander Drive, Research (866) 208–3372 (voice) or 202–208–1659 notice to announce the date and Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; (TTY), or send a FAX to 202–208–2106 location of a site visit for the proposed telephone number: (919) 541–3356; fax with the required accommodations. Liberty Gas Storage Project in Calcasieu number: (919) 541–0824; e-mail address: and Beauregard Parishes, Louisiana. The All interested parties and staff are [email protected]. project consists of two natural gas permitted to attend. For further SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA storage caverns; four injection and information please contact Aileen Roder has established a public docket for this withdrawal wells, two compressor at (202) 502–6022 or e-mail ICR under Docket ID number OAR– stations, approximately 1.3 miles of 20- [email protected]. 2005–0118, which is available for public inch-diameter pipeline, approximately viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket 23.3 miles of 30-inch-diameter pipeline Magalie R. Salas, in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), with associated facilities and four Secretary. EPA West, Room B102, 1301 meter/regulator stations. [FR Doc. E5–2548 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, The site visit will be held on BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Wednesday May 18, 2005, starting at Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. (CST) from the Best Suites, 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 401 Lakeshore Drive, Lake Charles, excluding legal holidays. The telephone Louisiana. The site visit will include an number for the Reading Room is (202) aerial over flight followed by a ground 566–1744, and the telephone number for inspection of the project. Anyone the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) interested in participating in the site 566–1742. An electronic version of the visit may attend, but all participants public docket is available through EPA must provide their own transportation. Dockets (EDOCKET) at http://
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29306 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
www.epa.gov/edocket. Use EDOCKET to Hazardous Air Pollutants Standards (iv) Minimize the burden of the obtain a copy of the draft collection of (NESHAPS), the Federal operating collection of information on those who information, submit or view public permit program, and the enhanced are to respond, including through the comments, access the index listing of compliance and monitoring regulations. use of appropriate automated electronic, the contents of the public docket, and to Before any agency, department, or mechanical, or other technological access those documents in the public instrumentality of the Federal collection techniques or other forms of docket that are available electronically. Government engages in, supports in any information technology, e.g., permitting Once in the system, select ‘‘search,’’ way, provides financial assistance for, electronic submission of responses. then key in the docket ID number licenses, permits, approves any activity, Burden Statement identified above. that agency has the affirmative Any comments related to this ICR responsibility to ensure that such action Total Industry Respondent Burden and should be submitted to EPA within 60 conforms to the State implementation Costs days of this notice. The EPA’s policy is plan (SIP) for the attainment and that public comments, whether The estimated industry respondent maintenance of the national ambient air burden for total labor hours and costs submitted electronically or in paper, quality standards (NAAQS). An agency will be made available for public associated with one-time/periodic may not conduct or sponsor, and a activities are estimated to be 30,791 viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives person is not required to respond to, a them and without change, unless the hours and $2,129,966, respectively. collection of information request unless Total labor hours and costs associated comment contains copyrighted material, it displays a currently valid OMB Confidential Business Information (CBI), with annual activities are estimated to control number. The OMB control be 30,645 hours and $2,121,633, or other information whose public numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 disclosure is restricted by statute. When respectively. Total industry respondent CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 costs annualized over the 3-year time EPA identifies a comment containing CFR chapter 15. Section 176(c) of the copyrighted material, EPA will provide period are estimated to be $2,098,753 Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) per year. a reference to that material in the requires that all Federal actions conform version of the comment that is placed in with the SIPs to attain and maintain the Total State and Local Agency Burden EDOCKET. The entire printed comment, NAAQS. Depending on the type of and Costs including the copyrighted material, will action, the Federal entities must collect The estimated State and local agency be available in the public docket. information themselves, hire Although identified as an item in the burden for total labor hours and costs consultants to collect the information or associated with one-time/periodic official docket, information claimed as require applicants/sponsors of the CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise activities are estimated to be 4,812 Federal action to provide the hours and $259,879, respectively. Total restricted by statute, is not included in information. the official public docket, and will not labor hours and costs associated with The type and quantity of information annual activities for that time period are be available for public viewing in required will depend on the EDOCKET. For further information estimated to be 4,788 hours and circumstances surrounding the action. about the electronic docket, see EPA’s $258,578, respectively. Total costs First, the entity must make an Federal Register notice describing the annualized over the 3-year time period applicability determination. If the electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 (May are estimated to be $255,006 per year. source is located within 25 miles of the 31, 2002), or go to http://www.epa.gov./ State’s seaward boundaries as Total EPA Burden and Costs edocket. Affected entities: Entities potentially established in the regulations, the The estimated EPA burden for total affected by this action are all outer requirements are the same as those that labor hours and costs associated with continental shelf sources except those would be applicable if the source were one-time only activities are estimated to located in the Gulf of Mexico west of located in the COA. State and local air be 1,537 hours and $102,000, 87.5 degrees longitude (near the border pollution control agencies are usually respectively. Total labor hours and costs of Florida and Alabama). For sources requested to provide information associated with annual activities are located within 25 miles of States’ concerning regulation of offshore estimated to be 1,528 hours and seaward boundaries, the requirements sources and are provided opportunities $101,586, respectively. Total costs are the same as those that would be to comment on the proposed annualized over the 3-year time period applicable if the source were located in determinations. The public is also are estimated to be $100,448 per year. the corresponding onshore area (COA). provided an opportunity to comment on Burden means the total time, effort, or In States affected by this rule, State the proposed determinations. financial resources expended by persons boundaries extend three miles from the The EPA would like to solicit to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose coastline, except off the coast of the comments to: or provide information to or for a Florida Panhandle, where the State’s (i) Evaluate whether the proposed Federal agency. This includes the time boundary extends three leagues (about collection of information is necessary needed to review instructions; develop, nine miles) from the coastline. for the proper performance of the acquire, install, and utilize technology Title: Outer Continental Shelf Air functions of the Agency, including and systems for the purposes of Regulations, EPA ICR Number 1601.06 whether the information will have collecting, validating, and verifying and OMB Control Number 2060.0249, practical utility; information, processing and expiration date: October 31, 2005. (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the maintaining information, and disclosing Abstract: Sources located beyond 25 Agency’s estimate of the burden of the and providing information; adjust the miles of States’ boundaries are subject to proposed collection of information, existing ways to comply with any Federal requirements (implemented and including the validity of the previously applicable instructions and enforced solely by EPA) for Prevention methodology and assumptions used; requirements; train personnel to be able of Significant Deterioration (PSD), New (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and to respond to a collection of Source Performance Standards (NSPS), clarity of the information to be information; search data sources; National Emissions Standards for collected; and complete and review the collection of
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29307
information; and transmit or otherwise Ends: 07/20/2005, Contact: Terri ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION disclose the information. Knutson 775–885–6156. AGENCY Dated: May 16, 2005. EIS No. 20050196, Draft EIS, NPS, UT, [ER–FRL–6663–6] Mary E. Henigin, Burr Trail Modification Project, Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning Proposed Road Modification Within Environmental Impact Statements and and Standards. Capitol Reef National Park, Garfield Regulations; Availability of EPA [FR Doc. 05–10145 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] County, UT, Comment Period Ends: Comments BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 07/20/2005, Contact: Chris Turk 303– 969–2832. Availability of EPA comments prepared pursuant to the Environmental EIS No. 20050197, Draft EIS, TVA, TN, Review Process (ERP), under section ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Watts Bar Reservoir Land AGENCY 309 of the Clean Air Act and Section Management Plan, Update 1988 Plan 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental [ER–FRL–6663–5] To Reflect Changing Community Policy Act as amended. Requests for Needs, Loudon, Meigs, Rhea and copies of EPA comments can be directed Environmental Impacts Statements; Roane Counties, TN, Comment Period to the Office of Federal Activities at Notice of Availability Ends: 07/05/2005, Contact: Richard L. 202–564–7167. Toennisson 865–632–8517. Responsible Agency: Office of Federal An explanation of the ratings assigned Activities, General Information (202) EIS No. 20050198, Draft EIS, AFS, WA, to draft environmental impact 564–7167 or http://www.epa.gov/ Growden Dam Sherman Creek statements (EISs) was published in FR compliance/nepa/. Restoration Project, and Forest Plan dated April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16815). Amendment #28, Implementation, Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Draft EISs Statements. Colville National Forest, Ferry Filed 05/09/2005 through 05/13/2005. County, WA, Comment Period Ends: EIS No. 20050037, ERP No. D–AFS– Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. 07/05/2005, Contact: Karen Honeycutt H65022–MO, Mark Twain National EIS No. 20050191, Final EIS, AFS, ID, 509–684–7224. Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, Implementation, Revise to the Meadows Slope Wildland Fire EIS No. 20050199, Draft EIS, DOD, DC, 1986 Land and Resource Management Protection Project, Proposes To Create Armed Forces Retirement Home Plan, Several Counties, MO. and Maintain a Fuelbreak of Reduced (AFRH–W), Proposed Master Plan for Crown Fire Hazard, Payette National Campus Located 3700 North Capitol Summary: EPA expressed Forest, New Meadows Rangers Street, NW, AFRH Trust Fund, environmental concerns about air District, Adams and Valley Counties, Washington, DC, Comment Period quality, cumulative impacts assessment, ID, Wait Period Ends: 06/20/2005, Ends: 07/05/2005, Contact: Craig and the adaptive management process. Contact: Sylvia Clark 208–347–0300. Wallwork 202–730–3038. The significant increase in prescribed EIS No. 20050192, Draft EIS, AFS, CA, burning realtive to the 1986 Forest Plan Empire Vegetation Management Amended Notices supports the need for a detailed pre- Project, Reducing Fire Hazards, burn analysis. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20050107, Draft EIS, AFS, IL, Harvesting of Trees Using Group- EIS No. 20050038, ERP No. D–BLM– Shawnee National Forest Proposed Selection (GS) and Individual Trees G65096–NM, McGregor Range Land and Resource Management Plan Selection (ITS) Methods, Mt. Hough Resource Management Plan Revision, Implementation, Alexander, Ranger District, Plumas National Amendment (RMPA), Gallatin, Hardin, Jackson, Johnson, Forest, Plumas County, CA, Comment Implementation, Otero County, NM. Massac, Pope, Union and Williamson Period Ends: 07/05/2005, Contact: Summary: EPA expressed lack of Merri Carol Martens 530–283–7689. Counties, IL, Comment Period Ends: 06/20/2005, Contact: Stephen Hupe objections for the proposed action. EIS No. 20050193, Final EIS, BIA, NV, Rating LO. Weber Dam Repair and Modification 618–253–7114. Revision of FR Notice EIS No. 20050049, ERP No. D–NOA– Project, Propose To Repair and Published on 03/18/2005: CEQ L91026–00, Pacific Coast Groundfish Modify Dam, Walker River Paiute Comment Period Ending on 06/16/ Fishery Management Plan, To Tribe, Right-of-Way Grant and U.S. 2005 Has Been Extended to 06/20/ Conserve and Enhance Essential Fish Army COE Section 404 Permit, 2005. Habitat Designation and Minimization Walker River Valley, Lyon and EIS No. 20050117, Draft EIS, BLM, NV, of Adverse Impacts, Pacific Coast Mineral Counties, NV, Wait Period Emigrant Mine Project, Develop and Exclusive Economic Zone, WA, OR, Ends: 06/20/2005, Contact: Amy Operate an Open Pit Mine, Construct and CA. Heuslein 602–379–6750. a Waste Rock Disposal Facility, South EIS No. 20050194, Final EIS, AFS, PA, of Carlin in Elko County, NV, Summary: EPA supports the Habitat Martin Run Project, To Implement Comment Period Ends: 06/24/2005, Suitability Probability modeling Management Direction as Outlined in Contact: Tom Schmidt 775–753–0200. approach used by NMFS, but has Allegheny National Forest Plan, Revision of FR Notice Published on concerns about inaccuracies and Bradford Ranger District, Allegheny 03/25/05: CEQ Comment Period limitations with the data used in the National Forest, Warren and McKean Ending 05/25/2005 has been Extended model, as acknowledged by NMFS. Counties, PA, Wait Period Ends: 06/ to 06/24/2005. Additional information is also needed 20/2005, Contact: Heather Luczak on the Fisheries Economic Assessment Dated: May 17, 2005. 814–723–5150. Model and Environmental Justice EIS No. 20050195, Draft EIS, BLM, NV, Ken Mittelholtz, analyses. Rating EC2. North Valleys Rights-of-Way Projects, Environmental Protection Specialist, Office EIS No. 20050089, ERP No. D–FHW– Proposed Construction and Operation of Federal Activities. K40257–CA, Los Banos Bypass of Water Transmission Pipelines, [FR Doc. 05–10110 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Project, Construct from CA–152 in Washoe County, NV, Comment Period BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Merced County beginning near Volta
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29308 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Road west to Los Banos, bypassing Summary: EPA previous issues have Tennessee Department of Environment Los Banos, ending near the Santa Fe been resolved, therefore EPA has no and Conservation) and 16 local Grade Road, U.S. Army COE Section objection to the action as proposed. programs (City of Huntsville Division of 404 Permit, Merced County, CA. EIS No. 20050152, ERP No. F–AFS– Natural Resources, AL; Jefferson County Summary: EPA has environmental J65411–MT, Snow Talon Fire Salvage Department of Health, AL; Broward concerns with the proposed project Project, Proposes to Salvage Harvest County Environmental Protection regarding impacts to waters of the U.S., Trees Burned in the Fire, Helena Department, FL; City of Jacksonville the scope of action, and the analysis of National Forest, Lincoln Ranger Environmental Quality Division, FL; indirect impacts. EPA recommends that District, Lewis and Clark County, MT. Hillsborough County Environmental Alternative 3M be selected as the Summary: EPA expressed concerns Protection Commission, FL; Miami- preferred alternative as it avoids about salvage logging on severely Dade County Air Quality Management permanent impacts to wetlands and the burned soils, however supports project Division, FL; Palm Beach County Health Gadwall Wildlife Area. Rating EC2. planning and design that appears to Department Division of Environmental EIS No. 20050110, ERP No. D–AFS– minimize sediment production, and Health, FL; Pinellas County Department K65279–CA, Freds Fire Restoration included restoration work to reduce of Environmental Management, FL; Project, To Reduce Long-Term Fuel existing sources of sediment. EPA Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control Loading for the Purpose of Reducing reiterates the importance that the District, KY; Forsyth County Future Fire Severity and Resistance to selected alternative avoid sediment Environmental Affairs Department, NC; delivery to streams, including 303(d) Control, Eldorado National Forest, El Mecklenburg County Land Use and Dorado County, CA. listed Blackfoot River and Copper Creek, Environmental Services Agency, NC; Summary: EPA expressed a critical bull trout spawning stream. environmental concerns about impacts Western North Carolina Regional Air Dated: May 17, 2005. Quality Agency, NC; Chattanooga- to drinking water supplies and air Ken Mittelholtz, quality, and the use of herbicides. EPA Hamilton County Air Pollution Control Environmental Protection Specialist, Office Bureau, TN; Knox County Department also requested additional information be of Federal Activities. provided on Clean Air Act of Air Quality Management, TN; [FR Doc. 05–10111 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] requirements, consultation with tribal Memphis-Shelby County Health governments, and the analysis of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Department, TN and Nashville- environmental justice issues. Rating Davidson County Metropolitan Public Health Department, TN). The 24 EC2. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION evaluations were conducted to assess EIS No. 20050116, ERP No. D–COE– AGENCY G39042–TX, PROGRAMMATIC— the agencies’ performance under the Lower Colorado River Basin Study, [FRL–7915–5] grants awarded by EPA under authority Provide Flood Damage Reduction and of section 105 of the Clean Air Act. EPA Availability of FY 04 Grant Ecosystem Restoration, Colorado Region 4 has prepared reports for each Performance Reports for States of River, TX. agency identified above and these Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, reports are now available for public Summary: EPA had no objections to Mississippi, North Carolina, South the proposed action. Rating LO. Carolina, Tennessee; All Local inspection. EIS No. 20050090, ERP No. DS–IBR– Agencies Within the States of ADDRESSES: The reports may be K64023–CA, Battle Creek Salmon and Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, North examined at the EPA’s Region 4 office, Steelhead Restoration Project, To Carolina and Tennessee 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia Address New Significant Information, Habitat Restoration in Battle Creek AGENCY: Environmental Protection 30303, in the Air, Pesticides, and Toxics and Tributaries, License Amendment Agency (EPA). Management Division. Issuance, Implementation, Tehama ACTION: Notice of availability of grantee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Shasta Counties, CA. performance evaluation reports. Marie Persinger (404) 562–9048 for Summary: EPA had no objections to SUMMARY: EPA’s grant regulations (40 information concerning the State and the proposed project. Rating LO. CFR 35.115) require the Agency to local agencies of Alabama; Miya Smith (404) 562–9091 for the State and local Final EISs evaluate the performance of agencies which receive grants. EPA’s regulations agencies of Florida, Sean Flynn (404) EIS No. 20050100, ERP No. F–HUD– for regional consistency (40 CFR 56.7) 562–9064 for the State of Mississippi K60034–CA, Marysville Hotel require that the Agency notify the and for the State and local agency of Demolition Project, Proposed public of the availability of the reports Kentucky; Mary Echols (404) 562–9053 Acquisition and Demolition of of such evaluations. EPA performed for the State of Georgia and for the State Building, City of Marysville, Yuba end-of-year evaluations of 8 state air and local agencies of North Carolina; County, CA. pollution control programs (Alabama and Rayna Brown (404) 562–9093 for Summary: No formal comment letter Department of Environmental the State of South Carolina and for the was sent to the preparing agency. Management; Florida Department of State and local agencies of Tennessee. EIS No. 20050122, ERP No. F–DOE– Environmental Protection; Georgia They may be contacted at the above K08025–00, Sahuarita-Nogales Department of Natural Resources; Region 4 address. Transmission Line, Construction and Kentucky Environmental & Public Operation of a 345,00-volt (345 kV) Protection Cabinet; Mississippi Dated: May 10, 2005. Electric Transmission Line across the Department of Environmental Quality; A. Stanley Meiburg, United States Border with Mexico, North Carolina Department of Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 4. Application for Presidential Permit, Environment and Natural Resources; [FR Doc. 05–10146 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Tucson Electric Power (TEP), Nogales, South Carolina Department of Health BILLING CODE 6560–50–P AZ. and Environmental Control; and
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29309
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION I. General Information Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still AGENCY A. Does this Action Apply to Me? access any of the publicly available [OPPT–2005–0028; FRL–7715–1] This action is directed to the public docket materials through the docket in general. This action may be of facility identified in Unit I.B.1. Once in National Advisory Committee for Acute particular interest to anyone who may the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in Exposure Guideline Levels for be affected if the AEGL values are the appropriate docket ID number. Hazardous Substances; Notice of adopted by government agencies for Public Meeting emergency planning, prevention, or II. Meeting Procedures response programs, such as EPA’s Risk For additional information on the AGENCY: Environmental Protection Management Program under the Clean scheduled meeting, the agenda of the Agency (EPA). Air Act and Amendments Section 112r. NAC/AEGL Committee, or the ACTION: Notice. It is possible that other Federal agencies submission of information on chemicals besides EPA, as well as State agencies to be discussed at the meeting, contact SUMMARY: A meeting of the National and private organizations, may adopt the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure the AEGL values for their programs. As INFORMATION CONTACT. Guideline Levels for Hazardous such, the Agency has not attempted to The meeting of the NAC/AEGL Substances (NAC/AEGL Committee) describe all the specific entities that Committee will be open to the public. will be held on June 13-15, 2005, in may be affected by this action. If you Oral presentations or statements by Washington, DC. At this meeting, the have any questions regarding the interested parties will be limited to 10 NAC/AEGL Committee will address, as applicability of this action to a minutes. Interested parties are time permits, the various aspects of the particular entity, consult the DFO listed encouraged to contact the DFO to acute toxicity and the development of under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION schedule presentations before the NAC/ Acute Exposure Guideline Levels CONTACT. AEGL Committee. Since seating for (AEGLs) for the following chemicals: outside observers may be limited, those 1,1,1-trichloroethane, allyl alcohol, bis- B. How Can I Get Copies of this wishing to attend the meeting as chloromethyl ether, bromine, calcium Document and Other Related observers are also encouraged to contact phosphide, carbon tetrachloride, Information? the DFO at the earliest possible date to chloroform, chloromethyl methyl ether, 1. Docket. EPA has established an ensure adequate seating arrangements. dimethylamine, ethylamine, ethylene official public docket for this action Inquiries regarding oral presentations oxide, hexafluoroacetone, magnesium under docket identification (ID) number and the submission of written aluminum phosphide, magnesium OPPT–2005–0028. The official public statements or chemical-specific phosphide, methanol, methylamine, docket consists of the documents information should be directed to the methyl ethyl ketone, potassium specifically referenced in this action, DFO. phosphide, propylenimine, sodium any public comments received, and phosphide, strontium phosphide, sulfur other information related to this action. III. Future Meetings dioxide, toluene, trimethylamine, Although a part of the official docket, Another meeting of the NAC/AEGL xylene and zinc phosphide. the public docket does not include Committee is scheduled for September DATES: A meeting of the NAC/AEGL Confidential Business Information (CBI) 2005 in Washington, DC. Committee will be held from 10:00 a.m. or other information whose disclosure is to 5 p.m. on June 13, 2005; 8:30 a.m. to restricted by statute. The official public List of Subjects 5:30 p.m. on June 14, 2005 and from docket is the collection of materials that Environmental protection, Chemicals, 8:00 AM to 12 noon on June 15, 2005. is available for public viewing at the Hazardous substances, Health. EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102 Reading ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Dated: May 12, 2005. the U.S. Department of Labor (Francis Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Wendy C. Hamnett, Perkins Building) 200 Constitution Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20210, Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and Toxics Rooms 3437 A, B and C (Judiciary [FR Doc. 05–10131 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Square Metrostop). excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone BILLING CODE 6560–50–S FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For number is (202) 566–1744 and the general information contact: Colby telephone number for the OPPT Docket, Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Risk which is located in EPA Docket Center, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Assessment Division (7403M), Office of is (202) 566–0280. AGENCY Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 2. Electronic access. You may access Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 this Federal Register document [OPP–2005–0100; FRL–7709–5] Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, electronically through the EPA Internet DC 20460–0001; telephone number: Pesticide Products; Registration under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at Applications (202) 554–1404; e-mail address:TSCA- http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. [email protected]. An electronic version of the public AGENCY: Environmental Protection For technical information contact: docket is available through EPA’s Agency (EPA). Paul S. Tobin, Designated Federal electronic public docket and comment ACTION: Notice. Officer (DFO), Risk Assessment Division system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA (7403M), Office of Pollution Prevention Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt and Toxics, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., to submit or view public comments, of applications to register pesticide NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; access the index listing of the contents products containing new active telephone number: (202) 564–8557; e- of the official public docket, and to ingredients not included in any mail address: [email protected]. access those documents in the public currently registered products pursuant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: docket that are available electronically. to the provisions of section 3(c)(4) of the
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29310 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and ADDRESSES: Comments may be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. submitted electronically, by mail, or Regulatory Action Leader, Registration DATES: Written comments, identified by through hand delivery/courier. Follow Division (7505C), listed in the table in the docket identification (ID) number the detailed instructions as provided in this unit: OPP–2005–0100, must be received on or Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY before June 20, 2005. INFORMATION.
Telephone number/E-mail Ad- File Symbol Regulatory Action Leader Mailing Address dress
42882–E John Hebert Environmental Protection Agency [email protected] 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., (703) 308–6249 Washington, DC 20460–0001
71768–E Daniel Peacock Do. [email protected] 71768–G (703) 305–5407
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Information and Records Integrity electronic access to all of the publicly Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall available docket materials through I. General Information #2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This EPA’s electronic public docket. A. Does this Action Apply to Me? docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to For public commenters, it is You may be potentially affected by 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, important to note that EPA’s policy is this action if you are an agricultural excluding legal holidays. The docket that public comments, whether producer, food manufacturer, or telephone number is (703) 305–5805. submitted electronically or in paper, pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 2. Electronic access. You may access will be made available for public affected entities may include, but are this Federal Register document viewing in EPA’s electronic public not limited to: electronically through the EPA Internet docket as EPA receives them and • Crop production (NAICS code 111) under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings without change, unless the comment • Animal production (NAICS code athttp://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. contains copyrighted material, CBI, or 112) An electronic version of the public other information whose disclosure is • Food manufacturing (NAICS code docket is available through EPA’s restricted by statute. When EPA 311) electronic public docket and comment identifies a comment containing • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA copyrighted material, EPA will provide code 32532) Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ a reference to that material in the This listing is not intended to be to submit or view public comments, version of the comment that is placed in exhaustive, but rather provides a guide access the index listing of the contents EPA’s electronic public docket. The for readers regarding entities likely to be of the official public docket, and to entire printed comment, including the affected by this action. Other types of access those documents in the public copyrighted material, will be available entities not listed in this unit could also docket that are available electronically. in the public docket. be affected. The North American Once in the system, select ‘‘search,’’ Public comments submitted on Industrial Classification System then key in the appropriate docket ID computer disks that are mailed or (NAICS) codes have been provided to number. delivered to the docket will be assist you and others in determining Certain types of information will not transferred to EPA’s electronic public whether this action might apply to be placed in the EPA Dockets. docket. Public comments that are certain entities. If you have any Information claimed as CBI and other mailed or delivered to the Docket will questions regarding the applicability of information whose disclosure is be scanned and placed in EPA’s this action to a particular entity, consult restricted by statute, which is not electronic public docket. Where the person listed underFOR FURTHER included in the official public docket, practical, physical objects will be INFORMATION CONTACT. will not be available for public viewing photographed, and the photograph will in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA’s be placed in EPA’s electronic public B. How Can I Get Copies of this policy is that copyrighted material will docket along with a brief description Document and Other Related not be placed in EPA’s electronic public written by the docket staff. Information? docket but will be available only in 1. Docket. EPA has established an printed, paper form in the official public C. How and to Whom Do I Submit official public docket for this action docket. To the extent feasible, publicly Comments? under docket ID number OPP–2005– available docket materials will be made You may submit comments 0100. The official public docket consists available in EPA’s electronic public electronically, by mail, or through hand of the documents specifically referenced docket. When a document is selected delivery/courier. To ensure proper in this action, any public comments from the index list in EPA Dockets, the receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate received, and other information related system will identify whether the docket ID number in the subject line on to this action. Although a part of the document is available for viewing in the first page of your comment. Please official docket, the public docket does EPA’s electronic public docket. ensure that your comments are not include Confidential Business Although not all docket materials may submitted within the specified comment Information (CBI) or other information be available electronically, you may still period. Comments received after the whose disclosure is restricted by statute. access any of the publicly available close of the comment period will be The official public docket is the docket materials through the docket marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not required to collection of materials that is available facility identified in Unit I.B.1. EPA consider these late comments. If you for public viewing at the Public intends to work towards providing wish to submit CBI or information that
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29311
is otherwise protected by statute, please WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid 3. Provide copies of any technical follow the instructions in Unit I.D. Do the use of special characters and any information and/or data you used that not use EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit form of encryption. support your views. CBI or information protected by statute. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: 4. If you estimate potential burden or 1. Electronically. If you submit an Public Information and Records costs, explain how you arrived at the electronic comment as prescribed in this Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office estimate that you provide. unit, EPA recommends that you include of Pesticide Programs (OPP), 5. Provide specific examples to your name, mailing address, and an e- Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 illustrate your concerns. mail address or other contact Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 6. Offer alternative ways to improve information in the body of your DC 20460–0001, Attention: Docket ID the registration activity. comment. Also include this contact Number OPP–2005–0100. 7. Make sure to submit your information on the outside of any disk 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver comments by the deadline in this or CD ROM you submit, and in any notice. cover letter accompanying the disk or your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, CD ROM. This ensures that you can be be sure to identify the docket ID number identified as the submitter of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. assigned to this action in the subject comment and allows EPA to contact you line on the first page of your response. in case EPA cannot read your comment 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID You may also provide the name, date, due to technical difficulties or needs and Federal Register citation. further information on the substance of Number OPP–2005–0100. Such your comment. EPA’s policy is that EPA deliveries are only accepted during the II. Registration Applications will not edit your comment, and any docket’s normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I.B.1. EPA received applications as follows identifying or contact information to register pesticide products containing provided in the body of a comment will D. How Should I Submit CBI to the active ingredients not included in any be included as part of the comment that Agency? currently registered products pursuant is placed in the official public docket, to the provision of section 3(c)(4) of Do not submit information that you and made available in EPA’s electronic FIFRA. Notice of receipt of these consider to be CBI electronically public docket. If EPA cannot read your applications does not imply a decision through EPA’s electronic public docket comment due to technical difficulties by the Agency on the applications. and cannot contact you for clarification, or by e-mail. You may claim EPA may not be able to consider your information that you submit to EPA as Products Containing Active Ingredients comment. CBI by marking any part or all of that Not Included in Any Currently i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA’s information as CBI (if you submit CBI Registered Products electronic public docket to submit on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside 1. File symbol: 42882–E. Applicant: comments to EPA electronically is of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then Gametrics Limited HC 69, Box 50, EPA’s preferred method for receiving identify electronically within the disk or Alzada, MT 59311. Product name: comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets CD ROM the specific information that is Epibloc. Type of product: Rodenticide/ athttp://www.epa.gov/edocket/, and CBI). Information so marked will not be chemosterilant. Active ingredient: follow the online instructions for disclosed except in accordance with Alpha-chlorohydrin (3-chloro-1,2- submitting comments. Once in the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. propanediol) at 1%. Proposed system, select ‘‘search,’’ and then key in In addition to one complete version of classification/Use: Restricted use--for docket ID number OPP–2005–0100. The the comment that includes any the control of Norway rats in and system is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ information claimed as CBI, a copy of around homes, industrial and system, which means EPA will not the comment that does not contain the agricultural buildings, similar man- know your identity, e-mail address, or information claimed as CBI must be made structures, dumps, and in sewers. other contact information unless you submitted for inclusion in the public 2. File symbols: 71768–E and 71768– provide it in the body of your comment. docket and EPA’s electronic public ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by G.Applicant: ChemArmor Inc., 6142 docket. If you submit the copy that does Nancy Ridge Drive, Suite 101, San e-mail [email protected], not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP– Diego, CA 92121. Product names: Bear mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM Pause II and CapSynth. Type of product: 2005–0100. In contrast to EPA’s clearly that it does not contain CBI. electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail Bear deterrent. Active ingredient: Information not marked as CBI will be Nonivamide at 2% and 98%. Proposed system is not an ‘‘anonymous access’’ included in the public docket and EPA’s system. If you send an e-mail comment classification/Use: Unclassified--to deter electronic public docket without prior bear attacks for 2% Bear Pause II directly to the docket without going notice. If you have any questions about through EPA’s electronic public docket, product and classification not CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, applicable for 98% Technical Active EPA’s e-mail system automatically please consult the person listed under captures your e-mail address. E-mail Ingredient. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. addresses that are automatically List of Subjects captured by EPA’s e-mail system are E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare included as part of the comment that is My Comments for EPA? Environmental protection, Pesticides placed in the official public docket, and and pest. You may find the following made available in EPA’s electronic suggestions helpful for preparing your public docket. Dated: May 9, 2005. iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments: Betty Shackleford, comments on a disk or CD ROM that 1. Explain your views as clearly as Acting Director, Registration Division, Office you mail to the mailing address possible. of Pesticide Programs. identified in Unit I.C.2. These electronic 2. Describe any assumptions that you [FR Doc. 05–10133 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] submissions will be accepted in used. BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29312 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION New York, Index No. CERCLA–02– five years. It received used metal and AGENCY 2005–2003. To request a copy of the dross from a number of clients, proposed settlement agreement, please including those in the printing [FRL–7915–2] contact the individual identified below. industries. EPA confirmed Proposed CERCLA Section 122(g) de FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: contamination at the Site as high as minimis Administrative Agreement James F. Doyle, Assistant Regional 15% lead in the top two feet of soil. Regarding the Li Tungsten Superfund Counsel, New York/Caribbean Other hazardous substances at the site Site, Located in Glen Cove, Nassau Superfund Branch, Office of Regional include cadmium, antimony, beryllium, County, NY Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection copper, nickel, silver, zinc, and PCBs. Agency, 17th Floor, 290 Broadway, New As a result of the release or threatened AGENCY: Environmental Protection York, New York 10007–1866. release of hazardous substances, EPA Agency. Telephone: (212) 637–3165. has undertaken response actions at or in ACTION: Notice; request for public Dated: May 4, 2005. connection with the Site under section comment. 104 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9604. William McCabe, Section 122(g) of CERCLA authorizes SUMMARY: In accordance with section Acting Division Director, Emergency EPA to consider, compromise and settle Remedial Response Division, Region 2. 122(i) of the Comprehensive certain claims incurred by the United Environmental Response, [FR Doc. 05–10144 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] States. Under the terms of the Compensation, and Liability Act of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Agreement, the de minimis Settling 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 Parties will pay a total of approximately U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given by $370,000.00 to reimburse EPA for the U.S. Environmental Protection ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY certain response costs incurred at the Agency (‘‘EPA’’), Region II, of a Site. In exchange, EPA will grant a proposed de minimis administrative [FRL–7915–4] covenant not to sue or take agreement pursuant to section 122(g) of administrative action against the Parties CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(g), pertaining Proposed Settlement Under Section for reimbursement of past-response to the Li Tungsten Site (‘‘Site’’) located 122(g) of the Comprehensive costs pursuant to section 107(a) of in Glen Cove, Nassau County, New Environmental Response, CERCLA. The Attorney General has York. The settlement requires that 22 Compensation and Liability Act approved this settlement. settling parties, identified by EPA as Regarding the Pittsburgh Metal and EPA will consider any comments having contributed a minimal volume of Equipment Superfund Site, Jersey received during the comment period hazardous substances, pay a total of City, NJ and may withdraw or withhold consent $210,970 into a special account which AGENCY: Environmental Protection to the proposed settlement if comments has been established for the Site. This disclose facts or considerations that amount is considered to be their fair Agency. ACTION: Notice of proposed indicate the proposed settlement is share of cleanup costs incurred and inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. anticipated to be incurred in the future, administrative settlement and request for public comment. EPA’s response to any comments plus a ‘‘premium’’ that accounts for, received will be available for public among other things, uncertainties SUMMARY: In accordance with section inspection at the U.S. Environmental associated with the costs of that future 122(g)(4) of the Comprehensive Protection Agency, Office of Regional work at the Site. The settlement Environmental Response, Counsel, 290 Broadway—17th Floor, includes a covenant not to sue the Compensation, and Liability Act of New York, New York 10007–1866, settling parties for claims pursuant to 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 Telephone: (212) 637–3111. sections 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(g)(4), to reach settlements U.S.C. 9606 and 9607(a), in exchange for DATES: Comments must be provided with de minimis parties in actions within June 20, 2005. their payment of monies. For thirty (30) under section 106 or 107 of CERCLA, 42 ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to days following the date of publication of U.S.C. 9606 or 9607, et seq., the U.S. the U.S. Environmental Protection this notice, EPA will receive written Environmental Protection Agency Agency, Office of Regional Counsel, 290 comments relating to the settlement. (‘‘EPA’’) announces a proposed Broadway—17th Floor, New York, NY EPA will consider all comments administrative settlement to resolve 10007–1866 and should refer to: received and may modify or withdraw claims under CERCLA at the Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Metal and Equipment its consent to the settlement if Metal & Equipment Superfund Site. Superfund Site, U.S. EPA Index No. comments received disclose facts or This settlement among the de minimis CERCLA–02–2005–2007. considerations that indicate that the Settling Parties with respect to the Site proposed settlement is inappropriate, pursuant to section 122(g) of CERCLA, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. improper, or inadequate. EPA’s 42 U.S.C. 9622(g), allows Parties to Environmental Protection Agency, response to any comments received will make a cash payment to resolve their Office of Regional Counsel, 290 be available for public inspection at alleged civil liability under Sections 106 Broadway—17th Floor, New York, New EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, New and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and York 10007–1866. Telephone: (212) York, New York 10007–1866. 9607, for injunctive relief with regard to 637–3111. DATES: Comments must be submitted on the Site and for response costs incurred SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A copy of or before June 20, 2005. and to be incurred at or in connection the proposed administrative settlement ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is with the Site. By this notice, EPA is may be obtained in person or by mail available for public inspection at EPA informing the public of the proposed from Sonia Malone-Ayala, U.S. Region II offices at 290 Broadway, New settlement and of the opportunity to Environmental Protection Agency, 290 York, New York 10007–1866. Comments comment. Broadway—17th Floor, New York, NY should reference the Li Tungsten Site The Site is a former smelting facility 10007–1866. Telephone: (212) 637– located in Glen Cove, Nassau County, that operated for approximately thirty- 3126.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29313
Dated: May 2, 2005. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Manual § 310.1) or a qualifying William J. McCabe, HUMAN SERVICES prospective data collection system Acting Director, Emergency and Remedial (either a practical clinical trial or Response Division, Region 2. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid prospective systematic data collection, Services [FR Doc. 05–10147 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] which is sometimes referred to as a registry); Frequency: Other—as needed; BILLING CODE 6560–50–P [Document Identifier: CMS–10151, CMS– 10152, and CMS–R–220] Affected Public: Business or other for- profit, Individuals or Households, and Agency Information Collection Not-for-profit institutions; Number of Activities: Proposed Collection; Respondents: 1217; Total Annual FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Comment Request Responses: 50,000; Total Annual Hours: COMMISSION 4167. AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 2. Type of Information Collection [Report No. 2703] Medicaid Services, HHS. Request: New Collection; Title of In compliance with the requirement Information Collection: Data Collection Petitions for Reconsideration and of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the for Medicare Beneficiaries Receiving Clarification of Action in Rulemaking Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the FDG Positron Emissions Tomography Proceedings Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (PET) for Brain, Cervical, Ovarian, Services (CMS) is publishing the Pancreatic, Small Cell Lung and April 25, 2005. following summary of proposed Testicular Cancers; Form Nos.: CMS– collections for public comment. Petitions for Reconsideration and 10152 (OMB # 0938–NEW); Use: In the Interested persons are invited to send Clarification have been filed in the Decision Memo #CAG–00181N issued comments regarding this burden on January 27, 2005, CMS determined Commission’s Rulemaking proceedings estimate or any other aspect of this listed in this Public Notice and that the evidence is sufficient to collection of information, including any conclude that for Medicare beneficiaries published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). of the following subjects: (1) The The full text of this document is receiving FDG positron emission necessity and utility of the proposed tomography (PET) for brain, cervical, available for viewing and copying in information collection for the proper Room CY–B402, 445 12th Street, SW., ovarian, pancreatic, small cell lung, and performance of the agency’s functions; testicular cancers is reasonable and Washington, DC or may be purchased (2) the accuracy of the estimated necessary only when the provider is from the Commission’s copy contractor, burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, participating in and patients are Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI) (1– utility, and clarity of the information to enrolled in a systematic data collection 800–378–3160). Oppositions to these be collected; and (4) the use of project. CMS will consider prospective petitions must be filed by June 6, 2005. automated collection techniques or data collection systems to be qualified if See section 1.4(b)(1) of the other forms of information technology to they provide assurance that specific Commission’s rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). minimize the information collection hypotheses are addressed and they Replies to an opposition must be filed burden. collect appropriate data elements. The within 10 days after the time for filing 1. Type of Information Collection data collection should include baseline oppositions have expired. Request: New Collection; Title of patient characteristics; indications for Information Collection: Data Collection Subject: Federal-State Joint Board on the PET scan; PET scan type and for Medicare Beneficiaries Receiving characteristics; FDG PET results; results Universal Service (CC Docket No. 96– Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators 45). of all other imaging studies; facility and for Primary Prevention of Sudden provider characteristics; cancer type, Number of Petitions Filed: 1. Cardiac Death; Form Nos.: CMS–10151 grade, and stage; long-term patient Subject: In the Matter of (OMB # 0938–NEW); Use: CMS provides outcomes; disease management changes; Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier coverage for implantable cardioverter- and anti-cancer treatment received; Charges (CC Docket No. 02–53). defibrillators (ICDs) for secondary Frequency: Other—as needed; Affected prevention of sudden cardiac death Public: Business or other for-profit, In the Matter of Unbundled Access to based on extensive evidence showing Individuals or Households, and Not-for- Network Elements (WC Docket No. 04– that use of ICDs among patients with a profit institutions; Number of 313). certain set of physiologic conditions are Respondents: 2,000; Total Annual Number of Petitions Filed: 3. effective. Accordingly, CMS considers Responses: 50,000; Total Annual Hours: coverage for ICDs reasonable and Subject: Review of the Section 251 4167. necessary under Section 1862(a)(1)(A) of 3. Type of Information Collection Unbundling Obligations of Incumbent the Social Security Act. However, Request: Extension of a currently Local Exchange Carriers (CC Docket No. evidence for use of ICDs for primary approved collection; Title of 01–338). prevention of sudden cardiac death is Information Collection: HIPAA Number of Petitions Filed: 7. less compelling for certain patients. To Standard Unique Employer Identifier encourage responsible and appropriate and Supporting Regulations in 45 CFR Marlene H. Dortch, use of ICDs, CMS issued a Decision Parts 160 and 162; Form Nos.: CMS–R– Secretary. Memo for Implantable Defibrillators on 220 (OMB # 0938–0874); Use: Section [FR Doc. 05–9108 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] January 27, 2005, indicating that ICDs 1173b of Subtitle F of Title II of the BILLING CODE 6712–01–M will be covered for primary prevention Health Insurance Portability and of sudden cardiac death if the Accountability Act of 1996 (P.L. 104– beneficiary is enrolled in either an FDA- 191) requires the Secretary of the approved category B Investigational Department of Health and Human Device Exemption (IDE) clinical trial Services to adopt standards for unique (see 42 CFR § 405.201), a trial under the health identifiers for individuals, CMS Clinical Trial Policy (see NCD employers, health plans, and health care
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29314 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
providers. The use of this standard In compliance with the requirement Written comments and improves the Medicare and Medicaid of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the recommendations for the proposed programs, other Federal health programs Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information collections must be mailed and private health programs, by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid within 60 days of this notice to the simplifying the administration of the Services (CMS) is publishing the address below: CMS, Office of Strategic system and enabling the efficient following summary of proposed Operations and Regulatory Affairs, electronic transmission of certain health collections for public comment. Division of Regulations Development, information; Frequency: Other—one- Interested persons are invited to send Attention: Melissa Musotto, PRA time; Affected Public: Business or other comments regarding this burden Analyst, Room C4–26–05, 7500 Security for-profit, Not-for-profit institutions, estimate or any other aspect of this Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244– Federal Government, and State, Local or collection of information, including any 1850. Tribal Government; Number of of the following subjects: (1) The Dated: May 12, 2005. necessity and utility of the proposed Respondents: 2,550,000; Total Annual Michelle Shortt, Responses: 2,550,000; Total Annual information collection for the proper Acting Director, Regulations Development Hours: 1. performance of the agency’s functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated Group, Office of Strategic Operations and To obtain copies of the supporting Regulatory Affairs. burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, statement and any related forms for the [FR Doc. 05–10054 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] proposed paperwork collections utility, and clarity of the information to BILLING CODE 4120–01–P referenced above, access CMS’ Web site be collected; and (4) the use of address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to regulations/pra/, or E-mail your request, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND minimize the information collection including your address, phone number, HUMAN SERVICES OMB number, and CMS document burden. identifier, to [email protected], 1. Type of Information Collection Administration for Children and or call the Reports Clearance Office on Request: Revision of a currently Families (410) 786–1326. approved collection; Title of Written comments and Information Collection: Medicaid Submission for OMB Review; recommendations for the proposed Program Budget Report; Form Nos.: Comment Request information collections must be mailed CMS–37 (OMB # 0938–0101); Use: The within 60 days of this notice to the Medicaid Program Budget Report is Title: LIHEAP Quarterly Allocation address below: CMS, Office of Strategic prepared by the State Medicaid Estimates Form ACF–535. Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Agencies and is used by the Centers for OMB No.: 0970–0037 Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for Division of Regulations Development, Description: The Low Income Home (1) developing National Medicaid Attention: William N. Parham, III, PRA Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Analyst, Room C5–13–27, 7500 Security Budget estimates, (2) qualification of Budget Estimate Changes, and (3) the Quarterly Allocation Estimates Form– Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244– 535 is a one-page form that is sent to 50 1850. issuance of quarterly Medicaid Grant Awards. The structure of the currently State grantees and to the District of Dated: May 2, 2005. approved CMS–37 was revised based on Columbia. It is also sent to Tribal Michelle Shortt, CMS experience with budget Government grantees that receive over Acting Director, Regulations Development information provided by the States. $1 million annually for LIHEAP. Group, Office of Strategic Operations and (Note: Details are outlined in the Grantees are asked to complete and Regulatory Affairs. Addendum which can be found on the submit the form in the 4th quarter of [FR Doc. 05–9642 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] CMS Web site address below.) each fiscal year. The data collected on the form are grantees’ estimates of BILLING CODE 4120–01–P Frequency: Quarterly; Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Government; obligations they expect to make each Number of Respondents: 56; Total quarter of the upcoming fiscal year for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Annual Responses: 224; Total Annual the LIHEAP program. This is the only HUMAN SERVICES Hours: 7,616. method used to request anticipated To obtain copies of the supporting distributions of the grantee’s LIHEAP Centers for Medicare & Medicaid statement and any related forms for the funds. The information is used to Services proposed paperwork collections develop apportionment requests to OMB referenced above, access CMS’ Web site and to make grant awards based on [Document Identifier: CMS–37] address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ grantee anticipated needs. Information collected on this form is not available Agency Information Collection regulations/pra/, or e-mail your request, including your address, phone number, through any other Federal source. Activities: Proposed Collection; Submission of the form is voluntary. Comment Request OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected], Respondents: 50 States, the District of AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & or call the Reports Clearance Office on Columbia and those Tribal governments Medicaid Services. (410) 786–1326. that receive over $1 million annually.
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Average bur- Instrument Number of responses per den hours per Total burden respondents respondent response hours
ACF–535 ...... 55 1 .25 13.75
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29315
Estimated Total Annual Burden DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Unemployment Insurance Hours: 13.75. HUMAN SERVICES administrative records in order to more Additional Information: Copies of the fully understand how individuals were Administration for Children and proposed collection may be obtained by affected by such programs. This will Families writing to The Administration for include outcomes such as length of job retention; job quality; educational Children and Families, Office of Submission for OMB Review; attainment; household composition; Administration, Office of Information Comment Request employment barriers (such as child care, Services, 370 L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Title: Employment Retention and health status, and transportation); health Washington, DC 20447. Attn: ACF insurance coverage; income; wealth, Reports Clearance Officer. E-mail: Advancement (ERA) Evaluation 42- Month Survey. debt, and consumption; hardship (such [email protected]. OMB No.: New Collection. as food insecurity); and children well- OMB Comment: OMB is required to Description: The proposed being. make a decision concerning the information collection is for follow-up • The data will allow for the conduct collection of information between 30 information within the Employment of non-experimental analyses to explain and 60 days after publication of this Retention and Advancement (ERA) participation decisions and provide a document in the Federal Register. Evaluation that is sponsored by the descriptive picture of the circumstances Therefore, a comment is best assured of Administration for Children and of low-wage workers. • having its full effect if OMB receives it Families (ACF) of the U.S. Department The survey will address within 30 days of publication. Written of Health and Human Services.1 The participation information important to comments and recommendations for the ERA project is a multi-year evaluation the evaluation’s cost-benefit component. proposed information collection should that is designed to study the net impact Respondents: The respondents of the be sent directly to the following: Office and cost-benefits of programs designed 42-month survey are TANF applicants, of Management and Budget, Paperwork to help Temporary Assistance for Needy current and former TANF recipients, or individuals in families at-risk of Reduction Project, Attn: Desk Officer for Families (TANF) recipients, former needing TANF benefits (working poor ACF. E-mail address: recipients, or families at-risk of needing TANF retain and advance in and hard-to-employ) who are in the [email protected]. employment.2 The ERA Evaluation research sample in a subset of the 15 Dated: May 16, 2005. involves 15 random assigment programs participating in the ERA Robert Sargis, experiments in eight states, testing a Evaluation. Survey participants will be Reports Clearance Officer. diverse set of strategies. The ERA administered a telephone survey [FR Doc. 05–10121 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] project will generate rigorous data on approximately 42 months after the date the implementation, effects, and costs of they were enrolled in the research BILLING CODE 4184–01–M these alternative approaches. The data sample and randomly assigned to the collected as part of the 42-month survey treatment or control group. For those will be used for the purposes described individuals who cannot be reached by below. phone, survey firm staff will attempt to • The survey data will allow for the contact them in person. A total of analysis of ERA programs’ impacts on a approximately 3,500 participants will wider range of outcome measures than complete the survey over a 2-year is available through welfare or period (1,750 respondents annually).
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Instrument Number of responses per Average burden hours per response Total burden respondents respondent hours
42-Month Survey ...... 1,750 1 30 minutes (or .50 hrs) ...... 875.0.
Estimated Total Annual Burden collection of information between 30 Dated: May 16, 2005. Hours: 875.0. and 60 days after publication of this Robert Sargis, Additional Information: Copies of the document in the Federal Register. Reports Clearance Officer. proposed collection may be obtained by Therefore, a comment is best assured of [FR Doc. 05–10122 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] writing to the Administration for having its full effect if OMB receives it BILLING CODE 4184–01–M Children and Families, Office of within 30 days of publication. Written Administration, Office of Information comments and recommendations for the Services, 370 L’Enfant Promenade, SW., proposed information collection should Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF be sent directly to the following: Office Reports Clearance Officer. All requests of Management and Budget, Paperwork should be identified by the title of the Reduction Project, Attn: Desk Officer for information collection. E-mail address: ACF. E-mail address: [email protected]. [email protected]. OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the
2 From the Department of Health and Human 1 The U.S. Department of Labor has also provided Services RFP No.: 105–99–8100. funding to support the ERA project.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29316 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND OMB No.: 0970–0145. funding and it is used to provide the HUMAN SERVICES Description: The State plan is a public with information about the mandatory statement submitted to the program. If a State makes changes in its Administration for Children and Secretary of the Department of Health program, it must submit a State plan Families and Human Services by the State. It amendment. Proposed Information Collection consists of an outline of how the State’s Respondents: The 50 States, the Activity; Comment Request TANF program will be administered District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and operated and certain required and the Virgin Islands. Proposed Projects certifications by the State’s Chief Title: Temporary Assistance for Needy Executive Officer. Its submittal triggers Families (TANF) State Plan Guidance. the State’s family assistance grant
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Number of responses Average Total burden Instrument respondents per respond- burden hours hours ent per response
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Plan Guidance ...... 54 1 33 1,782
Estimated Total Annual Burden of automated collection techniques or with the CFSP or the APSR to apply for Hours: 1,782. other forms of information technology. appropriated funds for the next fiscal In compliance with the requirements Consideration will be given to year. The CFSP also includes the of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the comments and suggestions submitted required State plans under section 106 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the within 60 days of this publication. of the Child Abuse Prevention and Administration for Children and Dated: May 16, 2005. Treatment Act (CAPTA) and section 477 Families is soliciting public comment Robert Sargis, of title IV–E, the Chafee Foster Care on the specific aspects of the Reports Clearance Officer. Independence Program (CFCIP), of the information collection described above. Social Security Act (the Act). Copies of the proposed collection of [FR Doc. 05–10123 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184–01–M Congress has now appropriated funds information can be obtained and for payments to States to implement the comments may be forwarded by writing Educational and Training Vouchers to the Administration for Children and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND program (ETV) under section 477(a)(6) Families, Office of Administration, HUMAN SERVICES and 477(i) of the Act. The ETV program Office of Information Services, 370 is integrated into the overall purpose L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, Administration for Children and and framework of the Chafee program; DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Families however, the program has a separate Officer. E-mail address: budget authorization and appropriation [email protected]. All requests should Proposed Information Collection and has a Catalog of Federal Domestic be identified by the title of the Activity; Comment Request Assistance (CFDA) number of 93.599. If information collection. The Department specifically requests Proposed Projects a State does not apply for funds for the comments on: (a) Whether the proposed ETV program for a fiscal year by July 31 Title: Child and Family Services Plan, of that year, the funds will be reallocatd collection of information is necessary Annual Progresss and Services Report, for the proper performance of the to other States on the basis of their and the CFS–101, Parts I and II. relative need for funds as requested. functions of the agency, including OMB No. 0980–0047. whether the information shall have Description: Under title IV–B, The CFSP and the APSR are being practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the subparts 1 and 2, of the Social Security renewed and the CFS–101 is being agency’s estimate of the burden of the Act, States and Indian Tribes are to updated to include the request for ETV proposed collection of information; (c) submit a five-year Child and Family funds and to either request or release the quality, utility, and clarity of the Services Plan (CFSP) or an Annual funds for reallocation. information to be collected; and (d) Progresss and Services Report (APSR), Respondents: 275 (50 States, the ways to minimize the burden of the and an annual budget request and District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and collection of information on estimated expenditure report (CFS–101). approximately 223 possible Tribal respondents, including through the use The CFS–101 is submitted annually entities).
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Average burden Instrument Number of responses per hours per Total burden respondents respondent response hours
CFSP ...... 275 1 240 66,000/5 = 13,200 APSR ...... 275 1 180 49,500 CFS–101 ...... 275 1 5 1,375
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29317
Estimated Total Annual Burden Dated: May 16, 2005. (1) Interviews with state and local Hours: 64,075. Robert Sargis, refugee program administrators and In compliance with the requirements Reports Clearance Officer. service providers in three sites to learn of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the [FR Doc. 05–10124 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] about service delivery and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the BILLING CODE 4184–01–M organizational arrangements, and with a small number of local employers who Administration for Children and work with RSS- and TAG-funded Families is soliciting public comment DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND service providers to learn about their on the specific aspects of the HUMAN SERVICES experiences with the programs; (2) A information collection described above. sample of 1,125 refugees to collect data Copies of the proposed collection of Administration for Children and on refugees’ employment and earnings information can be obtained and Families outcomes; (3) Two to three focus groups comments may be forwarded by writing with seven to ten program clients in Proposed Information Collection to the Administration for Children and each of the three sites to obtain Activity; Comment Request Families, Office of Administration, customer perspectives of the services Office of Information Services, 370 Proposed Projects they received and their adjustment L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, experiences. Title: Evaluation of the Refugee Social DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Respondents: (1) Interviews will be Service (RSS) and Targeted Assistance Officer. E-mail address: Formula Grant (TAB) Programs: Data conducted with three state refugee [email protected]. All requests Collection. coordinators, voluntary agency should be identified by the title of the OMB No.: New Collection. (VOLAG) and Mutual Assistance information collection. Description: The Office of Refugee Association (MAA) staff, local RSS and The Department specifically requests Resettlement (ORR) within the U.S. TAG service providers, and employers comments on: (a) Whether the proposed Department of Health and Human who employ significant numbers of refugees. (2) The respondents of the collection of information is necessary Services (HHS) funds the Refugee Social survey are refugees who have been in for the proper performance of the Services (RSS) and Targeted Assistance the United States for fewer than five functions of the agency, including Formula Grant (TAG) programs, which are designed to help refugees achieve years, and, thus, are eligible for RSS and whether the information shall have TAG services. The survey relies on a practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the economic success quickly following their arrival in the U.S. through mixed-mode data collection method that agency’s estimate of the burden of the employment services, English-language involves both telephone and in-person proposed collection of information; (c) instruction, vocational training, and interviews. If individuals cannot be the quality, utility, and clarity of the other social services. ORR is sponsoring reached by phone, an attempt will be information to be collected; and (d) a project to (1) conduct a comprehensive made to contact them in person. ways to minimize the burden of the evaluation of the effectiveness of ORR Approximately 900 of the 1,125 refugees collection of information on employability services through RSS and sampled will complete the survey over respondents, including through the use TAG, and (2) propose options for a nine-week period. of automated collection techniques or institutionalizing ongoing evaluation (3) Respondents of the focus groups other forms of information technology. and performance assessment into the will include refugees who have received Consideration will be given to programs. RSS-and TAG-funded services. comments and suggestions submitted ORR is requesting OMB clearance for Approximately 70 refugees will within 60 days of this publication. three methods of information collection: participate in the focus groups.
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Number of responses Average Total burden Instrument respondents per respond- burden hours hours ent per response
Interviews with program staff ...... 60 1 1 60 Interviews with employers ...... 12 1 2 24 Survey of refugees ...... 900 1 0.5 450 Focus group with program clients ...... 70 1 2 140
Estimated Total Annual Burden Families, Office of Administration, whether the information shall have Hours: 674. Office of Information Services, 370 practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the In compliance with the requirements L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, agency’s estimate of the burden of the of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance proposed collection of information; (c) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Officer. E-mail address: the quality, utility, and clarity of the Administration for Children and [email protected]. All requests information to be collected; and (d) Families is soliciting public comment should be identified by the title of the ways to minimize the burden of the on the specific aspects of the information collection. collection of information on information collection described above. The Department specifically requests respondents, including through the use Copies of the proposed collection of comments on: (a) Whether the proposed of automated collection techniques or information can be obtained and collection of information is necessary other forms of information technology. comments may be forwarded by writing for the proper performance of the Consideration will be given to to the Administration for Children and functions of the agency, including
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29318 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
comments and suggestions submitted OMB No.: 0970–0205. requests to Congress through the within 60 days of this publication. Description: State agencies administer Department and to enable oversight of Dated: May 16, 2005. the Foster Care and Adoption the financial management of the Assistance Programs under Title IV–E of Robert Sargis, programs. the Social Security Act. The Reports Clearance Officer. Respondents: State agencies Administration for Children and [FR Doc. 05–10125 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Families provides Federal funding at the (including the District of Columbia and BILLING CODE 4184–01–M rate of 50 percent for most of the Puerto Rico) administering the Foster administrative costs and at other rates Care and Adoption Assistance programs for other specific categories of costs as under Title IV–E of the Social Security DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND detailed in Federal statute and Act. HUMAN SERVICES regulations. This form is submitted Administration for Children and quarterly by each State to estimate the Families funding needs for the upcoming fiscal quarter and to report expenditures for Proposed Information Collection the fiscal quarter just ended. This form Activity; Comment Request is also used to provide annual budget projections from each State. The Proposed Projects information collected in this report is Title: Form ACF–IV–E–1: Title IV–E used by this agency to calculate Foster Care and Adoption Assistance quarterly Federal grant awards and to Financial Report. enable this agency to submit budget
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of Average Instrument Number of responses per burden hours Total burden respondents respondent per response hours
Form ACF–IV–E–1 ...... 52 4 17 3,536.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Consideration will be given to targets the implementation of Hours: 3,536. comments and suggestions submitted community-based abstinence In compliance with the requirements within 60 days of this publication. educational programs designed to: (a) of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Dated: May 16, 2005. Reduce the proportion of adolescents Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Robert Sargis, who engage in premarital sexual Administration for Children and activity, including but not limited to Reports Clearance Officer. Families is soliciting public comment sexual intercourse; (b) reduce the on the specific aspects of the [FR Doc. 05–10126 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies information collection described above. BILLING CODE 4184–01–M among adolescents; and (c) reduce the Copies of the proposed collection of incidence of sexually transmitted diseases among adolescents. Priority information can be obtained and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND funding will be given to those entities comments may be forwarded by writing HUMAN SERVICES to the Administration for Children and that demonstrate a strong record of Families, Office of Administration, Administration for Children and providing abstinence education among Office of Information Services, 370 Families adolescents as defined by Section L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, 510(b)(2) of Title V of the Social DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Family and Youth Services Bureau Security Act, which promotes a strong Officer. E-mail address: Administration on Children, Youth and abstinence until marriage message to [email protected]. All requests Families youth. should be identified by the title of the Funding Opportunity Title: Priority Area 1 information collection. Community-Based Abstinence The Department specifically requests I. Funding Opportunity Description Education. comments on: (a) Whether the proposed Announcement Type: Initial. The Family and Youth Services collection of information is necessary Funding Opportunity Number: HHS– Bureau (FYSB) is accepting applications for the proper performance of the 2005–ACF–ACYF–AE–0099. to provide support to public and private functions of the agency, including CFDA Number: 93.010. entities for the development and whether the information shall have Due Date for Applications: June 20, implementation of the Community- practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 2005. Based Abstinence Education Program agency’s estimate of the burden of the Executive Summary: The Family and for adolescents, ages 12 through 18, in proposed collection of information; (c) Youth Services Bureau (FYSB) is communities across the country. This the quality, utility, and clarity of the accepting applications to provide funding opportunity targets the information to be collection; and (d) support to public and private entities for implementation of community-based ways to minimize the burden of the the development and implementation of abstinence educational programs collection of information on the Community-Based Abstinence designed to: (a) Reduce the proportion respondents, including through the use Education Program for adolescents, ages of adolescents who engage in premarital of automated collection techniques or 12 through 18, in communities across sexual activity, including but not other forms of information technology. the country. This funding opportunity limited to sexual intercourse; (b) reduce
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29319
the incidence of out-of-wedlock children; build partnerships with community leaders; promote youth skill pregnancies among adolescents; and (c) individuals, front-line service providers, development in literacy, competence, reduce the incidence of sexually communities, American Indian tribes, work readiness and social and transmitted diseases among adolescents. Native communities, States, and emotional skills; and provide youth Priority funding will be given to those Congress that enable solutions which with increased opportunities to serve entities that demonstrate a strong record transcend traditional agency others and build self-esteem. For of providing abstinence education boundaries; ensure that services are additional information regarding FYSB among adolescents as defined by planned, reformed, and integrated to programs and initiatives, please visit: Section 510(b)(2) of Title V of the Social improve needed access; and support a http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/fysb/ Security Act, which promotes a strong strong commitment to working with or the National Clearinghouse on abstinence until marriage message to people with developmental disabilities, Families and Youth (NCFY) at: http:// youth. refugees, and migrants to address their www.ncfy.com/. needs, strengths, and abilities. Background Program Purpose and Scope Administration on Children, Youth and This program, in addition to the The purpose of the Community-Based Families (ACYF) mandatory formula Title V Section 510 Abstinence Education Program is to Abstinence Education Program, has The Administration on Children, provide support to public and private been reassigned from the Health Youth and Families (ACYF) is one of entities for the development and Resources and Services Administration, several primary agencies within the implementation of abstinence education Maternal and Child Health Bureau, to Federal government with the programs for adolescents, ages 12 the Administration for Children and responsibility for serving children and through 18, in communities across the Families, Family and Youth Services families. ACYF administers national country. Bureau to further fulfill the President’s programs for children and youth, The specific objectives of the commitment to enhance and coordinate provides information and other Community-Based Abstinence similar youth programs across the assistance to parents, works with States Education Program are to: • Federal government. In addition to and local communities to develop Support programmatic efforts that supporting the President’s goals of services that support and strengthen foster the development of abstinence- enhancing and coordinating similar family life, and seeks joint ventures only education for adolescents, ages 12 youth programs across the Federal with the private sector. The concerns of through 18, in communities across the ACYF extend to all children from birth country. government, this reassignment closely • aligns the abstinence program with to adolescence, with a particular Develop and implement abstinence- comprehensive Positive Youth emphasis on children with special only programs that target the prevention Development efforts in ACF already needs. of teenage pregnancy and premarital underway as well as coordinated sexual activity. Family and Youth Services Bureau • Develop abstinence education welfare reform efforts. (FYSB) approaches that are culturally sensitive Funding for the Community-Based The Family and Youth Services Abstinence Education Program was and age-appropriate to meet the needs of Bureau (FYSB) within ACF will a diverse audience of adolescents, ages appropriated to the Administration for administer the Community-Based Children and Families (ACF) in the FY 12 through 18. Abstinence Education grants, in • Implement community-based 2005 Departments of Labor, Health and addition to the Section 510 Abstinence educational programs that promote Human Services, and Education, and Education mandatory formula grants to abstinence-until-marriage decisions to Related Agencies Appropriations Act States. The mission of FYSB is to adolescents, ages 12 through 18. (Consolidated Appropriation Act) of provide national leadership on youth Grantees are expected to work closely 2005. issues and to assist individuals and with ACF to ensure that Community- The Community-Based Abstinence organizations in providing effective, Based Abstinence Education programs Education Program is authorized by comprehensive services for youth in at- support these objectives. ACF Title XI, Section 1110 of the Social risk situations and their families. The encourages but does not require Security Act (using the definitions goals of FYSB programs are to provide coordination and collaboration between contained in Title V, Section 510(b)(2) positive alternatives for youth, ensure potential and existing grantees and the of the Act). their safety, and maximize their State agencies administering a Section Background on the Administration for potential to take advantage of available 510 Abstinence Education grant. Such Children and Families (ACF) opportunities. FYSB encourages coordination and collaboration is communities to support young people considered beneficial in promoting Administration for Children and through a Positive Youth Development complementary efforts between State Families (ACF) approach. This approach suggests that and community agencies and advancing The Administration for Children and the best way to prevent young people’s positive youth development. A list of Families (ACF), within the Department involvement in risky behavior is to help Section 510 State Abstinence Education of Health and Human Services (HHS), is them achieve their full potential. As the Coordinators is available at http:// responsible for Federal programs that lead office for the promotion of the www.ncfy.com. promote the economic and social well- Positive Youth Development Strategy A key component of promoting being of families, children, individuals, within HHS, FYSB administers Positive Youth Development is and communities. ACF programs aim to: programs that provide youth with encouraging youth to make the Empower families and individuals to healthy messages about their bodies, healthiest choice regarding their sexual increase their own economic their behaviors, and their interactions; behavior by abstaining from sexual independence and productivity; build provide safe and structured places for activity, included but not limited to strong, healthy, supportive communities youth to study, recreate, and socialize; sexual intercourse, before marriage. that have a positive impact on the support positive adult role models such Since communicating abstinence quality of life and the development of as parents, mentors, coaches or education to various target populations
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29320 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
requires a number of different each of the eight elements of the Section Legislative Authority: The approaches, activities may include 510 abstinence education definition. Community-Based Abstinence mentoring, counseling, and adult Applicants are required to provide a Education Program is authorized by supervision to promote abstinence from Curriculum Summary for every Title XI, Section 1110 of the Social sexual activity. Programs funded curriculum that is to be used in the Security Act (using the definitions through the Community-Based proposed project. Please see Section contained in Title V, Section 510(b)(2) Abstinence Education Program must IV.2 Content and Form of Application of the Act). promote abstinence education as Submission Section for a detailed II. Award Information defined by Section 510(b)(2) of Title V description. ACF encourages but does of the Social Security Act (for a copy of not require consultation and Funding Instrument Type: Service Sec. 510(b)(2), please see Appendix A). collaboration between grantees and the Grants. Programs that utilize this definition State agencies throughout the life of the Anticipated Total Priority Area promote ‘‘abstinence Sex education project. Funding: $36,823,000. programs that promote the use of In order to ensure access and cultural Anticipated Number of Awards: 60 to contraceptives are not eligible for competence, it is expected that projects 70. funding under this announcement. will involve individuals from the Ceiling on Amount of Individual For purposes of this program, the term populations to be served in the planning Awards per Budget Period: $800,000. ‘‘abstinence education’’ means an and implementation of the project. Floor on Amount of Individual educational or motivational program ACF’s intent is to ensure that project Awards per Budget Period: $200,000. which— interventions are responsive to the Average Projected Award Amount Per (A) has as its exclusive purpose, different needs of special populations, Budget Period: $459,000. teaching the social, psychological, and that services are accessible to health gains to be realized by abstaining consumers, and that the broadest III. Eligibility Information from sexual activity; possible representation of culturally 1. Eligible Applicants (B) teaches abstinence from sexual distinct and historically under State governments, County activity outside marriage as the represented groups is supported through governments, City or township expected standard for all school age programs and projects sponsored by governments, Independent school children; ACF. (C) teaches that abstinence from Grants under this program shall be districts, Hospitals and Clinics, State sexual activity is the only certain way made to entities which agree that, with controlled institutions of higher to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, respect to an adolescent to whom the education, Native American tribal sexually transmitted diseases, and other entities provide abstinence education governments (Federally recognized), associated health problems; under such grant, the entities will not Public Housing authorities/Indian (D) teaches that a mutually faithful provide to that adolescent any other housing authorities, Native American monogamous relationship in the context education regarding sexual conduct, tribal organizations (other than of marriage is the expected standard of except in the case of an entity expressly Federally recognized tribal human sexual activity; required by law to provide health governments), Non-profits having a (E) teaches that sexual activity outside information or services. Each adolescent 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than of the context of marriage is likely to shall not be precluded from seeking institutions of higher education, Private have harmful psychological and health information or services from the institutions of higher education, and physical effects; entity in a different setting—either in For-profit organizations other than small (F) teaches that bearing children out- time or place—than the setting in which businesses. of-wedlock is likely to have harmful abstinence education was provided. Additional Information on Eligibility consequences for the child, the child’s Nothing shall preclude entities that parents, and society; have a public health mandate from Faith-based and community (G) teaches young people how to discussing other forms of sexual organizations are eligible to apply. reject sexual advances and how alcohol conduct or providing services, as long as These grants must be made only to and drug use increases vulnerability to this is conducted in a different setting— public and private entities who agree sexual advances; and either in time or place—than where and that, with respect to an adolescent to (H) teaches the importance of when the abstinence-only course is whom the entities provide abstinence attaining self-sufficiency before being conducted. ACF strongly education under such grant, the entities engaging in sexual activity. encourages grantees to sign and submit will not provide to that adolescent any Curricula developed or selected for with their applications the voluntary other education regarding sexual implementation in the Community- assurance that speaks to this separation conduct, except, in the case of an entity Based Abstinence Education grant of Federal abstinence education services expressly required by law to provide program must be responsive to the eight and private abstinence and/or sex health information or services. ACF elements of the Section 510 abstinence education services. Please see Section strongly encourages applicants to sign education definition and may not be IV. 2 Content and Form of Application and submit with their applications the inconsistent with any aspect of this Submission and Appendix B for a full voluntary assurance that speaks to this definition. Curriculum must emphasize description. requirement. Please see Section IV.2 the importance of abstaining from In order to ensure that grantees are Content and Form of Application sexual activity, included but not limited geographically well distributed, special Submission and Appendix B for a to sexual intercourse, before marriage consideration may be given to highly detailed description. and that the healthiest life outcomes are ranked applications in States (and ACF strongly encourages and will obtained if an individual abstains from territories) that do not have a currently grant preference to those applicants that sexual activity before marriage. In their funded Community-Based Abstinence demonstrate they have extensive Curriculum Summary/Summaries, the Education grant or where the State’s previous experience providing applicant must demonstrate that the only Community-Based grantee is in its Abstinence Education Services that selected curricula are consistent with last year of funding. conform to the eight criteria defined by
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29321
Section 510(b)(2) of Title V of the Social organization that the applicant side of 81⁄2 x 11 plain white paper with Security Act. Sex education programs organization is a local non-profit at least 1 inch margins on all sides, that promote the use of contraceptives affiliate. using black print Times New Roman, are not eligible for funding under this When applying electronically we with 12 pitch or 12 point size font. For announcement; however, this eligibility strongly suggest you attach your proof of charts, budget tables, supplemental criterion will not be used as a non-profit status with your electronic letters and support documents, disqualification factor in the initial application. applicants may use a different pitch or review of applications. Private, non-profit organizations are size font, not less than 10 pitch or size encouraged to submit with their font, or single-space. Please see Section 2. Cost Sharing/Matching applications the survey located under V.1 Criteria, for instructions on None. ‘‘Grant Related Documents and Forms,’’ preparing the full project description. 3. Other ‘‘Survey for Private, Non-Profit Grant Curricula Summaries Applicants,’’ titled, ‘‘Survey on All applicants must have a Dun & Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Curricula developed or selected for Bradstreet number. On June 27, 2003 the Applicants,’’ at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ implementation in the Community- Office of Management and Budget programs/ofs/forms.htm. Based Abstinence Education grant published in the Federal Register a new program must be responsive to the eight Federal policy applicable to all Federal Disqualification Factors elements of the Section 510 abstinence grant applicants. The policy requires Applications that exceed the ceiling education definition and may not be Federal grant applicants to provide a amount will be considered non- inconsistent with any aspect of that Dun & Bradstreet Data Universal responsive and will not be considered definition. Curriculum must emphasize Numbering System (DUNS) number for funding under this announcement. the importance of abstaining from when applying for Federal grants or Any application that fails to satisfy sexual activity before marriage and that cooperative agreements on or after the deadline requirements referenced in the healthiest life outcomes are obtained October 1, 2003. The DUNS number will Section IV.3 Submission Dates and if an individual abstains from sexual be required whether an applicant is Times will be considered non- activity before marriage. In their submitting a paper application or using responsive and will not be considered Curriculum Summary/Summaries, the the government-wide electronic portal for funding under this announcement. applicant must demonstrate that the (http://www.Grants.gov). A DUNS selected curricula are consistent with number will be required for every IV. Application and Submission each of the eight elements of the Section application for a new award or renewal/ Information 510 abstinence education definition. continuation of an award, including 1. Address to Request Application Applicants are required to provide a applications or plans under formula, Package Curriculum Summary for every entitlement and block grant programs, curriculum that is to be used in the submitted on or after October 1, 2003. ACYF Operations Center, c/o The proposed project. Please ensure that your organization Dixon Group, Attn: Community-Based Direct Federal grants, sub-award has a DUNS number. You may acquire Abstinence Education Program Funding, funds, or contracts under this a DUNS number at no cost by calling the 118 Q Street NE., Washington, DC Community-Based Abstinence dedicated toll-free DUNS number 20002–2132. Phone: 866–796–1591. Education Program shall not be used to request line on 1–866–705–5711 or you 2. Content and Form of Application support inherently religious activities may request a number online at Submission such as religious instruction, worship, http://www.dnb.com. or proselytization. Therefore, Non-profit organizations applying for Each application package should organizations must take steps to funding are required to submit proof of include an original and two copies. Do separate, in time or location, their their non-profit status. not staple the applications. inherently religious activities from the Proof of non-profit status is any one The length of the entire application services funded under this Program. of the following: package should not exceed 80 pages. Regulations pertaining to the Equal • A reference to the applicant This includes the required Federal Treatment for Faith-based organization’s listing in the Internal forms/certifications (424, 424a, 424b, Organizations, which includes the Revenue Service’s (IRS) most recent list Lobbying and Smoke Free Workplace prohibition against Federal funding of of tax-exempt organizations described in certification), table of contents, project inherently religious activities, can be the IRS Code. summary, curricula summaries, project found at either 45 CFR 87.1 or the HHS • A copy of a currently valid IRS tax description, budget/budget justification, Web site at http://www.os.dhhs.gov/ exemption certificate. supplemental documentation, proof of fbci/waisgate21.pdf. • A statement from a State taxing non-profit status, third party agreement body, State attorney general, or other summaries and letters of support or Appendices appropriate State official certifying that agreement. All pages of the application Appendices should include all the applicant organization has a non- package should be sequentially supporting documentation, such as: profit status and that none of the net numbered beginning with page one. The Position descriptions, curricula vitae earning accrue to any private required Federal forms will be counted (CVs), letters of agreement and support, shareholders or individuals. towards the total number of pages. Each evaluation tools, protocols and tables • A certified copy of the application will be counted to and graphs. Job descriptions and CV’s organization’s certificate of determine the total length. Cover letters should not exceed two pages each. incorporation or similar document that are not required. Applicants are Spacing will vary depending on the clearly establishes non-profit status. reminded that if a cover letter is nature of the appendix, but only one- • Any of the items in the submitted, it will count towards the 80 sided pages are acceptable. Appendices subparagraphs immediately above for a page limit. should be brief and supplemental in State or national parent organization The project description should be nature. Do not include pamphlets or and a statement signed by the parent typed and double-spaced on a single- brochures in the application package
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29322 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
unless they were specifically created for • To use Grants.gov, you, as the Construction Programs; SF–424B, the project. Refer to style and format applicant, must have a DUNS number Assurances—Non-Construction section of this guidance for specific and register in the Central Contractor Programs. The forms may be reproduced conventions to be followed in Registry (CCR). You should allow a for use in submitting applications. formatting appendices. minimum of five days to complete the Applicants must sign and return the The appendices should be brief and CCR registration. standard forms with their application. should be limited to the items listed • You will not receive additional Applicants must furnish prior to below, in the following order: point value because you submit a grant award an executed copy of the Standard i. Descriptions of committees/ application in electronic format, nor Form LLL, Certification Regarding consortia which are a part of or related will we penalize you if you submit an Lobbying, when applying for an award to the basic program, including the application in paper format. in excess of $100,000. Applicants who composition, function, and • You may submit all documents have used non-Federal funds for responsibilities of each. electronically, including all information lobbying activities in connection with ii. Copies of agreements/ typically included on the SF 424 and all receiving assistance under this commitments, letters of understanding necessary assurances and certifications. announcement shall complete a • or similar documents defining the Your application should comply disclosure form, if applicable, with their relationships between the proposed with any page limitation requirements applications (approved by the Office of program and affiliated departments, described in this program Management and Budget under control announcement. number 0348–0046). Applicants must institutions or agencies, and the • responsibilities of each. Pro-forma After you electronically submit sign and return the certification with letters of endorsement should not be your application, you will receive an their application. included. automatic acknowledgement from Applicants must also understand they iii. Position descriptions for all Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov will be held accountable for the smoking prohibition included within professional and technical positions for tracking number. The Administration Public Law 103–227, Title XII which grant support is requested, and for Children and Families will retrieve Environmental Tobacco Smoke (also for similar positions with significant your application from Grants.gov. • We may request that you provide known as the PRO–KIDS Act of 1994). roles in the program, even though original signatures on forms at a later A copy of the Federal Register notice supported from other sources. date. which implements the smoking iv. Biographical sketches, such as • You may access the electronic prohibition is included with forms. By resumes or CVs, for each incumbent in application for this program on signing and submitting the application, a position for which a job description is www.Grants.gov. applicants are providing the submitted. • You must search for the certification and need not mail back the You may submit your application to downloadable application package by certification with the application. us in either electronic or paper format. the CFDA number. Applicants must make the appropriate To submit an application electronically, An original and two copies of the certification of their compliance with all please use the http://www.Grants.gov/ complete application are required. The Federal statutes relating to Apply site. If you use Grants.gov, you original and each of the two copies nondiscrimination. By signing and will be able to download a copy of the should include all required forms, submitting the applications, applicants application package, complete it off- certifications, assurances, and are providing the certification and need line, and then upload and submit the appendices, be signed by an authorized not mail back the certification form. application via the Grants.gov site. ACF representative, have original signatures, Complete the standard forms and the will not accept grant applications via and be submitted unbound. associated certifications and assurances email or facsimile transmission. Private, non-profit organizations are based on the instructions on the forms. Please note the following if you plan encouraged to submit with their The forms and certifications may be to submit your application applications the survey located under found at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ electronically via Grants.gov: ‘‘Grant Related Documents and Forms,’’ programs/ofs/forms.htm. • Electronic submission is voluntary. ‘‘Survey for Private, Non-Profit Grant • When you enter the Grants.gov site, Applicants,’’ titled, ‘‘Survey on Voluntary Assurance you will find information about Ensuring Equal Opportunity for ACF strongly encourages grantees to submitting an application electronically Applicants,’’ at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ sign and submit with their applications through the site, as well as the hours of programs/ofs/forms.htm. the voluntary assurance that prohibits operation. We strongly recommend that Standard Forms and Certifications: Community-Based Abstinence you do not wait until the application The project description should include Education grantees from providing to an deadline date to begin the application all the information requirements adolescent and/or adolescents any other process through Grants.gov. described in the specific evaluation education regarding sexual conduct— • We recommend you visit criteria outlined in the program either in time or place—except, in the Grants.gov at least 30 days prior to filing announcement under Section V. case of an entity expressly required by your application to fully understand the Application Review Information. In law to provide health information or process and requirements. We addition to the project description, the services. Please see Section I. Funding encourage applicants who submit applicant needs to complete all the Opportunity Description and Appendix electronically to submit well before the standard forms required for making B for a full description. closing date and time so that if applications for awards under this Logic Model: A logic model is a tool difficulties are encountered an applicant announcement. that presents the conceptual framework can still send in a hard copy overnight. Applicants seeking financial for a proposed project and explains the If you encounter difficulties, please assistance under this announcement linkages among program elements. contact the Grants.gov Help Desk at 1– must file the Standard Form (SF) 424, While there are many versions of the 800–518–4276 to report the problem Application for Federal Assistance; SF– logic model, they generally summarize and obtain assistance with the system. 424A, Budget Information—Non- the logical connections among the needs
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29323
that are the focus of the project, project Deadline: Mailed applications shall be application with the note. Applicants goals and objectives, the target considered as meeting an announced are cautioned that express/overnight population, project inputs (resources), deadline if they are received on or mail services do not always deliver as the proposed activities/processes/ before the deadline time and date at the agreed. outputs directed toward the target ACYF Operations Center, c/o The Dixon Late applications: Applications which population, the expected short- and Group, Inc., ATTN: Family and Youth do not meet the criteria above are long-term outcomes the initiative is Services Bureau, Community-Based considered late applications. ACF shall designed to achieve, and the evaluation Abstinence Education Program Funding notify each late applicant that its plan for measuring the extent to which 118 Q Street NE., Washington, DC application will not be considered in proposed processes and outcomes 20002–2132. Applicants are responsible the current competition. Any actually occur. Information on the for mailing applications well in application received after 4:30 pm on development of logic models is advance, when using all mail services, the deadline date will not be considered available on the Internet at http:// to ensure that the applications are for competition. Applicants using www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/ or http:// received on or before the deadline time express/overnight mail services should www.extension.iastate.edu/cyfar/ and date. allow two working days prior to the capbuilding/outcome/ Applications hand-carried by deadline date for receipt of applications. outcome_logicmdir.html. applicants, applicant couriers, other (Applicants are cautioned that express/ representatives of the applicant, or by ACF encourages applicant overnight mail services do not always overnight/express mail couriers shall be organizations to use a logic model in deliver as agreed). considered as meeting an announced developing their applications. deadline if they are received on or Extension of deadlines: ACF may Those organizations required to before the deadline date, between the extend application deadlines when provide proof of non-profit status, hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., EST, at circumstances such as acts of God please refer to Section III.3. the ACYF Operations Center, c/o The (floods, hurricanes, etc.) occur, or when there are widespread disruptions of mail 3. Submission Dates and Times Dixon Group, Inc., ATTN: Family and Youth Services Bureau, Community- service, or in other rare cases. A The closing time and date for receipt Based Abstinence Education Program determination to extend or waive of applications is 4:30 p.m. (Eastern Funding, 118 Q Street NE., Washington, deadline requirements rests with the Time Zone) on the date noted above. DC 20002–2132, between Monday and Chief Grants Management Officer. Mailed or hand carried applications Friday (excluding Federal holidays). Checklist: You may use the checklist received after 4:30 p.m. on the closing This address must appear on the below as a guide when preparing your date will be classified as late. envelope/package containing the application package.
What to submit Required content Required form or format When to submit
Project Abstract ...... See Sections IV.2 and V ... Found in Sections IV.2 and V ...... By application due date. Project Description ...... See Sections IV.2 and V ... Found in Sections IV.2 and V ...... By application due date. Curriculum Summaries ...... See Section I and IV.2 ...... Found in Sections I and IV.2 ...... By application due date. Budget Narrative/Justifica- See Sections IV.2 and V ... Found in Sections IV.2 and V ...... By application due date. tion. SF 424 ...... See Section IV.2 ...... See http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/forms.htm .... By application due date. SF 424 A ...... See Section IV.2 ...... See http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/forms.htm .... By application due date. SF 424 B ...... See Section IV.2 ...... See http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/forms.htm .... By application due date. SF–LLL Certification Re- See Section IV.2 ...... See http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/forms.htm .... By date of award. garding Lobbying. Certification Regarding En- See Section IV.2 ...... See http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/forms.htm .... By date of award. vironmental Tobacco Smoke. Voluntary Assurance ...... See Section I, III, and IV.2 Found in Section I, III, and IV.2 ...... By application due date. Table of Contents ...... See Section IV.2 ...... Found in Section IV.2 ...... By application due date. Support Letters (if applica- See Sections IV.2 and V.1 Found in Section IV.2 and V.1 ...... By date of award. ble). Other: 3rd Party Agree- See Sections IV.2 and V.1 Found in Section IV.2 and V.1 ...... By date of award. ments. Proof of Non-Profit Status .. See Section III.3 ...... Found in Section III.3 ...... By date of award. Appendices (if applicable) .. See Section IV.2 ...... Found in Section IV.2 ...... By date of award.
Additional Forms applications the survey located under Ensuring Equal Opportunity for ‘‘Grant Related Documents and Forms,’’ Applicants,’’ at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ Private, non-profit organizations are ‘‘Survey for Private, Non-Profit Grant programs/ofs/forms.htm. encouraged to submit with their Applicants,’’ titled, ‘‘Survey on
What to submit Required content Location When to submit
Survey for Private, Non- See form ...... Found in http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/ By application due date. Profit Grant Applicants. forms.htm.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29324 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
4. Intergovernmental Review requirements when submitting information concerning activities that This program is not subject to applications electronically. will not be directly funded by the grant or information that does not directly Executive Order 12372, V. Application Review Information ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal pertain to an integral part of the grant Programs,’’ or 45 CFR Part 100, The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 funded activity should be placed in an ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of (Pub. L. 104–13) appendix. Pages should be numbered Department of Health and Human Public reporting burden for this and a table of contents should be Services Programs and Activities’’. collection of information is estimated to included for easy reference. average 40 hours per response, Introduction 5. Funding Restrictions including the time for reviewing Applicants required to submit a full Grant awards will not allow instructions, gathering and maintaining project description shall prepare the reimbursement of pre-award costs. the data needed and reviewing the project description statement in Construction is not an allowable collection information. accordance with the following activity or expenditure under this The project description is approved instructions while being aware of the solicitation. under OMB control number 0970–0139 specified evaluation criteria. The text Applicants should note that grants to which expires 4/30/2007. options give a broad overview of what be awarded under this program An agency may not conduct or your project description should include announcement are subject to the sponsor, and a person is not required to while the evaluation criteria identifies availability of funds. The size of the respond to, a collection of information the measures that will be used to actual awards will vary. unless it displays a currently valid OMB evaluate applications. Sex education programs that promote control number. the use of contraceptives are not eligible 1. Criteria Project Summary/Abstract for funding under this announcement. Provide a summary of the project In order to ensure that grantees are The following are instructions and guidelines on how to prepare the description (a page or less) with geographically well distributed, special reference to the funding request. consideration may be given to highly ‘‘project summary/abstract’’ and ‘‘full ranked applications in States (and project description’’ sections of the Objectives and Need for Assistance territories) that do not have a currently application. Under the evaluation Clearly identify the physical, funded Community-Based Abstinence criteria section, note that each criterion economic, social, financial, Education grant, or, where the State’s is preceded by the generic evaluation institutional, and/or other problem(s) only Community-Based grantee is in its requirement under the ACF Uniform requiring a solution. The need for last year of funding. Project Description (UPD). assistance must be demonstrated and 6. Other Submission Requirements Part I—The Project Description the principal and subordinate objectives Overview of the project must be clearly stated; Submission by Mail: An applicant supporting documentation, such as Purpose must provide an original application letters of support and testimonials from with all attachments, signed by an The project description provides a concerned interests other than the authorized representative and two major means by which an application is applicant, may be included. Any copies. Please see Section IV.3 evaluated and ranked to compete with relevant data based on planning studies Submission Dates and Times for an other applications for available should be included or referred to in the explanation of due dates. Applications assistance. The project description endnotes/footnotes. Incorporate should be mailed to: ACYF Operations should be concise and complete and demographic data and participant/ Center, c/o The Dixon Group, Attn: should address the activity for which beneficiary information, as needed. In Community-Based Abstinence Federal funds are being requested. developing the project description, the Education Program Funding, 118 Q Supporting documents should be applicant may volunteer or be requested Street NE., Washington, DC 20002– included where they can present to provide information on the total 2132. information clearly and succinctly. In range of projects currently being Hand Delivery: An applicant must preparing your project description, conducted and supported (or to be provide an original application with all information responsive to each of the initiated), some of which may be attachments signed by an authorized requested evaluation criteria must be outside the scope of the program representative and two copies. The provided. Awarding offices use this and announcement. application must be received at the other information in making their address below by 4:30 p.m. eastern time funding recommendations. It is Results or Benefits Expected on or before the closing date. important, therefore, that this Identify the results and benefits to be Applications that are hand delivered information be included in the derived. will be accepted between the hours of application in a manner that is clear and Approach 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. eastern time, complete. Monday through Friday. Applications Outline a plan of action that describes should be delivered to: ACYF General Instructions the scope and detail of how the Operations Center, c/o The Dixon ACF is particularly interested in proposed work will be accomplished. Group, Attn: Community-Based specific project descriptions that focus Account for all functions or activities Abstinence Education Program Funding, on outcomes and convey strategies for identified in the application. Cite factors 118 Q Street NE., Washington, DC achieving intended performance. Project that might accelerate or decelerate the 20002–2132. descriptions are evaluated on the basis work and state your reason for taking Electronic Submission: http:// of substance and measurable outcomes, the proposed approach rather than www.Grants.gov. Please see Section IV.2 not length. Extensive exhibits are not others. Describe any unusual features of Content and Form of Application required. Cross-referencing should be the project such as design or Submission for guidelines and used rather than repetition. Supporting technological innovations, reductions in
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29325
cost or time, or extraordinary social and of experience in the program area, and applicant’s project budget should reflect community involvement. other pertinent information. If the this requirement. Provide quantitative monthly or applicant is a non-profit organization, Personnel quarterly projections of the submit proof of non-profit status in its accomplishments to be achieved for application. Description: Costs of employee each function or activity in such terms The non-profit agency can accomplish salaries and wages. as the number of people to be served this by providing: (a) A reference to the Justification: Identify the project and the number of activities applicant organization’s listing in the director or principal investigator, if accomplished. Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) most known. For each staff person, provide recent list of tax-exempt organizations the title, time commitment to the project Evaluation described in the IRS Code; (b) a copy of (in months), time commitment to the Provide a narrative addressing how a currently valid IRS tax exemption project (as a percentage or full-time the conduct of the project and the certificate; (c) a statement from a State equivalent), annual salary, grant salary, results of the project will be evaluated. taxing body, State attorney general, or wage rates, etc. Do not include the costs In addressing the evaluation of results, other appropriate State official of consultants or personnel costs of state how you will determine the extent certifying that the applicant delegate agencies or of specific to which the project has achieved its organization has a non-profit status and project(s) or businesses to be financed stated objectives and the extent to that none of the net earnings accrue to by the applicant. which the accomplishment of objectives any private shareholders or individuals; Fringe Benefits can be attributed to the project. Discuss (d) a certified copy of the organization’s the criteria to be used to evaluate certificate of incorporation or similar Description: Costs of employee fringe results, and explain the methodology document that clearly establishes non- benefits unless treated as part of an that will be used to determine if the profit status; (e) any of the items approved indirect cost rate. needs identified and discussed are being immediately above for a State or Justification: Provide a breakdown of met and if the project results and national parent organization and a the amounts and percentages that benefits are being achieved. With statement signed by the parent comprise fringe benefit costs such as respect to the conduct of the project, organization that the applicant health insurance, FICA, retirement define the procedures to be employed to organization is a local non-profit insurance, taxes, etc. determine whether the project is being affiliate. Travel conducted in a manner consistent with Description: Costs of project-related the work plan presented and discuss the Third-Party Agreements travel by employees of the applicant impact of the project’s various activities Provide written and signed organization (does not include costs of on the project’s effectiveness. agreements between grantees and sub grantees or subcontractors or other consultant travel). This budget line item Geographic Location cooperating entities. These agreements should only include travel outside the Describe the precise location of the must detail scope of work to be State and should not include local project and boundaries of the area to be performed, work schedules, travel. Justification: For each trip, show the served by the proposed project. Maps or remuneration, and other terms and total number of traveler(s), travel other graphic aids may be attached. conditions that structure or define the destination, duration of trip, per diem, relationship. Staff and Position Data mileage allowances, if privately owned Provide a biographical sketch and job Letters of Support vehicles will be used, and other description for each key person Provide statements from community, transportation costs and subsistence appointed. Job descriptions for each public and commercial leaders that allowances. Travel costs for key staff to vacant key position should be included support the project proposed for attend ACF-sponsored workshops as well. As new key staff is appointed, funding. All submissions should be should be detailed in the budget. biographical sketches will also be included in the application OR by Equipment required. application deadline. Supplies Budget and Budget Justification Plan for Project Continuance Beyond Description: Costs of all tangible Grant Support Provide a budget with line-item detail personal property other than that Provide a plan for securing resources and detailed calculations for each included under the Equipment category. and continuing project activities after budget object class identified on the Only equipment greater than $5,000 Federal assistance has ended. Budget Information form. Detailed should be included in this section. All calculations must include estimation Organizational Profiles items under $5,000 per unit are not methods, quantities, unit costs, and considered equipment and should be Provide information on the applicant other similar quantitative detail placed under line item supplies. organization(s) and cooperating sufficient for the calculation to be Justification: Specify general partners, such as organizational charts, duplicated. Also include a breakout by categories of supplies and their costs. financial statements, audit reports or the funding sources identified in Block Show computations and provide other statements from CPAs/Licensed Public 15 of the SF–424. information which supports the amount Accountants, Employer Identification Provide a narrative budget requested. Numbers, names of bond carriers, justification that describes how the contact persons and telephone numbers, categorical costs are derived. Discuss Contractual child care licenses and other the necessity, reasonableness, and Description: Costs of all contracts for documentation of professional allocability of the proposed costs. The services and goods except for those that accreditation, information on Project Director is required to attend an belong under other categories such as compliance with Federal/State/local annual grantees meeting in Washington, equipment, supplies, construction, etc. government standards, documentation DC for three days and two nights. The Include third party evaluation contracts
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29326 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
(if applicable) and contracts with Program Income the specific objectives listed in Section secondary recipient organizations, I. Funding Opportunity Description. Description: The estimated amount of including delegate agencies and specific income, if any, expected to be generated • The extent to which the application project(s) or businesses to be financed from this project. describes the target population and by the applicant. Justification: Describe the nature, subsets (if applicable), as well as their Justification: Demonstrate that all source and anticipated use of program relative needs and culture. The extent to procurement transactions will be income in the budget or refer to the which the proposed activities are conducted in a manner to provide, to pages in the application which contain sensitive to the age and cultural needs the maximum extent practical, open and this information. of the specified population(s). free competition. Recipients and sub • The extent to which the project recipients, other than States that are Total Direct Charges, Total Indirect describes adolescent and consumer/ required to use CFR Part 92 procedures, Charges, Total Project Costs family participation in the planning and must justify any anticipated Evaluation Criteria implementation of proposed program procurement action that is expected to activities. be awarded without competition and The following evaluation criteria exceed the simplified acquisition appear in weighted descending order. • The extent to which the application threshold fixed at 41 U.S.C. 403(11) The corresponding score values indicate describes the agency’s positive youth (currently set at $100,000). the relative importance that ACF places development philosophy and approach Recipients might be required to make on each evaluation criterion; however, and how it integrates that approach into available to ACF pre-award review and applicants need not develop their all proposed activities and services procurement documents, such as applications precisely according to the provided by the agency. The extent to request for proposals or invitations for order presented. Application which specific information on how the bids, independent cost estimates, etc. components may be organized such that youth and the community will be involved in evaluating the project. Note: Whenever the applicant intends to a reviewer will be able to follow a delegate part of the project to another agency, seamless and logical flow of information • The extent to which the application the applicant must provide a detailed budget (i.e., from a broad overview of the describes how this project will be and budget narrative for each delegate project to more detailed information structured and managed and defines agency, by agency title, along with the about how it will be conducted). how the project is being conducted in a required supporting information referred to In considering how applicants will manner consistent with FYSB goals and in these instructions. carry out the responsibilities addressed objectives. The extent to which the under this announcement, competing application describes contributions of Indirect Charges applications for financial assistance will organizations, cooperating entities, Description: Total amount of indirect be reviewed and evaluated against the consultants, or other key individuals costs. This category should be used only following criteria: who will work on the project. when the applicant currently has an Objectives and Need for Assistance • The extent to which the application indirect cost rate approved by the 30 Points describes a project implementation plan Department of Health and Human and the methodology or models to be • Services (HHS) or another cognizant The extent to which the application used for the abstinence education Federal agency. Copies of any indirect describes the current physical, services. The extent to which the plan cost agreements should be included economic, social, financial, is results oriented and relates to the with the application. governmental, and institutional goals and objectives in Section I. Justification: An applicant that will challenges and problems that support Funding Opportunity Description The charge indirect costs to the grant must the funding request. The extent to extent to which the plan indicates how enclose a copy of the current rate which the application describes how the the project will expand opportunities agreement. If the applicant organization project addresses the needs of youth in for skill-development and describes the is in the process of initially developing the proposed area(s). Statistical data and safety precautions that will be in place or renegotiating a rate, upon notification other information should be provided to to prevent incidents which may pose a that an award will be made, it should support the need. The extent to which health or safety risk. immediately develop a tentative indirect the application describes the proposed • The extent to which the application cost rate proposal based on its most project objectives, goals, and strategies describes how the project will form recently completed fiscal year, in and that objectives are measurable and collaborations among private, non- accordance with the cognizant agency’s support the identified need. The extent profit, community, state, local, and guidelines for establishing indirect cost to which the objectives, goals, and Federal entities necessary to carry out rates, and submit it to the cognizant strategies are related to the overall FYSB the project. agency. Applicants awaiting approval of goals and objectives as stated in Section • their indirect cost proposals may also I. Funding Opportunity Description The extent to which the application request indirect costs. When an indirect Section. provides third party agreement cost rate is requested, those costs • The extent to which the application summaries or letters of agreement (as included in the indirect cost pool is responsive to all eight elements of the appropriate) that detail the scope of the should not also be charged as direct legislative definition, as defined in work to be performed and any other costs to the grant. Also, if the applicant Section 510 of Title V of the Social terms and conditions that structure or is requesting a rate which is less than Security Act, and the extent to which define the relationship. If written what is allowed under the program, the the proposed project methodology agreements do not exist, sample or draft authorized representative of the describes a community-based agreements may be submitted. applicant organization must submit a educational intervention to promote • The extent to which the application signed acknowledgement that the abstinence education to adolescents describes potential barriers that may applicant is accepting a lower rate than ages 12 through 18. The extent to which affect project implementation and allowed. the proposed project activities address possible resolution of these difficulties.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29327
Approach 25 Points agency’s current mission and structure, previous experience providing The extent to which activities or steps the cope of current activities, and an Abstinence Education Services that proposed will accomplish the specified organizational chart, and describes how conform to the eight criteria defined by goals and objectives of the proposed these all contribute to the ability of the Section 510(b)(2) of Title V of the Social project. organization to conduct the Community- Security Act. The extent to which the application Based Abstinence Education Program Application review panels will assign provides a detailed description of the Grant requirements and meet program a score (maximum score of 105) to each mechanisms to be used, the specific expectations. The extent to which the application. The panel will identify the activities to be conducted, and clearly application describes the administrative application’s strengths and weaknesses indicates how these will lead to the and organizational structure within based on the application’s accomplishment of the intended goals which the project will function. The responsiveness to the evaluation and objectives, as they were stated in extent to which the application includes criteria. Section I. Funding Opportunity organizational charts that outlining the In order to ensure that grantees are Description. The extent to which the structure. The extent to which the geographically well distributed, special applicant demonstrates that proposed application demonstrates that project consideration may be given to highly activities are age-appropriate and staff will be supervised and project ranked applications in States (and culturally sensitive to the age, race and contracts and activities will be territories) that do not have a currently culture of the target population. monitored. The extent to which the funded Community-Based Abstinence The extent to which the application application provides a biographical Education grant, or, where the State’s includes a timeline that describes each sketch and job description for each key only Community-Based grantee is in its activity and identifies responsible staff person appointed, showing how each last year of funding. that will work to support these person has a demonstrated history of Approved but Unfunded Applications experience providing abstinence until activities. Applications that are approved but marriage education. The extent to which unfunded may be held over for funding Budget and Budget Justification job descriptions for each vacant key in the next funding cycle, pending the 15 Points position are included in the application. availability of funds, for a period not to 1. The extent to which the application The extent to which the application exceed one year. describes how the funds requested, includes biographical sketches as new which may include Federal and non- and/or key staff are appointed. 3. Anticipated Announcement and Federal funds, will be used for The extent to which the application Award Dates abstinence education services that are demonstrates organizational experience Applications will be reviewed in the allowed under this announcement. The in working with adolescents to promote Spring of 2005. Grant awards will have extent to which the budget items show abstinence education. a start date no later than September 30, how the expenditures will assist the Additional Bonus Points 5 Points 2005. applicant in achieving the project goals. 2. The extent to which the applicant’s The extent to which the application VI. Award Administration Information demonstrates that the applicant has budget describes detailed calculations 1. Award Notices that show how the line-item costs are extensive previous experience in derived. These costs should include providing abstinence education among The successful applicants will be quantities, unit costs, and other similar adolescents as defined by Section notified through the issuance of a quantitative detail. If applicable, sub- 510(b)(2) of the Social Security Act, Financial Assistance Award document contractor budgets for third party which promotes a strong ‘‘abstinence’’ which sets forth the amount of funds agreements are provided in the budget until marriage youth message. granted, the terms and conditions of the grant, the effective date of the grant, the detail. The sub-contractor budget should 2. Review and Selection Process provide the same quantitative detail as budget period for which initial support the applicant. Since ACF will be using non-Federal will be given, the non-Federal share to 3. The extent to which the application reviewers in the review process, be provided, and the total project period describes the fiscal controls and applicants have the option of omitting for which support is contemplated. The accounting procedures. The extent to from the application copies (not the Financial Assistance Award will be which the application describes how the original) of specific salary rates or signed by the Grants Officer and controls and procedures will be used to amounts for individuals specified in the transmitted via postal mail. ensure prudent use, proper application budget. Organizations whose applications will disbursement and accurate accounting No grant award will be made under not be funded will be notified in of funds received as well as accounts for this announcement on the basis of an writing. non-Federal resources. incomplete application. All applications which are complete 2. Administrative and National Policy Results or Benefits Expected 15 Points and conform to the requirements of this Requirements 1. The extent to which the application program announcement will be subject Direct Federal grants, sub-award describes specific measurable outcomes to a competitive review and evaluation funds, or contracts under this and how they will be achieved. based on the specific competitive Community-Based Abstinence 2. The extent to which the application evaluation criteria. This review will be Education Program shall not be used to describes how the intended audience conducted in Washington, DC by a support inherently religious activities will be impacted and describes the panel of experts knowledgeable in the such as religious instruction, worship, extent to which improvements in youth areas of abstinence education, youth or proselytization. Therefore, development will occur. development, and social/human organizations must take steps to services. separate, in time or location, their Staff and Position Data 15 Points ACF strongly encourages and will inherently religious activities from the The extent to which the application grant preference to those applicants that services funded under this Program. provides information on the applicant demonstrate they have extensive Regulations pertaining to the Equal
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29328 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Treatment for Faith-based Applicants will be sent The appropriation under the preceding Organizations, which includes the acknowledgements of received sentence for a fiscal year is made on October prohibition against Federal funding of applications. 1 of the fiscal year. inherently religious activities, can be Dated: May 16, 2005. Appendix B—Voluntary Assurance found at either 45 CFR 87.1 or the HHS Joan E. Ohl, web site at http://www.os.dhhs.gov/fbci/ As the authorized individual signing this Commissioner, Administration on Children, grant application on behalf of (name of waisgate21.pdf. Youth and Families. applicant), I hereby attest and certify that 45 CFR Part 74 (name of applicant organization), while Appendix A—Section 510 of Title V of administering Federal and/or non-Federal 45 CFR Part 92 the Social Security Act funds under the Community-Based SEC. 510. [42 U.S.C. 710] (a) For the Abstinence Education Program, will not Grantees are subject to the provide to an adolescent and/or adolescents requirements in 45 CFR Part 74 (non- purpose described in subsection (b), the Secretary shall, for fiscal year 1998 and each any other education regarding sexual governmental) or 45 CFR Part 92 subsequent fiscal year, allot to each State conduct, except that, in the case of an entity (governmental) organizations. which has transmitted an application for the expressly required by law to provide health Grantees may be asked to participate fiscal year under section 505(a) an amount information or services. In this circumstance, in a national evaluation of the equal to the product of: health information or services (expressly Community-Based Abstinence (1) The amount appropriated in subsection required by law) must be conducted in a (d) for the fiscal year; and different setting—either in time or place— Education program. The grantee will than where and when the abstinence-only cooperate with any research or (2) The percentage determined for the State under section 502(c)(1)(B)(ii). course is being conducted. evaluation efforts sponsored by the (b)(1) The purpose of an allotment under lllllllllllllllllllll Administration for Children and subsection (a) to a State is to enable the State Date Families (ACF). to provide abstinence education, and at the lllllllllllllllllllll option of the State, where appropriate, 3. Reporting Requirements mentoring, counseling, and adult supervision Printed Name of Authorized Individual All grantees are required to submit to promote abstinence from sexual activity, lllllllllllllllllllll semi-annual (quarterly or annual) with a focus on those groups which are most Signature of Authorized Individual likely to bear children out-of-wedlock. program reports; grantees are also (2) For purposes of this section, the term [FR Doc. 05–10105 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] required to submit semi-annual ‘‘Abstinence Education’’ means an BILLING CODE 4184–01–P expenditure reports using the required educational or motivational program which: financial standard form (SF–269) which (A) Has as its exclusive purpose, teaching can be found at the following URL: the social, psychological, and health gains to DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/ be realized by abstaining from sexual HUMAN SERVICES forms.htm. activity; (B) Teaches abstinence from sexual activity Food and Drug Administration Final reports are due 90 days after the outside marriage as the expected standard for end of the grant period. all school age children; [Docket No. 1998N–0359 (formerly Docket Programmatic Reports: Semi- (C) Teaches that abstinence from sexual No. 98N–0359)] Annually. activity is the only certain way to avoid out- of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted Program Priorities in the Center for Financial Reports: Semi-Annually. diseases, and other associated health Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; VII. Agency Contacts problems; (D) Teaches that a mutually faithful Request for Comments Program Office Contact monogamous relationship in the context of AGENCY: marriage is the expected standard of human Food and Drug Administration, Jeffrey Trimbath, Family and Youth sexual activity; HHS. Services Bureau, 118 Q Street, NW., (E) Teaches that sexual activity outside of ACTION: Notice; request for comments. Washington, DC 20002–2132. Phone: 1– the context of marriage is likely to have 866–796–1591. E-mail: harmful psychological and physical effects; SUMMARY: The Food and Drug [email protected]. (F) Teaches that bearing children out-of- Administration (FDA) is requesting wedlock is likely to have harmful comments concerning the establishment Grants Management Office Contact consequences for the child, the child’s of program priorities in the Center for parents, and society; Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Peter Thompson, Grants Officer, (G) Teaches young people how to reject ACYF Grants Office, 118 Q Street, NW., sexual advances and how alcohol and drug (CFSAN) for fiscal year (FY) 2006. As Washington, DC 20002–2132. Phone: 1– use increases vulnerability to sexual part of its annual planning, budgeting, 866–796–1591. E-mail: advances; and and resource allocation process, CFSAN [email protected]. (H) The importance of attaining self- is reviewing its programs to set sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity. priorities and establish work product VIII. Other Information (c)(1) Sections 503, 507, and 508 apply to expectations. This notice is being allotments under subsection (a) to the same published to give the public an Notice: Beginning with FY 2006, the extent and in the same manner as such opportunity to provide input into the Administration for Children and Families sections apply to allotments under section (ACF) will no longer publish grant 502(c). priority-setting process. announcements in the Federal Register. (2) Sections 505 and 506 apply to DATES: Submit written or electronic Beginning October 1, 2005 applicants will be allotments under subsection (a) to the extent comments by July 19, 2005. able to find a synopsis of all ACF grant determined by the Secretary to be ADDRESSES: Submit written comments opportunities and apply electronically for appropriate. concerning this document to the opportunities via: http://www.Grants.gov. (d) For the purpose of allotments under Applicants will also be able to find the subsection (a), there is appropriated, out of Division of Dockets Management (HFA– complete text of all ACF grant any money in the Treasury not otherwise 305), Food and Drug Administration, announcements on the ACF Web site located appropriated, an additional $50,000,000 for 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/index.html. each of the fiscal years 1998 through 2002. MD 20852. Submit electronic comments
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29329
to http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ (1) Ensuring Food Defense and applications (ANDAs) for azithromycin ecomments. Security, 250-mg oral capsules. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (2) Improving Nutrition and Dietary FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald J. Carrington, Center for Food Supplement Safety, Elizabeth Sadove, Center for Drug Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS– (3) Ensuring Food/Color Additives Evaluation and Research (HFD–7), Food 666), Food and Drug Administration, and Cosmetic Safety, and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, (4) Ensuring Food Safety: Crosscutting Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301–594– MD 20740, 301–436–1697, or e-mail: Areas, and 2041. (5) Priority Ongoing Activities. [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1984, FDA expects there will be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress enacted the Drug Price considerable continuity and Competition and Patent Term I. Background followthrough between the 2005 and Restoration Act of 1984 (Public Law 98– 2006 workplans. For example, On December 1, 2004, CFSAN 417) (the 1984 amendments), which initiatives aimed at increasing the released a document entitled ‘‘FY 2005 authorized the approval of duplicate security of our country’s food supply CFSAN Program Priorities.’’ The versions of drug products approved will continue to be a high priority in FY document, a copy of which is available under an ANDA procedure. ANDA 2006. FDA requests comments on other on CFSAN’s Web site sponsors must, with certain exceptions, broad program areas that should (www.cfsan.fda.gov) or from the contact show that the drug for which they are continue to be a priority, as well as new person listed in the FOR FURTHER seeking approval contains the same program areas or activities that should INFORMATION CONTACT section, active ingredient in the same strength be added as a high priority, for FY 2006. constitutes the Center’s priority and dosage form as the ‘‘listed drug,’’ workplan for FY 2005 (i.e., October 1, III. Comments which is typically a version of the drug that was previously approved. Sponsors 2004, through September 30, 2005). The Interested persons may submit to the of ANDAs do not have to repeat the FY 2005 workplan is based on input we Division of Dockets Management (see extensive clinical testing otherwise received from our stakeholders (see 69 ADDRESSES) written or electronic necessary to gain approval of a new FR 35380, June 24, 2004), as well as comments regarding this document. drug application (NDA). The only input generated internally. The primary Submit a single copy of electronic clinical data required in an ANDA are focus is: ‘‘Where do we do the most comments or two paper copies of any data to show that the drug that is the good for consumers?’’ mailed comments, except that subject of the ANDA is bioequivalent to The FY 2005 workplan contained individuals may submit one paper copy. the listed drug. three lists of activities, as follows: The Comments are to be identified with the The 1984 amendments include what ‘‘A-list,’’ the ‘‘B-list,’’ and a ‘‘Priority docket number found in brackets in the is now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Ongoing Activities’’ list. Our goal is to heading of this document. Received Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. complete fully at least 90 percent of the comments may be seen in the Division 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to ‘‘A-list’’ activities by the end of the of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. publish a list of all approved drugs. fiscal year, September 30, 2005. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Activities on the ‘‘B-list’’ are those we FDA publishes this list as part of the plan to make progress on, but may not Dated: May 12, 2005. ‘‘Approved Drug Products with complete before the end of the fiscal Jeffrey Shuren, Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,’’ year. Items in the ‘‘Priority Ongoing Assistant Commissioner for Policy. which is generally known as the Activities’’ list illustrate some of the [FR Doc. 05–10033 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] ‘‘Orange Book.’’ Under FDA regulations, many priority activities the Center BILLING CODE 4160–01–S drugs are withdrawn from the list if the performs on a regular basis in addition agency withdraws or suspends approval to those identified on our ‘‘A’’ and ‘‘B’’ of the drug’s NDA or ANDA for reasons lists. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND of safety or effectiveness or if FDA CFSAN intends to issue a progress HUMAN SERVICES determines that the listed drug was report on what program priority withdrawn from sale for reasons of activities already have been completed Food and Drug Administration safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162). to date in the summer of FY 2005, as Under 21 CFR 314.161(a)(1), the [Docket 2004P–0220] well as any adjustments in the workplan agency must determine whether a listed (i.e., additions or deletions) for the Determination That ZITHROMAX drug was withdrawn from sale for balance of the fiscal year. (Azithromycin) 250-Milligram Oral reasons of safety or effectiveness before an ANDA that refers to that listed drug II. 2006 CFSAN Program Priorities Capsules Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or may be approved. FDA may not approve FDA is requesting comments on what Effectiveness an ANDA that does not refer to a listed program priorities CFSAN should drug. consider establishing for FY 2006. The AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, ZITHROMAX (azithromycin) 250-mg input will be used to develop CFSAN’s HHS. oral capsules are the subject of NDA 50– FY 2006 workplan. The workplan will ACTION: Notice. 670 held by Pfizer, Inc. (Pfizer). FDA set forth the Center’s program priorities approved NDA 50–670 on November 1, for the period of October 1, 2005, SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 1991. In February 1994, Pfizer through September 30, 2006. FDA Administration (FDA) has determined submitted NDA 50–711 for intends to make the FY 2006 workplan that ZITHROMAX (azithromycin) 250- ZITHROMAX (azithromycin) 250-mg available in the fall of 2005. milligram (mg) oral capsules were not tablets. Pfizer explained that the new The format of the FY 2006 workplan withdrawn from sale for reasons of dosage form was intended to replace the will be identical to the FY 2005 plan, safety or effectiveness. This capsule formulation. Pfizer decided to and it will be formatted into the determination will allow FDA to change the dosage form from capsules to following five sections: approve abbreviated new drug tablets because tablets do not have a
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29330 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
food effect. In its February 15, 1994, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Committee should contact Tom Morris, letter accompanying NDA 50–711, HUMAN SERVICES M.P.A., Executive Secretary, National Pfizer explained that the tablets are Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services, Health Resources and bioequivalent to the capsule formulation Health Resources and Services Administration Services Administration, Parklawn Building, and ‘‘* * * unlike the capsule, can be Room 9A–55, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, taken without regard to meals.’’ After National Advisory Committee on Rural MD 20857, telephone (301) 443–0835, Fax NDA 50–711 was approved, Pfizer Health and Human Services; Notice of (301) 443–2803. Persons interested in attending any portion decided not to market the capsule Meeting formulation and ZITHROMAX of the meeting should contact Michele Pray- (azithromycin) 250-mg oral capsules In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of Gibson, Office of Rural Health Policy (ORHP), telephone (301) 443–0835. The were moved from the prescription drug the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), notice is hereby given Committee meeting agenda will be posted on product list to the ‘‘Discontinued Drug ORHP’s Web site http:// Product List’’ section of the Orange that the following committee will www.ruralhealth.hrsa.gov. convene its fiftieth meeting: Book. The ‘‘Discontinued Drug Product Dated: May 13, 2005. Name: National Advisory Committee on List’’ delineates, among other items, Tina M. Cheatham, drug products that have been Rural Health and Human Services. Dates and Times: June 12, 2005, 1:30 p.m.– Director, Division of Policy Review and discontinued from marketing for reasons 5:15 p.m., June 13, 2005, 8:45 a.m.–5 p.m., Coordination. other than safety or effectiveness. June 14, 2005, 9 a.m.–10:45 a.m. [FR Doc. 05–10098 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] In a citizen petition submitted under Place: Carnegie Hotel, 1216 W State of BILLING CODE 4165–15–P 21 CFR 10.30 dated May 4, 2004 (Docket Franklin Road, Johnson City, TN 37604, Phone: 423–979–6400, Fax: 423–979–6424. No. 2004P–0220), as amended by a letter Status: The meeting will be open to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND dated May 17, 2004, Wapner, Newman, public. Wigrizer & Brecher requested that FDA Purpose: The National Advisory HUMAN SERVICES determine whether ZITHROMAX Committee on Rural Health and Human National Institutes of Health (azithromycin) 250-mg oral capsules Services provides advice and were withdrawn from sale for reasons of recommendations to the Secretary with respect to the delivery, research, Opportunity for a Cooperative safety or effectiveness. The agency has development, and administration of health Research and Development Agreement determined that ZITHROMAX and human services in rural areas. (CRADA) for Research and (azithromycin) 250-mg oral capsules Agenda: Sunday afternoon, June 12, at 1:30 Development of Vigabatrin as a were not withdrawn from sale for p.m., the Chairperson, the Honorable David Potential Pharmacotherapy for the reasons of safety or effectiveness. The Beasley, will open the meeting and welcome Treatment of Cocaine and the Committee. There will be a brief petitioners identified no data or other discussion of Committee business and Methamphetamine Dependence information suggesting that updates by Federal staff. The first session ZITHROMAX (azithromycin) 250-mg will open with an overview of East AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, oral capsules were withdrawn from sale Tennessee by Dr. Paul Stanton, President of PHS, DHHS. East Tennessee State University. The as a result of safety or effectiveness ACTION: Notice. concerns. FDA has independently remainder of the day’s meeting will be devoted to panel discussions on the three evaluated relevant literature and data topics for the 2006 workplan: Pharmacy SUMMARY: The National Institute on and has found no information that Access, Health Information Technology Drug Abuse, a component of the would indicate this product was (HIT), and Elderly Caregiver Support. The National Institutes of Health, withdrawn for reasons of safety or Sunday meeting will close at 5:15 p.m. Department of Health and Human effectiveness. Monday morning, June 13, at 8:45 a.m., the Services (DHHS) seeks an agreement Committee will break into Subcommittees After considering the citizen petition and conduct site visits to local health and with a pharmaceutical or biotechnology and reviewing agency records, FDA human services facilities. Transportation to company to test the hypotheses that determines that, for the reasons outlined these sites will not be provided to the general vigabatrin may be a safe and effective in this document, ZITHROMAX public. The Pharmacy Access Subcommittee medication for the treatment of cocaine will visit Wilson Pharmacy in Johnson City; and methamphetamine dependence. (azithromycin) 250-mg oral capsules, the HIT Subcommittee will visit Central approved under NDA 50–670, were not Appalachian Health Information Partnership A body of literature relevant to withdrawn from sale for reasons of in Mountain City; and the Elderly Caregiver preclinical studies of vigabatrin as a safety or effectiveness. Accordingly, the Support Subcommittee will visit the potential treatment agent for various agency will continue to list Mountain Empire Older Citizens Area types of substance dependence Agency on Aging in Big Stone Gap. The (including cocaine and ZITHROMAX (azithromycin) 250-mg Subcommittees will reconvene at 1:45 p.m. at oral capsules in the ‘‘Discontinued Drug methamphetamine) and a more limited the Carnegie Hotel to continue discussions body of literature concerning clinical Product List’’ section of the Orange on the workplan. The Committee of the results exists. As there are currently no Book. As a result, ANDAs that refer to whole will reconvene at 4:30 p.m. for a brief discussion of the workplan. The Monday medications approved by the U. S. Food ZITHROMAX (azithromycin) 250-mg and Drug Administration (FDA) for the oral capsules may be approved by the meeting will close at 5 p.m. The final session will be convened treatment of cocaine and/or agency. Tuesday morning, June 14, at 9 a.m. The methamphetamine dependence, and Dated: May 12, 2005. Committee will review the discussion of the cocaine and methamphetamine 2006 Workplan and have updates on the Jeffrey Shuren, dependence have substantial negative Subcommittees site visits. The meeting will public health impacts, the National Assistant Commissioner for Policy. conclude with a discussion of the September Institute on Drug Abuse is interested in [FR Doc. 05–10032 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] meeting. The meeting will be adjourned at 10:45 a.m. evaluating the safety and efficacy of BILLING CODE 4160–01–S For Further Information Contact: Anyone vigabatrin for the treatment of cocaine requiring information regarding the and methamphetamine dependence.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29331
Rationale for Studying Vigabatrin in (bioavailability c. 75%) and widely in adult resistant partial epilepsy. Seizure Stimulant(s) Dependence distributed. The drug is eliminated 9:112–118. Hancock E, Osborne JP (1999). Vigabatrin in The dependence-producing properties primarily by the renal route and is not significantly bound to plasma proteins. the treatment of infantile spasms in of stimulants have been associated with tuberous sclerosis. J Child Neurol 14:71– their pharmacological actions on the The elimination half-life is 74. mesolimbic dopamine reward pathways approximately 5–9 hours in healthy Kushner SA, Dewey SL, Kornetsky C (1999). in the central nervous system (CNS). subjects and may be prolonged in The irreversible gamma-amino butyric acid Gamma-amino butyric acid (GABA) elderly patients or those with impaired (GABA) transaminase inhibitor gamma inhibits striatal dopamine release, and renal function (Rey et. al., 1992). The vinyl-GABA blocks cocaine self- usual adult dose of vigabatrin for administration in rats. J.Pharmacol attenuates cocaine-induced increases in ExpTher 290(2): 797–802. extracellular dopamine in the striatum epilepsy is 1–3 g/day. There is no evidence that plasma concentrations of Molina PE, Ahmed N, Ajmal M, Dewey S, and nucleus accumbens (Molina et. al., Volkow N, Fowler J, Abumrad N (1999). 1999). Selective increases in GABAergic vigabatrin correlate closely with Co-administration of Gamma-Vinyl GABA tone attenuate cocaine-induced therapeutic effects (Brodie et. al., 2003). and Cocaine: Preclinical Assessment of dopamine release without the apparent There are anecdotal reports that Safety. Life Sciences 11:1175–1182. side effects typically associated with dosing with vigabatrin prevents the Rey E, Pons G, Olive G (1992). Vigabatrin. GABA agonists. Therefore, targeting ‘‘high’’ associated with cocaine intake in Clinical pharmacokinetics. Clin humans dependent on cocaine and can, Pharmacokinet 23:267–278. brain GABAergic systems is a Schiffer WK, Martsteller D, Dewey SL (2003). potentially effective pharmacologic therefore, result in decreased cocaine consumption. Two open label pilot Sub-chronic low dose gamma vinyl GABA treatment strategy for cocaine and (vigabatrin) inhibits cocaine-induced methamphetamine dependence (Molina studies suggest a therapeutic effect in increases in nucleus accumbens dopamine. et. al., 1999). Data from proof of concept most patients recruited in abstaining Psychopharmacology 168: 339–343. clinical trials of similar GABAergic from cocaine or methamphetamine Stromberg MF, Mackler SA, Volpicelli JR, medications e.g. topiramate, baclofen, (Brodie et. al., 2005) use (Brodie et. al., O’Brien CP, Dewey SL (2001). The effect of and tiagabine show efficacy in reducing 2003; Brodie et. al., 2005). gamma-vinyl-GABA on the consumption of cocaine use or in preventing relapse to Therefore, it may be predicted that concurrently available oral cocaine and dosing with vigabatrin in a cocaine ethanol in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem use. These data suggest that vigabatrin, Behav 68:291–299. which possesses more potent dependent population might prevent the DATES: NIDA will consider all proposals GABAergic action, may be more cocaine ‘‘high’’ and the subsequent received within 45 days of the date of efficacious than these medications. ‘‘craving’’, and possibly reduce the publication of this notice. This notice is Preclinical studies in animal models perceived need for repeated use, and active until July 5, 2005. have confirmed that dosing with often higher, drug doses (Dewey et. al., vigabatrin can block the manifestations 1999). ADDRESSES: Proposals and questions of consumption of cocaine typically As an initial step in the clinical about this opportunity may be seen in these models (Stromberg et. al., development of vigabatrin for addressed to Frank Vocci, Ph.D., 2001), without impairing the usual stimulants dependence, it is important Division of Pharmacotherapy and dopamine mechanisms necessary to to assess the potential efficacy and Medical Consequences of Drug Abuse, maintain a stable equilibrium. In rodent safety of this compound in cocaine and National Institute on Drug Abuse, 6001 models, vigabatrin has been shown to methamphetamine dependent subjects. Executive Blvd., MSC 9551, Bethesda, reduce self-administration of cocaine Maryland 20892–9551. For overnight and alcohol (Stromberg et. al., 2001; References mail service, 6001 Executive Blvd., Kushner et al., 1999), and to block Brodie JD, Figueroa E, Dewey SL (2003). Room 4123, Rockville, Maryland 20852. conditioned place preference induced Treating cocaine addiction: From Tel: (301) 443–2711, Fax: (301) 443– by cocaine (Dewey et. al, 1998), nicotine preclinical to clinical experience with 2599. gamma-vinyl GABA. Synapse 50: 261–265. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NIDA will (Dewey et. al., 1999), and heroin (Paul, Brodie JD, Figueroa E, Lasha EM, Dewey SL et. al., 2001). Further, vigabatrin can (2005). Safety and efficacy of gamma-vinyl consider proposals from all qualified reduce the increases in nucleus GABA (GVG) for the treatment of entities and will, subject to negotiation accumbens dopamine induced by methamphetamine and cocaine addiction. of the details of a mutually agreed upon cocaine (Schiffer et. al., 2003), as well Synapse 55(2): 122–125. Research Plan, provide the CRADA as methamphetamine, heroin, and Dewey SL, Brodie JD, Gerasimov M, Horan B, Collaborator access to its comprehensive ethanol (Gerasimov et. al., 1999). Gardner EL, Ashby CR (1999). A preclinical and clinical trials resources Vigabatrin (GVG) is an irreversible pharmacological strategy for the treatment with the understanding that the CRADA gamma-amino butyric acid (GABA) of nicotine addiction. Synapse 31: 76–86. Collaborator will be able to utilize data transaminase inhibitor that produces a Dewey SL, Morgan SE, Ashby CR, Horan B, derived from the CRADA to pursue Gardner EL, Brodie JD (1998). A novel two to three fold rise in brain GABA strategy for the treatment of cocaine regulatory filings in the U.S. and abroad. concentrations (Guberman et. al., 2000). addiction. Synapse 30: 119–129. NIDA’s Medications Development Following oral administration, Gerasimov MR, Ashby CR, Gardner EL, Mills Program possesses the capacity to vigabatrin readily crosses the blood- MJ, Brodie JD, Dewey SL (1999). Gamma- perform chemical synthesis, dosage brain barrier and is active within the Vinyl GABA inhibits methamphetamine, form development, pharmacokinetics, central nervous system. It has been heroin, or ethanol-induced increases in pharmacodynamics, toxicology, shown to be effective, both as an add- nucleus accumbens dopamine. Synapse 34: regulatory management, and clinical on agent and in monotherapy in 11–19. testing (Phase I through Phase III) resistant and newly-diagnosed epilepsy Gillis MC (2005). CPS: Compendium of meeting FDA requirements for Good Pharmaceutical and Specialties (CPS). 37th (Guberman et. al., 2000) and as first line Edition, Canadian Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Good Laboratory monotherapy in the treatment of Association, Ottawa, pp: 1513–1515. Procedures, and Good Clinical Practices infantile spasms (West syndrome) Guberman A, Bruni J & The Canadian standards. NIDA may apply these (Hancock et. al., 1999). After oral Vigabatrin Study Group (2000). Long-term capacities in the assessment of dosing, vigabatrin is well absorbed open multicentre, add-on trial of vigabatrin vigabatrin, as may be warranted based
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29332 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
on NIDA’s evaluation of the 1. Ability to collaborate with NIDA on DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND information, capacities, and plans further research and development of HUMAN SERVICES provided by potential Collaborator(s). this technology in Phase I and Phase II NIDA follows stepwise development clinical studies. All such studies will National Institutes of Health processes and procedures common to occur in the United States and under the medications development paradigm, FDA IND rules. Demonstration of Government-Owned Inventions; i.e., a candidate compound must experience and expertise in this or Availability for Licensing successfully complete each necessary related areas of technology and the AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, pre-requisite step prior to being ability to provide intellectual Public Health Service, DHHS. advanced for further testing and contribution to the ongoing research and development. It is NIDA’s intention to development. Ability to accomplish ACTION: Notice. provide, assuming pre-requisite objectives according to an appropriate SUMMARY: The inventions listed below preclinical and clinical safety, timetable to be outlined in the are owned by an agency of the U.S. preclinical and clinical trials services Collaborator’s proposal. At an absolute Government and are available for sufficient to permit the completion of minimum, Collaborator must be able to licensing in the U.S. in accordance with Phase II hypothesis testing trials for provide vigabatrin and placebo 35 U.S.C. 207 to achieve expeditious cocaine and methamphetamine sufficient to complete all clinical and commercialization of results of dependence indications. Assuming preclinical studies required in the federally-funded research and demonstration and review of safety and Research Plan. efficacy at the conclusion of Phase II development. Foreign patent 2. Demonstration of the resources trials and subject to negotiation, NIDA applications are filed on selected (facilities, personnel and expertise) will consider undertaking Phase III inventions to extend market coverage necessary to perform research, trials sufficient to permit Collaborator to for companies and may also be available development and commercialization of seek a U.S. New Drug Application for licensing. this technology. (NDA). ADDRESSES: Licensing information and Please note that a CRADA is not a 3. Commitment of reasonable effort copies of the U.S. patent applications funding mechanism. No NIH funding and resources on research, development listed below may be obtained by writing may be provided to a Collaborator under and commercialization of this to the indicated licensing contact at the a CRADA. All assistance is provided technology. Office of Technology Transfer, National ‘‘in-kind’’. Therefore the Collaborator 4. Expertise in the commercial Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive will bear the financial and development, production, marketing Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, organizational costs of meeting its share and sales of products related to this area Maryland 20852–3804; telephone: (301) of obligations under any Research Plan of technology . 496–7057; fax: (301) 402–0220. A signed that may be negotiated in connection 5. The level of financial support, if Confidential Disclosure Agreement will with the CRADA. any, the Collaborator will supply for be required to receive copies of the ‘‘Cooperative Research and CRADA-related Government activities. patent applications. Development Agreement’’ or ‘‘CRADA’’ 6. A willingness to cooperate with the means the anticipated joint agreement to Synthesis of Phosphocholine Ester National Institute on Drug Abuse in the be entered into by NIDA pursuant to the Derivatives and Conjugates Thereof publication of research results. Federal Technology Transfer Act of Louis J. Rezanka (NIA), U.S. Provisional 7. An agreement to be bound by the 1986 and Executive Order 12591 of Application No. 60/623,762 filed 29 DHHS rules involving human subjects, October 10, 1987 to collaborate on the Oct 2004 (DHHS Reference No. E– patent rights and ethical treatment of specific research project described 330–2004/0–US–01) below. animals. The National Institute on Drug Abuse 8. A willingness to accept the legal Licensing Contact: Michael seeks an agreement with a provisions and language of the CRADA Shmilovich; (301) 435–5019; pharmaceutical or biotechnology with only minor modifications (if any). [email protected]. company for joint research, Available for licensing and 9. Provisions for equitable commercial development is a method of development, evaluation, and potential distribution of patent rights to any commercialization of vigabatrin for the synthesizing EPC (4-Nitrophenyl-6-(O- inventions made during the course of phosphocholine) hydroxyhexanoate) treatment of cocaine and the subject CRADA research. Generally, methamphetamine dependence. and methods of synthesizing the rights of ownership are retained by phosphocholine analogues and the The CRADA aims include the rapid the organization which is the employer publication of research results and the phosphocholine conjugates formed of the inventor, with (1) an irrevocable, therefrom. These molecules have timely exploitation of commercial nonexclusive, royalty-free license to the opportunities. The CRADA partner will clinical and research applications as Government (when a company anti-microbial agents. Specifically, EPC enjoy rights of first negotiation for employee is the sole inventor) or (2) an licensing Government rights to any conjugated to protein carriers has been option to negotiate an exclusive or demonstrated to generate a protective inventions arising under the agreement nonexclusive license to the company on and will advance funds payable upon immune response to Streptococcus terms that are appropriate (when a pneumoniae. The invention provides a signing the CRADA to help defray Government employee is an inventor). Government expenses for patenting process for EPC synthesis as well as for such inventions and other CRADA- Dated: May 11, 2005. its reaction intermediates for use in related costs. Steven M. Ferguson, synthesis. The expected duration of the CRADA Director, Division of Technology Development In addition to licensing, the will be 3 to 5 years. and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, technology is available for further Selection criteria for choosing the National Institutes of Health. development through collaborative CRADA partner will include but not be [FR Doc. 05–10066 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] research opportunities with the limited to: BILLING CODE 4140–01–P inventors.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29333
Methods and Compositions for the ex via an introduced binding moiety under The invention is a method for vivo High-Throughput Detection of nondenaturing conditions. preventing venous access device (VAD) Protein/Protein Interactions Proteins or other biologically active thrombosis by coating the VAD catheter molecules are easily denatured, and with lepirudin, which has been found to Sankar Adhya and Amos Oppenheim once introduced into the body, rapidly be readily adsorbed by the silicone (NCI), U.S. Provisional Application cleared. These problems are rubber of the VADs, and is expected to No. 60/629,933 filed 23 Nov 2004 circumvented by first incorporating the have good retention properties. VADs (DHHS Reference No. E–264–2004/0– protein into the microbead. Microbeads typically remain in place for weeks or US–01) with protein payloads are then months and sometimes cause clotting Licensing Contact: Cristina introduced into the tissue of interest, (thrombosis) of the veins. Accordingly, Thalhammer-Reyero; (301) 435–4507; where the microbeads remain while the simple technique of soaking a [email protected]. degrading into biologically innocuous silicone catheter in lepirudin before This invention relates to methods and materials while delivering the protein/ venous insertion is the gist of the compositions for the high-throughput drug payload for adjustable periods of invention. Chronically ill patients who detection of protein-protein interactions time ranging from hours to weeks. This must be catheterized for long periods of using a lambda phage display system. technology is an improvement of the time will benefit particularly from this One of the central challenges in systems microbead technology described in U.S. technique which promises to reduce biology is defining the interactome, or Patent No. 5,759,582. swelling and pain associated with VAD- set of all protein-protein interactions This technology has two commercial induced thrombosis. within a living cell, as a basis for applications. The first is a Reference: Horne, MK, Brokaw, KJ. understanding biological processes for pharmaceutical drug delivery Antithrombin activity of lepirudin early diagnosis of disease and for drug application. The bead allows the adsorbed to silicone development. The invention provides a incorporated protein or drug to be (polydimethylsiloxane) tubing. novel proteomic toolbox for high- delivered locally at high concentration, Thrombosis Research 2003; 112:111– throughput medical research based in ensuring that therapeutic levels are 115. combining phage lambda protein reached at the target site while reducing In addition to licensing, the display and recent advances in side effects by keeping systemic technology is available for further manipulation of the phage’s genome. concentration low. The microbead development through collaborative accomplishes this while protecting the The method uses the bacteriophage research opportunities with the biologically active protein from harsh lambda vector to express proteins on its inventors. surface, and is based on the use of conditions traditionally encountered mutant phage vectors such that only during microbead formation/drug VAC–BAC Shuttle Vector System interacting phages will be able to formulation. Bernard Moss, Arban Domi (NIAID), The microbeads are inert, reproduce and co-infect an otherwise U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ biodegradable, and allow a sustained non-permissive host and produce 371,840 filed 10 Apr 2002 (DHHS release or multiple-release profile of plaques. The invention allows for the Reference No. E–355–2001/0–US–01); treatment with various active agents characterization of bacteriophage U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ without major side effects. In addition, display libraries that could be easily 402,824 filed 09 Aug 2002 (DHHS the bead maintains functionality under adapted to be used in large-scale Reference No. E–355–2001/1–US–01); functional protein chip assays. physiological conditions. Second, the microbeads and International Patent Application No. In addition to licensing, the microparticles can be used in various PCT/US03/11183 filed 10 Apr 2003, technology is available for further research assays, such as isolation and which published as WO 03/087330 development through collaborative separation assays, to bind target proteins A2 on 23 Oct 2003 (DHHS Reference research opportunities with the from biological samples. A disadvantage No. E–355–2001/2–PCT–01); U.S. inventors. of the conventional methods is that the Patent Application No. 10/959,392 Coacervate Microparticles Useful for proteins become denatured. The filed 05 Oct 2004 (DHHS Reference the Sustained Release Administration denaturation results in incorrect binding No. E–355–2001/2–US–02); European of Therapeutics Agents studies or inappropriate binding Patent Application No. 037183431 complexes being formed. The instant filed 10 Apr 2003 (DHHS Reference Phillip Heller (NIA), U.S. Provisional technology corrects this disadvantage by No. E–355–2001/2–EP–03) Application No. 60/602,651 filed 19 using a bead created in a more neutral Licensing Contact: Robert M. Joynes; Aug 2004 (DHHS Reference No. E– pH environment. It is this same (301) 594–6565; [email protected]. 116–2004/0–US–01) environment that is used for the binding This invention relates to a VAC–BAC Licensing Contact: Susan O. Ano; of the protein of interest as well. shuttle vector system for the creation of (301) 435–5515; [email protected]. recombinant poxviruses from DNA The described technology is a Lepirudin Adsorbed to Catheter cloned in a bacterial artificial biodegradable microbead or McDonald Horne (CC), U.S. Provisional chromosome. A VAC–BAC is a bacterial microparticle, useful for the sustained Application No. 60/436,439 filed 23 artificial chromosome (BAC) containing localized delivery of biologically active Dec 2002 (DHHS Reference No. E– a vaccinia virus genome (VAC) that can proteins or other molecules of 295–2002/0–US–01); PCT Application replicate in bacteria and produce pharmaceutical interest. The No. PCT/US03/40888 filed 22 Dec infectious virus in mammalian cells. microbeads are produced from several 2003, which published as WO 2004/ The following are some of the uses for USP grade materials, a cationic polymer, 058324 A2 on 15 Jul 2004 (DHHS a VAC–BAC: an anionic polymer and a binding Reference No. E–295–2002/0–PCT– 1. VAC–BACs can be used to modify component (e.g., gelatin, chondroitin 02) vaccinia virus DNA by deletion, sulfate and avidin), in predetermined Licensing Contact: Michael insertion or point mutation or add new ratios.) Biologically active proteins are Shmilovich; (301) 435–5018; DNA to the VAC genome with methods incorporated into preformed microbeads [email protected]. developed for bacterial plasmids, rather
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29334 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
than by recombination in mammalian Government and are available for under circumstances where normal cells. licensing in the U.S. in accordance with differentiation is compromised. 2. It can be used to produce 35 U.S.C. 207 to achieve expeditious In addition to licensing, the recombinant vaccinia viruses for gene commercialization of results of technology is available for further expression. federally-funded research and development through collaborative 3. It can be used for the production of development. Foreign patent research opportunities with the modified vaccinia viruses that have applications are filed on selected inventors. improved safety or immunogenicity. inventions to extend market coverage Methods for Detecting Progression of Advantages of the VAC–BAC shuttle for companies and may also be available Low Grade Cervical Dysplasia system: for licensing. 1. VAC–BACs are clonally purified ADDRESSES: Licensing information and Thomas Ried et al. (NCI) from bacterial colonies before virus copies of the U.S. patent applications DHHS Reference No. E–041–2005/0– reconstitution in mammalian cells. US–01 2. Manipulation of DNA is much listed below may be obtained by writing to the indicated licensing contact at the Licensing Contact: Thomas P. Clouse; simpler and faster in bacteria than in 301/435–4076; [email protected] mammalian cells. Office of Technology Transfer, National 3. Modified genomes can be Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive This invention describes a test that characterized prior to virus Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, can be applied to Pap smears to reconstitution. Maryland 20852–3804; telephone: 301/ differentiate low-grade dysplastic 4. Only virus with modified genomes 496–7057; fax: 301/402–0220. A signed lesions that are likely to progress to will be produced so that virus plaque Confidential Disclosure Agreement will higher-grade dysplasia and cervical isolations are not needed. be required to receive copies of the cancer from those that are likely to 5. Generation of a stock of virus from patent applications. regress. The differentiating factor is the a VAC–BAC is accomplished within a presence of genetic gain on the long arm DU145 Camptothecin (CPT)-Resistant of chromosome 3. The inventors have week rather than many weeks. Cell Line 6. Multiple viruses can be generated shown that low grade Pap smears that at the same time since plaque Dr. Yves Pommier (NCI) progress already exhibit extra copies of purification is unnecessary. DHHS Reference No. E–159–2005/0— 3q, while those that do not show the 3q References: Research Tool gain spontaneously regress. 1. Domi, A., and B. Moss. 2002. Licensing Contact: John Stansberry; 301/ Around 10–15% of the 3 million Pap Cloning the vaccinia virus genome as a 435–5236; [email protected] smears with low-grade dysplasia each bacterial artificial chromosome in Drug resistance is a major limitation year in the United States progress to Escherichia coli and recovery of of chemotherapy. Understanding how higher grade lesions. Currently, HPV infectious virus in mammalian cells. drug resistance develops may lead to testing is used to stratify these low grade Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:12415– more effective treatments. This disease Pap smears, but as the majority 12420. invention describes the DU145 of these Pap smears are already HPV 2. Domi, A., and B. Moss. 2005. Camptothecin (CPT)-resistant prostate infected, the test has very low Engineering of a vaccinia virus bacterial cancer cell line that can be used to specificity. The instant 3q test, which artificial chromosome in Escherichia study mechanisms of drug resistance. targets the human telomerase gene, coli by bacteriophage lambda-based For more details see Pommier et al., TERC, is a significant improvement in recombination. Nature Methods 2:95– Cancer Research 61, 1964–1969, March sensitivity and specificity over the 97. 1, 2001. current methods used for the detection In addition to licensing, the of progressing versus regressing lesions. technology is available for further Mammary Gland Differentiation by 2- development through collaborative Methoxyestradiol Antibodies to Rheb, a Ras-Related Protein research opportunities with the Jeffrey E. Green et al. (NCI) inventors. DHHS Ref. No. E–069–2005/0–US–01 Geoffrey J. Clark and Michele Vos (NCI) Dated: May 12, 2005. Licensing Contact: Thomas P. Clouse; DHHS Reference No. E–351–2004— Steven M. Ferguson, 301/435–4076; [email protected] Research Tool. Licensing Contact: Mojdeh Bahar; 301/ Director, Division of Technology Development This invention is based on the and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, discovery that administration of 2- 435–2950; [email protected] National Institutes of Health. Methoxyestradiol (2-ME2) to female The invention relates to polyclonal [FR Doc. 05–10064 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] mice at various developmental stages antibodies that recognize the protein BILLING CODE 4140–01–P will result in the differentiation of Rheb, a key player in protein mammary epithelial cells to form biosynthesis. Rheb is a small GTP- rudimentary alveolar structures and to binding protein that is structurally DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND produce milk proteins. This effect has related to the oncoprotein Ras, but Rheb HUMAN SERVICES also been demonstrated in an in vitro does not activate the same pathways as experimental system. Since 2-ME2 is Ras. Instead, Rheb binds to the tumor National Institutes of Health highly expressed during late stages of suppressor TSC2 (Tuberin) and causes human pregnancy and pregnancy is activation of the S6 kinase in a TOR Government-Owned Inventions; known to reduce the risk of human (Target of Rapamycin) dependent Availability for Licensing bresat cancer, possibly due to manner. Rheb likely plays roles in the AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, differentiating effects on the mammary response to insulin and the Public Health Service, DHHS. gland, 2ME2 may be developed into a development of human tumors. Thus, ACTION: Notice. preventive agent against breast cancer in the antibodies could provide useful women. Additionally, 2-ME2 may be reagents to investigate the functions of SUMMARY: The inventions listed below useful in augmenting mammary gland Rheb in these and other biological are owned by an agency of the U.S. differentiation and milk production processes.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29335
In addition to licensing, the 22242 filed 09 Jul 2004 (DHHS In addition to the novel polyketide technology is available for further Reference No. E–272–2003/0–PCT– macrolide compounds the application development through collaborative 02) also describes compositions derived research opportunities with the Licensing Contact: Jesse Kindra; 301/ from a non-virulent strain of M. inventors. 435–5559; [email protected] ulcerans. These compositions may be Methods of Reducing the Activity and The present disclosure relates to anti- useful in inducing an immune response Concentration of an Eph Receptor angiogenesis compositions and (vaccines) which could be useful in methods, and particularly thalidomide Tyrosine Kinase providing subjects with resistance to the analogs that actively inhibit Jennifer Isaacs and Leonard Neckers development of buruli ulcers. angiogenesis in humans and animals. Antibodies against mycolactone are (NCI) Angiogenesis is the formation of new being developed. These antibodies U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ blood vessels from pre-existing vessels. 591,986 filed 29 Jul 2004 (DHHS Angiogenesis is prominent in solid could be used for diagnostic purposes. Reference No. E–245–2004/0–US–01) tumor formation and metastasis. A Some early publications which Licensing Contact: George Pipia; 301/ tumor requires formation of a network describe this work are KM George et al. 435–5560; [email protected] of blood vessels to sustain the nutrient Science 283(5403): 854–7 (Feb. 5, 1999) The Eph receptors comprise a family and oxygen supply for continued and KM George et al. Infect. Immun. of 14 members and as such, they carry growth. Some tumors in which 66(2): 587–93 (Feb. 1998). More out diverse functions, including angiogenesis is important include most recently, novel mycolactones have been embryonic patterning, migration, and solid tumors and benign tumors, such as isolated and characterized from the formation of neural networks. acoustic neuroma, neurofibroma, Australian isolates of M. ulcerans (Judd Recently, it was discovered that a subset trachoma, and pyogenic granulomas. et al. Organic Lett. 6: 4901–4904 (2004)) of these proteins play an integral role in Prevention of angiogenesis could halt as well as from the frog pathogen M. the formation of blood vessels, or the growth of these tumors and the liflandii (Mve-Obiang, A. et al. Infect. angiogenesis, which is a process resultant damage due to the presence of Immun. (In Press)). essential to tumor development. In fact, the tumor. several of these proteins have the The subject application discloses Spatial and Temporal Control of Gene capacity to transform normal cells, active thalidomide analogs that exhibit Expression Using a Heat Shock Protein when overexpressed. We have enhanced potency in the inhibition of Promoter in Combination with Local discovered that the HSP90 inhibitor 17- undesirable angiogenesis, and methods Heat Allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin for using these compounds to treat (17–AAG) effectively downregulates the angiogenesis and solid tumors. In Chrit T. Moonen (ORS) level of several angiogenic Eph particular, the presently disclosed U.S. Patent Application No. 10/864,102 receptors and impairs their oncogenic method provides for inhibiting filed 09 Jun 2004, claiming priority to signaling. This suggests that it maybe unwanted angiogenesis in a human or 15 Aug 1996 (DHHS Reference No. E– animal by administering to the human possible treat cancers overexpressing 235–1995/0–US–09); Foreign rights or animal with the undesired these oncogenes, by selectively available inhibiting HSP90 with 17–AAG and its angiogenesis a composition comprising derivatives. an effective amount of the active Licensing Contact: George Pipia; 301/ thalidomide analogs. According to a 435–5560; [email protected] Retinal Pigment Epithelial Cells more specific aspect, the method In many instances, it is desirable to Immortalized with TERT and involves inhibiting angiogenesis by express exogenous genes only in certain Expressing the Adenoviral E1A exposing a mass having the undesirable Oncoprotein angiogenesis to an angiogenesis tissues, and/or at will at certain times, Karen Vousden et al. (NCI) inhibiting amount of one or more and/or only to a certain degree. DHHS Reference No. E–135–2004/0— compounds, or pharmaceutically However, current gene transfer and Research Tool acceptable salts of such compounds. exogenous gene expression protocols do Licensing Contact: Thomas P. Clouse; not provide adequate means of 301/435–4076; [email protected] Mycolactone and Related Compounds simultaneously controlling which cells This invention describes human Pamela L. Small and Kathleen M. in a heterogeneous population are retinal pigment epithelial cells George (NIAID) transformed and when, where, and to immortalized with telomerase reverse U.S. Patent 6,680,055 issued 20 Jan 2004 what degree the transferred genes are transcriptase (TERT). Some of these (DHHS Reference No. E–199–1999/0– expressed. The invention provides cells express the adenoviral E1A US–06) methods for using local heat to control oncoprotein, while others do not. The Licensing Contact: John Stansberry; 301/ gene expression. The heat shock protein 435–5236; [email protected] E1A expressing cells serve as a model (hsp) gene promoter is recombined with for cancerous cells. Those that do not This application describes and claims a selected therapeutic gene and express E1A behave like normal cells. novel pharmocoactive compounds expressed in selected cells. Local which belong to the class of compounds As such these immortalized cells can be controlled heating is used to activate the known as polyketide macrolides. These used to compare the behavior of normal hsp promoter, for example by using compounds have been isolated from M. and cancer cells in vitro. focused ultrasound controlled by MRI. ulcerans the causative agent of buruli Analogs of Thalidomide as Potential ulcers. Early work with these In addition to licensing, the Angiogenesis Inhibitors compounds suggests that the principle technology is available for further William D. Figg, Erin Lepper (NCI) compound, mycolactone, or mixtures of development through collaborative U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ mycolactone with other isolated research opportunities with the 486,515 filed 11 Jul 2003 (DHHS polyketide macrolides or other agents inventors. Reference No. E–272–2003/0–US–01); may be useful in treating cancer or PCT Application No. PCT/US04/ suppressing an inflammatory response.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29336 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
Dated: May 11, 2005. Information is also available on the Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; Steven M. Ferguson, Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/bsa.htm, where Director, Division of Technology Development Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, an agenda any any additional information for and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, HHS.) the meeting will be posted when available. National Institutes of Health. Dated: May 12, 2005. [FR Doc. 05–10065 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Director, Office of Federal Advisory 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Committee Policy. Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer [FR Doc. 05–10071 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology BILLING CODE 4140–01–M HUMAN SERVICES Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, National Institutes of Health Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HHS.) HUMAN SERVICES National Cancer Institute; Notice of Dated: May 12, 2005. Meeting LaVerne Y. Stringfield, National Institutes of Health Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Cancer Institute; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Committee Policy. Meeting amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice [FR Doc. 05–10070 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] is hereby given of a meeting of the BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Pursuant to section 10(d) of the National Cancer Institute Board of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Scientific Advisors. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice The meeting will be open to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND is hereby given of the meeting of the public, with attendance limited to space HUMAN SERVICES National Cancer Advisory Board. available. Individuals who plan to The meeting will be open to the attend and need special assistance, such National Institutes of Health public as indicated below, with as sign language interpretation or other attendance limited to space available. reasonable accommodations, should National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting Individuals who plan to attend and notify the Contact Person listed below need special assistance, such as sign in advance of the meeting. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the language interpretation or other Name of Committee: National Cancer Federal Advisory Committee Act, as reasonable accommodations, should Institute Board of Scientific Advisors. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2) notice notify the Contact Person listed below Date: June 27–28, 2005. is hereby given of the following in advance of the meeting. Time: June 27, 2005, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. meeting. A portion of the meeting will be Agenda: Director’s Report; Ongoing and The meeting will be closed to the closed to the public in accordance with New Business; Reports of Program Review public in accordance with theprovisions Group(s); and Budget Presentation; Reports of the provisions set forth in sections Special Initiatives; RFA and RFP Concept set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(4), and 552b(c)(6), as amended. Review; and Scientific Presentations. 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the Place: National Institutes of Health, The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential Building 31, C Wing, 6 Floor, Conference Rm. discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property 10, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and 20892. such as patentable material, and personal information concerning Time: June 28, 2005, 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant Agenda: Ongoing and New Business; Reports of Program Review Group(s); and individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which Budget Presentation; Reports of Special applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted Initiatives; RFA and RFP Concept Review; would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. and Scientific Presentations. invasion of personal privacy. Name of Committee: National Cancer Place: National Institutes of Health, Name of Committee: National Cancer Advisory Board Subcommittee on Planning Building 31, C Wing, 6 Floor, Conference Rm. Institute Initial Review Group, Subcommittee and Budget. 10, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD F—Manpower & Training. Open: June 6, 2005, 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. 20892. Date: June 14–15, 2005. Agenda: To discuss activities related to the Contact Person: Paulette S. Gray, PhD, Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Subcommittee on Planning and Budget. Executive Secretary, Division of Extramural Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Activities, National Cancer Institute, National applications. Bethesda Metro Center, Bethesda, MD 20814. Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive Place: Wyndham City Center Hotel, 1143 Boulevard, 8th Floor, Rm. 8001, Bethesda, Contact Person: Ms. Cherie Nichols, New Hampshire Ave., NW., Washington, DC MD 20892, (301) 496–5147. Executive Secretary, National Cancer 20037. Any interested person may file written Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6116 Contact Person: Lynn M. Amende, PhD, comments with the committee by forwarding Executive Boulevard, 2nd Floor, Room 205, Scientific Review Administrator, Resources the statement to the Contact Person listed on Bethesda, MD 20892–2590, (301) 496–5515. and Training Review Branch, Division of this notice. The statement should include the Name of Committee: National Cancer Extramural Activities, National Cancer name, address, telephone number and when Advisory Board. Institute, 6116 Executive Blvd., Room 8105, applicable, the business or professional Open: June 7, 2005, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451–4759, affiliation of the interested person. Agenda: Program reports and [email protected]. In the interest of security, NIH has presentations; Business of the Board. instituted stringent procedures for entrance (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Place: National Cancer Institute, 9000 into the building by non-government Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Rockville Pike, Building 31, C Wing, 6th employees. Persons without a government 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Floor, Conference Room 10, Bethesda, MD I.D. will need to show a photo I.D. and sign- Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and 20892. in at the security desk upon entering the Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Contact Person: Dr. Paulette S. Gray, building. Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Executive Secretary, National Cancer
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29337
Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6116 confidential trade secrets or commercial DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Executive Boulevard, 8th Floor, Room 8001, property such as patentable material, HUMAN SERVICES Bethesda, MD 20892–8327, (301) 496–5147. and personal information concerning Name of Committee: National Cancer individuals associated with the grant National Institutes of Health Advisory Board. applications, the disclosure of which Closed: June 7, 2005, 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. would constitute a clearly unwarranted National Institute of Allergy and Agenda: Review of grant applications. invasion of personal privacy. Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Contact Person: Dr. Paulette S. Gray, Meeting Executive Secretary, National Cancer Name of Committee: National Center for Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6116 Complementary and Alternative Medicine Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Executive Boulevard, 8th Floor, Room 8001, Special Emphasis Panel, DB–20 International Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Bethesda, MD 20892–8327, (301) 496–5147. Centers for Research in CAM. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Name of Committee: National Cancer Date: June 14–16, 2005. is hereby given of the following Advisory Board. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. meeting. Open: June 8, 2005, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant The meeting will be closed to the Agenda: Program reports and applications. public in accordance with the presentations; Business of the Board. Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Contact Person: Dr. Paulette S. Gray, provisions set forth in sections Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Executive Secretary, National Cancer Contact Person: Dale L. Birkle, PhD, Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6116 as amended. The grant applications and Scientific Review Administrator, NIH/ the discussions could disclose Executive Boulevard, 8th Floor, Room 8001, NCCAM, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Democracy Bethesda, MD 20892–8327, (301) 496–5147. confidential trade secrets or commercial Two Building, Suite 401, Bethesda, MD Any interested person may file written 20892, (301) 451–6570, [email protected]. property such as patentable material, comments with the committee by forwarding and personal information concerning the statement to the Contact Person listed on Name of Committee: National Center for individuals associated with the grant Complementary and Alternative Medicine this notice. The statement should include the applications, the disclosure of which name, address, telephone number and when Special Emphasis Panel, Basic Science. applicable, the business or professional Date: June 20–21, 2005. would constitute a clearly unwarranted affiliation of the interested person. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. invasion of personal privacy. Information is also available on the Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Institute of Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// applications. Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/ncab.htm, Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Emphasis Panel, Center for HIV/AIDS where an agenda and any additional Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. Vaccine Immunology, (CHAVI). information for the meeting will be posted Contact Person: Dale L. Birkle, PhD, Date: June 22, 2005. when available. Scientific Review Administrator, NIH/ Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance NCCAM, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Democracy Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Two Building, Suite 401, Bethesda, MD applications. 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention 20892, (301) 451–6570, [email protected]. Place: Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 Washingtonian Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Name of Committee: National Center for Boulevard, Gaithersburg, MD 20878. Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Contact Person: Cheryl K. Lapham, PhD, Special Emphasis Panel, Clinical Science. Scientific Review Administrator, NIH/NIAID, Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; Date: June 23–24, 2005. 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Scientific Review Program, Room 2217, Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 6700–B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant HHS) Bethesda, MD 20892–7616, 301–496–2550, applications. [email protected]. Dated: May 12, 2005. Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Contact Person: Jeanette M. Hosseini, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Committee Policy. Scientific Review Administrator, National Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Center for Complementary and Alternative Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) [FR Doc. 05–10073 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Medicine, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 401, BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451–9096. Dated: May 12, 2005. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Name of Committee: National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Director, Office of Federal Advisory DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Special Emphasis Panel, CERC. Committee Policy. HUMAN SERVICES Date: July 12–13, 2005. [FR Doc. 05–10067 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. National Center for Complementary & Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Alternative Medicine; Notice of Closed Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. HUMAN SERVICES Meetings Contact Person: Martin H. Goldrosen, PhD, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Chief, Office of Scientific Review, National National Institutes of Health Center for Complementary and Alternative Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Medicine, National Institutes of Health, 6707 National Institute of Mental Health; amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Democracy Blvd., Suite 106, Bethesda, MD Notice of Closed Meetings is hereby given of the following 20892–5475, (301) 451–6331. meetings. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the The meetings will be closed to the Dated: May 12, 2005. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as public in accordance with the LaVerne Y. Stringfield, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice provisions set forth in sections Director, Office of Federal Advisory is hereby given of the following 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Committee Policy. meetings. as amended. The grant applications and [FR Doc. 05–10075 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] The meetings will be closed to the the discussions could disclose BILLING CODE 4140–01–M public in accordance with the
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29338 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
provisions set forth in sections DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND is hereby given of the following 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., HUMAN SERVICES meeting. as amended. The grant applications and The meeting will be closed to the the discussions could disclose National Institutes of Health public in accordance with the confidential trade secrets or commercial provisions set forth in sections National Institute of Arthritis property such as patentable material, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; as amended. The grant applications and and personal information concerning Notice of Closed Meeting individuals associated with the grant the discussions could disclose applications, the disclosure of which Pursuant to section 10(d) of the confidential trade secrets or commercial would constitute a clearly unwarranted Federal Advisory Committee Act, as property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning invasion of personal privacy. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following individuals associated with the grant Name of Committee: National Institute of meeting. applications, the disclosure of which Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel, The meeting will be closed to the would constitute a clearly unwarranted Treatment for Children. public in accordance with the invasion of personal privacy. Date: June 14–15, 2005. provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: National Institute of Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Agenda: To review and evaluate grant as amended. The contract proposals and Emphasis Panel, Review of an unsolicited M. applications. the discussions could disclose tuberculosis P01 Application. Place: Ritz-Carlton Hotel at Pentagon City, confidential trade secrets or commercial Date: June 15, 2005. 1250 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA Time: 2 p.m. 4 p.m. property such as patentable material, 22202. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant and personal information concerning Contact Person: Christopher S. Sarampote, applications. individuals associated with the contract PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Place: National Institutes of Health, proposals, the disclosure of which Rockledge 6700, 6700B Rockledge Drive Division of Extramural Activities, National 3123, Bethesda, MD 20817, (Telephone Institute of Mental Health, NIH, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Conference Call). Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Contact Person: Alec Ritchie, Phd, Room 6148, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892– Name of Committee: National Institute of Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific 9608, 301–443–1959, Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Review Program, Division of Extramural [email protected]. Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, Contract Activities, NIAID/NIH/DHHS, 6700 B Innovative Therapies for Rheumatic and Skin Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD Name of Committee: National Institute of Diseases. Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel, 20892–7616, 301–435–1614, Date: June 8–9, 2005. [email protected]. Questionnaire Development. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Date: June 16, 2005. Agenda: To review and evaluate contract (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Time: 1:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. proposals. Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Microbiology and Infectious Diseases applications. Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. Contact Person: Eric H. Brown, MS, PhD, Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Place: National Institutes of Health, Scientific Review Administrator, National Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Dated: May 12, 2005. Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal & Skin LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Conference Call). Democracy Blvd., Room 824, MSC 4872, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Contact Person: Martha Ann Carey, PhD, Bethesda, MD 20892–4872, (301) 594–4955, Committee Policy. RN, Scientific Review Administrator, [email protected]. [FR Doc. 05–10072 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Division of Extramural Activities, National This notice is being published less than 15 BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Institute of Mental Health, NIH, days prior to the meeting due to the timing Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle. Room 6151, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892– DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 9608, 301–443–1606, [email protected]. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance HUMAN SERVICES Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health Program Nos. 93.242, Mental Health Research National Institutes of Health, HHS) Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development LaVerne Y. Stringfield, National Institute of General Medical Award, Scientist Development Award for Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting Clinicians, and Research Scientist Award; Director, Office of Federal Advisory 93.282, Mental Health National Research Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Service Awards for Research Training, [FR Doc. 05–10069 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institutes of Health, HHS) BILLING CODE 4410–01–M amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Dated: May 12, 2005. is hereby given of the following meeting. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND The meeting will be closed to the Director, Office of Federal Advisory HUMAN SERVICES public in accordance with the Committee Policy. provisions set forth in sections [FR Doc. 05–10068 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] National Institutes of Health 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., BILLING CODE 4140–01–M National Institute of Allergy and as amended. The grant applications and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed the discussions could disclose Meeting confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the and personal information concerning Federal Advisory Committee Act, as individuals associated with the grant amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice applications, the disclosure of which
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29339
would constitute a clearly unwarranted Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One uninspected fishing vessels, fish invasion of personal privacy. Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin processing vessels, and fish tender Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. vessels. (See 46 U.S.C. 4508.) Name of Committee: National Institute of Contact Person: Melissa J. Stick, PhD., General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis CFIVSAC consists of 17 members as MPH, Chief, Scientific Review Branch, follows: (a) Ten members from the Panel, Modeling Infectious Disease Agents Scientific Review Branch, Division of Systems. Extramural Research, NIDCD/NIH, 6120 commercial fishing industry who reflect Date: June 6–7, 2005. Executive Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, 301– a regional and representational balance Time: 7 p.m. to 6 p.m. 496–8683. and have experience in the operation of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance vessels to which Chapter 45 of Title 46, applications. Program Nos. 93.173, Biological Research United States Code applies, or as a crew Place: Holiday Inn Select Bethesda, 8120 Related to Deafness and Communicative member or processing line member on Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Disorders, National Institutes of Health, HHS) an uninspected fish processing vessel; Contact Person: Arthur L Zachary, PhD, (b) one member representing naval Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Dated: May 12, 2005. architects or marine surveyors; (c) one Scientific Review, National Institute of LaVerne Y. Stringfield, General Medical Sciences, National Institutes member representing manufacturers of Director, Office of Federal Advisory vessel equipment to which Chapter 45 of Health, Natcher Building, Room 3AN–12, Committee Policy. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2886, applies; (d) one member representing [FR Doc. 05–10076 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] [email protected]. education or training professionals BILLING CODE 4140–01–M (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance related to fishing vessel, fish processing Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical vessels, or fish tender vessel safety, or Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and personnel qualifications; (e) one Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND member representing underwriters that Physiology, and Biological Chemistry SECURITY insure vessels to which Chapter 45 Research; 93.862, Genetics and applies; (f) and three members Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Coast Guard representing the general public Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, [USCG–2005–21201] including, whenever possible, an Special Minority Initiatives, National independent expert or consultant in Institutes of Health, HHS) Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel maritime safety and a member of a Dated: May 12, 2005. Safety Advisory Committee; Vacancies national organization composed of LaVerne Y. Stringfield, persons representing the marine AGENCY: Director, Office of Federal Advisory Coast Guard, DHS. insurance industry. Committee Policy. ACTION: Request for applications. CFIVSAC generally meets once a year. [FR Doc. 05–10074 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] It may also meet for extraordinary SUMMARY: The Coast Guard seeks BILLING CODE 4140–01–M purposes. Its subcommittees and applications for membership on the working groups may meet inter- Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel sessionally to prepare for meetings or DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Safety Advisory Committee (CFIVSAC). develop proposals for the committee as HUMAN SERVICES CFIVSAC advises and makes a whole to address specific problems. recommendations to the Coast Guard for We will consider applications for six National Institutes of Health improving commercial fishing industry positions that expire or become vacant safety practices. in October 2005 in the following National Institute of Deafness and DATES: Application forms should reach categories: (a) Commercial Fishing Other Communication Disorders; the Coast Guard at the location noted in Industry (four positions); (b) Equipment Notice of Closed Meeting ADDRESSES on or before July 1, 2005. Manufacturer (one position); (c) General ADDRESSES: You may request an Public (one position). Pursuant to section 10(d) of the application form by writing to Each member serves a 3-year term. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Commandant (G–MOC–3), U.S. Coast Members may serve consecutive terms. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW., Room All members serve at their own expense is hereby given of the following 1116, Washington, DC 20593–0001. and receive no salary from the Federal meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Government, although travel The meeting will be closed to the Captain Michael B. Karr, Executive reimbursement and per diem are public in accordance with the Director of CFIVSAC, or Lieutenant provided. provisions set forth in sections Kenneth Vazquez, Assistant to the In support of the policy of the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Executive Director, by telephone at 202– Department of Homeland Security on as amended. The grant applications and 267–0478, fax 202–267–0506, e-mail: gender and ethnic diversity, we the discussions could disclose [email protected]. encourage qualified women and confidential trade secrets or commercial members of minority groups to apply. property such as patentable material, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The You may request an application form and personal information concerning Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel by writing to Commandant (G–MOC–3), individuals associated with the grant Safety Advisory Committee (CFIVSAC) U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, applications, the disclosure of which is a Federal advisory committee under SW., Room 1116, Washington, DC would constitute a clearly unwarranted 5 U.S.C. App. 2 as required by the 20593–0001; by calling 202–267–2854; invasion of personal privacy. Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel by faxing 202–267–0506; or by e-mailing Safety Act of 1988. The Coast Guard Name of Committee: Communication [email protected]. This notice Disorders Review Committee. established CFIVSAC to provide advice and the application are also available on Date: June 15–16, 2005. to the Coast Guard on issues related to the Internet at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/ Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. the safety of commercial fishing vessels g-m/cfvs. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant regulated under Chapter 45 of Title 46, If you are selected as a member applications. United States Code, which includes representing the general public, you are
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29340 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
required to complete a Confidential for recording trade names are provided Emergency Management Agency, Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form at § 133.11 et seq., of the Customs Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705. 450). We may not release the report or Regulations (19 CFR parts 1–140). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The the information in it to the public, Pursuant to this regulatory provision, Federal Emergency Management Agency except under an order issued by a Shell Stores Corporation d/b/a Joy (FEMA) hereby gives notice that Federal Court or as otherwise provided Enterprises, a Florida corporation pursuant to the authority vested in the under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a). organized under the laws of the State of Under Secretary for Emergency Dated: May 12, 2005. Florida, 1862 M.L. King Blvd., Riviera, Preparedness and Response, Department B. Emond, Florida 33404–7105, applied to CBP for of Homeland Security, under Executive protection of its manufacturer’s trade Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Order 12148, as amended, Scott R. Director of Standards, Marine Safety, Security name, ‘‘JOY ENTERPRISES.’’ Morris, of FEMA is appointed to act as & Environmental Protection, By Direction. On Friday, November 12, 2004, CBP the Director of Florida Long-term published a notice of application for the [FR Doc. 05–10142 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Recovery for this declared disaster. recordation of the trade name ‘‘JOY This action terminates my BILLING CODE 4910–15–P ENTERPRISES’’ in the Federal Register appointment of William L. Carwile, III (69 FR 65445). The application advised as Federal Coordinating Officer for this DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND that before final action would be taken disaster. SECURITY on the application, consideration would (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic be given to any relevant data, views, or Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Bureau of Customs and Border arguments submitted in writing in for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Protection opposition of the recordation of this Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora trade name. The closing day for the Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis [CBP Decision 05–17] comment period was January 11, 2005. Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services As of the end of the comment period, Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Recordation of Trade Name: ‘‘JOY Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management ENTERPRISES’’ January 11, 2005, no comments were received. Accordingly, as provided by Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection § 133.14, of the Customs Regulations, Households Disaster Housing Operations; (CBP). ‘‘JOY ENTERPRISES’’ is recorded with 97.050, Individuals and Households ACTION: Notice of final action. CBP as the trade name used by the Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public manufacturer, Shell Stores Corporation Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation SUMMARY: This document gives notice d/b/a Joy Enterprises, and will remain Grant Program.) that ‘‘JOY ENTERPRISES’’ has been in force as long as this trade name is in Michael D. Brown, recorded with CBP as a trade name by use by this manufacturer unless the Shell Stores Corporation d/b/a Joy recordant requests cancellation of the Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness Enterprises, a Florida corporation and Response, Department of Homeland recordation or any other provision of Security. organized under the laws of the State of law so requires. Florida, 1862 M.L. King Blvd., Riviera [FR Doc. 05–10080 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Dated: May 11, 2005. Beach, Florida 33404–7105. BILLING CODE 9110–10–P The application for trade name George Frederick McCray, recordation was properly submitted to Esq. Chief, Intellectual Property Rights CBP and published in the Federal Branch. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Register. As no public comments in [FR Doc. 05–10079 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] SECURITY opposition to the recordation of this BILLING CODE 4820–02–P Federal Emergency Management trade name were received by CBP Agency within the 60-day comment period, the trade name has been duly recorded with DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND [FEMA–1551–DR] CBP and will remain in force as long as SECURITY this trade name is in use by this Florida; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of Federal Emergency Management manufacture, unless the recordant a Major Disaster Declaration Agency requests cancellation of the recordation AGENCY: Federal Emergency or any other provision of law so [FEMA–1561–DR] Management Agency, Emergency requires. Florida; Amendment No. 10 to Notice Preparedness and Response Directorate, EFFECTIVE DATE: November 12, 2004 of a Major Disaster Declaration Department of Homeland Security. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: La ACTION: Notice. Verne Watkins, Paralegal Specialist, AGENCY: Federal Emergency Intellectual Property Rights Branch, Management Agency, Emergency SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Office of Regulations and Rulings, U.S. Preparedness and Response Directorate, of a major disaster declaration for the Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Department of Homeland Security. State of Florida (FEMA–1551–DR), Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Mint ACTION: Notice. dated September 16, 2004, and related Annex, Washington, DC 20229; (202) determinations. 572–8710. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice EFFECTIVE DATE: May 15, 2005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Trade of a major disaster declaration for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: names that are being used by State of Florida (FEMA–1561–DR), Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal manufacturers or traders may be dated September 26, 2004, and related Emergency Management Agency, recorded with Customs and Border determinations. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705. Protection (CBP) to afford the particular EFFECTIVE DATE: May 15, 2005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The business entity with increased FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Emergency Management Agency commercial protection. CBP procedures Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal (FEMA) hereby gives notice that
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29341
pursuant to the authority vested in the Morris, of FEMA is appointed to act as as Federal Coordinating Officer for this Under Secretary for Emergency the Director of Florida Long-term disaster. Preparedness and Response, Department Recovery for this declared disaster. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic of Homeland Security, under Executive This action terminates my Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Order 12148, as amended, Scott R. appointment of William L. Carwile, III for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Morris, of FEMA is appointed to act as as Federal Coordinating Officer for this Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora the Director of Florida Long-term disaster. Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Recovery for this declared disaster. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment This action terminates my Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management appointment of William L. Carwile, III for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and as Federal Coordinating Officer for this Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis disaster. Households Disaster Housing Operations; Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic 97.050, Individuals and Households Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Grant Program.) Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Households Disaster Housing Operations; Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Michael D. Brown, 97.050, Individuals and Households Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management and Response, Department of Homeland Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Security. Grant Program.) Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and [FR Doc. 05–10083 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Households Disaster Housing Operations; Michael D. Brown, BILLING CODE 9110–10–P 97.050, Individuals and Households Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public and Response, Department of Homeland Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Security. Grant Program.) DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND [FR Doc. 05–10082 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] URBAN DEVELOPMENT Michael D. Brown, BILLING CODE 9110–10–P Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness [Docket No. FR–4975–N–15] and Response, Department of Homeland Security. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Comment Request; Lender [FR Doc. 05–10081 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] SECURITY Insurance Certification BILLING CODE 9110–10–P Federal Emergency Management AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Agency Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND [FEMA–1539–DR] Commissioner, HUD. SECURITY ACTION: Notice. Florida; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of Federal Emergency Management a Major Disaster Declaration SUMMARY: The proposed information Agency collection requirement described below AGENCY: Federal Emergency [FEMA–1545–DR] Management Agency, Emergency will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Florida; Amendment No. 14 to Notice Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security. review, as required by the Paperwork of a Major Disaster Declaration Reduction Act. The Department is ACTION: Notice. soliciting public comments on the AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice subject proposal. Preparedness and Response Directorate, of a major disaster declaration for the DATES: Comments Due Date: July 17, Department of Homeland Security. State of Florida (FEMA–1539–DR), 2005. ACTION: Notice. dated August 13, 2004, and related ADDRESSES: Interested persons are determinations. invited to submit comments regarding SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice EFFECTIVE DATE: May 15, 2005. this proposal. Comments should refer to of a major disaster declaration for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the proposal by name and/or OMB State of Florida (FEMA–1545–DR), Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Control Number and should be sent to: dated September 4, 2004, and related Emergency Management Agency, Wayne Eddins, Reports Management determinations. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705. Officer, Department of Housing and EFFECTIVE DATE: May 15, 2005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Urban Development, 451 7th Street, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Emergency Management Agency SW., L’Enfant Plaza Building, Room Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal (FEMA) hereby gives notice that 8001, Washington, DC 20410 or _ Emergency Management Agency, pursuant to the authority vested in the Wayne @hud.gov. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705. Under Secretary for Emergency FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Preparedness and Response, Department Vance Morris, Director, Office of Single Federal Emergency Management Agency of Homeland Security, under Executive Family Program Development, (FEMA) hereby gives notice that Order 12148, as amended, Scott R. Department of Housing and Urban pursuant to the authority vested in the Morris, of FEMA is appointed to act as Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Under Secretary for Emergency the Director of Florida Long-term Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Preparedness and Response, Department Recovery for this declared disaster. 708–2121 (this is not a toll free number) of Homeland Security, under Executive This action terminates my for copies of the proposed forms and Order 12148, as amended, Scott R. appointment of William L. Carwile, III other available information.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29342 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Dated: May 12, 2005. accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the Department is submitting the proposed Frank L. Davis, burden of the proposed collection of information collection to OMB for General Deputy Assistant Secretary for information; (3) Enhance the quality, review, as required by the Paperwork Housing-Deputy Federal Housing utility, and clarity of the information to Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Commissioner. be collected; and (4) Minimize the Chapter 35, as amended). [FR Doc. 05–10039 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] burden of the collection of information This notice is soliciting comments BILLING CODE 4210–27–M on those who are to respond; including from members of the public and affected the use of appropriate automated agencies concerning the proposed collection techniques or other forms of collection of information to: (1) DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND information technology, e.g., permitting Evaluation whether the proposed URBAN DEVELOPMENT electronic submission of responses. collection is necessary for the proper [Docket No. FR–4975–N–14] This Notice also lists the following performance of the functions of the information: agency, including whether the Notice of Proposed Information Title of Proposal: Loss Mitigation information will have practical utility; Collection: Comment Request; Loss Evaluation. (2) evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s Mitigation Evaluation OMB Control Number, if applicable: estimate of the burden of the proposed 2502–0523. AGENCY: Office of the Assistant collection of information; (3) enhance Description of the need for the Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing the quality, utility, and clarity of the information and proposed use: Commissioner, HUD. information to be collected; and (4) Mortgagees are required by 24 CFR minimize the burden of the collection of ACTION: Notice. 203.605 to evaluate what (if any) loss mitigation initiatives are appropriate, information on those who are to SUMMARY: The proposed information respond; including the use of collection requirement described below and must maintain documentation of appropriate automated collection will be submitted to the Office of this evaluation. Agency form numbers, if applicable: techniques or other forms of information Management and Budget (OMB) for None. technology, e.g., permitting electronic review, as required by the Paperwork Estimation of the total numbers of submission of responses. Reduction Act. The Department is hours needed to prepare the information This notice also lists the following soliciting public comments on the collection including number of information. subject proposal. respondents, frequency of response, and Title of Proposal: Lender Insurance DATES: Comments Due Date: July 19, hours of response: The estimated total Certification. 2005. number of hours needed to prepare the OMB Control Number, if applicable: ADDRESSES: Interested persons are information collection is 116,784 hours; New collection. invited to submit comments regarding the number of respondents is 600, the Description of the need for the this proposal. Comments should refer to total annual number of responses is information and proposed use: HUD’s the proposal by name and/or OMB approximately 467,135, the frequency of Lender Insurance (LI) program allows Control Number and should be sent to: response is on occasion, and the eligible Direct Endorsement mortgagees Wayne Eddins, Reports Management estimated time per response is estimated to submit loan-level data to HUD and Officer, Department of Housing and to be 15 minutes. receive the benefit of immediate Urban Development, 451 7th Street, Status of the proposed information mortgage insurance endorsement SW., L’Enfant Plaza Building, Room collection: Currently approved. without the necessity of HUD reviewing 8003, Washington, DC 20410 or the individual case binder prior to _ Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act Wayne [email protected]. of 1995, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35, as amended. insuring the loan. While existing statute FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and regulations describe lender Dated: May 12, 2005. Laurie Maggiano, Deputy Director, eligibility, FHA believes it prudent to Frank L. Davis, Single Family Asset Management and require participating lenders to self- General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Disposition Division, Room 9176, certify electronically that each is eligible Housing—Deputy Federal Housing Department of Housing and Urban under the LI program, and that they will Commissioner. Development, 451 7th Street, SW., abide by all regulations, handbooks, [FR Doc. 05–10040 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) mortgagees letters, and other BILLING CODE 4210–27–M 708-1672 (this is not a toll free number) appropriate notifications regarding the for copies of the proposed forms and LI program. other available information. Agency form numbers, if applicable: DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Yes. URBAN DEVELOPMENT Department is submitting the proposed Estimation of the total numbers of information collection to OMB for [Docket No. FR–4971–N–25] hours needed to prepare the information review, as required by the Paperwork Notice of Submission of Proposed collection including number of Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. respondents, frequency of response, and Information Collection to OMB; Chapter 35, as amended). Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure hours of response: The number of This Notice is soliciting comments Requirements burden hours is 24. The number of from members of the public and affected respondents is 300, the frequency of agencies concerning the proposed AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information response is quarterly, and the burden collection of information to: (1) Evaluate Officer, HUD. hour per response is 1 minute. whether the proposed collection is ACTION: Notice. Status of the proposed information necessary for the proper performance of collection: This is a new collection. the functions of the agency, including SUMMARY: The proposed information Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act whether the information will have collection requirement described below of 1995, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35, as amended. practical utility; (2) Evaluate the has been submitted to the Office of
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29343
Management and Budget (OMB) for and Urban Development, 451 Seventh information; (3) Enhance the quality, review, as required by the Paperwork Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; e- utility, and clarity of the information to Reduction Act. The Department is mail [email protected]; or be collected; and (4) Minimize the soliciting public comments on the Lillian Deitzer at burden of the collection of information subject proposal. [email protected] or on those who are to respond; including The Interstate Land Sales Full telephone (202) 708–2374. This is not a through the use of appropriate Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. 1701, et seq., toll-free number. Copies of available automated collection techniques or requires developers to register documents submitted to OMB may be other forms of information technology, subdivisions of 100 or more non-exempt obtained from Mr. Eddins or Ms Deitzer e.g., permitting electronic submission of lots with HID. The developer must give or from HUD’s Web site at http:// responses. each purchaser a property report that hlannwp031.hud.gov/po/i/icbts/ This notice also lists the following meets HUD’s requirements before the collectionsearch.cfm. information: purchaser signs the sales contract or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Title Of Proposal: Interstate Land agreement for sale or lease. notice informs the public that the Sales Full Disclosure Requirements. DATES: Comments Due Date: June 20, Department of Housing and Urban OMB Approval Number: 2502–0243. 2005. Development has submitted to OMB a Form Numbers: None. request for approval of the information Description Of The Need For The ADDRESSES: Interested persons are collection described below. This notice Information And Its Proposed Use: invited to submit comments regarding is soliciting comments from members of The Interstate Land Sales Full this proposal. Comments should refer to the public and affecting agencies Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. 1701, et seq., the proposal by name and/or OMB concerning the proposed collection of requires developers to register approval Number (2502–0243) and information to: (1) Evaluate whether the subdivisions of 100 or more non-exempt should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, proposed collection of information is lots with HID. The developer must give Office of Management and Budget, New necessary for the proper performance of each purchaser a property report that Executive Office Building, Washington, the functions of the agency, including meets HUD’s requirements before the DC 20503; fax: 202–395–6974. whether the information will have purchaser signs the sales contract or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: practical utility; (2) Evaluate the agreement for sale or lease. Wayne Eddins, Reports Management accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the Frequency Of Submission: On Officer, AYO, Department of Housing burden of the proposed collection of occasion, Annually.
Number of Annual × Hours per respondents responses response = Burden hours
Reporting Burden ...... 1,104 23.99 0.935 24,776
Total Estimated Burden Hours: seeking comments from HUD’s program Washington, DC 20410–0500, telephone 24,776. partners and participants, as well as (202) 708–1793 (this is not a toll-free Status: Extension of a currently other interested members of the public, number). Persons with hearing or approved collection. on HUD regulations that address the speech impairments may access this Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork production and rehabilitation of number through TTY by calling the toll- Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as affordable housing and that present or free Federal Information Relay Service amended. appear to present barriers to the at (800) 877–8339. Dated: May 13, 2005. production and rehabilitation of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: affordable housing. The November 25, Wayne Eddins, 2003, notice seeking public comment on I. Background Departmental Paperwork Reduction Act regulatory barriers is one of several Officer, Office of the Chief Information In June 2003, HUD announced Officer. efforts being undertaken as part of America’s Affordable Communities America’s Affordable Communities [FR Doc. E5–2524 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Initiative (the Initiative). This Initiative, a HUD initiative that focuses BILLING CODE 4210–27–P departmentwide initiative is devoted to on removing regulatory barriers that harnessing existing HUD resources to impede the production or rehabilitation develop tools to measure and ultimately DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND of affordable housing. This notice mitigate the harmful effects of excessive URBAN DEVELOPMENT responds to the public comments that barriers to affordable housing, at all were submitted in response to the levels of government. The Initiative has [Docket No. FR–4890–N–02] November 25, 2003, notice, and advises its roots in the Department’s renewed of actions taken by HUD since America’s Affordable Communities emphasis to increase the stock of November 2003 to remove HUD affordable housing to meet America’s Initiative HUD’s Initiative on Removal regulatory barriers to affordable housing of Regulatory Barriers: Identification of growing housing needs. Another or increase flexibility in program element of that renewed emphasis was HUD Regulations That Present Barriers administration of those HUD programs to Affordable Housing the creation, in 2001, of the Regulatory that address affordable housing. Barriers Clearinghouse, a central, web- AGENCY: Office of General Counsel, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: based repository of successful affordable HUD. Camille E. Acevedo, Associate General housing endeavors. The Regulatory ACTION: Notice. Counsel for Legislation and Regulations, Barriers Clearinghouse offers state and Office of General Counsel, Room 10282, local governments, nonprofits, builders, SUMMARY: On November 25, 2003, HUD Department of Housing and Urban and developers alike the opportunity to published a Federal Register notice Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., not only share ideas, but also share
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29344 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
solutions to overcome state and local attempted to respond to these issues in low-income families. The November regulatory barriers to affordable this notice. 2004 notice streamlined the housing. The Regulatory Barriers requirements for high-performing PHAs. III. Regulatory Reform Already Clearinghouse, like the Initiative, HUD published an interim rule on Underway at HUD presents a public forum to facilitate the November 22, 2004 (69 FR 68050) that identification of barriers to affordable Under Secretary Alphonso Jackson, amends its HOME program regulations housing and solutions to their removal. the charge of the Department to meet the to give participating jurisdictions the The Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse strategic goals of increasing flexibility to invest additional HOME can be found at http:// homeownership and promoting decent funds to preserve homebuyer housing www.regbarriers.org. affordable housing has been reinforced. for which HOME funds have already One of the primary tasks of the The Secretary recognizes that HUD’s been expended. Initiative is to examine federal, state, and the Administration’s proposals to HUD published its final rule on the and local regulatory barriers to increase the availability of affordable Federal Housing Administration (FHA) affordable housing and determine the rental and homeownership housing, TOTAL Mortgage Scorecard on feasibility of removing these barriers or, such as the American Dream November 26, 2004 (69 FR 68784). This at a minimum, reducing the burden Downpayment Initiative implemented final rule adopted a November 21, 2003, created by the barriers. HUD, as the in 2004, will not gain significant ground interim rule (68 FR 65824), which federal agency charged with promoting if at the same time HUD is issuing launched the use of the TOTAL and facilitating the production and regulations that present barriers to Mortgage Scorecard. The FHA TOTAL rehabilitation of affordable housing, affordable housing. The charge of the Mortgage Scorecard is an empirically- commenced a review of its own Initiative, indeed the entire Department, derived, statistically proven mortgage regulations. HUD’s review involves is to identify barriers to affordable scorecard for installation in various identifying HUD regulations that may housing and remove the barriers if automated underwriting systems. By adversely impact the production and possible or reduce the burden to the using automated underwriting systems rehabilitation of affordable housing, and extent feasible. that employ the TOTAL (Technology Open to Approved Lenders) mortgage therefore constitute unnecessary, Rulemaking Directed at Removing and scorecard, lenders are able to excessive, cumbersome, or duplicative Reducing Barriers departmental regulatory requirements. dramatically reduce the paperwork HUD’s review is targeting those Since publication of the November 25, associated with underwriting FHA regulations that raise costs substantially 2003, notice HUD has issued, or will insured mortgages, and reduce or significantly impede the development soon be issuing, several rules directed to underwriting staff costs as well. In or rehabilitation of America’s affordable promoting the availability of affordable addition, some borrowers, previously housing stock. housing or removing or reducing thought to represent too great of an regulatory burdens to affordable insurance risk to subjective II. Inviting the Public To Identify HUD housing, as reflected by the following underwriting requirements, may now Regulatory Barriers examples (listed in chronological order). have their mortgages approved by an In reviewing its own regulations, HUD On March 10, 2004, HUD published a objective electronic system. sought the assistance of its current and final rule (69 FR 11500) that made HUD is working with the former program participants and available a new adjustable rate mortgage Manufactured Housing Consensus partners, which include state and local (ARM) product for HUD-insured single Committee (MHCC) to review and governments, public housing agencies, family housing that can be better propose changes to HUD’s state finance agencies, nonprofit and tailored to the needs of borrowers. This manufactured housing safety standards for-profit organizations, and also the rule provides for seven- and ten-year and regulations. The first proposed rule general public. This assistance was ARMs adjustable annually by up to two resulting from this collaborative work sought through the notice published on percentage points, and for one-, three-, was issued on December 1, 2004 (69 FR November 25, 2003 (68 FR 66294). and five-year ARMs adjustable annually 70016). This December 1, 2004, In response to this notice, HUD by up to one percentage point. proposed rule recommends changes to received 33 public comments. The HUD issued its regulations to the following manufactured housing commenters included units of state and implement the American Dream standards: Whole-house ventilation, local governments, organizations Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) on firestopping, body and frame representative of various private March 30, 2004 (69 FR 16758). Under requirements, thermal protection, industries involved in housing or HUD ADDI, HUD makes formula grants to plumbing systems, and electrical, programs, as well as nonprofit participating jurisdictions under the heating, cooling and fuel burning organizations. The comments covered a HOME Investment Partnerships Program systems. broad range of HUD programs. HUD has (HOME program) for the purpose of On December 15, 2004 (69 FR 75204), reviewed all the comments responding assisting low-income families achieve HUD issued regulations that provide for to the November 25, 2003, notice and in homeownership. a reduced mortgage insurance premium this notice responds to the By notice issued on November 8, 2004 for its Home Equity Conversion recommendations and issues raised by (69 FR 64826), HUD further simplified Mortgage (HECM) program. HUD’s the commenters concerning reduction of the annual plan that must be submitted HECM program enables homeowners 62 HUD regulatory barriers. Several of the by public housing agencies (PHAs) in years or age or older who have paid off commenters responding to the accordance with the U.S. Housing Act of their mortgages or have small mortgage November 25, 2003, notice raised issues 1937 (see 42 U.S.C. 1437c–1) and HUD’s balances to stay in their homes while about HUD regulations that do not implementing regulations in 24 CFR using some of their equity as income. pertain to the production or part 903. The annual plan is the HUD issued a rule on December 23, rehabilitation of affordable housing. mechanism by which PHAs advise 2004 (69 FR 77114), that provided two Although the issues raised by these HUD, its residents and members of the additional exceptions to the time resale comments were not the focus of the public of its strategy, among other restrictions in HUD’s ‘‘Prohibition on November 25, 2003, notice, HUD has things, of serving low-income and very Property Flipping’’ regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29345
promulgated on May 1, 2003 (69 FR In addition to the issuance of rules, Congress on February 7, 2005, includes 77114). The December 23, 2004, rule HUD also has reduced certain barriers several legislative proposals directed to allows two additional categories of through notices related to regulatory removing barriers to affordable housing. properties to be more quickly marketed policies. For example, in late 2002, the The FHA Zero Downpayment and and sold, thereby removing a regulatory FHA Commissioner issued a mortgagee Payment Incentives legislative proposals barrier to affordable housing. letter that announced an alternative to would remove two larger barriers to On December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78830), existing HUD requirements where state homeownership—the downpayment HUD issued a proposed rule for public and local statutes differ from FHA and impaired credit. The Zero comment to clarify and streamline the guidelines with respect to the distance Downpayment legislative proposal consolidated plan, the planning between domestic wells and septic allows first-time buyers with a strong document that states and local drain tanks. The mortgagee letter credit record to finance 100 percent of jurisdictions receiving funding under reduces regulatory burden by allowing the home purchase price and closing HUD’s community planning and less onerous state and local standards to costs. For borrowers with limited or development formula grant programs prevail over more burdensome HUD weak credit histories, the Payment must submit to HUD. The consolidated requirements. Incentives legislative proposal provides plan serves as the jurisdiction’s In early 2003, FHA issued a mortgagee for an initial charge of a higher planning document for the use of the letter that eliminated policies and insurance premium and then reduces funds received under these programs. procedures for approving planned unit the premium after a period of on-time Consistent with efforts of the Initiative, developments (PUDs). Based on FHA’s payments. These two legislative the proposed rule would require each experience with PUDs and the role that proposals, if enacted, would assist more jurisdiction to describe specific actions state and local officials play in the than 250,000 families achieve it plans to take during the year development of PUD projects, HUD homeownership. (See page 170 of the addressed by the plan to address public abolished its requirement for a detailed FY2006 Budget of the U.S. Government, policies and procedures that impact the examination of the legal and budget available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ cost of developing, maintaining, or documents associated with PUDs. The omb/budget/fy2006/budget.html.) improving affordable housing. elimination of this requirement reduces The Single Family Homeownership HUD issued an interim rule on March costs to lenders and developers, and Tax Credit legislative proposal in the 29, 2005 (70 FR 16080) that makes possible delays to the mortgage closing. President’s FY2006 budget proposes a new homeownership tax credit that will available a new ARM product. The rule In June 2004, FHA issued a mortgagee increase the supply of single family enables FHA to insure five-year hybrid letter announcing that FHA would no affordable homes by up to an additional ARMs with interest rates adjustable up longer issue, and lenders need no longer 50,000 homes annually. Under this to two percentage points annually. This keep copies of, paper mortgage proposal, builders of affordable homes type of mortgage is known as a 5/1 insurance certificates. By relying on for middle-income purchasers will ARM. The lifetime cap on annual FHA’s electronic records and data receive a tax credit. State housing interest rate adjustments for five-year submission systems, the mortgage letter finance agencies will award tax credits ARMs is set at six percentage points. significantly reduced the paperwork and custodial requirements of issuing and to single family developments located in On April 26, 2005 (70 FR 21498), a census tract with median income HUD issued its second proposed rule maintaining this document, as well as the related costs incurred by lenders. equal to 80 percent or less of area developed in consultation with the median income and will be limited to MHCC. This proposed rule addresses Internal Rulemaking Procedures homebuyers in the same income range. model manufactured home installation HUD’s internal rulemaking The credits may not exceed 50 percent standards. procedures continue to include, as part of the cost of constructing a new home These are a few of the rules issued by of the development of new rules, a or rehabilitating an existing property. HUD that reflect it’s efforts to remove review to ensure that new regulations Each state would have a barriers to affordable housing and do not present new barriers to affordable homeownership credit ceiling adjusted increase flexibility in program housing. This procedure was put in for inflation each year and equal to the administration of those HUD programs place at the commencement of the greater of $1.75 times the state that address affordable housing. In Initiative and continues as part of population or $2 million. (See page 170 addition to rules already issued, HUD HUD’s regular internal rulemaking of the FY2006 Budget of the U.S. expects to soon finalize its rule on procedures. Government, available at http:// Mixed-Finance Development for www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/ Supportive Housing for the Elderly or New Regulatory Review fy2006/budget.html.) Persons with Disabilities, for which an As part of its continuing review of its The prior year’s budget, the interim rule was published on existing regulations, in 2005, the President’s FY2005 Budget announced a December 1, 2003. The interim rule Initiative has targeted for enhanced HUD legislative proposal that is enables the use of mixed-finance and review and assessment HUD’s designed to provide flexibility in for-profit participation in HUD’s Section regulations governing financing of administering HUD’s Housing Choice 202 Supportive Housing programs for condominiums, minimum property Voucher program. (The FY2005 Budget the elderly and HUD’s Section 811 standards, and its environmental of the U.S. Government can be found at Supportive Housing program for regulations. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/ persons with disabilities. The use of a fy05/browse.html.) The Housing Choice mixed-finance development in these Legislation Directed at Removing or Voucher program provides two million programs allows for leveraging the Reducing Barriers low-income families with help to afford capital and expertise of the private Rulemaking activity is one avenue by a decent place to live. These families developer to create attractive and which HUD strives to address barriers to contribute 30 percent of their income affordable supportive housing affordable housing. Legislation provides towards their rent and the government developments for the elderly and another avenue. The President’s Fiscal pays the rest. In the past, funds have persons with disabilities. Year (FY) 2006 Budget presented to been appropriated for a specific number
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29346 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
of units each year. These funds were selected by a diverse group of senior- IV. Discussion of Public Comments given to PHAs based on the number of level HUD staff who comprise the This section provides response to the vouchers they were awarded. Over the Initiative Team. HUD intends to public comments received in response years, HUD and Congress have recognize local governments for their to the November 25, 2003, notice. The expressed concern with this program outstanding work to encourage the discussion of public comments is because voucher costs have increased at production of homes affordable to organized in accordance with HUD a rate of more than double the average working families. HUD expects to program area jurisdiction. As will be increase in the private rental market for announce the award winners in June evident in the discussion that follows, the past two years. The Administration’s 2005. Secretary Jackson recently many HUD regulations reflect statutory proposal is to simplify this program and announced that the Affordable requirements and therefore HUD has no give more flexibility to PHAs to Communities Awards would be named authority to change these regulations as administer the program to better address the Robert L. Woodson, Jr. Award, in requested by commenters. Other HUD local needs. On April 13, 2005, Senator memory of HUD’s former chief of staff. regulations reflect statutory Wayne Allard of Colorado introduced requirements under which HUD was legislation, the State and Local Housing Reducing Regulatory Barriers Through authorized to exercise discretion, but Flexibility Act of 2005 (S.771) that is Information Sharing and Education only within the parameters set by the similar to the Administration’s statute, and therefore, HUD is also legislative proposal. HUD’s efforts to reduce regulatory barriers also include information unable to revise these regulations Recognizing Successful Efforts at the sharing and education. HUD’s through rulemaking. However, in State and Local Level in Reducing several cases where a specific statute Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse Barriers may pose a barrier to affordable (http://www.regbarriers.org), a national housing, the discussion notes that the With respect to HUD’s funding web-based forum established in 2001 issue of legislative relief will be taken opportunities, HUD continues to place a gives state and local governments the premium on funding local communities under advisement. ability to share ideas and develop As noted earlier in this notice, several and organizations that are working solutions to address unique housing toward removing excessive and commenters raised issues about challenges. This website is a primary regulations that do not pertain to the burdensome regulations that restrict the vehicle for information sharing on development of affordable housing at production or rehabilitation of reducing regulatory barriers. In July the local level. As HUD provided in affordable housing. HUD recognizes that 2004, Secretary Jackson hosted an FY2004, HUD will continue to award while certain of its regulations may not priority points to certain applicants in affordable housing roundtable at HUD directly address the production or communities that can demonstrate Headquarters entitled ‘‘Affordable rehabilitation of affordable housing, successful efforts to reduce regulatory Housing: Confronting Regulatory they may nevertheless relate in some barriers that prevent many families from Barriers Together.’’ The panel that led way to HUD programs directed to living in the communities where they the discussion of regulatory barriers promoting affordable housing or work. More information about the facing the nation included increasing homeownership, and may be priority points for reducing regulatory representatives from nonprofit found to be administratively barriers can be found in the Federal organizations, industry groups, and burdensome. HUD has included those Register notices published on November government associations from across the comments in this notice and has strived 25, 2003 (68 FR 66288), March 22, 2004 country. In February 2005, Secretary to be responsive to the commenters’ (69 FR 13450), April 21, 2005 (69 FR Jackson released a major report on questions or concerns about such 21664), and also in HUD’s FY2004 affordable housing in America entitled regulations. Other commenters raised Super Notice of Funding Availability ‘‘Why Not in Our Community?’’ This questions about activities or procedures, (NOFA), published on May 14, 2004 (69 report constitutes HUD’s first beneficial to the production or FR 26942) and HUD’s FY2005 substantive examination of the impact rehabilitation of affordable housing, SuperNOFA, published on March 21, of regulatory barriers on affordable which appeared prohibited or restricted 2005 (70 FR 13576). housing since the Department’s report by HUD regulations but, in fact, were HUD also seeks to recognize the in 1991 entitled ‘‘Not in My Backyard.’’ not prohibited or restricted. While HUD successful efforts of state and local Like the 1991 report, the 2005 report was pleased to be able to respond governments in reducing regulatory found that outdated, exclusionary, and positively to the commenters’ concerns, barriers to affordable housing through unnecessary regulations continue to the fact that there was ambiguity about an awards program. On November 17, block the construction or rehabilitation a HUD regulation is equally important 2004, Secretary Jackson announced the of affordable housing in some parts of information to HUD. HUD will review Affordable Communities Awards America. The 2005 report, however, also these regulations to determine if they program, a new national awards found that many communities are should be revised for clarity or user program designed to recognize local actively removing these barriers and friendliness. governments for reducing regulatory As highlighted in Section III of this promoting the production of housing barriers to affordable housing. Interested notice, HUD has published rules or that was formerly beyond the reach of individuals or groups were invited to proposed legislation to address existing many working families. nominate either a state or local regulatory barriers in response to public government that demonstrated The activities described above comments and its own review of extraordinary achievements in constitute a few of the efforts that HUD regulations. Finally, some comments eliminating regulatory barriers to has taken, through the Initiative, to addressed governmentwide regulations housing affordability. State and local reduce regulatory barriers to affordable for which HUD does not have governments were also invited to housing. More details about these jurisdictional responsibility, such as nominate themselves or other local activities can be found at HUD’s Web regulations under the National Historic units of government for awards. site at http://www.hud.gov/initiatives/ Preservation Act, the Davis-Bacon Act, Submissions will be evaluated and affordablecom.cfm. or the Uniform Relocation Assistance
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29347
and Real Property Acquisition Policies authorize use of CDBG funding for owned by Community Housing Act. Since HUD is not the lead agency ‘‘activities necessary to make essential Development Organizations (CHDOs), for these authorities, HUD did not repairs and payment of operating which are community-based non-profit include a discussion of comments expenses needed to maintain the organizations. To date, 51 percent of all pertaining to these statutes in this habitability of housing units under the HOME funds in completed projects have notice. supervision of a court in order to been used by CHDOs and other prevent abandonment and deterioration nonprofit organizations, with 49 percent A. Office of Community Planning and of such housing in primarily low- and used by for-profit developers for Development (CPD) moderate-income neighborhoods.’’ completed HOME projects. 1. Community Development Block Grant Response. CDBG regulations currently Response. Because this requirement is (CDBG) Program allow the use of CDBG funds to make based in statute, HUD could not remove emergency repairs in privately owned the requirement through regulation. Comment. One commenter requested buildings, as long as a national objective HUD, however, believes strongly in the that HUD make direct homeownership can be met. The fact that a privately ability of local PJs to identify affordable assistance, such as subsidizing principal owned building may be under the housing priorities and independently and interest rates, a permanent eligible control of a court-appointed determine which organizations are best activity under the CDBG program. administrator would not change its suited to assist them in achieving their Response. HUD is pleased to advise eligibility for rehabilitation assistance. goals. HUD believes local flexibility to that direct homeownership assistance, A statutory change would be required, make such decisions is important. such as subsidizing principal and however, to allow CDBG funds to be Comment. Five commenters raise a interest rates, is a permanent eligible used to pay the operating costs of such HOME Program topic that was recently activity under the CDBG program. buildings. To date, HUD has not highlighted by HUD in its June 2003 HUD’s regulations at 24 CFR 570.201(n) pursued a legislative approach because HOMEfires policy guidance newsletter provide that CDBG funds may be used HUD remains concerned that (Vol. 5, No. 2). The commenters’ issue to provide direct homeownership broadening eligibility in this way may centers on the statutory and regulatory assistance to low or moderate-income draw funds away from other eligible requirement that a HOME PJ repay its households in accordance with section activities. local HOME account from non-federal 105(a) of the Housing and Community sources in instances in which a HOME- Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2. Home Program assisted property does not remain 5305(a)). Direct homeownership Comment. One commenter affordable for the entire period of assistance was made a permanent recommended delegating subsidy- affordability. These provisions can be eligibility category in the CDBG program layering reviews to state allocating found in section 219(b) of the HOME by the Omnibus Consolidated agencies for Low-Income Housing Tax statute (42 U.S.C. 12749) and Rescissions and Appropriations Act of Credit (LIHTC) properties that are § 92.503(b)(1) of the HOME regulations. 1996 (Pub. L. 104–136), which was HOME-assisted. Subsidy layering Response. HUD regrets that the enacted April 26, 1996. Direct reviews are required by 24 CFR statutory and regulatory requirements homeownership assistance may be used 92.250(b) of HUD’s HOME regulations. governing repayment may have been to: (1) Subsidize interest rates and This regulatory section states that before misunderstood by some PJs, but notes mortgage principal amounts for low- committing funds to a project, a this is not a new policy. It is also and moderate-income homebuyers; (2) participating jurisdiction (PJ) must important to recognize that it also has finance the acquisition by low- and evaluate the project in accordance with been HUD’s longstanding policy to grant moderate-income homebuyers of its own subsidy layering guidelines to requests for waivers of the repayment housing that is occupied by the ensure that no more HOME funds, in requirement when a PJ can demonstrate homebuyers; (3) acquire guarantees for combination with other funds, are that it took reasonable steps to intervene mortgage financing obtained by low- invested in the housing than is in a troubled project. Consequently, for and moderate-income homebuyers from necessary to provide affordable housing. rental projects, PJs that practice sound private lenders (except that amounts Response. HUD is pleased to advise asset management (e.g., exercising a received may not be used to directly that the proposal outlined by the reasonable amount of physical and guarantee such mortgage financing and commenter is already allowable under financial oversight of their HOME- grantees may not directly provide such the HOME program. HUD previously assisted projects and taking feasible guarantees); (4) provide up to 50 percent provided guidance on this topic in its actions to correct problems) reduce or of any downpayment required from low- Notice CPD 98–01. The Notice states eliminate their repayment risk, even if or moderate-income homebuyers; or (5) that for projects using LIHTC, the PJ their actions are unsuccessful. With pay reasonable closing costs (normally may rely upon the state tax credit respect to homeownership projects, associated with the purchase of a home) allocating agency’s evaluation (which is HUD published an interim rule on incurred by low-or moderate-income conducted to determine whether there November 22, 2004 (69 FR 68050), that homebuyers. are excess tax credits) to ensure that mitigates the risk incurred by PJ. HUD Comment. One commenter stated that HUD subsidies are not greater than believes that the current approach is fair CDBG funds should be allowed to be necessary to provide affordable housing to PJs, while maximizing the continued used for emergency repairs and when combining HOME assistance with availability of affordable housing units operating assistance in buildings where the LIHTC. and protecting public funds. a court has seized control and appointed Comment. One commenter raised the Comment. Two commenters inquired an administrator (for example, as in issue of for-profit involvement in the about HUD allowing PJs to charge fees New York City’s 7A Program). The HOME program. Section 231 of the to help defray the cost of complying commenter further wrote that, where tax HOME Investment Partnerships Act (42 with the HOME onsite inspection foreclosure has not occurred, HUD U.S.C. 12744–12745) (HOME statute) requirement (24 CFR 92.504(d)) during should urge Congress to amend section requires that at least 15 percent of a PJ’s the period of affordability. Section 105(a) of the Housing and Community annual HOME allocation be reserved for 92.214(b) of the HOME regulations Development Act (42 U.S.C. 5305(a), to projects to be developed, sponsored, or prohibits PJs from charging monitoring,
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29348 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
servicing and origination fees in HOME- familial status, or disability. This 108-style HOME loan guarantee program assisted projects. responsibility applies to HUD’s similar to the program suggested by the Response. HUD agrees that as the recipients through site and commenter. Creation of the type of loan number of completed units in a PJ’s neighborhood standards. The guarantee suggested by the commenter, portfolio increases, its monitoring commenter, however, raises an issue for however, would require a statutory burden increases as well and that the further consideration within HUD, and change and previous efforts to establish current 10 percent administrative set- HUD will examine the requirements to such a program have been unsuccessful. aside may not always cover these costs. determine whether modification is While loan guarantees are currently an Permitting PJs to charge monitoring fees needed. eligible form of assistance under is one method of covering this cost. Comment. One commenter proposed a § 92.205(b)(2) of the HOME regulations, However, assessing monitoring fees on change to the regulation at § 92.214(a)(6) it is important to note that loan projects will have the effect of raising of the HOME regulations, which guarantees have been used infrequently rents charged to low- and very low- prohibits an additional investment of during the history of the HOME income tenants, making housing less HOME funds in HOME-assisted program. affordable rather than reducing a barrier properties after one year of completion. Comment. One commenter urges HUD to affordable housing. Response. The purpose of this to revise the HOME regulations to Comment. Three commenters raised regulation is to ensure HOME funds are simplify the rent and income the issue of expanding the eligible being invested in projects that will restrictions of HOME-assisted rental recipients of CHDO operating expense deliver standard units of affordable projects. The commenter wrote that the funds to include nonprofit organizations housing. This regulation prevents HOME rent and income requirements that do not develop, sponsor, or own HOME funds from being used for (1) unnecessarily restrict an owner’s right HOME-assisted units. Section 92.208(a) staged rehabilitation projects that do not to collect reasonable rents, while of the HOME regulations allows up to bring properties up to standard, and (2) simultaneously failing to ensure that all five percent of a PJ’s annual HOME the ongoing maintenance of HOME- tenants are in fact paying a reasonable allocation to be used for the operating assisted units. HUD, therefore, does not percentage of their income for rent. The expenses of CHDOs. However, support a change to this regulation. commenter also favors a single income § 92.300(e) limits these operating funds However, HUD recognizes that there are eligibility ceiling of 80 percent of area to organizations that will enter into a individual circumstances, subject to median income. written agreement with the PJ to examination on a case-by-case basis, in Response. The HOME rent and develop, own or sponsor HOME-assisted which this regulation may constitute a income restrictions are found in housing within the next 24 months barrier to affordable housing. In these sections 214 and 215 of the HOME following receipt of funds for operating circumstances, HUD has granted statute and §§ 92.216 and 92.252 of the assistance. waivers of this regulation for good cause HOME regulations. HUD agrees that the Response. The purpose of allowing up for the purpose of salvaging severely rent and income restrictions of the to five percent of a PJ’s annual HOME financially distressed HOME projects or HOME program are somewhat complex, allocation to be used for operating costs addressing unforeseen problems. but it is this system of rent and income for CHDOs is to support organizations Comment. One commenter advised restrictions that ensures the affordability that are undertaking HOME projects. that the need to document and account of the housing assisted by HUD. HUD is Currently, PJs use much less than the for HOME match is overly burdensome concerned that the commenter’s five percent allowed for CHDO to PJs, although the commenter did not proposal would result in increased rents operating expenses, choosing instead to elaborate on specific aspects of and a reduction of the affordability of use the funds for development of documenting and accounting for HOME HOME-assisted rental units for low- and projects. Consequently, allowing HOME match that the commenter found overly very low-income renters. Increasing funds to be used for operating expenses burdensome. rents and weakening income targeting for nonprofit organizations that do not Response. By establishing the HOME for lower income households would develop, own or sponsor HOME-assisted program, Congress intended to establish result in HOME funds being used housing might subject PJs to local a partnership between the federal increasingly for those renters with pressure to fund organizations that do government and states, units of local higher incomes or those with tenant- not produce HOME-assisted housing, government and nonprofit organizations based rental assistance. reducing the amount of HOME funds to expand the supply of affordable, A June 28, 2001, study of rental available for affordable housing standard housing for low-income housing under the HOME program production and the number of families. In keeping with the concept of performed by Abt Associates, Inc., affordable housing units produced. partnership, each PJ is required to make entitled ‘‘Study of Ongoing Affordability Comment. One commenter noted that contributions to qualified housing in an of HOME Program Rents,’’ found that 60 for HOME projects involving the new amount equal to 25 percent of percent of all renter households in construction of rental housing, appropriated HOME funds drawn down HOME-assisted rental housing are rent- § 92.202(b) requires the PJ to meet the for housing projects. These burdened, or pay more than 30 percent site and neighborhood standards at contributions are referred to as ‘‘match.’’ of their income for housing. The study § 983.6(b). The commenter states that The recordkeeping and reporting also found that 80 percent of the the site and neighborhood standards requirements pertaining to HOME households living in HOME-assisted requirement in § 92.202 is unnecessary match are necessary to demonstrate rental units have an annual income of and that the location of affordable compliance with the HOME statute. 50 percent or less of area median housing developments should be a local Comment. One commenter supports income. An increase in HOME rents land use decision. the creation of a new HOME loan would affect not only those tenants that Response. HUD has an affirmative guarantee program modeled after the could afford an increase in rent, but also responsibility to provide equal housing CDBG Section 108 Loan Guarantee those tenants that are already rent- opportunity and to expand housing Program. burdened, thereby increasing their rent choice for all persons without regard to Response. In the past, HUD has burden and making the HOME-assisted race, color, national origin, religion, sex, supported attempts to enact a Section units less affordable. Given the findings
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29349
of this study, HUD is not inclined to the PJ’s investment in affordable at § 92.251, which address the property support a statutory or regulatory change housing is protected. However, HUD standard requirements of HOME- to the HOME rent and income will further examine this issue to assisted units. The HOME program was requirements. determine whether the inspections not designed to address emergency Comment. One commenter advises currently required are excessive, or repair needs, as evidenced by its that HOME funds would be more useful whether alternative approaches, such as exclusion as an eligible activity. HUD if the funds could be used for project risk-based approaches, would achieve notes, however, that with respect to reserves for operating costs and the same protections. emergency needs, CDBG funds can be operating reserves for HOME-assisted Comment. Two commenters proposed used to address the emergency repair rental projects. The HOME regulations that the HOME program could be more needs of low-income households. at § 92.214(1) state that HOME funds effective by allowing PJs to fund Comment. One commenter wrote that may not be used to provide project housing counseling for low-income the income verification requirement of reserve accounts, except as initial families that will not use HOME funds the HOME program is a regulatory operating deficit reserve, or operating to assist in the purchase of their own barrier to affordable housing because it subsidies to cover potential shortfalls in home. The HOME program regulation at deters many private landlords from the first 18 months of operation. § 92.206(d)(6) identifies housing participating in the program. Response. Based on the purposes of counseling as an allowable project soft Response. For HOME-assisted rental the HOME program, which among cost only if the (homebuyer) project is projects, § 92.252(h) of the HOME others is to increase the supply of funded and the individual receiving the regulations requires initial decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable counseling becomes the owner of a determination of income using source housing for very low- and low-income HOME-assisted project. documentation and annual re- families, and the limited HOME Response. HUD agrees that housing certification of each tenant’s annual resources appropriated each year, the counseling is a crucial component of a income during the period of eligible use of HOME funds should not successful homeownership program. affordability. This requirement ensures be expanded to cover operating The chief purpose of the HOME compliance with section 215(a)(1)(C) of subsidies and project reserves. In this program is to expand the supply of the HOME statute (42 U.S.C. regard, it is important to recognize that decent, safe, sanitary and affordable 12745(a)(1)(C)), which provides that, in HOME funds are typically a small housing. By limiting the use of HOME order for HOME-assisted rental units to percentage of the total funding package funds for housing counseling to those qualify as affordable, they must be in most rental housing development who purchase housing with HOME occupied only by households that projects and are often used as gap funds, HUD ensures that HOME qualify as low-income families. In financing enabling many affordable program beneficiaries are purchasing developing the HOME regulations in housing development projects to decent, safe, sanitary and affordable 1996, HUD attempted to minimize the happen. HOME funds also often housing. As a result, the HOME program burden of performing income leverage other public and private funds would not be more effective by allowing determinations on project owners by that may be used for project operating PJs to fund housing counseling for low- allowing owners to use tenant income costs. If operating reserve funding is income families that will not use HOME self-certifications for five years after necessary, other funding sources can be funds to assist in the purchase of their conducting the initial income used to capitalize reserves and HOME own home. Currently, HUD administers determination. A complete income funds attributed to other eligible costs. a housing counseling program through determination is required to be In addition, the limited amount of HUD’s Office of Housing. In a recent performed every sixth year. In addition, resources appropriated for the HOME study of HOME-assisted homebuyer HUD posted an interactive online program each year often restricts PJs programs, more than 90 percent of PJs calculator on http://www.hud.gov to from investing anything beyond gap were either requiring or encouraging assist project owners with income financing in rental housing. eligible homebuyers to participate in determinations. Initial and periodic Comment. Two commenters counseling programs. It is clear that tenant income determinations ensure addressed the HOME onsite inspection most jurisdictions receiving HOME that HOME-assisted affordable housing requirements at § 92.504(d)(1). The funds are using HUD-sponsored continues to benefit the intended commenters wrote that an onsite counseling programs or are supporting population. Consequently, HUD does inspection requirement of once every other existing counseling programs. not support a statutory change to three years is more practical than the Comment. One commenter takes issue eliminate this requirement. current HOME regulations, which with the inclusion of property standards Comment. One commenter requests a require periodic inspections based on in the HOME program. The commenter change to § 92.252(a) of the HOME the total number of units in a HOME- submits that the property standard regulations, which bases rent levels in assisted rental project. One of the requirements of the HOME program HOME-assisted units on the lesser of the commenters offers a risk assessment result in fewer households receiving HUD Section 8 fair market rent (FMR) plan to determine how often projects rehabilitation assistance. According to or rent that does not exceed 30 percent should be inspected, with required the commenter, this is because rather of the adjusted income of a family inspections at least every three years. than only addressing the emergency whose annual income equals 65 percent The commenter also suggests that the needs of the unit, the PJ must also of the area median income. The number of HOME-assisted units, and ensure that the HOME-assisted unit commenter writes that by basing HOME not the total number of units in a meets all applicable property standards, rent levels on FMR and not on income, project, should determine the frequency which is often a more costly endeavor. tenants at higher income levels are of inspections. Response. As discussed above, a paying less than they can afford under Response. HUD believes that frequent primary purpose of the HOME program a standard of affordability of 30 percent inspection ensures that beneficiaries of is to expand the supply of decent, safe, of income or less. the HOME program are residing in sanitary, and affordable housing. The Response. FMRs are set at the 40th quality, standard housing at affordable HOME program is able to accomplish percentile rents paid by recent movers rents and, equally as important, ensures this goal due, in part, to the provisions for standard quality housing units (e.g.,
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29350 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
40 percent of all recently rented units concurrently and that all inspections be interpretation results in the rent for less than the FMR). They are completed before grant execution. As a displacement of poor non-homeless intended to be high enough to permit result, properties have been lost when a persons who are equally in need of program participants to access a wide seller is ready to close before others in housing. The commenter requested that range of neighborhoods. Local housing the group are ready. This further delays HUD revisit its interpretation to allow authorities are asked to review proposed or denies production of housing. for the inclusion of these ‘‘in-place’’ FMRs each year, and to provide Response. The program statute tenants. comments and documentation if they requires HUD to recapture and Response. The McKinney-Vento Act, believe FMRs are inaccurate and need to reallocate funds if an applicant does not at section 441(b) (42 U.S.C. 11401(b), be revised. FMRs were established by obtain ownership or control of the states that the amounts made available the Congress as a ceiling on HOME project site within 12 months of under Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program rents on the premise that rents notification of the award of a grant. for the SRO program shall be used only above that level contributed little to the HUD regulations requiring all sites to be in connection with moderate housing affordability problems faced by under control before the grant is signed rehabilitation of housing for occupancy low income renters. HUD believes that are designed to comply with the statute, by homeless individuals. Persons who the Congress’s concerns were valid and while ensuring that the entire project reside in the housing prior to supports retention of FMRs as a limit on selected in the competition will be rehabilitation are not homeless, within HOME rents. carried out as described in the the McKinney-Vento Act definition, so As discussed above in this notice, a application. Applicants who are may not benefit from the S+C rental June 28, 2001, study of rental housing concerned that they will not be able to assistance payments. Such persons are under the HOME program performed by obtain control over multiple sites at one eligible for relocation benefits pursuant Abt Associates, Inc., entitled ‘‘Study of time should apply for each individual to the Uniform Relocation Assistance Ongoing Affordability of HOME site as a separate project. and Real Property Acquisition Policies Program Rents,’’ provided significant Comment. One commenter stated that Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.) information about rental housing under projects under Housing Preservation (URA) or may return to their unit the HOME program. This study found and Development programs and the without rental assistance. that 60 percent of all renter households Shelter Plus Care (S+C) program, Comment. One commenter made the in HOME-assisted rental housing are including Section 8 Single Room following recommendations. First, the rent burdened (i.e., pay more than 30 Occupancy (SRO) Moderate commenter recommended that the percent of their income for housing). Rehabilitation projects, should be McKinney-Vento Act funds authorized The study also found that 80 percent of automatically renewed similar to for the Continuum of Care (CoC) the households living in HOME-assisted Section 8 vouchers. Expiring contracts program should be allowed to assist in rental units have an annual income of should be renewed through the Section the development of ground floor 50 percent or less of area median 8 Certificate Fund. commercial units as part of homeless income. Therefore, HUD does not Response. Annual appropriations acts project development. Such units would support using a higher rent standard specify the source of funds and renewal help reduce costs and help build than the FMRs and would not endorse standards for S+C renewals. Without support for projects. Second, the a move to increase rents in HOME- Congressional action, HUD cannot commenter recommended that local assisted rental projects. implement automatic renewals through CoCs should determine the match Comment. One commenter proposes the Housing Certificate Fund. required for eligible activities. that all units in HOME-assisted projects Comment. One commenter stated that Response. With respect to the first that also receive project-based rental HUD’s S+C regulations do not recommendation, the McKinney-Vento assistance should rent at the level adequately allow for the reality and Act requires all program funds to be allowable under the project-based rental complexity of new construction used for homeless persons. HUD does subsidy program so that very low- projects. The commenter implies a need permit the development of commercial income tenants would not have to pay for a construction period that can activities in homeless facilities with more than 30 percent of income as rent. exceed one year as currently limited in non-McKinney-Vento funds. With Currently, § 92.252(b)(2) of the HOME the McKinney-Vento Homeless respect to the second recommendation, regulations allows state or local project- Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11301 et seq.) the match is established by statute and based rents only to be charged in (McKinney-Vento Act). The commenter HUD therefore cannot make the HOME-assisted units occupied by recommended that HUD change the requested change through regulation. statute to expand the time allowed for families with income at or below 50 B. Office of Fair Housing and Equal new construction. percent of area median income. Opportunity Response. Currently, project-based Response. The McKinney-Vento Act rents can only be charged in HOME- does not authorize S+C rental assistance Comment. One commenter raised a assisted units occupied by families with in conjunction with new construction. question about uniform federal incomes at or below 50 percent of area However, where new construction is accessibility standards with respect to median income. This is a statutory performed in conjunction with SHP, the HUD’s Supportive Housing for Persons limitation, which would require construction activities must begin with with Disabilities (also referred to as the legislative change. 18 months of the date of HUD’s grant Section 811 program). The commenter award letter and must be complete with stated that participants in the Section 3. Special Needs Assistance Programs 36 months after that notification. 811 program that provide for Comment. One commenter stated that Comment. One commenter stated that construction and development should a HUD field office has interpreted HUD’s recent reinterpretation of the law be able to design their group homes for Supportive Housing (SHP) program has disallowed any ‘‘in-place’’ low- persons with developmental disabilities regulations at 24 CFR 583.320 (Site income tenants of a S+C/SRO project by working with HUD architects, based Control) to mean that all properties from returning to units after renovation on their knowledge and experience with funded for acquisition under a single to receive rental assistance. The clients. The commenter referred to a project award must meet site control commenter stated that this group home that has housed persons
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29351
with developmental disabilities for the Comment. One commenter wrote that recommendations for resolution. In past 18 years. The commenter’s issue is the accessibility requirements are response to requests from the industry, directed to section 4.34 of the Uniform cumbersome and confusing for both the HUD provided technical guidance in Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS), public and private sectors because development of code text language that which pertains to kitchens. Under this several federal agencies have would address the areas of requirement, most of the clients are overlapping administrative inconsistency HUD identified for the supervised while handling food and requirements that sometimes appear to International Building Code (IBC), and cooking and are rarely able to work conflict with regulations administered in development of a stand-alone alone in preparation. The staff at these by other federal agencies or state and document, entitled ‘‘Code Requirements homes is responsible for utilizing the local public housing agencies and for Housing Accessibility,’’ resulting in kitchen appliances in assisting the builders. The commenter stated that it HUD’s recognition of the 2003 IBC as an clients, and it is burdensome for them would like to see more consistency in additional safe harbors for compliance to work in situations where everything guidance provided by HUD on the Fair with the accessibility requirements of is lowered. Housing Act and Section 504. the Fair Housing Act. The results of Response. Section 504 of the Response. HUD recognizes that the HUD’s review were published in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. existence of more than one federal law Federal Register on February 28, 2005 791 et seq.) (Section 504) prohibits mandating accessibility for persons with (70 FR 9738). discrimination based on disability in disabilities in housing presents c. HUD’s program offices issued four any program or activity receiving federal challenges for the building industry in notices to its recipients detailing the financial assistance. HUD’s regulation assuring compliance with all applicable requirements of Section 504, the Fair implementing Section 504, codified at laws. HUD provides ongoing technical Housing Act and the ADA: Two covered 24 CFR part 8, requires the design, assistance and guidance concerning the CPD programs, one covered Office of construction, or alteration of buildings statutes it enforces and their Housing programs, and the one most to be in conformance with UFAS. In implementing regulations. HUD has recently covered programs of the Office addition, the Fair Housing Act (42 taken a number of steps over a period of Public and Indian Housing. These U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) and the regulation of years to provide guidance to HUD notices reach thousand of recipients that implementing the Fair Housing Act (24 recipients and the building industry on administer all of HUD’s programs and CFR part 100) prohibit discrimination in meeting the accessibility requirements services. d. HUD’s Fair Housing Accessibility the sale, rental, and financing of of Section 504, the Architectural FIRST program is providing extensive dwelling units, regardless of federal Barriers Act (42 U.S.C. 4151 et seq.), the education and outreach on the financial assistance, based on a variety Fair Housing Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. accessibility requirements of the Fair of factors including disability. 12101 et seq.) (ADA). These efforts Housing Act. (See, for example, the As Section 811 projects are frequently include holding town meetings and information about the program on the newly constructed, both Section 504 training seminars, disseminating Web site: http:// and the Fair Housing Act apply. When training materials at these meetings, and www.fairhousingfirst.org.) While the projects are designed with accessibility providing technical guidance to outside FIRST program focuses on the Fair features in mind from the beginning, housing-industry organizations. More Housing Act, the training modules, costs associated with providing such recently, HUD has taken the steps FAQ’s and other information also elements are minimal. Additionally, described below: discuss related laws, including Section although these accessibility a. In its role as a standard setting 504, the Architectural Barriers Act and requirements are mandated by statute, agency and member of the U.S. Access the ADA. The Disability Rights Laws recipients have the authority to request Board, HUD participated in the training module includes a matrix of the waivers in limited situations. For development of new guidelines covering laws. HUD acknowledges that it has an example, although the regulation in 24 access to facilities covered by the ADA. ongoing obligation to provide assistance CFR 891.310(b)(3) mandates that all These guidelines overhaul the existing to the public and anticipates more dwelling units in acquired or ADA Accessibility Guidelines, which guidance in the future. rehabilitated independent living were first published in 1991. As part of Comment. HUD has recently denied facilities be accessible or adaptable for this effort, HUD has assisted in revising FHA mortgage insurance under section people with physical disabilities, it also guidelines for federally funded facilities 221 of the National Housing Act (12 allows for a lesser number of units to be required to be accessible under the U.S.C. 17151) to properties that restrict accessible if costs make it financially Architectural Barriers Act. Both the occupancy to persons age 62 or over due infeasible, if less than one-half of the ADA guidelines and the guidelines for to HUD’s long-standing policy of not intended occupants have mobility the Architectural Barriers Act specify discriminating against families with impairments, and if the project complies access in new construction and children. with 24 CFR 8.23. alterations, and provide detailed Response. HUD is not aware of the The Department acknowledges that provisions for various building situation to which the commenter refers certain costs are associated with elements, including ramps, elevators, but advises that section 808(e)(5) of the ensuring that facilities are accessible to restrooms, parking, and signage, among Fair Housing Act requires HUD to people with disabilities and that not others. The guidelines, which are now administer HUD programs and activities every person will benefit from all in the final stages of development, are in a manner that affirmatively furthers accessible features. Persons with expected to be published in the near the purposes of the Fair Housing Act. developmental disabilities, however, future. HUD’s handbook entitled Occupancy can also benefit from features of b. HUD published a final report and Requirements of Subsidized Multifamily accessible housing under these laws. policy statement on its review of model Housing Programs (Handbook 4350.3, Additionally, it is incumbent upon the building codes for consistency with the issued on June 12, 2003) is consistent Department and its recipients to comply accessibility requirements of the Fair with the Fair Housing Act and addresses with the regulatory requirements of Housing Act, including identification of the matter raised by the commenter. Section 504 and the Fair Housing Act. areas of inconsistency and Paragraph 3–22(D) of this handbook
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29352 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
provides that owners of properties that are duplicative of HUD training found, allow either: (a) A risk which house elderly persons or which requirements. assessment and interim controls for house elderly persons and persons with Response. The EPA training and rehabilitation between $5,000 and disabilities may not exclude otherwise certification requirements for workers $25,000 per unit, or (b) standard eligible elderly families with children. are for lead-based paint abatement work treatment or abatement. Third, the The policy stated in this paragraph (see 40 CFR 745.227). EPA does not commenter stated that a requirement to furthers the intent of the Fair Housing require training and certification for have certified workers is unnecessary in Act to affirmatively further fair housing rehabilitation, renovation or remodeling a vacant building because there are no for families with children under the age work that is not abatement. HUD children or residents to protect; OSHA of 18. recognizes the value of the abatement and EPA requirements would suffice. worker training and certification, and Fourth, the commenter stated that after C. Office of Healthy Homes and Lead has provided, in its regulations at 24 substantial rehabilitation work is Hazard Control (OHHLC) CFR part 35 (the Lead Safe Housing completed in a building, HUD should Comment. One commenter stated that Rule), that anyone who has completed require a final clearance test of the lead-based paint inspection and paint an abatement worker or supervisor whole building. removal is required of homes receiving course is qualified to perform interim Response. With respect to the repair loans or grants up to $20,000 controls in HUD-assisted housing commenter’s first recommendation, under the Department of Agriculture’s without further training. The OSHA HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule already Rural Housing Service 504 program, and lead-in-construction training (29 CFR allows a lead-based paint inspection for that this requirement is burdensome and 1926.62) covers the same general safety a vacant building (24 CFR 35.115(a)(4) should be withdrawn. issues as the HUD interim controls and (a)(5)). Response. The U.S. Department of training, but OSHA’s focus is on With respect to the commenter’s Agriculture has decided to use HUD’s protecting the worker, and not on second recommendation, HUD’s Lead approach for residential properties protecting the home after the work is Safe Housing Rule already allows the which the Department of Agriculture done. The HUD-approved curricula approach in: (a) 24 CFR 35.930(c), for provides rehabilitation assistance and address both issues. rehabilitation of $5,000 up to and that are not also receiving HUD Comment. One commenter stated that including $25,000 per unit, and (b) 24 assistance. This was not a requirement HUD should streamline and simplify its CFR 35.120(a), for rehabilitation up to imposed by HUD. Lead Safe Housing Rule. and including $25,000 per unit. The Comment. One commenter suggested Response. HUD agreed with this governing statutes (the Lead-Based Paint that HUD remove the clearance testing comment and issued a rule on June 21, Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. requirement and recognize the training 2004 (69 FR 34262), that made a number 4821 et seq.) and the Residential Lead- provided by either the Environmental of technical amendments to its Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of Protection Agency (EPA) or the Safe Housing Rule. HUD believes this 1992 (42 U.S.C. 4851 et seq.)) and Occupational Health and Safety rule clarified several regulatory HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule require Administration (OSHA) as sufficient to provisions and contributed to improving abatement of lead hazards for perform ‘‘interim controls.’’ the simplicity and comprehensibility of rehabilitation above $25,000 per unit Response. Clearance is required to its regulations. The June 21, 2004, rule (see 24 CFR 35.930(d)). ensure that the job is done properly. also streamlined several regulatory With respect to the commenter’s third HUD therefore finds that clearance provisions. recommendation, HUD requires testing is not a substitute for EPA Comment. One commenter stated that certified workers only when EPA training, but rather constitutes a quality there is a shortage of licensed lead requires them, that is, for abatement assurance measure, which is important abatement contractors, which hinders work. Abatement during rehabilitation in striving for lead-hazard free housing. implementation of HUD’s Lead Safe is only required under the Lead Safe HUD, however, does recognize EPA Housing Rule. Housing Rule for those projects with training, and has for some time. Response. A small percentage of federal assistance over $25,000 per unit. Comment. In a related issue, one HUD-assisted housing requires lead However, regardless of the cost of a commenter stated that HUD’s abatement work. HUD’s Lead Safe project, HUD believes that lead work requirement that clearance testing be Housing Rule provides that most should be performed in a protective done prior to completion of any job can required lead-related work constitutes manner that minimizes the creation and result in significant delays in the interim controls of lead hazards, for dispersal of lead dust and debris, rehabilitation of housing. The which certified/licensed lead abatement because children may in fact be present commenter states that neither EPA nor contractors are not required. In addition, after the work has been completed in a OSHA requires clearance testing prior to HUD has provided training to over vacant unit. Therefore, for rehabilitation conclusion of work on a jobsite. 40,000 individuals in lead-safe work projects over $5,000 and up to $25,000 Response. For most rehabilitation, practices for use in interim control per unit, HUD requires interim controls, renovation and remodeling projects in activities. and the associated training and pre-1978 assisted housing, clearance is Comment. One commenter stated that clearance, to ensure that the housing required to ensure that the job is done HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule does not will be safe for the family that will properly and to reduce the liability of significantly distinguish between vacant occupy the house after the work is contractors. HUD believes that it has and occupied buildings, causing completed, whether or not the unit was addressed this burden to the extent unnecessary costs and delays. The vacant during the work. Similarly, for feasible by allowing an exemption from commenter offered several suggestions. work up to $5,000 per unit, HUD the clearance requirements for First, the commenter recommended that requires that the rehabilitation work be disturbances of only a small area of for vacant buildings, the regulations done safely and that clearance is paint surfaces. should allow lead-based paint conducted, to achieve the same Comment. One commenter stated that inspection, regardless of amount of protective goal. EPA and OSHA have established worker federal funding. Second, the commenter With respect to the commenter’s training and work practice standards recommended that if lead-based paint is fourth recommendation, HUD already
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29353
requires that a clearance test be based paint hazards to all occupants of properties are properly appraised, HUD conducted after paint disturbance, multifamily buildings. should also require two years as a interim hazard controls, or abatement Response. The limitation of grants to licensed or certified appraiser as a (Lead Safe Housing Rule, 24 CFR state, tribal, and local governments is a condition of being placed on the [FHA 35.930(b) and 35.1330(a)(3), statutory one (42 U.S.C. 4851), as is the Appraiser] Roster. Appraisals completed respectively). HUD’s interpretive zero-bedroom exemption (42 U.S.C. for HUD/FHA are often more guidance (item R13) notes that, 4851b), and therefore cannot be changed complicated than those completed for ‘‘Clearance must be performed after all through regulations. For HUD to require conventional clients and thus warrant the rehabilitation and/or hazard disclosure of lead-based paint hazards the additional experience. In reduction work is complete.’’ to all occupants of multifamily housing comparison to conventional appraisals, Comment. One commenter stated that would require a change to the HUD and FHA appraisers require a higher degree HUD should clarify that federal EPA position that information or reports of skill and more knowledge of regulations do not require certified on other units in a multifamily building construction, depreciation, cost abatement personnel for interim are only relevant to prospective estimating for repairs and estimating the controls work. purchasers or lessees if the information useful and remaining life of residential Response. HUD’s Lead Safe Housing stems from a representative sample of improvements and equipment.’’ Rule distinguishes the training the dwelling units in the building and Response. HUD’s regulations requirements for abatement (abatement the findings apply to the multifamily governing the FHA Appraiser Roster worker training and certification) at 24 housing as a whole (see preamble to the require that appraisers be state-licensed CFR 35.1325, which incorporates EPA’s Lead Disclosure Rule, at 61 FR 9072, or state-certified but the regulations do training requirements at 40 CFR subunit IV.D.2.c, paragraph 3). When not direct impose a minimum 745.226(c) and 745.227(e)(1), and the evaluation findings do apply to the experience requirement. Instead HUD interim controls work (lead-safe work multifamily housing as a whole, the relies on the experience requirements practices training) at 35.1330(a)(4)(iii). hazards must be disclosed to all tenants. imposed by the states before they will HUD is continuing to reach out with HUD does not believe such a change is license or certify an individual as an this message through its programmatic necessary (see 42 U.S.C. 4852d). appraiser. efforts. HUD believes that its outreach Comment. One commenter stated that Although FHA does have additional efforts provide the clarification. HUD should issue lead-safety reporting requirements appraisals Comment. One commenter stated that requirements for housing covered by completed for HUD/FHA are not, HUD should issue guidance for CPD HUD-insured single family mortgages. intrinsically, more complicated than grantees on how to comply with the Response. Subpart E of HUD’s Lead those completed for conventional Lead Safe Housing Rule efficiently and Safe Housing Rule is reserved for lending purposes. The more specific cost-effectively. possible future rulemaking on lead- FHA reporting requirements do not Response. HUD is continuing to reach based paint poisoning prevention require a higher degree of skill, only an out to CDBG grantees through staff in requirements, and HUD is considering adherence to FHA policies and CPD, both at Headquarters and in the rulemaking under this subpart. regulations. In addition, conventional field, and continuing to provide training Comment. One commenter stated that appraisers, as well as FHA appraisers, and technical assistance to these HUD should clarify that the are required to have a working grantees. Consolidated Plan must describe the knowledge of residential construction Comment. One commenter stated that relationship between plans for reducing techniques and are typically called HUD could reduce clearance costs by: lead hazards and the extent of lead upon to estimate the useful and (a) Clarifying that a state-certified poisoning and lead hazards. remaining life of residential sampling technician can be used for Response. OHHLHC is working with improvements and equipment as well as non-abatement clearance; and (b) CPD to promote the integration of lead- be well versed in the application of the including sampling technician training hazard control into Consolidated Plans. cost approach. in the housing quality standard core In order for an appraiser to be eligible Comment. One commenter stated that training. for inclusion on the FHA Appraiser the Lead Safe Housing Rule is Response. With respect to the Roster, the appraiser must fall within burdensome to organizations that commenter’s first suggestion, HUD notes one of the three Appraiser rehabilitate low-income housing, and that its regulations provide that state- Qualifications Board (AQB) real certified sampling technicians can be many housing providers are no longer property appraiser classifications: (1) used for clearance examinations. The rehabilitating existing housing. Licensed; (2) certified residential; and Response. As noted above in this ability to use state-certified sampling (3) certified general. The minimum notice, HUD has streamlined its technicians can be found in the Lead number of required experience hours for regulation to provide for use of interim Safe Housing Rule at 24 CFR these classifications are 2,000, 2,500, controls rather than abatement in all but 35.1340(a)(iii) and (iv). With respect to and 3,000, respectively. those units for which rehabilitation cost the second suggestion, HUD believes FHA is interested in maintaining high over $25,000. HUD has provided that the technician training proposal standards for appraisers listed on the information on how providers can merits further consideration, and HUD FHA Appraiser Roster and continually conduct lead-safe rehabilitation cost- will take the commenter’s revises and updates its quality control effectively. HUD will continue to do so. recommendation under advisement. and review programs to ensure that such Comment. One commenter stated that D. Office of Housing—Federal Housing standards are adhered to. Additionally, HUD should provide lead hazard Administration to increase the accuracy and control grant program set-asides for thoroughness of FHA appraisals, FHA community-based organizations. The 1. Single Family Housing clarifies policies and procedures commenter also stated that HUD should Comment. With respect to the FHA through mortgagee letters to FHA drop the zero-bedroom exemption from Appraiser Roster requirements in 24 appraiser and industry partners and the definition of target housing, and CFR 200.202, one commenter stated continually updates and revises HUD should require disclosure of lead- that, ‘‘[i]n order to ensure that FHA appraisal related handbooks.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29354 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
HUD believes that the current eliminate the ability of investors and who tend to have less concern for the eligibility requirements for placement contractors to profit from their actions, condition of the property. on the FHA Appraiser Roster are but rather to assure that homeowners HUD recognizes that condominium sufficient to ensure that an appraiser, at are not purchasing overvalued houses ownership has matured and is now time of placement on the FHA and becoming the unwitting victims of recognized as a viable housing form. As Appraiser Roster, has acquired the predatory practices. To this end, HUD part of this recognition, HUD is necessary experience, training and believes the final rule as published on presently exploring the elimination of knowledge to adequately perform May 2, 2003, as amended by the rule prior HUD approval for certain types of appraisals of properties that will serve published on December 23, 2004 (and condominium developments before as security for FHA-insured loans. discussed in Section III of this notice) insuring mortgages in them. Comment. With respect to the accomplishes this goal. Comment. One commenter stated that requirements in 24 CFR 203.37a, Comment. With respect to the HUD should establish fire safety prohibiting the practice of property regulations in 24 CFR 203.21, one requirements for its single-family ‘‘flipping,’’ one commenter expressed commenter stated that HUD should residential properties similar to those concern regarding the restriction on lengthen the amortization period for mandated by the Fire Administration resale of property occurring 90 days or FHA mortgage loans beyond the existing Authorization Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102– less following acquisition. The 30-year term. The commenter stated that 522) for its multi-family properties, and regulation provides that if a property is recently, more and more lenders have should use the National Fire Protection sold within 90 days or less following the begun offering 20- and 40-year loans to Association (NFPA) Building date of acquisition by the seller, the facilitate the availability and Construction and Safety Code (NFPA property is not eligible for purchase affordability of homeownership. The 5000) to reduce HUD’s dependence with an FHA-insured mortgage. commenter suggested that extending the upon its Minimum Property Standards The commenter stated ‘‘[t]his life of the loan above 30 years would (MPS). The MPS presently establish fire requirement has had an adverse impact reduce the monthly mortgage payment, safety standards for single-family on legitimate business deals because it allowing more households to qualify for residential properties. Response. HUD agrees that the MPS, discourages investors from wanting to a mortgage and, hence, increase last updated in 1994, contain outdated participate in property rehabilitation homeownership opportunities. projects that utilize FHA mortgage construction requirements, including Response. FHA is constantly assessing insurance. Investors make legitimate fire-safety standards that are new products that will make livings purchasing distressed properties, incorporated by reference, and as homeownership more affordable, but reconditioning them, and returning discussed in Section III of this notice, has no plans at this time to offer them to market at fair market prices and the Initiative intends to focus its review within a reasonable amount of time. The mortgages that have terms longer than specifically on the MPS in 2005. While end result of this activity is more 30 years. the published MPS do not contain homeownership opportunities and Comment. One commenter expressed specific or prescriptive requirements, improved neighborhood revitalization. concern regarding the requirement that the standards pertaining to fire safety HUD should allow more exemptions to condominium developments be at least are incorporated by reference to the the rule.’’ 51 percent owner-occupied before 1991 Uniform Building Code, the 1993 Response. In the proposed rule on individual units can be deemed eligible BOCA Building Code, the 1991 property flipping, published on for FHA-insured loans. The commenter Standard Building Code (24 CFR September 5, 2001 (46 FR 46502), HUD wrote that this requirement limits sales 200.924c) for multi-family dwellings, proposed to prohibit FHA-insured and homeownership opportunities, and the 1992 CABO Building Code for financing for any property being sold particularly in market areas comprised single family dwellings. within six months after acquisition by of significant condominium Before incorporating by reference the the seller. This proposed six month developments and first-time NFPA 5000 code, HUD must first prohibition generated the most homebuyers. The condominium market complete its ongoing assessment of the comments on the proposed rule, and has matured since adoption of the 51 MPS to determine their use and many commenters wrote that the six- percent rule and as a result liquidity necessity in today’s marketplace, and month ban would reduce the incentive risk has declined. Condominium develop a vision for the future of the for investors to buy and rehabilitate ownership is now a viable MPS. This assessment is also necessary these properties. In response to these homeownership tool. before developing additional fire-safety concerns, HUD, in the final rule Response. Since FHA began insuring requirements or incorporating by published May 1, 2003 (68 FR 23370), individual units in condominium reference updated model building substantially revised the proposed time developments, it has held the view that codes. HUD’s Office of Policy restrictions on re-sales while still condominium associations under the Development and Research completed implementing safeguards to assure that control of owner occupants have a and published a study of the MPS the value of the property is recognized greater probability of flourishing and during the first half of 2002, which is in the marketplace and to reduce the thereby reducing risk of loss to the currently being reviewed and evaluated possibility of appraisal fraud. insurance fund than would within HUD. Should HUD decide to HUD believes that re-sales executed condominium developments that are retain the MPS for multifamily housing within 90 days imply prearranged primarily rental units with the and single-family dwellings, the fire transactions that often prove to be the condominium association controlled by safety requirements, as well as model most egregious examples of predatory investors. Homeowners have different building codes incorporated by lending practices. Furthermore, HUD interests regarding condominium reference, would be part of the updating believes that 90 days is not an properties than investors/tenants. efforts. unreasonable waiting period if actual Homeowners are more likely to promote rehabilitation and repair of a property maintenance, repairs and adequate 2. Manufactured Housing Program occur before the property is resold. It reserves than investors who are inclined Comment. One commenter stated that has never been HUD’s intention to to minimize expenditures and tenants HUD should restore a ‘‘bright line’’
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29355
distinction between HUD code The commenter also stated that HUD proposed rule to facilitate some on-site manufactured homes and other should strengthen its oversight and construction without the need for HUD structures, such as state-regulated enforcement of the federal approval. Interested parties and the modular homes, and clarify manufactured housing program to public will have an opportunity to responsibilities for regulating aspects of reduce consumer complaints, improve comment on the specifics of this on-site completion of factory-built product quality and durability, and proposal when published. Additionally, homes. The commenter stated that HUD increase public acceptance. The HUD will further consider the should consider the actions described commenter states that a significantly recommendations made by the below: higher number of consumer complaints commenter. (1) Rescind all prior actions allowing for manufactured homes versus modular Comment. One commenter stated that complete or partial removal or alteration homes (10–20 times the number of state and local jurisdictions should not of the chassis on-site. A two-story HUD- complaints), together with the public’s use zoning and land use regulations to code home (with the chassis altered) lack of ability to distinguish between require that manufactured housing in looks just like a two story site-built or manufactured homes and modular their communities is aesthetically modular home. Further, the completion homes, have tainted the public’s identical to existing single family of garages or basements to a HUD-code perception of modular housing as a housing. The commenter wrote that home, where a specially designed viable affordable housing alternative. HUD’s 1997 statement of policy on this chassis has been removed or sunken The commenter submits that confusion subject should be revised and expanded underground, looks like state-regulated by public and financial institutions as to in accordance with the mandates of the site-built and modular homes that what constitutes a HUD-code home has Manufactured Housing Improvement Congress indicated were not being resulted in increasing numbers of local Act of 2000 (title VI Pub. L. 106–569, preempted. Relatively poor performance jurisdictions attempting to impose approved December 27, 2000), (the MHI of manufactured homes hurts the market zoning restrictions, which limit the Act) to include zoning regulations. for affordable factory-built housing, availability of both affordable Discriminatory practices on certain including better-performing modular manufactured and modular homes. The zoning and land use decisions are homes. commenter wrote that this problem is continuing to be made by state and local (2) Restrict the amount of work that being exacerbated by retailers that governments despite the 1997 statement can be done to a manufactured home represent to consumers that they are of policy. on-site to placing the home on a purchasing modular homes built to Response. The MHI Act does not foundation or pier system support or higher safety standards, when they are provide HUD with the authority to pad, to avoid confusion regarding HUD actually purchasing a poorer performing extend its preemption of state and local versus state/local jurisdiction. manufactured home. The commenter laws over manufactured home (3) Rescind all alternative concludes with the statement that this construction, under section 604(d) of construction letters that permit on-site has also caused taxation problems for the 1974 Act, to state and local zoning completion of manufactured homes consumers and public officials when laws and regulations. Further discussion using factory personnel and approved communities discover that the home is of this position can be found in a notice third agency personnel, and allow state/ a manufactured home, to be taxed as a published by HUD in the Federal local governments to inspect/approve chattel, rather than a modular unit taxed Register on July 17, 2003 (68 FR 42327). all site work in accordance with state as real estate. HUD’s Manufactured Housing Program manufactured home ‘‘installation’’ Response. The nature of the Office worked cooperatively with requirements. This would remove a manufactured home industry and the MHCC to develop a revised draft major gap in the present regulatory products the industry produces have statement of policy to reflect the system regarding site completion work changed drastically since enactment of changes in the purposes resulting from on manufactured homes. the National Manufactured Housing the MHI Act. While HUD can encourage The commenter stated that gaps are Construction and Safety Standards Act state and local governments to eliminate being created in regulatory oversight by of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.) (1974 certain zoning and land use practices to the Department’s reduced inspections of Act). Market demands have resulted in facilitate the placement of manufactured manufactured home facilities and the changes in design and construction by housing, it cannot require that states or actual or effective unilateral preemption many manufactured home producers local governments discontinue those of state and local officials performing such that their homes do closely practices under the 1974 Act. inspections of on-site construction and resemble modular home construction in Comment. One commenter stated that installation of manufactured homes. The appearance. The manufactured housing subpart I of HUD’s manufactured commenter wrote that these perceived industry has changed from producing housing procedural and enforcement gaps are eroding public and elected mostly single-section homes that were regulations (24 CFR part 3282, subpart official confidence in both mobile, to producing multiple-section I) establishes procedures concerning manufactured housing and modular homes that rarely are moved. how manufacturers notify and remedy construction. The commenter stated that Modular homes are generally either defects in manufactured homes. One HUD should work with the modular not covered by the 1974 Act, if they also commenter wrote that the subpart I housing industry to identify actions that meet the definition of ‘‘manufactured requirements are considered vague and can be taken to assist the modular home,’’ or can be excluded from confusing by some industry members construction industry to produce coverage. The majority of all and others and that there has been affordable housing. The commenter manufactured homes being produced significant controversy as to the wrote that in furtherance of this goal, today require some on-site work in meaning of certain aspects of the HUD should consider sponsoring a order to complete them. This does not regulations. The commenter also wrote national conference or workshop as part include their placement on a foundation that some industry members claim there of its affordable housing initiative with or stabilization system for support at the have been abuses by HUD contractors, all sectors of the home building site. who these industry members describe industry, consumers, government HUD has received comments from have financial incentives to find fault officials, lenders, and insurers. MHCC on a pre-publication draft with manufactured homes. According to
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29356 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
the commenter, these perceived abuses manufactured homes, and no longer HUD would not be sufficient to cover lead to higher priced homes for require advance approval by the the project’s annual expenses for the consumers. The commenter Secretary under the AC process for first year. In year two, when the owner recommends that HUD impose time specified completion work to be may apply for a PRAC increase, the limits of one year after initial sale for performed at the site. The commenter notes for the PRAC will include records application of a requirement for encourages adoption of this proposed of the discrepancy between the reserved notification of defects, and five years for rule to clarify requirements for on-site amount and the actual amount needed application of a requirement for completion, and streamlining or to operate the project, as well as of the correction of defects that present an eliminating certain requirements project’s actual expenses for the first unreasonable risk of death or injury. relating to work performed on site. year. If the formula rents are not The commenter describes this change as Response. HUD is in agreement and is sufficient to cover the actual monthly conforming to existing law. The pursuing rulemaking on this matter. expenses, the owner will still be commenter stated that industry also 3. Multifamily Housing Programs required to submit a voucher based on recommends that the regulations be the project’s actual expenses. When at modified to protect manufacturers that Comment. With respect to the year’s end a budget shortfall occurs, the act in ‘‘good faith’’ when making regulations governing HUD’s Section owner’s minimum capital investment is determinations under 24 CFR part 3282, 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly used to cover the deficit and, if there is subpart I. The commenter claims this (Section 202) and Section 811 still a shortfall, the owner, with HUD ‘‘good faith’’ is a safe harbor for Supportive Housing for Persons with approval, can borrow against the second manufacturers under the law, and Disabilities (Section 811) programs, year budget authority. HUD’s plan is to would promote affordability by codified in 24 CFR part 891, several contract for a study to determine if the eliminating unnecessary requirements. commenters stated that the development initial rewards are consistent with Response. HUD is in agreement that cost limits in 24 CFR 891.140 are not actual operating costs for comparable some streamlining of the current subpart reflective of the true costs of assisted housing in various housing I regulations would help remove some development in each region of the markets. ambiguities and confusion in the country. The commenters wrote that Comment. Four commenters stated existing procedures. The MHCC has sponsors are therefore forced to exhaust that requiring the removal of all been actively reviewing, with HUD all other funding sources before contamination from sites on FHA- participation, the existing regulations to requesting additional funding from insured multifamily properties without identify areas in need of revision. HUD, which delays the development taking into account risk, or the use of However, the 1974 Act does not limit process. institutional controls or engineered manufacturers’ responsibilities in some The commenters also expressed barriers, is a barrier to the development ways suggested by the commenter. For concern about the operating costs of affordable properties, especially in example, there are no provisions in the standards in 24 CFR 891.150, that older urban areas. The commenters 1974 Act to establish time limits for establish the amount of project rental recommended that HUD require that: manufacturer notification to assistance contract (PRAC) funds (1) Developers enter a program similar homeowners of defects, or correction of awarded to the Section 202 and Section to the Illinois Site Remediation Program defects that present unreasonable risks 811 projects. The regulations do not using ‘‘risk-based’’ decisionmaking and to occupants. permit any adjustments to the PRAC institutional controls, or at least make The statute does not contemplate until after one year of operation. The contact with the state environmental ‘‘good faith’’ as being a safe harbor from commenter stated that this is a agency as soon as possible in the notification and correction disincentive to participate in the development process; responsibilities, and HUD believes that, programs by small nonprofits. (2) Remedial action plans be approved by implication, manufacturers are Response. With the publication of before the start of construction; required to act in good faith. HUD, HUD’s FY2004 and FY2005 Section 202 (3) Remedial action is completed prior however, will further consider specific and Section 811 NOFAs (May 14, 2004, to occupancy; and use of the term ‘‘good faith’’ in revising 69 FR 26942, March 21, 2005, 70 FR (4) A Phase I or Phase II investigation the regulations in subpart I of 24 CFR 13576), the Department has raised the be conducted for the site. The developer part 3282. development cost limits applicable to would not be required to participate in Comment. One commenter stated that the Section 202 and Section 811 the Site Remediation Program if it can the current alternative construction (AC) programs to be consistent with the cost be shown that no remediation is approval letter procedure, set forth in limits established pursuant to section required for the site. HUD’s regulations in 24 CFR 3282.14, is 221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act In summary, the commenters limited to specific narrow (12 U.S.C. 17151(d)(3)) that were raised recommend allowing FHA insurance or circumstances and requires the in January 2004. The Department also assistance for properties that meet EPA manufacturer to submit a formal request contracted for a study, which addresses standards, as these standards are to HUD to obtain approval for the limits for the total cost of developing a interpreted by the state and local completion of homes at the site. The Section 202 or Section 811 project. That regulatory agency for residential safety. process can take up to three months study has been completed and is under Response. HUD is examining the issue before an AC letter is issued to permit final review. raised by the commenters and is taking limited aspects of homes, which did not Although PRAC authority for the first the commenters’ suggestion under conform to the federal Manufactured year cannot be amended because a full advisement. Home Construction and Safety year is required to determine the actual Comment. One commenter advised of Standards in the factory, to be cost of operating a project, HUD already the burden associated with HUD’s completed at the site. The commenter has in place a policy to deal with any ‘‘previous participation’’ requirements noted that HUD provided the statutorily shortfalls during the first year. Two in 24 CFR 200.217a, referred to as the created MHCC with a draft proposed notes have been added to the PRAC to ‘‘2530 review.’’ The commenter stated rule for comment that would permit alleviate concerns expressed by some that the current 2530 review process limited on-site completion of new owners that the PRAC amount set by was established before the involvement
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29357
of major corporate entities as passive compliance, cannot be waived. Accelerated Processing (MAP) guide to limited partner investors, and before the Although current occupants may not explicitly allow age restrictions in availability of contemporary database, need the full accessibility in the properties financed with FHA-insured credit reporting, and other information kitchen, future tenants may need such mortgages. Current interpretation of systems that allow for the expedited and accessibility. Furthermore, the choice of policy that does not permit age- thorough analysis of a project sponsor’s new construction or rehabilitation of a restricted occupancy on insured financial strength and background. HUD property is at the option of the project properties will be a significant requires a 2530 review of all individual sponsor. It is much more difficult and impediment to refinancing Section 202 officers of any corporation directly costly to make an existing structure loans with FHA insurance. HUD investing as a limited partner in an FHA accessible than it is to newly construct participation in affordable housing for insured low-income housing tax credit an accessible project. the elderly is further constrained in (LIHTC) transaction. All officers and As noted in an earlier response, the areas with community defined zoning directors three levels below the Department has brought relief by for the elderly that excludes residents mortgagor entity must be listed. The increasing the development cost limits under 18. commenter stated that this is a in the FY 2004 and the FY2005 NOFAs Response. Current HUD policy for its particularly onerous and inhibiting and the Department is also contracting market rate Section 221(d)(4) program prospect for larger syndications. The for a study to develop realistic cost (the program provided under section commenter recommended that, where limits for the development of Section 221(d)(4) of the National Housing Act the limited partnership is a fund 811 and Section 202 housing, which (12 U.S.C. 17151(d)(4))) requires established by a syndicator, the 2530 should alleviate a lot of the shortfalls designated elderly properties to admit clearance be required only for that that sponsors have been experiencing in families with children and young adults specific fund or a ‘‘master 2530’’ trying to develop such housing. unless the head of household is under procedure be established for direct Comment. One commenter referred to age 62. However, under section 231 of corporate investors or syndication firms. HUD’s regulations in 24 CFR 245.310 the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. Response. HUD is currently and stated that certain rent increases are 1715v), all occupants must be 62 years considering a revision to the 2530 adjustments authorized annually by of age or older. HUD has been receiving process based on ownership type. HUD HUD under an Annual Adjustment inquiries from lenders regarding the also determined that this process was Factor (AAF) or an Operating Cost submission of mortgage insurance ideal for e-government. On April 13, Adjustment Factor (OCAF) that do not applications for properties that will 2005 (70 FR 19660), HUD published a impact the portion of the rent that restrict occupancy to only the elderly, final rule which requires all participants tenants receiving Section 8 assistance defined as an individual who is at least in HUD’s multifamily housing programs pay since their contribution to rent is 62 years of age. Lenders currently may to file their previous participation based on 30 percent of their income choose to submit an application for such certificates by a specific date using the regardless of the new rent. The properties for mortgage insurance under Active Partner Performance System on commenter recommended that the section 231. HUD’s secure Internet site. This rule regulation should be amended to require HUD is reviewing its existing reduces the paperwork burden that tenants be notified only when regulations and policies regarding associated with previous participation owners are seeking budget-based rent elderly restrictions in FHA’s various review. increases, special rent adjustments, multifamily programs and will publish Comment. One commenter stated that tenant utility decreases, etc. which for public comment a rule that describes under current regulations in 24 CFR part cause a change in the dollar amount of the policies affecting the tenant 891, there is no middle ground between the rent paid by the tenant. eligibility requirements for residency in extremes of non-compliance versus full Response. This requirement predates FHA mortgage insured projects. compliance with HUD’s accessibility automatic adjustments such as AAF and Comments received in response to that requirements. The commenter stated OCAF, which do not result in a change rulemaking will be thoroughly reviewed that the cognitive abilities of persons in the tenant’s portion of the rent. HUD and considered, and amendments to the with developmental disabilities are such will revise its regulation to reflect MAP Guide may result from this that the tasks they would be able to current practice. rulemaking. perform in the kitchen would not Comment. One commenter expressed Comment. With respect to FHA’s use require full accessibility. The shortfalls concern that HUD policy on occupancy of a low-floater finance package to experienced as a direct consequence of of properties restricted to the elderly is facilitate the production of affordable the Section 811 development cost limits not consistent with the Fair Housing multifamily housing, one commenter not being updated on a regular basis to Act. The commenter stated that there is stated that FHA’s proposal is too limited reflect drastic rises in site acquisition also evidence that it is not consistent in nature to benefit or encourage costs, compounded by the strict with custom and practice, which production of affordable housing. The adherence to UFAS, has the unintended maintains elderly communities for the commenter recommends that HUD meet consequence of raising project costs, elderly population only. HUD has not with industry experts to craft a low- thus impeding the development and clarified its position on elderly housing floater finance package that will be of rehabilitation of affordable housing for subsequent to amendments to the Fair limited risk and maximum benefit to persons with developmental disabilities. Housing Act enacted in 1995. The serve the affordable housing objective. Response. The Section 811 commenter recommended that all Response. HUD met with various programmatic accessibility requirements housing should conform to the Housing industry groups to informally solicit at 24 CFR 891.310 allow for a lesser for Older Persons Act (Pub. L. 104–76, recommendations and HUD is number of accessible units and approved December 28, 1995), except examining its current policy on low- bedrooms if the project will be for specific conditions stipulated in floater finance packages. rehabilitated for persons with physical housing specifically restricted to the or developmental disabilities. However, elderly, such as Section 202. The E. Office of Public and Indian Housing the Section 504 requirements at 24 CFR commenter specifically recommended Comment. One commenter stated that part 8, which use UFAS to measure amending FHA’s Multifamily HUD should establish separate FMRs for
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29358 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
assisted living facilities and allow PHAs HUD agrees that automated payment and new construction of affordable to set payment standards at 120 percent systems will provide the most reliable units. The commenter believes that if of the FMR and/or to move to the 50th and timely payment to owners. PHAs had more flexibility in the use of percentile FMRs. The commenter also However, individual PHAs must initiate Section 8 dollars, the need for stated that HUD should be more flexible such systems with their financial recaptures would be reduced. in considering local data in setting institutions. PHAs lacking capacity to Response. The statutory framework of FMRs rather than rely on expensive and fully develop such systems need to the Section 8 program only allows PHAs complex data surveys and streamline explore partnerships with other PHAs or to use Section 8 funds to provide rental the process for PHAs to receive higher organizations to maximize their abilities assistance on behalf of eligible families. FMRs. in this area. As discussed above, PHAs may, however, use up to 20 Response. Legislation similar to housing assistance payments are percent of the funding authorized by HUD’s legislative proposals for a provided to PHAs through electronic HUD to provide project-based rental Flexible Voucher Program (FVP) transfer on the first business day of each assistance to owners of newly (discussed in Section III of this notice), month. Neither the law (including constructed, rehabilitated, or existing and a public housing Rent regulations) nor the housing assistance housing. Simplification program were recently payment (HAP) contract between the Comment. One commenter proposed introduced as part of S.771 in the PHA and owner gives the owner a right that HUD allow participants in HUD’s Senate. If enacted, these proposals to seek a late payment from HUD. Section 8 Homeownership program to would address the statutory barriers Comment. Several commenters buy two and three family homes and raised by the commenter. Under the expressed concern about the regulations rent out the other units to generate proposed Flexible Voucher Program, a governing inspections of units (see 24 additional income; permit voucher PHA would no longer be required to set CFR 982.305 and 982.405). The subsidy periods to coincide with the payment standards based on FMRs. commenters stated that unit-by-unit term of the mortgage by eliminating the PHAs would have full discretion to inspections delay resident occupancy mandatory time limit; and allow use of establish payment standards for modest from up to 30 days or longer even when a higher separate payment standard for housing using local data as well as done within the required time. The homeownership families. FMRs. industry relies on seamless turnover to Response. The regulations that Comment. One commenter stated that contain overhead costs within tolerable provide the eligible unit must be either HUD should make funding for the limits. The financial implications of a one-unit property or a single dwelling Section 8 administrative fees sufficient such delays are sufficient to deter them unit in a cooperative or a condominium to cover costs. from participating in the program. The ensure that the program only subsidizes Response. The formula for payment of organizations recommend that PHAs be the unit occupied by the family, as administrative fees is statutory. HUD permitted to conduct inspections within opposed to additional units purchased cannot alter the formula or the amount 60 days of move-in. Alternatively, the to generate rental or investment income. established by an appropriations act. PHAs could conduct initial inspections This restriction on the use of the The FVP legislative proposal would of a representative sample of units to homeownership subsidy to the unit allow HUD to alter the formula for ‘‘certify’’ conditions. This process occupied by the family is required payment through rulemaking. would reward owners with well- under current law. Comment. One commenter stated that maintained properties. In implementing the homeownership housing assistance payments are late as Response. The Administration’s FVP option, HUD decided that a time limit a result of appropriation problems, legislative proposal would allow was appropriate for homeownership bureaucratic delays in Washington DC, inspections within 60 days of the assistance because the goal of the and antiquated systems. HUD should provision of initial assistance. program was not simply to defray the continue efforts to provide timely Comment. One commenter stated that family’s expenses, but to foster payments to owners by ensuring that each year vouchers are unused because responsibility and assist the family in PHAs have the ability to make owners are unwilling to participate in ultimately achieving economic self- automated electronic fund transfers to the program because of burdensome sufficiency. HUD also believed that owners. Additionally, HUD should requirements such as HAP contracts, permitting PHAs to set a higher provide technical assistance, funding amendments of landlord leases, and payment standard for homeownership and other support to ensure that all compliance with procedures not families was problematic in that it PHAs have the capacity to utilize normally attendant in conventional would increase program costs and automated payment systems. One housing practices. reduce the number of families assisted commenter stated that since PHAs are Response. The FVP legislative by the voucher program as a whole. not responsible for delays in payments, proposal, if enacted, will provide PHAs These were two outcomes that HUD owners should be able to directly charge the flexibility to design their programs specifically wished to avoid in HUD late penalties. to meet local needs. PHAs will be able implementing the homeownership Response. Housing assistance to enter into HAP contracts option. payments are obligated on a quarterly conditionally with owners before Under the FVP legislative proposal, basis and are electronically transferred inspecting units. This will ensure that all of these decisions would be to a PHA’s bank accounts on the first in tight rental markets program families delegated to the local PHA. The local business day of each month. have a fair opportunity to lease units, PHA would have the administrative Historically, when delays in the passage instead of losing potential units because flexibility to define unit eligibility, of appropriation laws occur HUD has the landlord is unable or unwilling to provide a larger or smaller subsidy to operated under continuing resolutions. hold the units vacant until such time homeowners (balanced against the Therefore, housing assistance payments that the PHA is able to complete the impact on the PHA’s funding and the continue in spite of such delays. HUD’s paperwork. total number of families that the PHA accounting and electronic fund transfer Comment. One commenter stated that could ultimately serve), and eliminate systems are very reliable and have HUD should allow PHAs to use Section the time limit on homeownership functioned well over the years. 8 funds for acquisition, rehabilitation, assistance for all families.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29359
Comment. One commenter urged clearly define ‘‘supportive services.’’ from environmental review reflect a HUD to implement the downpayment With respect to the deconcentration judgment that an activity (1) does not component of the Section 8 requirements, the March 18, 2004, have the potential for significant impact homeownership program. proposed rule deregulates much of the on the human environment and Response. Section 8(y)(7)(A) of the process for attaching project-based therefore is categorically excluded from U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. vouchers to structures. The rule review under the National 1437f(y)) provides that a PHA may provides that HUD will no longer Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and provide assistance to the family in lieu approve a PHA’s intent to project-base (2) would not alter any conditions so as of monthly assistance payments in the its units, a PHA’s unit selection policy to require a review or compliance form of a single grant to be used for the and advertisement, or HAP contract determination under related federal downpayment assistance ‘‘to the extent renewal terms. The public comment environmental laws listed in 24 CFR provided in advance in appropriations period closed on HUD’s project-based 58.5. HUD has already determined that Acts.’’ To date, Congress has not voucher proposed rule on May 17, 2004, one-to-four family home rehabilitation appropriated funding for this purpose and HUD has reviewed and considered is categorically excluded from NEPA and consequently, HUD is unable, under the comments. The rule is in the final review under certain conditions, as current law, to authorize use of the stages of internal review before described in 24 CFR 58.35(a)(3)(i). downpayment grant option. HUD’s FVP issuance. However, such rehabilitation may legislative proposal, however, would require review under the terms of other F. Environmental Requirements allow a PHA to offer the downpayment federal environmental laws or Applicable to HUD Programs grant option without the necessity of authorities, including consultation appropriations specifying downpayment Comment. HUD-funded developments under the National Historic Preservation assistance as one of the eligible should not have environmental Act. HUD does not have authority to activities of the FVP. requirements different or beyond those unilaterally exempt a class of HUD Comment. One commenter stated that imposed on non-HUD-funded actions from environmental review the 15 percent allocation limit should be developments. where a law or authority requires review increased to facilitate the financing of Response. Like other federal agencies, or compliance. HUD regulations do new construction and rehabilitation of HUD is subject to the statutes, executive provide that if a HOME recipient low and moderate-income multifamily orders, and oversight agency regulations carrying out federal environmental housing. Another commenter suggested that impose environmental and historic responsibilities determines that an that PHAs should be allowed to project- preservation review requirements on action is categorically excluded from base more than 20 percent of their federal actions. While HUD favors joint NEPA review and does not, in a vouchers. reviews and use of locally generated particular instance, trigger review under Response. The percentage of funding information, there is no way to avoid the other federal environmental laws that can be project-based is statutory, the separate statutory federal and authorities that action may be and therefore HUD is unable to revise requirements short of legislative change. declared to be exempt from further the limit by regulation. HUD has, however, taken several steps environmental review (see 24 CFR Comment. Three commenters stated to minimize this problem through: (1) 58.35(a)(12)). Risk-based methods are that supportive services, as used in the Seeking increased use of statutory acceptable by HUD’s program for the context of the Section 8 project-based provisions authorizing environmental homeless. voucher program, should be defined by processing by states or units of general regulation. The commenters also local government under 24 CFR part 58 V. Ongoing Review of HUD Regulations expressed concern with the so that localities can control the timing HUD appreciates the time that deconcentration requirements of reviews and combine them with those commenters took to review HUD applicable to the project-based voucher required under state law; (2) providing regulations and submit their comments, program. One commenter claimed the exemptions and categorical exclusions questions, and suggestions to HUD. initial guidance waiver process was for activities having minimal impacts; HUD hopes the commenters find that cumbersome. Another commenter stated (3) issuing guidance for absorbing the responses in this notice have that the 20 percent poverty limit should processing within normal program addressed their comments. The be removed. The third commenter stated operations; and (4) working with commenters raised important issues, that regulations regarding the oversight agencies (the Council on and HUD has already taken action to deconcentration requirements should be Environmental Quality and the respond to these issues and to consider issued. With respect to HUD’s project- Advisory Council on Historic recommended regulatory and statutory based voucher program, another Preservation) on simplifying changes. It is the intention of HUD to commenter stated that the process to requirements and expediting report periodically on its progress in convert tenant-based vouchers to procedures. reviewing its regulations and other project-based vouchers was Comment. One commenter stated that administrative practices with respect to cumbersome. HUD should defer to states, which have barriers they may pose to affordable Response. HUD’s proposed rule on their own requirements for housing. HUD’s review of its regulations project-based vouchers, published in the environmental review. HUD should also is not confined to any specific period. Federal Register on March 18, 2004 (69 exempt one-to-four family home HUD considers this an ongoing process. FR 12950), proposes to deregulate much rehabilitation under the HOME program Therefore, interested members of the of the process for attaching project- and should allow construction for public should submit comments to HUD based vouchers to structures. As housing the homeless under a risk-based as they work with HUD programs, HUD provided in the proposed rule, HUD approach rather than requiring 100 program requirements and regulations will no longer approve a PHA’s intent percent cleanup. and notify HUD of concerns that may to project-base its units, a PHA’s unit Response. Substitution of state not have already been expressed in this selection policy and advertisement or environmental requirements for federal notice or addressed by HUD. HUD HAP contract renewal terms. HUD ones would require major legislative acknowledges that regulatory change is agrees that there is a need to more changes. Full exclusions or exemptions not an expeditious process and statutory
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29360 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
change even less so, but HUD is reviewed by the landholding agencies, landholding agency, and the property committed to removing its own and each agency has transmitted to number. regulatory barriers to affordable housing HUD: (1) Its intention to make the For more information regarding for those regulations that are in fact property available for use to assist the particular properties identified in this determined to be barriers and where it homeless, (2) its intention to declare the Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing is feasible to do so. property excess to the agency’s needs, or sanitary facilities, exact street address), Dated: May 12, 2005. (3) a statement of the reasons that the providers should contact the property cannot be declared excess or appropriate landholding agencies at the A. Bryant Applegate, made available for use as facilities to following addresses: AIR FORCE: Ms. Senior Counsel and Director of America’s assist the homeless. Kathryn M. Halvorson, Director, Air Affordable Communities Initiative. Properties listed as suitable/available Force Real Property Agency, 1700 North [FR Doc. 05–10041 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] will be available exclusively for Moore St., Suite 2300, Arlington, VA BILLING CODE 4210–67–P homeless use for a period of 60 days 2209–2802; (703) 696–5502; COE: Ms. from the date of this Notice. Where Shirley Middleswarth, Army Corps of property is described as for ‘‘off-site use Engineers, Civil Division, Directorate of DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND only’’ recipients of the property will be Real Estate, 441 G Street, NW, URBAN DEVELOPMENT required to relocate the building to their Washington, DC 20314–1000; (202) 761– [Docket No. FR–4980–N–20T] own site at their own expense. 7425; ENERGY: Mr. Andy Duran, Homeless assistance providers Department of Energy, Office of Federal Property Suitable as Facilities interested in any such property should Engineering & Construction To Assist the Homeless send a written expression of interest to Management, ME–90, 1000 HHS, addressed to Heather Ranson, AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Independence Ave, SW., Washington, Division of Property Management, Secretary for Community Planning and DC 20585; (202) 586–4548; GSA: Mr. Program Support Center, HHS, room Development, HUD. Biran K. Polly, Assistant Commissioner, 5B–17, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, General Services Administration, Office ACTION: Notice. MD 20857; (301) 443–2265. (This is not of Property Disposal, 18th and F Streets, SUMMARY: This Notice identifies a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the NW., Washington, DC 20405; NAVY: unutilized, underutilized, excess, and interested provider an application Mr. Charles C. Cocks, Department of the surplus Federal property reviewed by packet, which will include instructions Navy, Real Estate Policy Division, Naval HUD for suitability for possible use to for completing the application. In order Facilities Engineering Command, assist the homeless. to maximize the opportunity to utilize a Washington Navy Yard, 1322 Patterson suitable property, providers should FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ave., SE., Suite 1000, Washington, DC submit their written expressions of Kathy Ezzel, room 7622, Department of 20374–5065; (202) 685–9200; (These are interest as soon as possible. For Housing and Urban Development, 451 not toll-free numbers). complete details concerning the Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC processing of applications, the reader is Dated: May 12, 2005. 20410; telephone (202) 708–1234; TTY encouraged to refer to the interim rule Mark R. Johnston, number for the hearing- and speech- governing this program, 24 CFR part Director, Office of Special Needs, Assistance impaired (202) 708–2565 (these 581. Programs. telephone numbers are not toll-free), or For properties listed as suitable/to be TITLE V, FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY call the toll-free Title V information line excess, that property may, if PROGRAM FEDERAL REGISTER REPORT at 1–800–927–7588. subsequently accepted as excess by FOR 5/20/2005 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In GSA, be made available for use by the Suitable/Available Properties accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and homeless in accordance with applicable section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney law, subject to screening for other Buildings (by State) Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Federal use. At the appropriate time, Colorado 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing HUD will publish the property in a Bunkhouse #3540 this Notice to identify Federal buildings Notice showing it as either suitable/ Forest Road 560 and other real property that HUD has available or suitable/unavailable. Section 32 reviewed for suitability for use to assist For properties listed as suitable/ Bailey Co: Park CO 80421– the homeless. The properties were unavailable, the landholding agency has Landholding Agency: GSA reviewed using information provided to decided that the property cannot be Property Number: 54200520012 HUD by Federal landholding agencies declared excess or made available for Status: Excess Comment: 560 sq. ft., most recent use— regarding unutilized and underutilized use to assist the homeless, and the storage, no sanitary facilities/potable buildings and real property controlled property will not be available. water/power by such agencies or by GSA regarding Properties listed as unsuitable will GAS Number: 7–A–CO–0657 its inventory of excess or surplus not be made available for any other Georgia Federal property. This Notice is also purpose for 20 days from the date of this published in order to comply with the Notice. Homeless assistance providers Bldg. W0–3 West Point Lake December 12, 1988 Court Order in interested in a review by HUD of the West Point Co: GA 31833– National Coalition for the Homeless v. determination of unsuitability should Landholding Agency: COE Veterans Administration, No. 88–2503– call the toll free information line at 1– Property Number: 31200520001 OG (D.D.C.). 800–927–7588 for detailed instructions Status: Unutilized Properties reviewed are listed in this or write a letter to Mark Johnston at the Comment: 7 x 7 gatehouse, off-site use only Notice according to the following address listed at the beginning of this Missouri categories: Suitable/available, suitable/ Notice. Included in the request for Social Security Building unavailable, suitable/to be excess, and review should be the property address 123 Main Street unsuitable. The properties listed in the (including zip code), the date of Joplin Co: Jasper MO 64801– three suitable categories have been publication in the Federal Register, the Landholding Agency: GSA
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29361
Property Number: 54200520013 Hartwell Co: GA 30643– Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39507– Status: Excess Landholding Agency: COE Landholding Agency: Air Force Comment: 10,322 sq. ft., needs repair, Property Number: 31200520003 Property Number: 18200520005 possible asbestos/lead paint, most recent Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized use—office, tenants to relocate within two Reason: Extensive deterioration Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or years Hawaii explosive material, Secured Area GSA Number: 7–G–MO–0674 Bldg. 3389 Bldg. 38 South Dakota Hickam AFB ANG CRTC Residence, Tract 139 Hickam Co: HI Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39507– 101 Laurel Avenue Landholding Agency: Air Force Landholding Agency: Air Force Oahe Dam/Lake Oahe Proj. Property Number: 18200520002 Property Number: 18200520006 Pierre Co: SD 57501– Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: COE Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Property Number: 31200520008 deterioration explosive material, Secured Area Status: Excess Idaho Montana Comment: 996 sq. ft., off-site use only Bldg. CF633 Bldg. 546 Residence, Tract 302 Idaho Natl Laboratory Malmstrom AFB 107 E. Main Street Scoville Co: Butte ID 83415– Cascade Co: MT 59402– Oahe Dam/Lake Oahe Proj. Landholding Agency: Energy Landholding Agency: Air Force Pierre Co: SD 57532– Property Number: 41200520005 Property Number: 18200520007 Landholding Agency: COE Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Property Number: 31200520009 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Excess Illinois explosive material, Secured Area Comment: 1096 sq. ft., off-site use only Bldg. 3101 New York Residence, Trace 525 Capital MAP, DCFT 108 East 7th Ave. Bldg. 276 Springfield Co: Sangamon IL 62707– Oahe Dam/Lake Oahe Proj. 106th RQW Landholding Agency: Air Force Pierre Co: SD 57532– Westhamton Beach Co: Suffolk NY 11978– Property Number: 18200520003 Landholding Agency: COE Landholding Agency: Air Force Status: Excess Property Number: 31200520010 Property Number: 18200520008 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Excess Status: Excess explosive material, Secured Area Comment: 1568 sq. ft., off-site use only Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 144–147 South Carolina Suitable/Unavailable Properties FERMILAB Batavia Co: DuPage IL 60510– Bldg. 277 Land (by State) Landholding Agency: Energy McEntire Air National Station New Mexico Property Number: 41200520003 Eastover Co: Richland SC 29044– Sites 69 & 70 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Air Force Conchas Lake Reasons: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 18200520009 San Miguel Co: NM Bldg. 325C Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: COE Argonne National Laboratory Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 31200520006 Argonne Co: DuPage IL 60439– deterioration Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Energy Bldg. 5 Comment: 1⁄2 acre lots, closest town is Property Number: 41200520004 J. Strom Thurmond Project approximately 32 miles away Status: Excess Clarks Hill Co: McCormick SC 29821– Reasons: Secured Area Landholding Agency: COE Unsuitable Properties Iowa Property Number: 31200520007 Buildings (by State) Status: Unutilized RTHBUN–79326 Reason: Extensive deterioration California Buck Creek Park Bldg. 11237 Centerville Co: Appanoose IA 52544– Tennessee Vandenberg AFB Landholding Agency: COE 17 Buildings Lompoc Co: Santa Barbara CA 93437– Property Number: 31200520004 Naval Support Activity Landholding Agency: Air Force Status: Excess Mid-South Property Number: 18200520001 Reasons: Extensive deterioration Millington Co: TN 38054– Status: Unutilized Kansas Location: 892–893, 1704, 1487, 2020, 2035, Reason: Secured Area Bldgs. L37, L38 2044–2045, 2071, 2074, 2079–2082, 2094, Bldgs. 4 & 15 Lucas Park 2096, 2063 Naval Submarine Base Sylvan Grove Co: KS 67481– Landholding Agency: Navy Point Loma Co: CA Landholding Agency: COE Property Number: 77200520012 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 31200520005 Status: Excess Property Number: 77200520014 Status: Excess Reason: Secured Area Status: Unutilized Reasons: Extensive deterioration Land (by State) Reason: Extensive deterioration Mississippi California Georgia Bldg. 6 Trailer Space Pumphouse ANG CRTC Naval Base Carters Lake Gulfport Co. Harrison MS 39507– San Diego Co: CA Oakman Co: GA 30732– Landholding Agency: Air Force Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: COE Property Number: 18200520004 Property Number: 77200520013 Property Number: 31200520002 Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Reason: Secured Area Reason: Extensive deterioration explosive material, Secured Area Bldgs. ASBC01, ASBC02 Bldgs. 19–22 [FR Doc. 05–9832 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Asbury Park ANG CRTC BILLING CODE 4210–29–M
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29362 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species. Bureau of Land Management Fish and Wildlife Service Applicant: Richard A. Bonander, Casper, WY, PRT–102452. Meeting of the California Desert Receipt of Applications for Permit District Advisory Council The applicant requests a permit to AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, import the sport-hunted trophy of one AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus Interior. ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications pygargus) culled from a captive herd ACTION: Notice of public meeting. for permit. maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, in SUMMARY: The public is invited to for the purpose of enhancement of the accordance with Public Laws 92–463 comment on the following applications survival of the species. and 94–579, that the California Desert to conduct certain activities with Applicant: Stephen H. McKelvain, District Advisory Council to the Bureau endangered species and marine Arlington, VA, PRT–103052. of Land Management, U.S. Department mammals. The applicant requests a permit to of the Interior, will meet in formal DATES: Written data, comments or import the sport-hunted trophy of one session on Friday, June 24, 2005, from requests must be received by June 20, cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) taken in 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Saturday, June 25 2005. Namibia, for the purpose of from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. The meeting will enhancement of the survival of the be held in the Ontario Airport Hilton ADDRESSES: Documents and other species. information submitted with these Hotel, located at 700 North Haven Applicant: Carl E. Beal, III, Blackwell, applications are available for review, Avenue, in Ontario, California. TX, PRT–098182. Tentative agenda items include the subject to the requirements of the following: Privacy Act and Freedom of Information The applicant requests a permit to authorize interstate and foreign —Reports by Council members, the Act, by any party who submits a written request for a copy of such documents commerce, export and cull of excess District Manager and five field office male red lechwe (Kobus leche) from his managers. within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife captive herd for the purpose of —Update on the West Mojave Plan. enhancement of the survival of the —Discussions regarding the formation Service, Division of Management species. This notification covers of a technical review team (TRT) to Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, activities conducted by the applicant evaluate the special use permit Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203; over a period of five years. process for events held in the fax 703/358–2281. California Desert District. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marine Mammals —Discussions regarding the formation Division of Management Authority, The public is invited to comment on of a TRT for Dumont Dunes and a telephone 703/358–2104. the following applications for a permit TRT for the El Mirage Dry Lake SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to conduct certain activities with marine Recreation Area. Endangered Species mammals. The applications were —Public comment for items not on the submitted to satisfy requirements of the agenda. The public is invited to comment on Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, All Desert District Advisory Council the following applications for a permit as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361, et seq.), meetings are open to the public. Time to conduct certain activities with and the regulations governing marine for public comment may be made endangered species. This notice is mammals (50 CFR part 18). Written available by the Council Chairman provided pursuant to Section 10(c) of data, comments, or requests for copies during the presentation of various the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as of the complete applications or requests agenda items, and is scheduled at the amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.). for a public hearing on these end of the meeting for topics not on the Written data, comments, or requests for applications should be submitted to the agenda. copies of these complete applications Director (address above). Anyone Written comments may be filed in should be submitted to the Director requesting a hearing should give advance of the meeting for the (address above). specific reasons why a hearing would be California Desert District Advisory Applicant: James R. Ake, Dunkirk, MD, appropriate. The holding of such a Council, c/o Bureau of Land PRT–100021. hearing is at the discretion of the Management, Public Affairs Office, The applicant requests a permit to Director. 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos, import the sport-hunted trophy of one Applicant: Salvatore Cucorullo, Moreno Valley, California 92553. male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus Washingtonville, NY, PRT–102062. Written comments also are accepted at pygargus) culled from a captive herd the time of the meeting and, if copies The applicant requests a permit to maintained under the management are provided to the recorder, will be import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) program of the Republic of South Africa, incorporated into the minutes. sport hunted from the Northern Beaufort for the purpose of enhancement of the Sea polar bear population in Canada for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: survival of the species. personal, noncommercial use. Doran Sanchez, BLM California Desert Applicant: Craig T. Boddington, Applicant: James Weyand, Bloomsburg, District Public Affairs Specialist (951) Templeton, CA, PRT–102421. PA, PRT–102654. 697–5220. The applicant requests a permit to The applicant requests a permit to Dated: May 12, 2005. import the sport-hunted trophy of one import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) Linda Hansen, male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus sport hunted from the Southern District Manager. pygargus) culled from a captive herd Beaufort Sea polar bear population in [FR Doc. 05–10092 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] maintained under the management Canada for personal, noncommercial BILLING CODE 4310–40–P program of the Republic of South Africa, use.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29363
Applicant: John J. Keslar Rector, PA, and ground effects such as faulting or Regional Director, Pacific Regional PRT–102694. landslides. The USGS may use the Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2800 The applicant requests a permit to information to provide qualitative, Cottage Way, Sacramento, California import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) quantitative, or graphical descriptions of 95825. Please include your name, return sport hunted from the Southern earthquake damage. address and caption, ‘‘DEIS Scoping Beaufort Sea polar bear population in Estimated Completion Time: 6 Comments, Enterprise Rancheria, 40 Canada for personal, noncommercial minutes. Acre Fee-to-Trust Casino/Hotel Project, use. Estimated Annual Number of Yuba County, California,’’ on the first Respondents: 100,000. page of your written comments. Dated: May 6, 2005. Frequency: After each earthquake. The public scoping meeting will be Monica Farris, Estimated Annual Burden Hours: held at the Elk’s Lodge, 920 D Street, Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, 10,000 hours. Marysville, California 95901–5322. Division of Management Authority. Affected Public: The general public. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John [FR Doc. 05–10096 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] For Further Information Contact: To Rydzik, (916) 978–6042. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P obtain copies of the survey, contact the Bureau clearance officer, U.S. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 40 Geological Survey, 807 National Center, acre project site is located 4 miles DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, Reston, southeast of the Community of Virginia 20192, telephone (703) 648– Olivehurst, California, near the Geological Survey 7313, or go to the Web site (http:// intersection of Forty Mile Road and pasadena.wr.usgs.gov/shake/). State Route 65, in unincorporated Yuba Request for Public Comments on County. The site is currently Extension of Existing Information Dated: May 16, 2005. undeveloped and in use for hay farming. Collection To Be Submitted to OMB for P. Patrick Leahy, Surrounding land uses include Review Under the Paperwork Associate Director for Geology. agriculture, open space and Reduction Act [FR Doc. 05–10152 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] entertainment. A request extending the information BILLING CODE 4310–47–M The proposed action consists of the collection described below will be placing of a 40 acre parcel, currently privately owned, into federal trust status submitted to the Office of Management DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR and Budget (OMB) for approval under and the construction of a casino-hotel project, for the benefit of the Enterprise the provisions of the Paperwork Bureau of Indian Affairs Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Rancheria. The proposed construction Copies of the proposed collection may Notice of Intent To Prepare an would consist of a 207,760 square-foot be obtained by contacting the USGS Environmental Impact Statement for gaming facility and a 107,125 square- Clearance Officer at the phone number the Proposed Enterprise Rancheria foot hotel on the 40 acre parcel. The listed below. Comments on the proposal Fee-to-Trust Transfer and Casino-Hotel two-story gaming facility would include should be made within 60 days to the Project, Yuba County, CA a casino floor, food and beverage areas Bureau Clearance Officer, U.S. (including a buffet, gourmet restaurant, AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Geological Survey, 807 National Center, and bar), meeting space, guest support Interior. Reston, VA 20192. services, offices and security area. The As required by OMB regulations at 5 ACTION: Notice. eight-story hotel would contain 170 rooms (152 standard rooms and 18 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), the USGS solicits SUMMARY: This notice advises the public specific public comments as to: suites) and would feature a lobby area, that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) retail space, exercise room and arcade. 1. Whether the collection of as lead agency, with the Estom Yumeka information is necessary for the proper The BIA previously prepared an Maidu Tribe (Enterprise Rancheria) as a Environmental Assessment (EA) that performance of the functions on the cooperating agency, intends to gather bureaus, including whether the analyzed the potential environmental information necessary for preparing an effects of the proposed action. The EA information will have practical utility; Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 2. The accuracy of the bureau’s was made available for public for a proposed 40 acre fee-to-trust comments in July 2004. Upon estimate of the burden of the collection transfer and casino and hotel project to of information, including the validity of consideration of the public and agency be located in Yuba County, California. comments received during the 30-day the methodology and assumptions used; The purpose of the proposed action is 3. The quality, utility, and clarity of public comment period, the BIA, in to help provide a land base for, and the information to be collected; and consultation with the Enterprise 4. How to minimize the burden of the address the socio-economic needs of the Rancheria, decided to prepare an EIS to collection of information on those who Enterprise Rancheria. This notice also further analyze the environmental are to respond, including the use of announces a public scoping meeting to effects which may result from the appropriate automated, electronic, identify potential issues, concerns and proposed action. mechanical, or other forms of alternatives to be considered in the EIS. Areas of environmental concern to be information technology. DATES: Written comments on the scope addressed in the EIS include land use, Title: Earthquake Report. and implementation of this proposal geology and soils, water resources, OMB Approval No: 1028–0048. must arrive by June 20, 2005. The public agricultural resources, biological Summary: The collection of scoping meeting, to be co-hosted by the resources, cultural resources, mineral information referred herein applies to a BIA and the Enterprise Rancheria, will resources, paleontological resources, World-Wide Web site questionnaire that be held June 9, 2005, from 6 p.m. to 9 traffic and transportation, noise, air permits individuals to report on the p.m., or until the last public comment quality, public health/environmental effects of the shaking from an is received. hazards, public services and utilities, earthquake—on themselves personally, ADDRESSES: You may mail or hand carry hazardous waste and materials, socio- buildings, other man-made structures, written comments to Clay Gregory, economics, environmental justice, and
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29364 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
visual resources/aesthetics. In addition ACTION: Notice of correction. E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, to the proposed action, a reasonable subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part range of alternatives, including a no- SUMMARY: In Federal Coal Exploration 207). License Application, WAOR 60818, action alternative, will be analyzed in EFFECTIVE DATE: May 9, 2005. the EIS. The range of issues and published February 25, 2005, as FR Doc. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: alternatives may be expanded based on 05–3629, make the following correction: Mary Messer (202–205–3193), Office of comments received during the scoping On page 9377, T. 14 N., R. 10 W., Sec. 1 1 Investigations, U.S. International Trade process. 8, E ⁄2SW ⁄4., should read T. 14 N., R. 1 1 1 Commission, 500 E Street SW., W., Sec 8, E ⁄2NW ⁄4. Public Comment Availability Any party electing to participate in Washington, DC 20436. Hearing- Comments, including names and this exploration program shall notify, in impaired persons can obtain addresses of respondents, will be writing, both the Oregon/Washington information on this matter by contacting available for public review at the BIA State Director, Bureau of Land the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– address shown in the ADDRESSES Management at the address above and 205–1810. Persons with mobility section, during business hours, 8 a.m. to the Transalta Centralia Mining LLC, at impairments who will need special 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 913 Big Hanaford Road, Centralia, assistance in gaining access to the except holidays. Individual respondents Washington 98531. Such written notice Commission should contact the Office may request confidentiality. If you wish must refer to serial number WAOR– of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. us to withhold your name and/or 60818 and be received no later than General information concerning the address from public review or from June 20, 2005, or 10 calendar days after Commission may also be obtained by disclosure under the Freedom of the last publication of this notice in the accessing its Internet server (http:// Information Act, you must state this Centralia Chronicle newspaper, www.usitc.gov). The public record for prominently at the beginning of your whichever is later. This notice will be these reviews may be viewed on the written comment. Such requests will be published once a week for two (2) Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) honored to the extent allowed by the consecutive weeks in the newspaper. at http://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 9, law. We will not, however, consider Dated: May 9, 2005. anonymous comments. All submissions 2005, the Commission determined that John S. Styduhar, from organizations or businesses, and it should proceed to full reviews in the from individuals identifying themselves Acting Chief, Branch of Land & Mineral subject five-year reviews pursuant to Resources, Oregon/Washington. as representatives or officials of section 751(c)(5) of the Act. The organizations or businesses, will be [FR Doc. 05–10093 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Commission found that both the made available for public inspection in BILLING CODE 4310–33–P domestic and respondent interested their entirety. party group responses to its notice of institution (70 FR 5471, February 2, Authority INTERNATIONAL TRADE 2005) were adequate. A record of the This notice is published in COMMISSION Commissioners’ votes, the accordance with sections 1501.7, 1506.6 [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–302 and 731– Commission’s statement on adequacy, and 1508.22 of the Council of TA–454 (Second Review)] and any individual Commissioner’s Environmental Quality Regulations (40 statements will be available from the CFR Parts 1500 through 1508) Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon Office of the Secretary and at the implementing the procedural From Norway Commission’s Web site. requirements of the National Authority: These reviews are being AGENCY: Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as United States International conducted under authority of title VII of the amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), Trade Commission. Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published Department of the Interior Manual (516 ACTION: Notice of Commission pursuant to section 207.62 of the DM 1–6), and is in the exercise of determinations to conduct full five-year Commission’s rules. authority delegated to the Principal reviews concerning the countervailing By order of the Commission. Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian duty and antidumping duty orders on Issued: May 17, 2005. Affairs by 209 DM 8.1. fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon from Marilyn R. Abbott, Dated: May 2, 2005. Norway. Secretary to the Commission. Michael D. Olsen, SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives [FR Doc. 05–10103 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary— notice that it will proceed with full BILLING CODE 7020–02–P Indian Affairs. reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of [FR Doc. 05–10138 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. BILLING CODE 4310–W7–U 1675(c)(5)) to determine whether INTERNATIONAL TRADE revocation of the countervailing duty COMMISSION and antidumping duty orders on fresh [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–465, 466, and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR and chilled Atlantic salmon from 468 (Second Review)] Bureau of Land Management Norway would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material Sodium Thiosulfate From China, [OR–936–1320–FL; HAG–05–0116; WAOR– injury within a reasonably foreseeable Germany, and the United Kingdom 60818] time. A schedule for the reviews will be AGENCY: United States International Notice of Invitation—Federal Coal established and announced at a later Trade Commission. Exploration License Application, date. For further information concerning ACTION: Termination of five-year WAOR 60818; Correction the conduct of these reviews and rules reviews. of general application, consult the AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Commission’s Rules of Practice and SUMMARY: The subject five-year reviews Interior. Procedure, part 201, subparts A through were initiated in February 2005 to
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29365
determine whether revocation of the 4. Inv. Nos. 731–TA–1082 and 1083 DATES: Written comments must be antidumping duty orders on sodium (Final) (Chlorinated Isocyanurates from submitted to the office listed in the thiosulfate from China, Germany, and China and Spain)—briefing and vote. addressee’s section below on or before the United Kingdom would be likely to (The Commission is currently scheduled July 19, 2005. lead to continuation or recurrence of to transmit its determination and ADDRESSES: Christine D. Kulick, U.S. material injury to a domestic industry. Commissioners’ opinions to the Department of Labor, Employment and On May 9, 2005, the Department of Secretary of Commerce on or before Training Administration, Room S–4231, Commerce published notice that it was June 22, 2005.) 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., revoking the orders effective March 7, 5. Outstanding action jackets: None. Washington, DC 20210: (202) 693–3045 2005, because ‘‘the domestic interested In accordance with Commission (voice) (This is not a toll free number); parties did not participate in these policy, subject matter listed above, not (202) 693–7755 (TTY); (202) 693–3015 sunset reviews’’ (70 FR 24393). disposed of at the scheduled meeting, (Fax); or e-mail: Accordingly, pursuant to section 751(c) may be carried over to the agenda of the [email protected]. of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. following meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1675(c)), the subject reviews are Issued: May 18, 2005. terminated. By order of the Commission. I. Background EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 2005. Marilyn R. Abbott, The purpose of this notice is to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Secretary to the Commission. provide interested parties with the Robert Carpenter (202–205–3172), [FR Doc. 05–10175 Filed 5–18–05; 10:08 am] planning guidance for use by States in Office of Investigations, U.S. BILLING CODE 7020–02–P submitting two years of their Strategic International Trade Commission, 500 E Five-Year State Plan for Title I of the Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and the Wagner Peyser Act. The Planning Hearing-impaired individuals are DEPARTMENT OF LABOR advised that information on this matter Guidance and Instructions provide a can be obtained by contacting the Employment and Training framework for the collaboration of Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– Administration Governors, Local Elected Officials, 205–1810. Persons with mobility businesses and other partners to impairments who will need special State Unified Plan Planning Guidance continue the development of workforce assistance in gaining access to the for State Unified Plans Submitted investment systems that address Commission should contact the Office Under Section 501 of the Workforce customer needs, deliver integrated, user- of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. Investment Act of 1998 (WIA): friendly services; and are accountable to General information concerning the Comment Request the customers and the public. Commission may also be obtained by II. Review Focus accessing its Internet server (http:// ACTION: Notice. www.usitc.gov). The Department of Labor is SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as particularly interested in comments Authority: These reviews are being part of its continuing effort to reduce which: terminated under authority of title VII of the paperwork and respondent burden • Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published Evaluate whether the proposed pursuant to section 207.69 of the conducts a pre-clearance consultation collection of information is necessary Commission’s rules (19 CFR 207.69). program to provide the general public for the proper performance of the and Federal agencies with an functions of the agency, including Issued: May 17, 2005. opportunity to comment on proposed whether the information will have By order of the Commission. and/or continuing collections of practical utility; Marilyn R. Abbott, information in accordance with the • Evaluate the accuracy of the Secretary to the Commission. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 agency’s estimate of the burden of the [FR Doc. 05–10104 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] (PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(A)]. This proposed collection of information, BILLING CODE 7020–02–P program helps to ensure that requested including the validity of the data can be provided in the desired methodology and assumptions used; format, reporting burden (time and • Enhance the quality, utility, and INTERNATIONAL TRADE financial resources) is minimized, clarity of the information to be COMMISSION collection instruments are clearly collected; and understood, and the impact of collection • Minimize the burden of the [USITC SE–05–020] requirements on respondents can be collection of information on those who Government in the Sunshine Act properly assessed. Currently, the are to respond, including through the Meeting Notice Employment and Training use of appropriate automated, Administration, Office of Workforce electronic, mechanical, or other AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United Investment is soliciting comments technological collection techniques or States International Trade Commission. concerning the proposed extension of other forms of information technology, TIME AND DATE: June 3, 2005 at 11 a.m. the collection for the Planning Guidance e.g., permitting electronic submissions and Instructions for Submission of the of responses. PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., State Unified Plan Planning Guidance Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: for State Unified Plans submitted under III. Current Actions (202) 205–2000. Section 501 of the Workforce Type of Review: Extension without STATUS: Open to the public. Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). A copy change. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: of the proposed information collection Agency: Employment and Training 1. Agenda for future meetings: None. request (ICR) can be obtained by Administration. 2. Minutes. contacting the office listed below in the Title: State Unified Plan Planning 3. Ratification List. addressee section of this notice. Guidance for State Unified Plans
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29366 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
submitted under Section 501 of the Strategic Five Year State Plan for Title III. Current Actions Workforce Investment Act of 1998 I of the Workforce Investment Act of Type of Review: Extension without (WIA). 1998 (WIA) and the Wagner Peyser Act. change. OMB Number: 1205–0407. A copy of the proposed information Agency: Employment and Training Affected Public: State, Local, or collection request (ICR) can be obtained Administration. Tribal. by contacting the office listed below in Title: Planning Guidance and Total Respondents: 59. the addressee section of this notice. Instructions for Submission of the Number of Responses: 59. DATES: Written comments must be Strategic Five Year State Plan for Title Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,475. submitted to the office listed in the I of the Workforce Investment Act of Total Burden Cost (Capital/Startup): addressee’s section below on or before 1998 (WIA) and the Wagner Peyser Act. $0. July 19, 2005. OMB Number: 1205–0398. Total Burden Cost (Operating/ Affected Public: State, Local, or Maintaining): $231.00 (mailing hard ADDRESSES: Christine D. Kulick, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Tribal. copy of State Plan). Total Respondents: 59. Comments submitted in response to Training Administration, Room S–4231, Number of Responses: 59. this comment request will be 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,475. summarized and/or included in the Washington, DC 20210: (202) 693–3045 Total Burden Cost (Capital/Startup): request for Office of Management and (voice) (This is not a toll free number); $0. Budget approval of the information (202) 693–7755 (TTY); (202) 693–3015 Total Burden Cost (Operating/ collection request; they will also (Fax); or e-mail: Maintaining): $231.00 (mailing hard become a matter of public record. [email protected]. copy of State Plan). Dated: May 16, 2005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments submitted in response to Gay Gilbert, this comment request will be I. Background summarized and/or included in the Administrator, Employment & Training Administration Office of Workforce The purpose of this notice is to request for Office of Management and Investment. provide interested parties with the Budget approval of the information [FR Doc. E5–2557 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] planning guidance for use by States in collection request; they will also become a matter of public record. BILLING CODE 4510–30–P submitting two years of their Strategic Five-Year State Plan for Title I of the Dated: May 16, 2005. Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and Gay Gilbert, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR the Wagner Peyser Act. The Planning Administrator, Employment & Training Guidance and Instructions provide a Administration, Office of Workforce Employment and Training framework for the collaboration of Investment. Administration Governors, Local Elected Officials, [FR Doc. E5–2558 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] businesses and other partners to BILLING CODE 4510–30–P Planning Guidance and Instructions continue the development of workforce for Submission of the Strategic Five investment systems that address Year State Plan for Title I of the customer needs, deliver integrated, user- DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Workforce Investment Act of 1998 friendly services; and are accountable to (WIA) and the Wagner Peyser Act: the customers and the public. Employment Standards Administration Comment Request II. Review Focus Minimum Wages for Federal and ACTION: Notice. The Department of Labor is Federally Assisted Construction; General Wage Determination Decisions SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as particularly interested in comments part of its continuing effort to reduce which: General wage determination decisions • paperwork and respondent burden Evaluate whether the proposed of the Secretary of Labor are issued in conducts a pre-clearance consultation collection of information is necessary accordance with applicable law and are program to provide the general public for the proper performance of the based on the information obtained by and Federal agencies with an functions of the agency, including the Department of Labor from its study opportunity to comment on proposed whether the information will have of local wage conditions and data made and/or continuing collections of practical utility; available from other sources. They information in accordance with the • Evaluate the accuracy of the specify the basic hourly wage rates and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 agency’s estimate of the burden of the fringe benefits which are determined to (PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(A)]. This proposed collection of information, be prevailing for the described class of program helps to ensure that requested including the validity of the laborers and mechanics employed on data can be provided in the desired methodology and assumptions used; construction projects of a similar format, reporting burden (time and • Enhance the quality, utility, and character and in the localities specified financial resources) is minimized, clarity of the information to be therein. collection instruments are clearly collected; and The determinations in these decisions understood, and the impact of collection • Minimize the burden of the of prevailing rates and fringe benefits requirements on respondents can be collection of information on those who have been made in accordance with 29 properly assessed. Currently, the are to respond, including through the CFR Part 1, by authority of the Secretary Employment and Training use of appropriate automated, of Labor pursuant to the provisions of Administration, Office of Workforce electronic, mechanical, or other the Davis-Bacon Act of March 3, 1931, Investment is soliciting comments technological collection techniques or as amended (46 Stat. 1494, as amended, concerning the proposed extension of other forms of information technology, 40 U.S.C. 276a) and of other Federal the collection for the Planning Guidance e.g., permitting electronic submissions statues referred to in 29 CFR Part 1, and Instructions for Submission of the of responses. Appendix, as well as such additional
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29367
statutes as may from time to time be Modification to General Wage AK20030003 (Jun. 13, 2005) enacted containing provisions for the Determination Decisions AK20030006 (Jun. 13, 2005) payment of wages determined to be The number of decisions listed to the Volume VI prevailing by the Secretary of Labor in Government Printing Office document accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act. California entitled ‘‘General Wage Determinations CA20030029 (Jun. 13, 2005) The prevailing rates and fringe benefits Issued Under the David-Bacon and determined in these decisions shall, in related Acts’’ being modified are listed General Wage Determination accordance with the provisions of the by Volume and State. Dates of Publication foregoing statutes, constitute the publication in the Federal Register are minimum wages payable on Federal and in parentheses following the decision General wage determinations issued federally assisted construction projects being modified. under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts, to laborers and mechanics of the including those notes above, may be specified classes engaged on contract found in the Government Printing Office Volume I work of the character and in the (GPO) document entitled ‘‘General Wage localities described therein. Connecticut Determinations Issued Under The Davis- Good cause is hereby found for not CT20030001 (Jun. 13, 2003) CT20030004 (Jun. 13, 2003) Bacon And Related Acts’’. This utilizing notice and public comment New York publication is available at each of the 50 procedure thereon prior to the issuance NY20030003 (Jun. 13, 2003) Regional Government Depository of these determinations as prescribed in NY20030004 (Jun. 13, 2003) Libraries and many of the 1,400 5 U.S.C. 553 and not providing for delay NY20030010 (Jun. 13, 2003) Government Depository Libraries across in the effective date as prescribed in that NY20030013 (Jun. 13, 2003) the country. section, because the necessity to issue NY20030014 (Jun. 13, 2003) current construction industry wage NY20030015 (Jun. 13, 2003) General wage determinations issued determinations frequently and in large NY20030016 (Jun. 13, 2003) under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts volume causes procedures to be NY20030018 (Jun. 13, 2003) are available electronically at no cost on NY20030020 (Jun. 13, 2003) the Government Printing Office site at impractical and contrary to the public NY20030022 (Jun. 13, 2003) interest. NY20030025 (Jun. 13, 2003) http://www.access.gpo.gov/davisbacon. General wage determination NY20030026 (Jun. 13, 2003) They are also available electronically by decisions, and modifications and NY20030031 (Jun. 13, 2003) subscription to the David-Bacon Online supersedeas decisions thereto, contain NY20030033 (Jun. 13, 2003) Service (http:// no expiration dates and are effective NY20030039 (Jun. 13, 2003) davisbacon.fedworld.gov) of the from the date of notice in the Federal NY20030040 (Jun. 13, 2003) National Technical Information Service Register, or on the date written notice NY20030041 (Jun. 13, 2003) (NTIS) of the U.S. Department of NY20030045 (Jun. 13, 2003) is received by the agency, whichever is NY20030048 (Jun. 13, 2003) Commerce at 1–800–363–2068. This earlier. These decisions are to be used NY20030049 (Jun. 13, 2003) subscription offers value-added features in accordance with the provisions of 29 NY20030066 (Jun. 13, 2003) such as electronic delivery of modified CFR Parts 1 and 5. Accordingly, the NY20030071 (Jun. 13, 2003) wage decisions directly to the user’s applicable decision, together with any NY20030075 (Jun. 13, 2003) desktop, the ability to access prior wage modifications issued, must be made a Volume II decisions issued during the year, part of every contract for performance of extensive Help desk Support, etc. the described work within the None geographic area indicated as required by Volume III Hard-copy subscriptions may be purchased from: Superintendent of an applicable Federal prevailing wage None law and 29 CFR Part 5. The wage rates Documents, U.S. Government Printing and fringe benefits, notice of which is Volume IV Office, Washington, DC 20402. (202) published herein, and which are Indiana 512–1800. contained in the Government Printing IN20030001 (Jun. 13, 2003) When ordering hard-copy IN20030006 (Jun. 13, 2003) Office (GPO) document entitled subscription(s), be sure to specify the ‘‘General Wage Determinations Issued Volume V State(s) of interest, since subscriiptions Under The Davis-Bacon And Related Iowa may be ordered for any or all of the six Acts,’’ shall be the minimum paid by IA20030003 (Jun. 13, 2005) separate volumes, arranged by State. contractors and subcontractors to IA20030005 (Jun. 13, 2005) Subscriptions include an annual edition laborers and mechanics. IA20030013 (Jun. 13, 2005) (issued in January or February) which IA20030019 (Jun. 13, 2005) Any person, organization, or includes all current general wage governmental agency having an interest IA20030029 (Jun. 13, 2005) IA20030032 (Jun. 13, 2005) determinations for the States covered by in the rates determined as prevailing is IA20030038 (Jun. 13, 2005) each volume. Throughout the remainder encouraged to submit wage rate and IA20030047 (Jun. 13, 2005) of the year, regular weekly updates will fringe benefit information for IA20030054 (Jun. 13, 2005) be distributed to subscribers. consideration by the Department. IA20030056 (Jun. 13, 2005) Further information and self- IA20030059 (Jun. 13, 2005) Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of explanatory forms for the purpose of IA20030060 (Jun. 13, 2005) May, 2005. submitting this data may be obtained by Missouri John Frank, MO20030012 (Jun. 13, 2005) writing to the U.S. Department of Labor, Acting Chief, Branch of Construction Wage MO20030053 (Jun. 13, 2005) Employment Standards Administration, Determinations. Wage and Hour Division, Division of Volume VI [FR Doc. 05–9840 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Wage Determinations, 200 Constitution Alaska BILLING CODE 4510–27–M Avenue, NW., Room S–3014, AK20030001 (Jun. 13, 2005) Washington, DC 20210. AK20030002 (Jun. 13, 2005)
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29368 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION should undertake such rulemaking proceedings. Wage and Hour Division Development of Regulatory Agenda for 2005–2006 Victor M. Fortuno, Vice President and General Counsel. [Administrative Order No. ] AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. [FR Doc. 05–10059 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Special Industry Committee for All ACTION: Development of regulatory BILLING CODE 7050–01–P Industries in American Samoa; agenda for 2005–2006 ‘‘request for Appointment; Convention; Hearing comments. LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION SUMMARY: As part of its ongoing efforts ACTION: Re-opening and extension of Development of Strategic Directions to improve the administration of period to submit pre-hearing statements. 2006–2010 regulatory programs and requirements, Legal Services Corporation is soliciting AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. SUMMARY: This document re-opens and suggestions for the possible extends the period for filing a pre- ACTION: Development of strategic clarification, modification, revision or directions ‘‘request for comments. hearing statement in order to participate deletion of existing LSC regulations, as a party in Industry Committee No. 26 looking toward the development of a SUMMARY: In 2000, the Legal Services for American Samoa. regulatory agenda and priorities for the Corporation (LSC) Board of Directors DATES: Pre-hearing statements must be years 2005–2006. adopted Strategic Directions 2000–2005. LSC is now undertaking an effort to received on or before May 31, 2005. DATES: Written comments must be develop Strategic Directions for the received on or before June 20, 2005. ADDRESSES: Send pre-hearing statements years 2006–2010. Toward that end, the to the U. S. Department of Labor, ADDRESSES: Written comments may be Legal Services Corporation is soliciting Employment Standards Administration, submitted by mail, fax or e-mail to suggestions for updating, revising and Wage and Hour Division, 200 Victor M. Fortuno at the addresses listed modifying LSC’s Strategic Directions. Constitution Avenue, NW., Room below. DATES: Written comments must be S3502, Washington DC 20210 and to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: received on or before June 20, 2005. Office of the Governor of American Victor M. Fortuno, Vice President for ADDRESSES: Written comments may be Samoa, P.O. Box 485, Pago Pago, General Counsel, Legal Services submitted by mail, fax or e-mail to American Samoa 96799. Corporation, 3333 K St., NW., Charles Jeffress at the addresses listed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Washington, DC, 20007; 202–295–1620 below. (phone); 202–337–6519 (fax); Nancy M. Flynn, Director of Planning FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Analysis, Wage and Hour Division, [email protected]. Charles Jeffress, Chief Administrative telephone: (202–693–0551) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Legal Officer, Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K Street, NW., Washington, DC SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Services Corporation’s (LSC) mission is 20007; 202–295–1630 (phone); 202– Federal Register of May 4, 2005, (70 FR to promote equal access to the system of 337–7302 (fax); [email protected]. 23236), the Department of Labor justice and improve opportunities for published a notice to convene special low-income people throughout the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 2000, Industry Committee No. 26 for United States by making grants for the the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) American Samoa on June 20, 2005, in provision of high-quality civil legal Board of Directors adopted Strategic assistance to those who would be Pago Pago, American Samoa. As a Directions 2000–2005. LSC is now otherwise unable to afford legal counsel undertaking an effort to develop prerequisite to participation as a party consistent with the requirements of Strategic Directions for the years 2006– in the Committee hearing, interested Congress. 2010. Toward that end, the Legal persons shall file six copies of a pre- Services Corporation is soliciting hearing statement at the Office of the LSC is in the process of developing a suggestions for updating, revising and Governor of American Samoa and six regulatory agenda and setting regulatory priorities for the years 2005–2006. With modifying LSC’s Strategic Directions. copies at the National Office of the The LSC Strategic Directions 2000–2005 Wage and Hour Division, U.S. this notice, LSC is soliciting public input for the consideration by the Board document is available at the LSC Department of Labor, Washington, DC of Directors in pursuit of this task. Electronic Public Reading Room on the 20210. Each pre-hearing statement shall Specifically, LSC seeks comment on LSC Web site at: http://www.lsc.gov/ contain the data specified in 29 CFR which of LSC regulations are in need of FOIA/foia_epr.htm. 511.8 of the regulations. The time amendment, and why. In particular, LSC seeks comments on the key period for filing pre-hearing statements LSC requests commenters to identify directions for LSC over the next several is extended to May 31, 2005. If such and discuss: years. LSC is actively seeking input statements are sent by airmail between • Regulations which may require from the public and all interested American Samoa and the mainland, clarification, modification or revision; stakeholders, who are asked to address: such filing shall be deemed timely if • What are realistic yet meaningful • Regulations which appropriately postmarked within the time provided. goals? may be considered for deletion; and • How may LSC most effectively Signed in Washington, DC this 16th day of • Areas or topics for which new May, 2005. achieve its identified goals? regulations may be needed or desirable. • How might LSC measure the Victoria A. Lipnic, In addition, to the extent that achievement of the identified goals? Assistant Secretary, Employment Standards comments provide suggestions on LSC also welcomes comments on Administration. which rules LSC should seek to clarify, whether there are different or additional [FR Doc. 05–10099 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] modify or revise, LSC seeks suggestions questions that LSC should consider in BILLING CODE 4510–27–P as to the priority order in which LSC its work on strategic directions for
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29369
2006–2010. Comments should be will be for up to 2 years. The award of panel review, discussion, evaluation submitted as set forth above. amount will be up to $500,000. Those and recommendation on applications interested in receiving the Program for financial assistance under the Victor M. Fortuno, Solicitation should see the address and National Foundation on the Arts and the Vice President and General Counsel. contact information below. Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, [FR Doc. 05–10060 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] DATES: This Program Solicitation is including discussion of information BILLING CODE 7050–01–P scheduled for release and posting on the given in confidence to the agency by the Internet on approximately May 20, grant applicants. Because the proposed 2005. Proposals shall be due on July 19, meetings will consider information that NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE 2005. Awards will be announced by is likely to disclose trade secrets and ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES September 30, 2005. commercial or financial information ADDRESSES: The Program Solicitation obtained from a person and privileged Institute of Museum and Library will be posted to the Institute’s Web site or confidential and/or information of a Services; Cooperative Agreement to at http://www.imls.gov/whatsnew/ personal nature the disclosure of which Study User Satisfaction With Access to current/access_study.htm on would constitute a clearly unwarranted Government Information and Services approximately May 20, 2005. Requests invasion of personal privacy, pursuant at Public Libraries and Public Access for the Program Solicitation should be to authority granted me by the Computing Centers addressed to Martha Crawley, Program Chairman’s Delegation of Authority to AGENCY: Institute of Museum and Officer, Office of Library Services, Close Advisory Committee meetings, Library Services (IMLS), NFAH. Institute of Museum and Library dated July 19, 1993, I have determined Services, 1800 M Street, NW., 9th Floor, that these meetings will be closed to the ACTION: Notification of availability. Washington, DC 20036–5802, telephone: public pursuant to subsections (c)(4), SUMMARY: The Institute of Museum and 202–653–4667, e-mail: and (6) of section 552b of Title 5, United Library Services (IMLS) is requesting [email protected]. States Code. 1. Date: June 3, 2005. proposals leading to one (1) award of a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Cooperative Agreement to Study User Martha Crawley, Program Officer, Office Satisfaction with Access to Government Room: 315. of Library Services, Institute of Museum Program: This meeting will review Information and Services at Public and Library Services, 1800 M Street, applications for Faculty Humanities Libraries and Public Access Computing NW., 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20036– Workshop, submitted to the Division of Centers. This study will explore how 5802, telephone: 202–653–4667, e-mail: Education Programs at the April 7, 2005 the part of the population with limited [email protected]. deadline. access to Internet resources (individuals who do not have broadband access from Dated: May 17, 2005. Michael McDonald, home, work, or school; who choose to Rebecca Danvers, Acting Advisory Committee Management access government services and Director of Research and Technology. Officer. information from locations other than [FR Doc. 05–10100 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 05–10050 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] home, work, or school; or who do so BILLING CODE 7036–01–M BILLING CODE 7536–01–P through traditional means of access) accesses services and information from the Federal, State, and local THE NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY governments and whether such users ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES COMMISSION are satisfied with the information and Meetings of Humanities Panel services they are able to access. The [Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364] study will also examine the ways that AGENCY: The National Endowment for Southern Nuclear Operating Company, public libraries and public access the Humanities. Inc., Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, computing centers provide assistance ACTION: Notice of meetings. Units 1 And 2; Notice of Issuance of (e.g., reference services, tutorials, Renewed Facility Operating License classes, training) to users seeking SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act Nos. NPF–2 And NPF–8 for an information and services from the Additional 20-Year Period Federal, State, and local governments. (Pub. L. 92–463, as amended), notice is Eligible organizations include all types hereby given that the following Notice is hereby given that the U.S. of libraries except Federal and for-profit meetings of the Humanities Panel will Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the libraries. Eligible libraries include be held at the Old Post Office, 1100 Commission) has issued Renewed public, school, academic, special, Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–2 private (not-for-profit), archives, library Washington, DC 20506. and NPF–8 to Southern Nuclear agencies, and library consortia. In FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Operating Company, Inc. (SNC or the addition, research libraries that give the Michael McDonald, Acting Advisory licensee), the operator of the Joseph M. public access to services and materials Committee Management Officer, Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP), Units 1 and suitable for scholarly research not National Endowment for the 2. Renewed Facility Operating License otherwise available to the public and Humanities, Washington, DC 20506; No. NPF–2 authorizes operation of FNP, that are not part of a university or telephone (202) 606–8322. Hearing- Unit 1, by the licensee at reactor core college are eligible. Institutions of impaired individuals are advised that power levels not in excess of 2775 higher education, including public and information on this matter may be megawatts thermal in accordance with not-for-profit universities and colleges, obtained by contacting the the provisions of the FNP, Unit 1, are also eligible. Graduate schools of Endowment’s TDD terminal on (202) renewed license and its technical library and information science may 606–8282. specifications. Renewed Facility apply as part of an institution of higher SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Operating License No. NPF–8 authorizes education. The Cooperative Agreement proposed meetings are for the purpose operation of FNP, Unit 2, by the licensee
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29370 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
at reactor core power levels not in Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day performance of the functions of the excess of 2775 megawatts thermal in of May 2005. agency, including whether the accordance with the provisions of the For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. information will have practical utility; FNP, Unit 2, renewed license and its Pao-Tsin Kuo, (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate technical specifications. Program Director, License Renewal and of the burden of the collection of The FNP units are Westinghouse Environmental Impacts Program, Division of information; (c) ways to enhance the pressurized-water nuclear reactors Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of quality, utility, and clarity of the located in Houston County, Alabama, on Nuclear Reactor Regulation. information collected; and (d) ways to the west bank of the Chattahoochee [FR Doc. E5–2556 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] minimize the burden of the collection of River. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P information on respondents, including The application for the renewed through the use of automated collection licenses complied with the standards techniques or other forms of information and requirements of the Atomic Energy SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE technology. Consideration will be given Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and COMMISSION to comments and suggestions submitted the Commission’s regulations. As in writing within 60 days of this required by the Act and the Reinstatement; Comment Request publication. Please direct your written comments Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR Upon Written Request, Copies Available Chapter I, the Commission has made to R. Corey Booth, Chief Information From: Securities and Exchange Officer, Office of Information appropriate findings, which are set forth Commission, Office of Filings and in each license. Prior public notice of Technology, Securities and Exchange Information Services, Washington, DC Commission, 450 5th Street, NW., the proposed issuance of these renewed 20549. licenses and of an opportunity for a Washington, DC 20549. hearing regarding the proposed issuance [‘‘Tell Us How We’re Doing!’’, SEC File No. Dated: May 11, 2005. of these renewed licenses was published 270–406, OMB Control No. 3235–0463] Margaret H. McFarland, in the Federal Register on November 5, Notice is hereby given that, pursuant Deputy Secretary. 2003 (68 FR 62640). to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [FR Doc. 05–10172 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] For further details with respect to this (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities BILLING CODE 8010–01–P action, see (1) SNC’s license renewal and Exchange Commission application for FNP, Units 1 and 2, (‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments dated September 12, 2003; (2) the on the collection of information SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Commission’s safety evaluation report summarized below. The Commission COMMISSION dated May 2005 (NUREG–1825); (3) the plans to submit this previously- licensee’s updated final safety analysis approved questionnaire to the Office of Sunshine Act Meetings report; and (4) the Commission’s final Management and Budget for approval. Notice is hereby given, pursuant to environmental impact statement dated The Commission currently sends the the provisions of the Government in the March 2005 (NUREG–1437, Supplement questionnaire to persons who have used Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94–409, that the 18). These documents are available at the services of the Commission’s Office Securities and Exchange Commission the NRC’s Public Document Room, One of Investor Education and Assistance. will hold the following meetings during White Flint North, 11555 Rockville The questionnaire consists mainly of the week of May 23, 2005: Pike, first floor, Rockville, Maryland eight (8) questions concerning the An open meeting will be held on 20852, and can be viewed from the NRC quality of services provided by OIEA. Monday, May 23, 2005, at 10 a.m., in Public Electronic Reading Room at Most of the questions can be answered Room 1C30, the William O. Douglas http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ by checking a box on the questionnaire. Meeting Room, and a closed meeting adams.html. The Commission needs the will be held on Wednesday, May 25, Copies of Renewed Facility Operating information to evaluate the quality of 2005 at 2 p.m. License Nos. NPF–2 and NPF–8 may be services provided by OIEA. Supervisory Commissioners, Counsel to the obtained by writing to the U.S. Nuclear personnel of OIEA use the information Commissioners, the Secretary to the Regulatory Commission, Washington, collected in assessing staff performance Commission, and recording secretaries DC 20555–0001, Attention: Director, and for determining what improvements will attend the closed meeting. Certain Division of Regulatory Improvement or changes should be made in OIEA staff members who have an interest in Programs. Copies of the safety operations for services provided to the matters may also be present. evaluation report (NUREG–1825) and investors. The General Counsel of the the final environmental impact The respondents to the questionnaire Commission, or his designee, has statement (NUREG–1437, Supplement are those investors who request certified that, in his opinion, one or 18) may be purchased from the National assistance or information from OIEA. more of the exemptions set forth in 5 Technical Information Service, The total reporting burden of the U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (9)(B), and Springfield, Virginia 22161–0002 questionnaire in 2004 was (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), (http://www.ntis.gov), 1–800–553–6847, approximately 5 hours and 45 minutes. 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of or the Superintendent of Documents, This was calculated by multiplying the the scheduled matters at the closed U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. total number of investors who meeting. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954 responded to the questionnaire times Commissioner Goldschmid, as duty (http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/ how long it is estimated to take to officer, voted to consider the items index.html), (202) 512–1800. All orders complete the questionnaire (23 listed for the closed meeting in closed should clearly identify the NRC respondents × 15 minutes = 5 hours and session, and that no earlier notice publication number and the requestor’s 45 minutes). thereof was possible. Government Printing Office deposit Written comments are invited on: (a) The subject matter of the open account number or VISA or MasterCard Whether the proposed collection of meeting scheduled for Monday, May 23, number and expiration date. information is necessary for the proper 2005, will be:
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29371
The Commission will hear oral argument Dated: May 17, 2005. proposed rule change. The text of these on an appeal by Rita J. McConville from the Jonathan G. Katz, statements may be examined at the decision of an administrative law judge. The Secretary. places specified in Item III below. The administrative law judge found that Exchange has prepared summaries, set McConville, formerly the chief financial [FR Doc. 05–10173 Filed 5–17–05; 4:20 pm] officer of Akorn, Inc. (‘‘Akorn’’), had BILLING CODE 8010–01–P forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of significant responsibility for the financial the most significant aspects of such statements in the Form 10–K for the year statements. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ended December 31, 2000 (the ‘‘2000 Form A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 10–K’’) filed by Akorn, which materially COMMISSION inflated Akorn’s accounts receivable, net Statement of the Purpose of, and sales, and assets; caused Akorn to maintain [Release No. 34–51696; File No. SR–PCX– Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule inaccurate books and records; and falsely 2005–50] Change assured Akorn’s auditors that the financial 1. Purpose statements in the 2000 Form 10–K complied Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific with Generally Accepted Accounting Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and On November 21, 2002, the Principles and that she did not know of any Order Granting Accelerated Approval Commission approved, for a six-month events that would materially impact those of Proposed Rule Change Relating to pilot period, the Exchange’s proposal to financial statements. In so doing, the law a Pilot Rule Extension of a Waiver of amend PCX and PCXE arbitration rules judge found, McConville violated Sections California Arbitrator Disclosure to require industry parties in arbitration 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Standards Act of 1934 and Rules 10b–5, 13b2–1 and to waive application of contested 13b2–2 thereunder, and caused Akorn to May 13, 2005. California arbitrator disclosure violate Sections 13(a) and 13(b)(2) of the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the standards, upon the request of Exchange Act and Rules 12b–20 and 13a–1 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 customers or, in employment thereunder. The law judge ordered (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 discrimination cases, upon the request 3 McConville to cease and desist from violating notice is hereby given that on April 12, of associated persons. The Commission and causing violations of these provisions, 2005 and on May 13, 2005 (Amendment approved an extension of the pilot and to pay disgorgement in the amount of 4 No. 1), the Pacific Exchange, Inc. period on May 15, 2003, November 19, $115,858, plus prejudgment interest. 5 6 (‘‘PCX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the 2003, May 24, 2004, and November 7 Among the issues likely to be argued Securities and Exchange Commission 23, 2004. The pilot period is currently are: (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule set to expire on May 25, 2005. 1. Whether McConville’s involvement change as described in Items I and II On July 1, 2002, the Judicial Council in the preparation and filing of the 2000 below, which Items have been prepared of the State of California adopted new Form 10–K was sufficient to provide a by the Exchange. The Commission is rules that mandated extensive basis for liability; publishing this notice to solicit disclosure requirements for arbitrators 2. Whether McConville knew that comments on the proposed rule change in California (the ‘‘California Akorn did not have a system of internal from interested persons and is Standards’’). The California Standards accounting controls for its accounts approving the proposal on an are intended to address perceived receivable necessary for the preparation accelerated basis. conflicts of interest in certain of accurate financial statements and commercial arbitration proceedings. As knowingly failed to implement such a I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s a result of the imposition of the system; Statement of the Terms of Substance of California Standards on arbitrations the Proposed Rule Change 3. Whether the Order Instituting conducted under the auspices of self- Proceedings gave McConville adequate The Exchange and its wholly owned regulatory organizations (‘‘SROs’’), the notice of the claims lodged against her subsidiary PCX Equities, Inc. (‘‘PCXE’’) National Association of Securities and the grounds on which those claims are proposing to extend the pilot rule in Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’) and the New allegedly rested; PCX Rule 12.1(i) and PCXE Rule 12.2(h), York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’) 4. Whether a cease-and-desist order which requires industry parties in suspended the appointment of against McConville is in the public arbitration to waive application of arbitrators for cases pending in interest; and contested California arbitrator California, and filed a joint complaint in 5. Whether disgorgement should be disclosure standards, upon the request federal court for declaratory relief in ordered, and if so, in what amount. of customers (and, in industry cases, which they contend that the California The subject matter of the closed upon the request of associated persons Standards cannot lawfully be applied to meeting scheduled for Wednesday, May with claims of statutory employment NASD and NYSE because the California 25, 2005, will be: discrimination), for an additional six- Standards are preempted by federal law and are inapplicable to SROs under Formal orders of investigations; month pilot period, until November 26, 2005. Institution and settlement of 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 46881 (November injunctive actions; and II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 21, 2002), 67 FR 71224 (November 29, 2002) (Order Institution and settlement of Statement of the Purpose of, and approving SR–PCX–2002–71). administrative proceedings of an Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 4 See Exchange Act Release No. 47872 (May 15, enforcement nature. Change 2003), 68 FR 28869 (May 27, 2003) (Order At times, changes in Commission approving SR–PCX–2003–22). In its filing with the Commission, the 5 See Exchange Act Release No. 48806 (November priorities require alterations in the Exchange included statements 19, 2003), 68 FR 66521 (November 26, 2003) (Order scheduling of meeting items. concerning the purpose of and basis for approving SR–PCX–2003–61). For further information and to the proposed rule change and discussed 6 See Exchange Act Release No. 49758 (May 24, ascertain what, if any, matters have been 2004), 69 FR 30734 (May 28, 2004) (Order any comments it received on the approving SR–PCX–2004–25). added, deleted or postponed, please 7 See Exchange Act Release No. 50731 (November contact: The Office of the Secretary at 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 23, 2004), 69 FR 69660 (November 30, 2004) (Order (202) 942–7070. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. approving SR–PCX–2004–104).
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29372 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
state law.8 Subsequently, in the interest beginning on May 26, 2005. The Commission process and review your of continuing to provide investors with extension of time permits the Exchange comments more efficiently, please use an arbitral forum in California pending to continue the arbitration process using only one method. The Commission will the resolution of the applicability of the PCX rules regarding arbitration post all comments on the Commission’s California Standards, the NASD and disclosures and not the California Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ NYSE filed separate rule proposals with Standards. No substantive changes are rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the the Commission that would temporarily being made to the pilot program, other submission, all subsequent require their members to waive the than extending the operation of pilot amendments, all written statements California Standards if all non-member program. with respect to the proposed rule parties to arbitration have done so. The change that are filed with the 2. Statutory Basis Commission approved the NASD’s rule Commission, and all written proposal on September 26, 2002 9 and The Exchange believes that the communications relating to the the NYSE’s rule proposal on November proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) proposed rule change between the 12, 2002.10 Both the NASD and the of the Act,12 in general, and Section Commission and any person, other than NYSE filed rule proposals to further 6(b)(5) of the Act,13 in particular, in that those that may be withheld from the extend the pilot period for additional it is designed to promote just and public in accordance with the six-month periods.11 equitable principles of trade by ensuring provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Since the NASD’s and NYSE’s lawsuit that OTP Holders, OTP Firms, ETP available for inspection and copying in relating to the application of the Holders and the public have a fair and the Commission’s Public Reference California Standards has not been impartial forum for the resolution of Room, 450 Fifth Street, NW., resolved, PCX is now requesting an their disputes. Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of extension of the pilot for an additional such filing also will be available for six months (or until the pending B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Burden on Competition inspection and copying at the principal litigation has resolved the question of offices of the Exchange. All comments whether or not the California Standards The Exchange does not believe that received will be posted without change; apply to SROs). PCX requests that the the proposed rule change will impose the Commission does not edit personal pilot be extended for six months any burden on competition that is not identifying information from necessary or appropriate in furtherance submissions. You should submit only 8 See Motion for Declaratory Judgment, NASD of the purposes of the Act. information that you wish to make Dispute Resolution, Inc. and New York Stock Exchange, Inc., v. Judicial Council of California, C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s available publicly. All submissions filed in the United States District Court for the Statement on Comments on the should refer to File Number SR–PCX– Northern District of California, No. C 02 3486 SBA Proposed Rule Change Received From 2005–50 and should be submitted on or (July 22, 2002). For a more complete discussion of before June 10, 2005. the various pending cases related to the California Members, Participants or Others Standards, see Exchange Act Release No. 50971 IV. Commission’s Findings and Order (January 6, 2005), 70 FR 2685 (January 14, 2005) Written comments on the proposed (Notice regarding SR–NASD–2004–180), Exchange rule change were neither solicited nor Granting Accelerated Approval of Act Release No. 51213 (February 16, 2005), 70 FR received. Proposed Rule Change 8862 (February 23, 2005) (Order approving SR– The Commission finds that the NASD–2004–180) and Exchange Act Release No. III. Solicitation of Comments 51395 (March 18, 2005), 70 FR 15137 (March 24, proposed rule change is consistent with 2005) (Order approving SR–NYSE–2005–14). Interested persons are invited to the requirements of the Act and the 9 See Exchange Act Release No. 46562 (September submit written data, views, and rules and regulations thereunder, 26, 2002), 67 FR 62085 (October 3, 2002) (Order arguments concerning the foregoing, applicable to a national securities approving SR–NASD–2002–126). Thereafter, the including whether the proposed rule 14 pilot period was extended to September 30, 2003. exchange. In particular, the See Exchange Act Release No. 48187 (July 16, change, as amended, is consistent with Commission finds that the proposed 2003), 68 FR 43553 (July 23, 2003) (Order approving the Act. Comments may be submitted by rule change is consistent with Section SR–NASD–2003–106). any of the following methods: 6(b)(5) of the Act 15 in that it promotes 10 See Exchange Act Release No. 46816 just and equitable principles of trade by (November 12, 2002), 67 FR 69793 (November 19, Electronic Comments ensuring that members and member 2002) (Order approving SR–NYSE–2002–56). • Thereafter, the pilot period was extended to Use the Commission’s Internet organizations and the public have a fair September 30, 2003. See Exchange Act Release No. comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ and impartial forum for the resolution of 47836 (May 12, 2003), 68 FR 27608 (May 20, 2003) rules/sro.shtml); or their disputes. (Order approving SR–NYSE–2003–16). • Send an e-mail to rule- The Commission also believes that the 11 See Exchange Act Release No. 48553 [email protected]. Please include File (September 26, 2003), 68 FR 57494 (October 3, proposed rule change raises no issues 2003) (Order approving SR–NASD–2003–144); Number SR–PCX–2005–50 on the that have not been previously Exchange Act Release No. 49452 (March 19, 2004) subject line. considered by the Commission. 69 FR 17010 (March 31, 2004) (Order approving Granting accelerated approval here will SR–NASD–2004–40); Exchange Act Release No. Paper Comments 48552 (September 26, 2003), 68 FR 57496 (October • merely extend a pilot program that is 3, 2003) (Order approving SR–NYSE–2003–28); Send paper comments in triplicate designed to inform aggrieved parties Exchange Act Release No. 49521 (April 2, 2004), 69 to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, about their options regarding FR 18661 (April 8, 2004) (Order approving SR– Securities and Exchange Commission, mechanisms that are available for NYSE–2004–18); Exchange Act Release No. 50447 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC (September 24, 2004), 69 FR 58567 (September 30, resolving disputes with broker-dealers. 2004) (Order approving SR–NASD–2004–126); 20549–0609. The PCX and PCXE adopted the pilot Exchange Act Release No. 50449 (September 24, All submissions should refer to File program under PCX Rule 12.1(i) and 2004), 69 FR 58985 (October 1, 2004) (Order Number SR–PCX–2005–50. This file PCXE Rule 12.2(h), respectively, in approving SR–NYSE–2004–50; Exchange Act number should be included on the Release No. 51213 (February 16, 2005), 70 FR 8862 (Order approving SR–NASD–2004–180); and subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 14 In approving this proposal, the Commission has Exchange Act Release No. 51395 (March 18, 2005), considered its impact on efficiency, competition, 70 FR 15137 (March 24, 2005) (Order approving 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). SR–NYSE–2005–14). 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29373
response to the purported imposition of Currencies. Intended effective date: 1 foreign air transportation of persons, the California Standards on Exchange May 2005. property and mail without frequency arbitrations and arbitrators. The pilot Docket Number: OST–2005–21172. and capacity limitation, on all routes rules are currently set to expire on May Date Filed: May 4, 2005. authorized in Annex I of the Bilateral 25, 2005, and must be extended in order Parties: Members of the International Agreement for carriers designated by the to continue to provide the waiver option Air Transport Association. Government of Cape Verde, namely: (i) until a final judicial determination is Subject: PTC COMP 1231 dated 2 May From points behind Cape Verde via reached. During the period of this 2005, Resolution 002aa—General Cape Verde and intermediate points to extension, the Commission and Increase Resolution except within a point or points in the United States Exchange will continue to monitor the Europe, between USA/US Territories and beyond; (ii) all-cargo service or status of the pending litigation. and Austria, Belgium, Chile, Czech services, between the United States and After careful consideration, the Republic, Finland, France, Germany, any point or points; (b) international Commission finds good cause, pursuant Iceland, Italy, Jordan, Korea (Rep. of), charter traffic of passengers (and their to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,16 for Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zealand, accompanying baggage) and/or cargo approving the proposed rule change Panama, Scandinavia, Switzerland; PTC (including, but not limited to, freight prior to the thirtieth day after the date COMP 1232 dated 2 May 2005 forwarder, split, and combination of publication of notice in the Federal Resolution 002a—General Increase (passenger/cargo) charters): (i) Between Register. The Commission notes that the Resolution between USA/US Territories any point or points in Cape Verde and current extension of the pilot program, and Austria, Belgium, Chile, Czech any point or points in the United States; under PCX Rule 12.1(i) and PCXE Rule Republic, Finland, France, Germany, and (ii) between any point or points in 12.2(h), expires on May 25, 2005. Iceland, Italy, Jordan, Korea (Rep. of), the United States and any point or Accordingly, the Commission believes Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zealand, points in a third country or countries, that there is good cause, consistent with Panama, Scandinavia, Switzerland; provided that, except with respect to Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,17 to approve Minutes: PTC COMP 1233 dated 4 May cargo charters, such service constitutes the proposal on an accelerated basis. 2005 Intended effective date: 30 May part of a continuous operation, with or 2005. V. Conclusion without a change of aircraft, that Andrea M. Jenkins, includes service to Cape Verde for the It is therefore ordered, pursuant to purpose of carrying local traffic between Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,18 that the Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. Cape Verde and the United States. proposed rule change (SR–PCX–2005– 50) is hereby approved on an [FR Doc. 05–10090 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Docket Number: OST–2005–21135. BILLING CODE 4910–62–P accelerated basis, and that PCX Rule Date Filed: May 2, 2005. 12.1(i) and PCXE Rule 12.2(h) are Due Date for Answers, Conforming extended until November 26, 2005. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Applications, or Motion to Modify For the Commission, by the Division of Scope: May 23, 2005. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Office of the Secretary authority.19 Description: Application of Jet Margaret H. McFarland, Notice of Applications for Certificates Airways (India) Ltd., requesting a foreign air carrier permit authorizing it Deputy Secretary. of Public Convenience and Necessity to engage in scheduled foreign air [FR Doc. E5–2525 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) transportation of persons, property, and BILLING CODE 8010–01–P During the Week Ending May 6, 2005 mail as follows: From points behind India, via India and intermediate points, The following Applications for to a point or points in the United States, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Certificates of Public Convenience and and beyond. Jet Airways also requests Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Office of the Secretary that its foreign air carrier permit include Permits were filed under subpart B authority to engage in charter foreign air Aviation Proceedings, Agreements (formerly subpart Q) of the Department transportation of persons, property, and Filed the Week Ending May 6, 2005 of Transportation’s Procedural mail between India and the United Regulations (see 14 CFR 301.201 et States and between the United States The following Agreements were filed seq.). The due date for Answers, and third countries (provided that such with the Department of Transportation Conforming Applications, or Motions to charter traffic is carried on a flight that under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 412 Modify Scope are set forth below for serves India for purposes of carrying and 414. Answers may be filed within each application. Following the Answer traffic between India and the United 21 days after the filing of the period DOT may process the application States), without prior Department application. by expedited procedures. Such approval; and other charter trips. Docket Number: OST–2005–21122. procedures may consist of the adoption Date Filed: May 2, 2005. of a show-cause order, a tentative order, Docket Number: OST–2005–21157. Parties: Members of the International or in appropriate cases a final order Date Filed: May 3, 2005. Air Transport Association. without further proceedings. Due Date for Answers, Conforming Subject: PTC COMP 1230 dated 2 May Docket Number: OST–2005–21130. Applications, or Motion to Modify Date Filed: May 2, 2005. 2005, Mail Vote 447—Resolution Scope: May 24, 2005. 024d—Currency Names, Codes, Due Date for Answers, Conforming Rounding Units and Acceptability of Applications, or Motion to Modify Description: Application of Executive Scope: May 23, 2005. Airlines, S.L., requesting a foreign air 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Description: Application of carrier permit authorizing it to engage in 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Transportes Aereos de Cabo Verde d/b/ charter foreign air transportation of 18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). a TACV, requesting a foreign air carrier persons, property and mail between 19 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). permit to engage in: (a) Scheduled Spain and the United States and other
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29374 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
charters between third countries and the (O’Hare or the Airport), P.O. Box 66142, Itasca Community Library, 500 W. United States, using small aircraft. Chicago, IL 60666, proposes to Irving Park Rd., Itasca modernize O’Hare to address existing Lombard Public Library, 110 W. Maple Andrea M. Jenkins, and future capacity and delay problems. St., Lombard Program Manager, Docket Operations, The City initiated master planning and Maywood Public Library, 121 S. 5th Federal Register Liaison. the process of seeking FAA approval to Ave., Maywood [FR Doc. 05–10088 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] amend its airport layout plan to depict Melrose Park Public Library, 801 N. BILLING CODE 4910–62–P the O’Hare Modernization Program Broadway, Melrose Park (OMP). The City is also seeking the Morton Grove Public Library, 6140 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION other necessary FAA approvals to Lincoln Ave., Morton Grove implement the OMP and associated Mount Prospect Public Library, 10 S. Federal Aviation Administration capital improvements and procedures. Emerson St., Mount Prospect The FAA has prepared its O’Hare Niles Public Library, 6960 W. Oakton Notice of Availability for the Draft Modernization DEIS addressing specific St., Niles O’Hare Modernization Section 303/4(f) improvements at and adjacent to Northlake Public Library, 231 N. Wolf and Section 6(f) Evaluation for Chicago O’Hare International Airport, Rd., Northlake Proposed New Runways and Chicago, Illinois. FAA’s DEIS, issued on Oak Park Public Library, 834 Lake St., Associated Development at Chicago January 21, 2005, presents an evaluation Oak Park O’Hare International Airport, Chicago, of the City’s proposed project and Oakton Community College Library, IL reasonable alternatives. Under the City’s 1616 E. Gold Rd., Des Plaines concept, O’Hare’s existing seven- Park Ridge Public Library, 20 S. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, Department of runway configuration would be Prospect Ave., Park Ridge Transportation (DOT). replaced by an eight-runway River Forest Public Library, 735 Lathrop configuration, in which six runways Ave., River Forest ACTION: Notice of availability of the would be oriented generally in the east/ Rover Grove Public Library, 8638 W. Draft O’Hare Section 303/4(f) and west direction, the existing northeast/ Grant Ave., River Grove Section 6(f) Evaluation and notice of southwest-oriented Runways 4L/22R Schaumburg Township District Library, public comment period. and 4R/22L would remain, and 130 S. Roselle Rd., Schaumburg Location of Proposed Action: O’Hare Runways 14L/32R and 14R/32L would Schiller Park Public Library, 4200 Old International Airport, Chicago, Illinois. be closed. River Rd., Schiller Park SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation The Section 303/4(f) and Section 6(f) Villa Park Public Library, 305 S. Administration (FAA) announces that Evaluation is available for review until Ardmore Ave., Villa Park, and the Draft O’Hare Modernization Section July 5, 2005, on the FAA’s Web site Wood Dale Public Library, 520 N. Wood 303/4(f) and Section 6(f) Evaluation for http://www.agl.faa.gov/OMP/DEIS.htm), Dale Rd., Wood Dale the O’Hare Modernization and at the following locations: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Environmental Impact Statement is Arlington Heights Memorial Library, Michael W. MacMullen, Airports available for public review and 500 North Dunton Ave., Arlington Environmental Program Manager, comment. The Section 303/4(f) and Heights Federal Aviation Administration, Section 6(f) Evaluation can be obtained Bellwood Public Library, 600 Bohland Chicago Airports District Office, 2300 on the Web at http://www.agl.faa.gov/ Ave., Bellwood East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL OMP/DEIS.htm or the locations noted Bensenville Community Public Library, 60018. Telephone: 847–294–8339, FAX: below. 200 S. Church Rd., Bensenville 847–294–7046; e-mail address: The Section 303/4(f) and Section 6(f) Berkeley Public Library, 1637 Taft Ave., [email protected]. Evaluation documents the consideration Berkeley Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois, on May 17, of impacts to Section 303/4(f) lands and Bloomingdale Public Library, 101 2005. DOT Section 6(f) lands that could be Fairfield Way, Bloomingdale Barry Cooper, impacted by build alternatives proposed College of DuPage Library, 425 Fawell Manager, Chicago Area Modernization at Chicago O’Hare International Airport. Blvd., Glen Ellyn Program Office, Great Lakes Region. The proposed build alternatives are Des Plaines Public Library, 1501 [FR Doc. 05–10132 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] intended to address the projected needs Ellinwood Ave., Des Plaines BILLING CODE 4910–13–M of the Chicago region by reducing delays Eisenhower Public Library, 4652 N. at O’Hare, thereby enhancing capacity of Olcutt Ave., Harwood Heights the National Airspace System, and Elk Grove Village Public Library, 1001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ensuring that terminal facilities and Wellington Ave., Elk Grove supporting infrastructure can efficiently Elmhurst Public Library, 211 Prospect Federal Aviation Administration accommodate airport users. Ave., Elmhurst The comment period is open as of the Elmwood Park Public Library, 4 W. [Policy Statement No. ANM–03–115–31] date of this Notice of Availability and Conti Pkwy., Elmwood Park Conducting Component Level Tests To closes July 5, 2005. Comments must be Franklin Park Public Library, 10311 Demonstrate Compliance sent to Michael W. MacMullen of the Grand Ave., Franklin Park FAA at the address shown below. Glendale Heights Library, 25 E. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Comments must be postmarked and Fullerton Ave., Glendale Heights Administration (FAA), DOT. emails must be sent no later than Glenview Public Library, 1930 Glenview ACTION: Notice of final policy. midnight, July 5, 2005. Rd., Glenview SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The City Harold Washington Library, 400 S. State SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation of Chicago (City), Department of St., Chicago Administration (FAA) announces the Aviation, as owner and operator of Hoffman Estates Library, 1550 Hassell availability of final policy on Chicago O’Hare International Airport Rd., Hoffman Estates conducting component level tests in
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29375
order demonstrate compliance with the ACTION: Notice of availability and meet in order for their product to be requirements of §§ 25.785(b) and (d). request for public comment. identified with TSO–C175 markings. DATES: The final policy was issued by SUMMARY: This notice announces the How To Obtain Copies the Transport Airplane Directorate on availability of, and requests comment on You can view or download the May 9, 2005. proposed Technical Standard Order proposed TSO from its online location ADDRESSES: Address your comments to (TSO) C–175, Galley Carts and at: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/rgl. At the individual identified under FOR Containers. This proposed TSO tells this Web page, select ‘‘Technical FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. persons seeking TSO authorization or Standard Orders.’’ At the TSO page, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff letter of design approval what minimum select ‘‘Proposed TSOs.’’ For a paper Gardlin, Federal Aviation performance standards (MPS) their copy, contact the person listed in FOR Administration, Transport Airplane galley carts and containers must meet to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Directorate, Transport Standards Staff, be identified with the appropriate TSO Note: SAE International documents are Airframe and Cabin Safety Branch, making. copyrighted and may not be reproduced ANM–115, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., DATES: Comments must be received on without the written consent of SAE Renton, WA 98055–4056; telephone or before July 19, 2005. International. You may purchase copies of (425) 227–2136; fax (425) 227–1320; e- ADDRESSES: Send all comments on this SAE International documents from: SAE mail: [email protected]. proposed TSO to: Federal Aviation International, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096–0001, or directly from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice Administration (FAA), Aircraft their Web site: http:/www.sae,org/. of proposed policy was published in the Certification Service, Aircraft Federal Register on July 22, 2003 (68 FR Engineering Division, Technical Issued in Washington, DC, on May 16, 43418). A notice reopening the Programs and Continued Airworthiness 2005. comment period for an additional Branch (AIR–120), 800 Independence Susan J.M. Cabler, amount of time was published in the Avenue SW., Washington DC 20591. Assistant Manager, Aircraft Engineering Federal Register on September 15, 2003 ATTN: Mr. Dave Rich. Or, you may Division, Aircraft Certification Service. (68 FR 54042). Three (3) commenters deliver comments to: Federal Aviation [FR Doc. 05–10135 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] responded to these requests for Administration, Room 815, 800 BILLING CODE 4910–13–M comments. Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591. Background FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The final policy provides FAA Dave Rich, AIR–120, Room 815, Federal certification policy on conducting Aviation Administration, 800 Federal Highway Administration Independence Avenue SW., component level tests in order to Environmental Impact Statement: Washington, DC 20591. Telephone (412) demonstrate compliance with the Nueces County, TX requirements of §§ 25.785(b) and (d). 262–9034, ext. 292, fax (412) 264–9302. Injurious item located within the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Federal Highway headstrike zone can be assessed for Administration (FHWA), DOT. Comments Invited occupant injury potential. These test ACTION: Notice of intent. methods are the product of an Aviation You are invited to comment on the Rulemaking Advisory Committee proposed TSO by submitting written SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this recommendation and are harmonized data, views, or arguments to the above notice to advise the public that an with the Joint Aviation Authorities address. Comments received may be environmental impact statement (EIS) (JAA) and Transport Canada. examined, both before and after the will be prepared for the proposed U.S. Highway (US) 181 Harbor Bridge The final policy as well as the closing date, in room 815 at the above replacement highway project in Nueces disposition of comments received is address, weekdays except Federal County, Texas. available on the Internet at the following holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 address: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/rgl. p.m. The Director, Aircraft Certification FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John If you do not have access to the Internet, Service, will consider all comments R. Mack, P.E. District Engineer, Federal you can obtain a copy of the policy by received on or before the closing date Highway Administration—Texas contacting the person listed under FOR before issuing the final TSO. Division, 300 East 8th Street, Austin, Texas 78701. Telephone: 512–536–5960. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Background SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9, In November 2004, the SAE FHWA, in cooperation with the Texas 2005. International organization published the Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Ali Bahrami, Aerospace Standard (AS) 8056, will prepare an environmental impact Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Minimum Design and Performance of statement (EIS) for a proposal to replace Aircraft Certification Service. Airplane Galley In-Flight Carts, the existing US 181 Harbor Bridge in [FR Doc. 05–10134 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] Containers, and Associated Nueces County, Texas. The proposed BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Components, that prescribes the improvement would involve minimum design and performance replacement of the existing Harbor requirements for equipment used in Bridge and approaches where US 181 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION aircraft for the housing of beverages, crosses the Corpus Christi Ship Federal Aviation Administration meals, and waste. As such, the FAA Channel, a roadway distance of elects to adopt with minor approximately 2.25 miles. Galley Carts and Containers modifications, the standards prescribed The need for the proposed bridge in AS 8056 as the minimum improvements is based on a number of AGENCY: Federal Aviation performance standards a manufacturer identified deficiencies in the existing Administration (FAA), (DOT). of galley carts and containers must first structure, including high maintenance
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 29376 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices
costs, safety issues, capacity needs, project mailing list, project newsletters, would not exceed $5 million and would shipping height restrictions, and a June 23, 2005 public scoping meeting not result in the creation of a Class II or connectivity to adjacent areas. The (public notice will be given of the time Class I rail carrier. purpose of the improvements is to and place), and numerous informal If the notice contains false or address these deficiencies while meetings with interested citizens and misleading information, the exemption identifying future plans for the US 181 stakeholders. In addition, a public is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the roadway structure and the area it serves. hearing will be held after the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) Alternatives under consideration publication of the Draft EIS. Public may be filed at any time. The filing of include (1) taking no action, and (2) notice will be given of the time and a petition to revoke will not replacing the existing US 181 Harbor place of the hearing. The Draft EIS will automatically stay the transaction. Bridge and approach roads with a be available for public and agency An original and 10 copies of all facility built to current highway review and comment prior to the public pleadings, referring to STB Finance standards. A Feasibility Study prepared hearing. Docket No. 34699, must be filed with in 2003 evaluated four corridor To ensure that the full range of issues the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 alternatives along existing and new related to this proposed action are K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423– location right-of-way and a No-Build addressed and all significant issues 0001. In addition, one copy of each alternative, resulting in the identified, comments and suggestions pleading must be served on Louis E. identification of a recommended study are invited from all interested parties. Gitomer, Esq., Ball Janik LLP, 1455 F corridor. A reasonable number of Comments or questions concerning this Street, NW., Suite 225, Washington, DC alignment alternatives will be identified proposed action and the EIS should be 20005. and evaluated in the EIS, as well as the directed to the FHWA at the address Board decisions and notices are No-Build Alternative, based on input provided above. available on our Web site at http:// from federal, state, and local agencies, (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance www.stb.dot.gov. as well as private organizations and Program Number 20.205, Highway Research, Decided: May 12, 2005. concerned citizens. Planning, and Construction. The regulations Impacts caused by the construction implementing Executive Order 12372 By the Board, David M. Konschnik, and operation of the proposed regarding intergovernmental consultation on Director, Office of Proceedings. improvements would vary according to Federal programs and activities apply to this Vernon A. Williams, the alternative alignment utilized. program) Secretary. Generally, impacts would include the Issued on: May 10, 2005. [FR Doc. 05–9993 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] following: Impacts to residences and John R. Mack, BILLING CODE 4915–01–P businesses, including potential District Engineer, Austin, Texas. relocation; impacts to parkland; [FR Doc. 05–10055 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] transportation impacts (construction BILLING CODE 4910–22–M DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY detours, construction traffic, and mobility improvement); air and noise Internal Revenue Service impacts from construction equipment DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and operation of the roadway; social Low Income Taxpayer Clinic Grant and economic impacts, including Surface Transportation Board Program; Availability of 2006 Grant impacts to minority and low-income Application Package [STB Finance Docket No. 34699] residents; impacts to historic cultural AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), resources; water quality impacts from Georgia Southwestern Railroad, Inc.— Treasury. construction and roadway runoff; and Acquisition and Operation ACTION: Notice. impacts to waters of the U.S. including Exemption—Central of Georgia wetlands from right-of-way Railroad Company SUMMARY: This document contains a encroachment. notice that the IRS has made available A letter that describes the proposed Georgia Southwestern Railroad, Inc. the grant application package action and a request for comments will (GSWR), a Class III rail carrier, has filed (Publication 3319) for organizations be sent to appropriate federal, state, and a verified notice of exemption under 49 interested in applying for a Low Income local agencies, and to private CFR 1150.41 to acquire from Central of Taxpayer Clinic (LITC) matching grant organizations and citizens who have Georgia Railroad Company (CGA) and for the 2006 grant cycle (January 1, previously expressed interest in the operate approximately 43 miles of rail 2006, through December 31, 2006). The proposal. TxDOT completed a line, extending from milepost R–120 at IRS will award a total of up to Feasibility Study for the project in June Florida Rock to milepost R–55.0 at $6,000,000 (unless otherwise provided 2003. In conjunction with the Allie, in Harris and Meriwether by specific Congressional appropriation) Feasibility Study, TxDOT developed a Counties, GA. The transaction also to qualifying organizations, subject to public involvement plan, sponsored includes the acquisition by GSWR of the limitations of Internal Revenue Code three citizens’ advisory committee 12.2 miles of incidental trackage rights, section 7526, for LITC matching grants. (CAC) meetings, held two public extending from milepost M–290.3 at meetings, and distributed two South Columbus through milepost M– DATES: Grant applications for the 2006 newsletters. An agency scoping meeting 290.9/P–290.9 at Columbus and grant cycle must be electronically filed will be held by TxDOT on June 23, 2005 milepost P–291.7/R–1.2 at West or received by the IRS no later than 4 to brief agency representatives on Columbus to milepost R–12.0 at Florida p.m. e.d.t. on July 25, 2005. project plans, introduce project team Rock, in Harris and Muscogee Counties, ADDRESSES: Send completed grant members, obtain comments pertaining GA. applications to: Internal Revenue to the scope of the EIS, identify The transaction was scheduled to be Service, Taxpayer Advocate Service, important issues, set goals, and respond consummated on May 20, 2005. GSWR LITC Grant Program Administration to questions. A continuing public certifies that its projected annual Office, Mail Stop 211–D, 401 W. involvement program will include a revenues as a result of this transaction Peachtree St., NW., Atlanta, GA 30308.
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Notices 29377
Copies of the 2006 Grant Application Program Office will mail notification DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Package and Guidelines, IRS Publication letters to each applicant. 3319 (Rev. 5–2005), can be downloaded Internal Revenue Service from the IRS Internet site at http:// Selection Consideration www.irs.gov/advocate or ordered from Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Applications that pass the eligibility Advocacy Panel Earned Income Tax the IRS Distribution Center by calling 1– screening process will be numerically 800–829–3676. Applicants can also file Credit Issue Committee ranked based on the information electronically at http://www.grants.gov. contained in their proposed program AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), For applicants applying through the Treasury. Federal Grants Web site, the Funding plan. Please note that the IRS Volunteer Number is TREAS–GRANTS–052006– Income Tax Assistance (VITA) and Tax ACTION: Notice. 001. Counseling for the Elderly (TCE) Programs are independently funded and SUMMARY: An open meeting of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The separate from the LITC Program. Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Earned LITC Program Office at 404–338–8306 Organizations currently participating in Income Tax Credit Issue Committee will (not a toll-free number) or by e-mail at be conducted (via teleconference). The the VITA or TCE Programs may be [email protected]. Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting eligible to apply for a LITC grant if they SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: public comments, ideas and suggestions meet the criteria and qualifications on improving customer service at the Background outlined in the 2006 Grant Application Internal Revenue Service. Package and Guidelines, Publication Section 7526 of the Internal Revenue DATES: The meeting will be held 3319 (Rev. 5–2005). Organizations that Code authorizes the IRS, subject to the Thursday, June 16, 2005. availability of appropriated funds, to seek to operate VITA and LITC award organizations matching grants of Programs, or TCE and LITC Programs, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: up to $100,000 for the development, must maintain separate and distinct Audrey Y. Jenkins at 1–888–912–1227 expansion, or continuation of qualified programs even if co-located to ensure (toll-free), or 718–488–2085 (non toll- free). low income taxpayer clinics. Section proper cost allocation for LITC grant 7526 authorizes the IRS to provide funds and adherence to the rules and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is grants to qualified organizations that regulations of the VITA, TCE and LITC hereby given pursuant to section represent low income taxpayers in Programs, as appropriate. In addition to 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory controversies with the IRS or inform the criteria and qualifications outlined Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) individuals for whom English is a in the 2006 Grant Application Package that an open meeting of the Taxpayer second language of their tax rights and and Guidelines, to foster parity Advocacy Panel Earned Income Tax responsibilities. The IRS may award regarding clinic availability and Credit Issue Committee will be held grants to qualifying organizations to accessibility for taxpayers nationwide, Thursday, June 16, 2005, from 2 p.m. to fund one-year, two-year or three-year the IRS will consider the geographic 3 p.m. e.t. via a telephone conference project periods. Grant funds may be call. The public is invited to make oral area of applicants as part of the awarded for start-up expenditures comments. Individual comments will be decision-making process. The IRS will incurred by new clinics during the grant limited to 5 minutes. For information or also seek to attain a proper balance of period. to confirm attendance, notification of The 2006 Grant Application Package academic and non-profit organizations, intent to attend the meeting must be and Guidelines, Publication 3319 (Rev. as well as a proper balance of start-up made with Audrey Y. Jenkins. Ms. 5–2005), includes several changes that and existing clinics. Jenkins may be reached at 1–888–912– are being implemented to improve Comments 1227 or (718) 488–2085, send written delivery of clinic services, including comments to Audrey Y. Jenkins, TAP additional oversight and assistance with Interested parties are encouraged to Office, 10 MetroTech Center, 625 Fulton the technical components of the LITC provide comments on the IRS’s Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201 or post Program by the LITC Program Office. administration of the grant program on comments to the Web site: http:// Among the changes, the LITC Program an ongoing basis. Comments may be www.improveirs.org. Due to limited Office has developed a new form to be sent to Internal Revenue Service, conference lines, notification of intent submitted with interim and annual Taxpayer Advocate Service, Attn: W.R. to participate in the telephone reports to assist clinics in consistently Swartz, LITC Program Office, 290 conference call meeting must be made reporting the number of cases worked Broadway, 14th Floor, New York, NY in advance. and taxpayers served throughout the 10007. The agenda will include various IRS year. In addition, the LITC Program issues. Office has clarified the comprehensive Nina E. Olson, Dated: May 17, 2005. Program standards. National Taxpayer Advocate, Internal Martha Curry, The costs of preparing and submitting Revenue Service. Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. an application are the responsibility of [FR Doc. 05–10170 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] each applicant. Each application will be [FR Doc. 05–10171 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830–01–P given due consideration and the LITC BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
VerDate jul<14>2003 20:07 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM 20MYN1 Friday, May 20, 2005
Part II
Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 960 Licensing of Private Land Remote-Sensing Space Systems; Proposed Rule
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 29380 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE rule captioned Licensing of Private Land Section 960.1(c) has been added to Remote-Sensing Space Systems; Interim emphasize the objective of the new U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Final Rule (See 65 FR 46822). These policy to sustain, enhance and Administration regulations, which were effective on encourage U.S. firms to play a August 30, 2000, set forth the agency’s leadership role in the commercial 15 CFR Part 960 minimum requirements for the remote sensing satellite industry. licensing, monitoring and compliance of [Docket No.: 050204028–5028–01] 2. Definitions operators of private Earth remote RIN: 0648–AT00 sensing space systems under the Act, 15 In section 960.3, the definition for the CFR Part 960. The regulations were term the President’s Policy has been Licensing of Private Land Remote- intended to facilitate the development removed. Instead, a more general Sensing Space Systems of the U.S. commercial remote sensing definition for the term U.S. Policy has industry and promote the collection and been added which is defined to include AGENCY: National Oceanic and widespread availability of Earth remote policy(ies) that address U.S. commercial Atmospheric Administration. sensing data, while preserving essential remote sensing space capabilities. Also ACTION: Proposed rule. U.S. national security interests, foreign added are definitions for the terms Data policy and international obligations. Protection Plan and Orbital Debris. SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Finally, the definition of the term Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Since the publication of the Significant or Substantial foreign proposes to amend its regulations regulations: Two new commercial agreement has been modified to governing the licensing of private Earth remote sensing satellites have been improve its clarity. remote sensing space systems under successfully launched and are now Title II of the Land Remote Sensing operational; NOAA has issued eight 3. Confidentiality of Information Policy Act of 1992, 15 U.S.C. 5621 et new licenses for increasingly advanced In section 960.5(a), the list of seq. (the Act). The proposed remote sensing space systems, bringing documents considered to be business amendments update the regulations to the total to 21 licenses issued; and, in confidential or proprietary information reflect: The new U.S. Commercial April 2003, the President announced a has been expanded to include foreign Remote Sensing Policy issued in April new policy on U.S. commercial remote agreements and supporting 2003, experience gained since August sensing from space. NOAA is now documentation submitted to NOAA that 2000 with respect to the licensing of proposing amendments to update the are explicitly designated and marked as commercial remote sensing space regulations to reflect: (1) The new U.S. business confidential or proprietary by systems, and improvements that take policy on commercial remote sensing the submitter. into account public comments received from space, (2) experience gained since In addition, section 960.5(b) has been on the regulations. The proposed August 2000 with respect to the modified to remove the requirement that amendments will allow NOAA to more licensing of commercial remote sensing a public summary of the proposed effectively license Earth remote sensing space systems, and (3) improvements system be submitted at the same time as space systems and help to ensure their that take into account public comments the license application. This is in compliance with the requirements of the received on the interim final rule. The recognition of the fact that the elements Act. proposed amendments will allow of the proposed system may differ from DATES: Comments must be received by NOAA to more effectively license Earth the licensed system. Instead, NOAA will July 5, 2005. remote sensing space systems and help require the public summary to be to ensure their compliance with the ADDRESSES: Comments on these submitted within 30 days of license requirements of the Act. proposed changes to the regulations issuance. This public summary will be should be sent to Mr. Douglas Brauer, Proposed Amendments used by NOAA to provide information NOAA/NESDIS International and to the public concerning a licensed 1. Purpose Interagency Affairs Office, 1335 East- system. NOAA will no longer require summaries for amendment requests. West Highway, Room 7311, Silver In section 960.1(a), the reference to Spring, Maryland 20910. the President’s March 1994 Policy on 4. Review Procedures for License FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Foreign Access to Remote Sensing Applications Douglas Brauer at (301) 713–2024 x213 Space Capabilities has been removed. NOAA has made minor modifications or Mr. Glenn Tallia at (301) 713–1221. This policy was rescinded and to section 960.6(a) to make the wording SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title II of superseded by the new U.S. Commercial consistent throughout that section and the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of Remote Sensing Policy issued on April thereby improve its clarity. In addition, 1992 (the Act), 15 U.S.C. 5621 et seq., 25, 2003. To avoid the need to update in sections 960.6(b) and (c), NOAA has authorizes the Secretary of Commerce the regulations in the future to include increased the period of time reviewing (the Secretary) to issue licenses for the citations to specific policies addressing agencies have to conduct completeness operation of private Earth remote commercial remote sensing, NOAA has reviews for license applications from 10 sensing space systems. The authority to included a more general reference to working days to 30 calendar days. The issue licenses and to monitor currently applicable U.S. Policy. In option to extend the completeness compliance therewith has been addition, the list of intended goals in review for an additional 10 working delegated from the Secretary to the the section has been modified to reflect days has been eliminated. In addition, Administrator of NOAA (the the goals of the most current policy. as part of the subsequent interagency Administrator) and redelegated to the Section 960.1(b) has been modified to review process, a reviewing agency will Assistant Administrator for Satellite and refer to currently applicable U.S. Policy be required to notify NOAA before the Information Services (the Assistant on remote sensing, as opposed to any expiration of the 30-day review period Administrator). specific remote sensing policy. The if it will be unable to complete its On July 31, 2000, NOAA published in addition of ‘‘necessary’’ corrects an review on time. As is required by the the Federal Register an interim final omission in the 2000 regulations. 2000 regulations, an agency must also
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29381
give a reason for its delay and an statutory review period. Finally, NOAA cost of fulfilling user requests to match estimate of when its review will be has added a new section 960.7(g) that the language in the Act. completed. These changes reflect the sets forth the conditions under which NOAA has added a new section experience of the interagency review the amendment request review process 960.11(b)(13). In this section, NOAA has process over the past four years. The may be terminated. added a new operational condition extension of the initial completeness requiring the licensee to submit to 6. Notification of Foreign Agreements review period will allow the reviewing NOAA a Data Protection Plan that agencies additional time to more NOAA has made a minor editorial provides information on how the thoroughly review license applications change to section 960.8(b) to remove licensee will protect data and and supporting documentation, which redundant wording. This change should information from tasking to should reduce the number of follow-up improve the clarity of section 960.8(b). dissemination. As NOAA licenses more questions to the applicant. These NOAA has added a new section 960.8(e) advanced systems, greater emphasis has changes, however, will not impact the to ensure that licensees provide to been placed on protection of the data. overall 120-day statutory review period. NOAA final documentation of their NOAA has added a new section In addition, section 960.6(e)(2) has been foreign agreements in a timely manner. 960.11(c), to allow licensees to seek modified to include the correct citation 7. License Term waivers of particular license conditions. to section 960.6(b). NOAA does not anticipate granting The February 2, 2000, interagency NOAA has added a new section blanket waivers of conditions; instead it Memorandum of Understanding 960.9(c) to reduce the administrative will grant waivers on a case-by-case Concerning the Licensing of Private burden to the U.S. Government for basis, for good cause shown, and Remote Sensing Satellite Systems licensed systems, which will not, in following consultations with other (MOU), included as Appendix 2 of the fact, be developed. This will allow agencies. regulations, contains timelines NOAA to devote its time and resources concerning completeness reviews that to licensees whose systems are under 9. Data Policy for Remote Sensing Space differ from what is proposed above. actual development, or in ongoing Systems NOAA, in consultation with the other operations. This section has two phases. Sections 960.12(b) and (c)(5) have signatory agencies to the MOU, has In the first phase, the licensee has five been modified to correct minor determined not to amend the MOU at years to conduct preliminary and oversights from the 2000 regulations. this time. In those limited cases where critical design reviews for its proposed 10. Prohibitions the timelines contained in the satellite system. Following the critical regulations and MOU differ, the design review, the licensee will have an In sections 960.13(f) and (g), NOAA timelines contained in the regulations additional five years to execute a has added the phrase ‘‘in a timely will govern. binding contract for launch services and manner.’’ This addition clarifies the complete the pre-ship review of the importance of the licensee providing 5. Amendments to Licenses satellite. If these milestones are not met, NOAA information while it is still In Section 960.7(a)(4), the citation to the Assistant Administrator may relevant. Appendix 1 has been corrected. In terminate the license if he/she 11. Enforcement Procedures addition, consistent with the changes determines that sufficient progress is proposed for review of new not being made toward the development NOAA has added new sections applications, in sections 960.7(c), (d), and launch of the satellite. Companies 960.15(b) through (g) which set forth and (e), NOAA has increased the period that are currently licensed will have five detailed procedures to be followed by of time reviewing agencies have to years from the date of issuance of these NOAA when assessing civil penalties conduct completeness reviews on regulations to conduct the preliminary under the Act. The 2000 regulations, in license amendment requests from 10 and critical design reviews. section 960.15(a), included a general working days to 30 calendar days. The NOAA appreciates the complexity of statement that all civil penalty option to extend the completeness raising the capital necessary to develop procedures shall be in accordance with review for an additional 10 working and launch a remote sensing satellite 15 CFR Part 904. Part 904 sets forth days has been eliminated. In addition, and will work with the individual procedures to be followed by NOAA as part of the subsequent interagency licensee in charting the progress of when assessing civil penalties under review process, a reviewing agency will development. The proposed milestone other statutes such as the Magnuson- be required to notify NOAA before the approach is consistent with that of other Stevens Fishery Conservation Act and expiration of the 30-day review period government agencies, most notably to the Marine Mammal Protection Act. if it will be unable to complete its the Federal Communications Upon additional review, it was review on time. As is required by the Commission for communications determined that not all of the provisions 2000 regulations, an agency must also satellite systems. NOAA is interested in of Part 904 would have application in give a reason for its delay and an receiving comments on whether the the case of NOAA assessing a civil estimate of when its review will be time frames for the milestone approach penalty against a NOAA licensee for completed. These changes reflect the proposed herein are suitable, and on violations the Act, regulations or a experience of the interagency review alternative approaches to ensure that the license. Accordingly, it was decided process over the past four years. The licenses it issues will be acted upon. that procedures specific to the extension of the initial completeness assessment of civil penalties against a 8. Conditions for Operation review period will allow the reviewing licensee for such violations should be agencies additional time to more In sections 960.11(b)(8) and (9), included. thoroughly review proposed license NOAA has clarified the relationship of amendments and supporting the Department of Interior to the 12. Filing Instructions and Information documentation, which should reduce National Land Remote Sensing Archive Because NOAA will no longer require the number of follow-up questions to and the means by which licensees will the public summary at the time a license the applicant. These changes, however, offer data to the Archive. NOAA has application is filed, Appendix 1(c) has will not impact the overall 120-day also corrected language regarding the been modified to remove a public
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 29382 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
summary from the list of information submission of satellite sub-systems that collection of information displays a that must be submitted with a license drawings; 3 hours for the submission of currently valid OMB Control Number. application. a final imaging system specifications C. National Environmental Policy Act In addition, because numerous document; 2 hours for the submission of (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) companies hold licenses for several a public summary for a licensed system; systems, NOAA has modified Appendix 2 hours for the submission of a Publication of these regulations does 1(d) Sec. III to add the requirement to preliminary design review; 2 hours for not constitute a major federal action name each system. This will allow the submission of a critical design significantly affecting the quality of the NOAA to better identify such systems. review; 1 hour for notification of a human environment. Therefore, an Finally, the requirement to submit binding launch services contract; 1 hour environmental impact statement is not technical information has been changed for notification of completion of pre- required. to require the submission of more ship review; 10 hours for the D. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory specific and detailed technical submission of a license amendment; 2 Planning and Review information. hours for the submission of a foreign agreement notification; 2 hours for the This rule has been determined to be Classification submission of spacecraft operational significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. A. Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. information submitted when a 601 et seq.) spacecraft becomes operational; 2 hours List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 960 for notification of deviation in orbit or This proposed rule establishes a more Administrative practice and spacecraft disposition; 2 hours for effective process to promote the procedure, Confidential business notification of any operational information, Penalties, Reporting and development of the remote sensing deviation; 2 hours for notification of recordkeeping requirements, Satellites, industry and to minimize any adverse planned purges of information to the Scientific equipment. impact on any entity, large or small, that National Satellite Land Remote Sensing may seek a license to operate a private Data Archive; 3 hours for the Dated: May 13, 2005. remote sensing space system. submission of an operational quarterly Gregory W. Withee, Accordingly, the Chief Counsel for report; 8 hours for an annual Assistant Administrator for Satellite and Regulation of the Department of compliance audit; 10 hours for an Information Services. Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel annual operational audit; and 2 hours Accordingly, for the reasons set forth for Advocacy of the Small Business for notification of the demise of a above, Part 960 of title 15 of the Code Administration that this proposed rule, system or a decision to discontinue of Federal Regulations is proposed to be if adopted, would not have a significant system operations. No estimate is being amended as follows: economic impact on a substantial given to provide imagery data to the number of small entities. Given the Archive. An estimate will be developed PART 960—LICENSING OF PRIVATE extraordinary capitalization required to at a later date. REMOTE SENSING SYSTEMS operate a commercial remote sensing The public burden for this collection space system, costs of development and of information includes the time for 1. The authority citation for part 960 launch are quite high. Depending on the reviewing instructions, searching continues to read as follows: complexity of a proposed commercial existing data sources, gathering and Authority: 15 U.S.C. 5624. remote sensing space system, it can cost maintaining the data needed, and 2. Section 960.1 is revised to read as approximately $250 to $500 million to completing and reviewing the collection follows: build, launch and operate such a of information. Public comment is system. As such, small entities have yet sought regarding: Whether this § 960.1 Purpose. to enter this field and appear highly proposed collection of information is (a) The regulations in this part set unlikely to do so. necessary for the proper performance of forth the procedural and informational B. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (35 the functions of the agency, including requirements for obtaining a license to U.S.C. 3500 et seq.) whether the information shall have operate a private remote sensing space practical utility; the accuracy of the system under Title II of the Land This proposed rule contains a new burden estimate; ways to enhance the Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 (15 collection-of-information requirement quality, utility, and clarity of the U.S.C. 5621 et seq.) (Pub. L. 102–555, subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act information to be collected; and ways to 106 Stat. 4163) and applicable U.S. (PRA) that will modify the existing minimize the burden of the collection of Policy, which addresses the U.S. collection-of-information requirement information, including through the use commercial remote sensing satellite that was approved by OMB under of automated collection techniques or industry. (Available from NOAA, control number 0648–0174. This new other forms of information technology. National Environmental Satellite Data requirement has been submitted to OMB Send comments on these or any other and Information Service, 1335 East-West for approval. Public reporting burden aspect of the collection of information to Highway, Room 7311, Silver Spring, MD for these requirements are estimated to Mr. Douglas Brauer, NOAA/NESDIS 20910). In addition, this part describes average: 40 hours for the submission of International and Interagency Affairs NOAA’s regulation of such systems, a license application; 10 hours for the Office, at the address noted above and pursuant to the Act and applicable U.S. submission of a data protection plan; 5 by e-mail to Policy. The regulations in this part are hours for the submission of a plan [email protected], or fax to intended to: describing how the licensee will comply (202) 395–7285. (1) Preserve the national security of with data collection restrictions; 3 hours Notwithstanding any other provision the United States; for the submission of an operations plan of the law, no person is required to (2) Observe the foreign policies and for restricting collection or respond to, nor shall any person be international obligations of the United dissemination of imagery of Israeli subject to a penalty for failure to comply States; territory; 3 hours for submission of a with, a collection of information subject (3) Advance and protect U.S. national data flow diagram; 2 hours for the to the requirements of the PRA, unless security and foreign policy interests by
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29383
maintaining U.S. leadership in remote communications links and/or delivery (3) The name and address upon whom sensing space activities, and by methods for tasking of the satellite, service of all documents may be made. sustaining and enhancing the U.S. downlinking of data to a ground station 5. Section 960.6 is amended by remote sensing industry; (including relay stations), and delivery revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (e) (4) Promote the broad use of remote of data from the satellite to the to read as follows: sensing data, their information products Licensee’s central data storage facilities. § 960.6 Review procedures for license and applications; Significant or Substantial foreign applications. (5) Ensure that unenhanced data agreement (also referred to in this part (a) The Assistant Administrator shall collected by licensed private remote as foreign agreement or agreement) within three (3) working days of receipt sensing space systems concerning the means an agreement with a foreign territory of any country are made of an application, forward a copy of the nation, entity, consortium, or person application to the Department of available to the government of that that provides for one of the following: country upon its request, as soon as Defense, the Department of State, the (1) Administrative control, which may Department of the Interior, and any such data are available and on include distributorship arrangements reasonable commercial terms and other Federal agencies determined to involving the routine receipt of high have a substantial interest in the license conditions as appropriate; volumes of the system’s unenhanced (6) Ensure that remotely sensed data application. The Assistant data; Administrator shall advise such are widely available for civil and (2) Participation in the operations of scientific research, particularly agencies of the deadline prescribed by the system, including direct access to paragraph (b) of this section to require environmental and global change the systems’s unenhanced data; or research; and additional information from the (3) An equity interest in the licensee applicant. The Assistant Administrator (7) Maintain a permanent held by a foreign nation and/or person, comprehensive U.S. government archive shall make a determination on the if such interest equals or exceeds or will application, in accordance with the Act of global land remote sensing data for equal or exceed ten (10) percent of total long-term monitoring and study of the and section 960.1(b), within 120 days of outstanding shares, or entitles the its receipt. If a determination has not changing global environment. foreign person to a position on the (b) In accordance with the Act and been made within 120 days, the licensee’s Board of Directors. applicable U.S. Policy, decisions Assistant Administrator shall inform the regarding the issuance of licenses and * * * * * applicant of any pending issues and any operational conditions (See Subpart B of U.S. Policy means the policy(ies) action required to resolve them. this part) will be made by the Secretary announced by the President that (b) The reviewing agencies have thirty of Commerce or his/her designee. specifically address U.S. commercial (30) days from receipt of application to Determinations of conditions necessary remote sensing space capabilities. notify the Assistant Administrator in to meet national security, foreign policy 4. Section 960.5 is revised to read as writing whether the application omits and international obligations are made follows: any of the information listed in Appendix 1 of this part or whether by the Secretaries of Defense and State, § 960.5 Confidentiality of information. respectively. additional information may be (c) In accordance with U.S. Policy, (a) Any proprietary information necessary to complete the application. NOAA encourages U.S. companies to related to a license application, This notification shall state the specific build and operate commercial remote application for amendment, foreign reasons why the additional information sensing space systems whose agreement, or any other supporting is being sought. The Assistant operational capabilities, products, and documentation submitted to NOAA will Administrator shall then notify the services are superior to any current or be treated as business confidential or applicant, in writing, what information planned foreign commercial systems. proprietary information, if that is required to complete the license However, because of the potential value information is explicitly designated and application. The 120-day review period of its products to an adversary, the U.S. marked as such by the submitter. This prescribed in Section 201(c) of the Act Government may restrict operations of does not preclude the United States will be stopped until the Assistant the commercial systems in order to limit Government from citing information in Administrator determines that the collection and/or dissemination of the public domain provided by the license application is complete. certain data and products to the U.S. licensee in another venue (e.g., a (c) Within thirty (30) days of receipt Government or to U.S. Government- licensee’s website or press release). of a complete application, as approved recipients. (b) Within thirty (30) days of the determined by the Assistant 3. Section 960.3 is amended by issuance of a license to operate a remote Administrator, each Federal agency revising the definition for the term sensing space system, the Licensee shall consulted in paragraph (a) of this Significant or Substantial foreign provide the Assistant Administrator a section shall recommend, in writing, to agreement, by adding, in alphabetical publicly-releasable summary of the the Assistant Administrator approval or order, definitions for the terms Data licensed system. The summary must be disapproval of the application. If a Protection Plan, U.S. Policy, and by submitted in a readily reproducible reviewing agency is unable to complete removing the definition for the term form accompanied by a copy on its review in thirty (30) days, it is President’s Policy. electronic media. This summary shall be required to notify NOAA prior to the available for public review at a location expiration of the interagency review § 960.3 Definitions. designated by the Assistant period, in writing, of the reason for its * * * * * Administrator and shall include: delay and provide an estimate of the Data Protection Plan refers to the (1) The name, mailing address and additional time necessary to complete licensee’s plan to protect data and telephone number of the licensee and the review. information through the entire cycle of any affiliates or subsidiaries; * * * * * tasking, operations, processing, (2) A general description of the (e) The Assistant Administrator may archiving and dissemination. At a system, its orbit(s) and the type of data terminate the license application review minimum, this includes protection of to be acquired; and process if:
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 29384 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(1) The application is withdrawn as determined by the Assistant (e) The licensee is required to provide before the decision approving or Administrator, each Federal agency NOAA a signed copy of the foreign denying it is issued; or consulted in paragraph (c) of this agreement within 30 days of its (2) The applicant, after receiving a section shall recommend, in writing, to signature. request for additional information the Assistant Administrator approval or * * * * * pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, disapproval of the amendment 8. Section 960.9 is amended by does not provide such information application. If a reviewing agency is adding a new paragraph (c) to read as within the time stated in the request. unable to complete its review in thirty follows: * * * * * (30) days, it is required to notify NOAA 6. Section 960.7 is amended by prior to the expiration of the interagency § 960.9 License term. revising paragraphs (a)(4), (c), (d), and review period, in writing, of the reason * * * * * (e), and by redesignating existing for its delay and provide an estimate of (c) The licensee shall notify the paragraph (g) as paragraph (h) and the additional time necessary to Assistant Administrator that specific adding a new paragraph (g) to read as complete the review. actions leading to the development and follows: * * * * * operation of the licensed remote sensing § 960.7 Amendments to licenses. (g) The Assistant Administrator may space system have been completed. If terminate the amendment request the Assistant Administrator determines (a) * * * that a licensee has not completed such (4) deviation from orbital review process if: actions with respect to a licensed characteristics, performance (1) The amendment request is system he/she may terminate the specifications, data collection and withdrawn before the decision license. The actions required to be taken exploitation capabilities, operational approving or denying it is issued; or and associated timelines are as follows: characteristics identified under (2) The applicant, after receiving a Appendix 1 of this part, or any other request for additional information (1) Presentation to NOAA of the change in license parameters. pursuant to paragraph (d) of this following formal review materials section, does not provide such within five (5) years of the license * * * * * information within the time stated in issuance: (c) The Assistant Administrator, shall the request. (i) Preliminary Design Review, and within three (3) working days of receipt (ii) Critical Design Review. of a request for amendment, forward a * * * * * copy of the request to the Department of 7. Section 960.8 is amended by (2) Licensee certification to NOAA of Defense, the Department of State, the revising paragraph (b), and the following milestones within five (5) Department of the Interior, and any redesignating existing paragraphs (e) years of the Critical Design Review: other Federal agencies determined to and (f) as paragraphs (f) and (g) and (i) Execution of a binding contract for have a substantial interest in the adding new paragraph (e) to read as launch services, and amendment request. The Assistant follows: (ii) Completion of the pre-ship review of the remote sensing payload. Administrator shall advise such § 960.8 Notification of foreign agreements. agencies of the deadline prescribed by (3) Remote sensing space systems paragraph (d) of this section to require * * * * * currently licensed by NOAA will have additional information from the (b) The Assistant Administrator, in five (5) years from the date of issuance licensee. The Assistant Administrator consultation with other appropriate of these regulations to meet the shall make a determination on the agencies, will review the proposed milestones in § 960.9(c)(1). amendment request, in accordance with foreign agreement. As part of this 9. Section 960.11 is amended by the Act and section 960.1(b), within 120 review, the Assistant Administrator will revising paragraphs (b)(8) and (b)(9) and days of its receipt. If a determination ensure that the proposed foreign adding new paragraphs (b)(13) and (c) to has not been made within 120 days, the agreement contains the appropriate read as follows: provisions to ensure compliance with Assistant Administrator shall inform the § 960.11 Conditions for operation. licensee of any pending issues and any all requirements concerning national actions necessary to resolve them. security interests, foreign policy and * * * * * (d) The reviewing agencies have thirty international obligations under the Act (b) * * * (30) days from receipt of the amendment or the licensee’s ability to comply with (8) A licensee shall make available request to notify the Assistant the Act, these regulations and the terms unenhanced data requested by the Administrator in writing whether the of the license. These requirements Department of the Interior on reasonable request omits any of the information include: cost terms and conditions as agreed by listed in Appendix 1 of this part or (1) The ability to implement, as the licensee and the Department of the whether additional information may be appropriate, restrictions on the foreign Interior. After the expiration of any necessary to complete the request. This party’s acquisition and dissemination of exclusive right to sell, or after an agreed notification shall state the specific imagery as imposed by the license or by amount of time, the Department of the reasons why the additional information the Secretary of Commerce; Interior shall make these data available is being sought. The Assistant (2) The obligations of the licensee to to the public at the cost of fulfilling user Administrator shall then notify the provide access to data for the National requests. licensee, in writing, what information is Satellite Land Remote Sensing Data (9) Before purging any licensed data required to complete the amendment Archive (the Archive); and in it possession, the licensee shall offer request. The 120-day review period (3) The obligations of the licensee to such data to the Archive at the cost of prescribed in Section 201(c) of the Act convey to the foreign party the reporting reproduction and transmission. The will be stopped until the Assistant and recordkeeping requirements of the Department of the Interior shall make Administrator determines that the license and to facilitate any monitoring these data available immediately to the amendment request is complete. and compliance activities identified in public at the cost of fulfilling user (e) Within thirty (30) days of receipt the license. requests. of a complete amendment application, * * * * * * * * * *
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29385
(13) The licensee shall submit a Data § 960.13 Prohibitions. contains such a request it will advise Protection Plan to the Assistant * * * * * the licensee: Administrator for review and approval. (f) Fail or refuse to provide to the (i) Of the amount of time the licensee The licensee’s Data Protection Plan shall Secretary or his/her designee in a timely has to cease and desist the violation. contain the process to protect data and manner, all reports and/or information The amount of time will be decided on information throughout the entire cycle required to be submitted to the a case-by-case basis at the sole of tasking, operations, processing, Secretary under the Act or the discretion of the Agency. archiving and dissemination. If the regulations in this part; (ii) If the licensee fails to respond or operating license restricts the (g) Fail to update in a timely manner, comply with NOAA’s request, an distribution of certain data and imagery the information required to be injunction or other judicial relief may be to the United States Government or submitted to the Secretary in the license sought. United States Government-approved application. (iii) Paragraph (c) of this section applies only to those parts of the NOVA customers, including data whose public * * * * * assessing monetary penalties. distribution is limited for 24 hours after 12. Section 960.15 is amended by collection, the Data Protection Plan (c) The licensee has 14 days from revising paragraph (a), redesignating receipt of the NOVA to respond. During should also provide for secure delivery existing paragraph (b) as paragraph (h), of restricted data and imagery to this time: and by adding a new paragraphs (b) (1) The licensee may accept the Government-approved customer through (g) to read as follows: facilities. Communications links that penalty or compromise penalty, if any, may require protection include, but are § 960.15 Penalties and sanctions. by taking the actions specified in the not limited to: Telemetry, tracking and NOVA. * * * * * (2) The licensee may request a hearing commanding; narrowband and (a) In addition, any person who wideband data, including satellite under section 960.10. violates any provision of the Act, any (3) The licensee may request an platform and sensor data, imagery, and license issued thereunder, or the extension of time to respond. NOAA metadata; and terrestrial delivery regulations in this part may be assessed may grant an extension of up to 14 days methods including electronic and a civil penalty by the Secretary of not unless it is determined that the physical package delivery. The more than $10,000 for each violation. requester could, exercising reasonable licensee’s Data Protection Plan must be Each day of operation in violation diligence, respond within the 14-day approved by NOAA before the licensee’s constitutes a separate violation. Civil period. A telephonic response to the remote sensing space system may be penalties will be assessed in accordance request is considered an effective launched. NOAA encourages the with the procedures contained in response, and will be followed by licensee’s early submission and review paragraphs (b) through (g) of this written confirmation. of the Data Protection Plan to avoid any section. (4) The licensee may take no action, negative impacts on its system’s (b) A notice of violation and in which case the NOVA becomes final development and launch schedule. assessment (NOVA) will be issued by in accordance with paragraph (d) of this (c) The Assistant Administrator may NOAA and served personally or by section. waive any of the conditions in registered or certified mail, return (d) If no request for hearing is timely § 960.11(b) upon a showing of good receipt requested, upon the licensee filed as provided in §960.10, the NOVA cause and following consultations with alleged to be subject to a civil penalty. becomes effective as the final the appropriate agencies. (1) The NOVA will contain: administrative decision and order of § 10. Section 960.12 is amended by (i) a concise statement of the facts NOAA on the 30th day after service of revising paragraphs (b) and (c)(5) to read believed to show a violation; the NOVA or on the last day of any as follows: (ii) a specific reference to the delay period granted. If a request for § 960.12 Data policy for remote sensing provisions of the Act, regulation, hearing is timely filed in accordance space systems. license, agreement, or order allegedly with §960.10, the date of the final * * * * * violated; administrative decision is as provided (b) If the U.S. Government has not (iii) the findings and conclusions in that section. funded and will not fund, either directly upon which NOAA based the (e) The licensee must make full or indirectly, any of the development, assessment; payment of the civil penalty assessed fabrication, launch, or operations costs (iv) the amount of the civil penalty within 30 days of the date upon which of a licensed system, the licensee may assessed; and the assessment becomes effective as the provide access to its unenhanced data in (v) an explanation of the licensee’s final administrative decision and order accordance with reasonable commercial rights upon receipt of the NOVA. of NOAA under paragraph (d) of this terms and conditions subject to the (2) In assessing a civil penalty, NOAA section or §960.10. requirement of providing data to the will take into account information (1) Payment must be made by mailing government of any sensed state, available to the Agency concerning any or delivering to NOAA at the address pursuant to §960.11(b)(10). factor to be considered under the Act specified in the NOVA a check or (c) * * * and implementing regulations, and any money order made payable in United (5) The extent to which the U.S. other information that justice or the States currency in the amount of the interest in promoting widespread data purposes of the Act require. assessment to the ‘‘Treasurer of the availability can be satisfied through (3) The NOVA may also contain a United States,’’ or as otherwise directed. license conditions that ensure access to proposal for compromise or settlement (2) Upon any failure to pay the civil the data for non-commercial scientific, of the case. penalty assessed, NOAA may request educational, or other public benefit (4) The NOVA may also contain a the Justice Department to recover the purposes. request for the licensee to cease and amount assessed in any appropriate 11. Section 960.13 is amended by desist operations which are in violation district court of the United States, or revising paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as of the Act, regulations, license, may act under paragraph (f) of this follows: agreement, or order. If the NOVA section.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 29386 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(f) NOAA, in its sole discretion, may extent, and gravity of the alleged (2) Technical space system information at compromise, modify, remit, or mitigate, violation; the licensee’s degree of the level of detail typical of a Request for with or without conditions, any civil culpability; any history of prior Proposal specification (including sensor type; penalty imposed. offenses; and such other matters as spatial and spectral resolution; pointing (1) The compromise authority of justice may require. parameters, etc.); (3) Anticipated best theoretical resolution NOAA under this section is in addition * * * * * to any similar authority provided in any 13. Appendix 1 to part 960 is (show calculation); (4) Swath width of each sensor (typically applicable statute or regulation, and amended by revising paragraphs (c) and at nadir); may be exercised either upon the Sec. III of paragraph (d) to read as (5) The various fields of view for each initiative of NOAA or in response to a follows: request by the alleged violator or other sensor (IFOV, in-track, cross-track); interested person. Any such request Appendix 1 to Part 960—Filing (6) On-board storage capacity; should be sent to NOAA at the address Instructions and Information To Be (7) Navigation capabilities—GPS, star specified in the NOVA. Included in the Licensing Application. tracker accuracies; (2) Neither the existence of the (8) Time-delayed integration with focal * * * * * plane; compromise authority of NOAA under (c) Number of copies. One (1) copy of each (9) Oversampling capability; this section nor NOAA’s exercise application must be submitted in a readily (10) Image motion parameters—linear thereof at any time changes the date reproducible form accompanied by a copy on electronic media. motion, drift, aggregation modes; upon which an assessment is final or (11) Anticipated system lifetime. payable. (d) * * * (g) Factors to be taken into Sec. III—Space Segment * * * * * consideration when assessing a penalty (1) The name of the system and the number [FR Doc. 05–9983 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] may include the nature, circumstances, of satellites which will compose this system; BILLING CODE 3510–HR–P
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP2.SGM 20MYP2 Friday, May 20, 2005
Part III
Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 927 Winter Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington; Order Amending Marketing Order No. 927; Final Rule
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 29388 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE published in the March 30, 2004, issue 3. Extend the order’s coverage to pears of the Federal Register (69 FR 16501), for processing by revising the definition Agricultural Marketing Service and a Recommended Decision issued on of ‘‘handle,’’ and adding definitions of January 5, 2005, and published in the ‘‘processor’’ and ‘‘process.’’ 7 CFR Part 927 January 13, 2005, issue of the Federal 4. Establish districts for pears for [Docket No. AO–F&V–927–A1; FV04–927–1 Register (70 FR 2520). Secretary’s processing. This amendment divides the FR] Decision and Referendum Order issued order’s production area into two February 28, 2005, and published in the districts for pears for processing: one Winter Pears Grown in Oregon and Federal Register on March 8, 2005 (70 being the State of Oregon and the other Washington; Order Amending FR 11155). being the State of Washington. Marketing Order No. 927 This action is governed by the 5. Dissolve the current Winter Pear provisions of sections 556 and 557 of Control Committee and establish two AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, title 5 of the United States Code and is new administrative committees: the USDA. therefore excluded from the Fresh Pear Committee and the Processed ACTION: Final rule. requirements of Executive Order 12866. Pear Committee (Committees). This proposal adds a public member and SUMMARY: This rule amends the Preliminary Statement marketing order (order) for winter pears public alternate member seat to both of This final rule was formulated on the grown in Oregon and Washington. The the newly established Committees and record of a public hearing held on April amendments are based on removes Section 927.36, Public 13 and 14, 2004, in Yakima, Washington recommendations jointly proposed by advisors. The Committees will and on April 16, 2004, in Portland, the Winter Pear Control Committee and coordinate administration of Marketing Oregon. Notice of this hearing was the Northwest Fresh Bartlett Marketing Order 927, with each Committee issued March 24, 2004 and published in Committee, which are responsible for recommending assessments and the Federal Register on March 30, 2004 local administration of orders 927 and administering program functions (69 FR 16501). The hearing was held to 931, respectively. Marketing Agreement specific to their commodity. consider the proposed amendment of and Order No. 931 regulates the Coordinated administration will allow Marketing Agreement and Order No. handling of fresh Bartlett pears grown in each Committee to make decisions on 927, regulating the handling of winter Oregon and Washington. The behalf of the commodity they represent, pears grown in the States of Oregon and amendments would combine the winter yet combine administrative functions, Washington, hereinafter referred to as pear and fresh Bartlett orders into a when applicable, to maximize the ‘‘order.’’ single program under marketing order efficiencies and minimize program 927, and would add authority to assess The hearing was held pursuant to the costs. pears for processing. All of the provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Additionally, related changes are proposals were favored by pear growers Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 being made to order provisions in a mail referendum, held March 22 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), hereinafter referred governing nomination and selection of through April 8, 2005. These to as the ‘‘Act,’’ and the applicable rules members and their alternates, terms of amendments are intended to streamline of practice and procedure governing the office, eligibility for membership, and industry organization and improve the formulation of marketing agreements quorum and voting requirements, to administration, operation, and and marketing orders (7 CFR part 900y). reflect the proposed dual committee functioning of the program. The notice of hearing contained order structure. changes proposed by both the Winter 6. Authorize changes in the number of DATES: This rule is effective May 21, Pear Control Committee and the Committee members and alternates, and 2005. Northwest Fresh Bartlett Marketing allowing reapportionment of committee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Committee, which are responsible for membership among districts and groups Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order local administration of orders 927 and (i.e., growers, handlers, and processors). Administration Branch, Fruit and 931, respectively. Marketing order 927 Such changes will require a Committee Vegetable Programs, Agricultural regulates the handling of winter pears recommendation and approval by the Marketing Service, USDA, Post Office grown in Oregon and Washington. Department. Box 1035, Moab, UT 84532, telephone: Marketing order 931 regulates the 7. Add authority to establish (435) 259–7988, fax: (435) 259–4945; or handling of Bartlett pears in the same assessment rates for each category of Susan Hiller, Marketing Order production area. pears, including: summer/fall pears, Administration Branch, Fruit and The amendments included in this winter pears, and all other pears. In Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, decision will: addition, rates of assessment could be Northwest Marketing Field Office, 1220 1. Expand the definition of ‘‘pears’’ to different for fresh pears and pears for SW. Third Avenue, room 385, Portland, include all varieties of pears classified processing in each category, and could OR 97204; telephone (503) 326–2724 or as summer/fall pears in addition to include supplemental rates on Fax (503) 326–7440. winter pears; add Concorde, Packham, individual varieties. Small businesses may request and Taylor’s Gold pears to the current 8. Add authority for container information on this proceeding by list of winter pear varieties; and add a marking requirements for fresh pears. contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order third category of pears which would 9. Remove the order provision Administration Branch, Fruit and include varieties not classified as allowing grower exemptions from Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 summer/fall or winter pears. This regulation. This is a tool no longer used Independence Avenue, SW., Stop 0237, amendment extends program coverage by the industry and, thus, is considered Washington, DC 20250–0237; telephone: to all pears grown in Oregon and obsolete. (202) 720–2491, fax: (202) 720–8938. Washington. 10. Amend § 927.70, Reports, to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior 2. Revise the definition of ‘‘size’’ to update order language regarding documents in this proceeding: Notice of include language currently used within confidentiality requirements to conform Hearing issued on March 24, 2004, and the industry. to language under the Act.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29389
11. Clarify inspection requirements applicable to pears for processing, a Small agricultural producers have and adding authority to eliminate those referendum must be conducted among been defined by the Small Business requirements if an alternative, adequate producers of such pears, and results Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) method of ensuring compliance with must be tallied by State (as opposed to as those having annual receipts of less quality and size standards in effect the entire production area). In order for than $750,000. Small agricultural under the order can be developed. such proposal to pass, a minimum of service firms, which include handlers 12. Eliminate the current exemptions 662⁄3 percent of either the number of regulated under the order, are defined as for pears for processing and for pears voters voting by State or the volume of those with annual receipts of less than shipped to storage warehouses. production for that State represented in $6,000,000. 13. Provide that separate continuance the referendum, must be favorable. Interested persons were invited to referenda be held every 6 years for fresh The voters voting in the referendum, present evidence at the hearing on the pears and processing pears. both by production area and by probable regulatory and informational 14. Add the authority for the processed pear producers by State, impact of the proposed amendments to Committees to conduct post-harvest favored all of the amendments proposed the order on small businesses. The research, in addition to production by the Committees. These amendments record evidence is that most of the research and promotion (including paid will authorize all pears produced in the proposed amendments are designed to advertising). States of Oregon and Washington, enhance industry efficiencies and 15. Update several order provisions to whether for the fresh or processed reduce costs, thereby improving grower make them more current. market, to be regulated under Federal returns. 16. Revise order provisions to reflect marketing order 927. The record indicates that there are the two-committee structure being Support for the amendments from approximately 1,850 pear growers in recommended for administration of the Oregon and Washington. Of that total, both fresh and processed pear producers program. 1,345 growers report Bartlett or other within the production area combined AMS also proposed to allow such summer/fall pear production, and 1,753 represented 98 percent of the eligible changes as may be necessary to the growers report winter pear production. voters voting and 99 percent of the order, if any of the proposed changes are Two-year average NASS figures (the production represented in the adopted, so that all of the order’s 2002 crop year and preliminary figures referendum. provisions conform to the effectuated for 2003) provides the following amendments. None are deemed Oregon producers of pears for production profile for Washington and necessary. processing voting in favor of the Oregon, respectively: bearing acres, Upon the basis of evidence amendments represented 100 percent of 24,800 and 17,600; yield per acre, 16.8 introduced at the hearing and the record the voters and volume of Oregon pears tons and 11.8 tons; annual production, thereof, the Administrator of AMS on for processing represented in the 417,500 tons and 207,500 tons. Total January 5, 2005, filed with the Hearing referendum. Washington producers of acres planted in pears for Washington Clerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture, a pears for processing voting in favor of and Oregon (including non-bearing Recommended Decision and the amendments represented 98 percent acres) in 2002 were 26,586 and 22,822, Opportunity to File Written Exceptions of the voters and 95 percent of the respectively. thereto by February 14, 2005. volume of Washington pears for Summing average Washington and A Secretary’s Decision and processing represented in the Oregon pear acreage for 2002 and 2003, Referendum Order was issued on referendum. and dividing by the number of growers February 28, 2005, directing that a The amended marketing agreement (1,850), the estimated average acreage referendum be conducted during the was subsequently mailed to all pear per grower in the two-state area is 26.7 period March 22 through April 8, 2005, handlers in the production area for their total acres and 22.9 bearing acres. among pear growers to determine approval. The marketing agreement was According to the 1997 Agricultural whether they favored the proposed not approved by handlers representing Census, the average Oregon and amendments to the order. Ballots at least 50 percent of the volume of Washington pear grower had representing 387 pear producers, or pears handled by all handlers during the approximately 23 and 15 total acres, about 20 percent of the producers representative period of July 1, 2003, respectively. The sum of average eligible to vote, were cast. through June 30, 2004. Washington and Oregon pear Ballots cast in the referendum were Small Business Consideration production for 2002 and 2003, divided tallied in two ways: (1) To determine by the number of growers, yields an the level of support for the amendments Pursuant to the requirements set forth estimated average production per from all pear producers (both fresh and in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), grower in the two-state area of 338 tons pears for processing) within the AMS has considered the economic (676,000 pounds). production area as a whole, and (2) to impact of this action on small entities. The average fresh market grower determine the level of support for the Accordingly, AMS has prepared this return for the two States has been amendments among producers of pears final regulatory flexibility analysis. between 20 and 22 cents per pound in for processing within the States of The purpose of the RFA is to fit recent years, and between 10 and 12 Oregon and Washington, each regulatory actions to the scale of cents per pound for processing. independently. business subject to such actions so that Estimated 2-year average pear sales To become effective, the amendments small businesses will not be unduly or revenue per grower in the production had to be approved by at least two- disproportionately burdened. Marketing area is approximately $101,000, which thirds of all producers voting or by orders and amendments thereto are is between 1⁄7 and 1⁄8 of the revenue that voters representing at least two-thirds of unique in that they are normally would qualify a grower to be a large the volume of pears represented by all brought about through group action of grower according to the SBA definition voters voting in the referendum. essentially small entities for their own (if based on pear sales alone). According Additionally, according to the AMAA, benefit. Thus, both the RFA and the Act to the hearing record, roughly 75 for the purpose of ascertaining producer are compatible with respect to small percent of the fresh pear producers in support for the issuance of an order entities. the States of Oregon and Washington
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 29390 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
qualify as small producers. One witness pears are examined at the end of the Witnesses explained that the winter, stated that a 1,000-acre farm represents production process, and the results are summer/fall, fresh and processed pear the threshold between a small and a certified by Federally licensed industries are closely inter-related. large producer (a substantially different inspectors. The record shows that in Growing, harvesting, packing, definition from what the SBA uses). recent years, the Federal-State processing and marketing activities of There are 55 handlers that handle Inspection Service has developed these industries all impact each other. fresh pears produced in Oregon and effective, less costly alternatives to the Thus, bringing all industry segments Washington; 73 percent of these fall into end-line inspection program. One together under a single marketing the SBA definition of ‘‘small business.’’ alternative is the ‘‘Partners in Quality’’ program will be beneficial for the There are five processing plants in the program, a documented quality Oregon and Washington pear industry. production area, with one in Oregon assurance system. Under this program, Proponent witnesses stated that the and four in Washington. All five individual packing houses must combined amendments, if implemented, processors are larger than the SBA’s demonstrate and document their ability will help to improve the orderly definition of small business. According to pack product that meets all relevant marketing of product within the to information presented by processors quality requirements. Effectiveness of industry. testifying at the hearing, roughly 90 the program is verified through Similarly, coordinated marketing and percent of pears received for processing periodic, unannounced audits of each distribution efforts for fresh varieties come from small grower entities. packer’s system by USDA-approved that appear in the marketplace The proposals put forth at the hearing auditors. simultaneously will assist in will streamline industry organization, Another program recently developed maximizing grower returns from each but will not result in a significant is the Customer Assisted Inspection variety. While the industries currently change in industry production, harvest Program (CAIP). Under CAIP, USDA undertake coordinated marketing and or distribution activities. In discussing inspectors oversee the in-line sampling promotional activities, witnesses stated the impacts of the proposed and inspection process performed by that combining these industries will amendments on small growers and trained company staff. USDA oversight further synchronize activities and handlers, witnesses indicated that the ranges from periodic visits throughout facilitate industry discussions and changes are expected to result in lower the day to a continuous on-site decision-making. costs. presence. Witnesses at the hearing The amendments will add authority When implemented, the amendments testified that the fresh pear industry to assess summer/fall pear handlers and will result in the consolidation of should be able to utilize any method of undertake promotional activities on marketing orders 927 and 931, inspection acceptable to the Federal- their behalf in a manner similar to that regulating fresh winter pears and State Inspection Service. These done currently for winter pears. When summer/fall pears, respectively. alternative methods have been asked if assuming this authority would Program coverage will also be extended developed by USDA as a means of be acceptable to the summer/fall pear to pears for processing. The combined reducing costs to industry. When industry, witnesses supported programs will be administered by two implemented, individual pear handlers promotional activities, including paid new administrative committees, one for will be able to choose the method of generic advertising, as a way to boost fresh pears and one for pears for inspection best suited to their sales and maintain market share. processing. Cost savings are expected to operations, thereby possibly reducing Post-harvest research will also benefit occur as a result of more efficient costs associated with inspection. the pear industries by focusing on a coordination of administrative activities Additionally, the authority to section of the pear crop-to-market flow between the two proposed committees. eliminate inspection requirements is that, until now, has not benefited from Record evidence indicates the expected to have handler cost research activities. Improved storage proposal to revise the order’s inspection implications. However, any increase or techniques resulting from industry- provisions may result in cost savings for decrease in costs cannot be determined funded post-harvest research could, for handlers. Handlers within the until specific alternative methods are example, benefit the pear industry by production area typically have about 75 developed to assure compliance with decreasing the loss of product due to percent of their product inspected on a any quality and size standards in effect. storage, or by increasing the storability voluntary basis. The remaining 25 The proposal to authorize container of product to help prolong the percent represents the amount of marking requirements is not expected to marketing season. additional product that would be result in significant cost increases for A significant market-facilitating required to be inspected if regulations fresh pear handlers. Testimony function carried out by the current were in effect. indicated that packing facilities are marketing order committees is the Handler witnesses also reported that already configured for labeling and collection of statistical data. That inspection costs average 121⁄2 cents per container marking. Witnesses noted that function will continue under the hundredweight, with a $9 minimum fee. there would be little, if any, need for amended marketing order and the In addition to paying the inspection fee, equipment changes or additions. Thus, authority to collect information will handlers may also experience delays in the proposed change is not expected to extend to additional varieties that are shipments while waiting for inspection have any adverse financial impact currently produced. Flexibility is to be completed. Handlers indicated related to handling fresh pears. It should provided for including other varieties in that such delays could be longer for be noted that this amendment will only the future. Witnesses emphasized the smaller shippers that do not have provide the committees with authority importance and value of collecting and inspectors regularly stationed at their to recommend container markings. disseminating accurate statistical warehouses. This amendment seeks to Implementation of this authority would information to enable industry reduce these costs by allowing require informal rulemaking in the participants to make economic and alternatives to mandatory inspection. future. The amendment itself will marketing decisions. Traditionally, the pear industry has therefore not impose any new regulatory The proposal to establish two used end-line inspection procedures. requirements on Oregon or Washington administrative committees also includes Under this scenario, samples of packed fresh pear handlers. the addition of a public member to each
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29391
of those committees. The benefit of requirements as a result of this Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act adding a non-industry, consumer proceeding will be submitted to OMB of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601 et perspective to committee deliberations for approval. seq.) and the applicable rules of practice and decision-making could prove very Witnesses stated that existing forms and procedure effective thereunder (7 beneficial. Witnesses stated that this could be adequately modified to serve CFR part 900), a public hearing was additional perspective would improve the needs of the proposed fresh and held upon the proposed amendments to the committees’ understanding of the processed pear committees. While Marketing Order No. 927 (7 CFR part consumer in the marketplace and could conforming changes to the forms would 927), regulating the handling of winter enhance committee activities aimed at need to be made (such as changing the pears grown in Oregon and Washington. increasing consumer demand for Oregon name of the committee), the Upon the basis of the evidence and Washington pears. functionality of the forms would remain introduced at such hearing and the The addition of a public member to the same. Therefore, there will be no record thereof it is found that: each committee is not expected to result modification to reporting and (1) The marketing order, as amended, in any substantial cost increases. While recordkeeping burdens generated from and as hereby further amended, and all these members will be entitled to these amendments. of the terms and conditions thereof, will reimbursement for certain expenses tend to effectuate the declared policy of allowed for under the order, this Civil Justice Reform the Act; expense is neither different nor any The amendments to Marketing (2) The marketing order, as amended, more burdensome than the current Agreement and Order 927 proposed and as hereby further amended, reimbursement arrangement for herein have been reviewed under regulates the handling of pears grown in committee members. Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice the production area in the same manner Interested persons were invited to Reform. They are not intended to have as, and is applicable only to persons in present evidence at the hearing on the retroactive effect. The amendments will the respective classes of commercial and probable regulatory and informational not preempt any State or local laws, industrial activity specified in the impact of the proposed amendments to regulations, or policies, unless they marketing order upon which hearings the order on small entities. The record present an irreconcilable conflict with have been held; evidence is that most of the this proposal. (3) The marketing order, as amended, amendments are designed to reduce The Act provides that administrative and as hereby further amended, is costs. While some of the proposals proceedings must be exhausted before limited in application to the smallest could impose some minimal costs, those parties may file suit in court. Under regional production area which is costs would be outweighed by the section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any practicable, consistent with carrying out benefits expected to accrue to the handler subject to an order may file the declared policy of the Act, and the Oregon and Washington pear industry. with USDA a petition stating that the issuance of several orders applicable to As with all Federal marketing order order, any provision of the order, or any subdivision of the production area programs, reports and forms are obligation imposed in connection with would not effectively carry out the periodically reviewed to reduce the order is not in accordance with law declared policy of the Act; (4) The marketing order, as amended, information requirements and and request a modification of the order and as hereby further amended, duplication by industry and public or to be exempted therefrom. A handler prescribes, insofar as practicable, such sector agencies. is afforded the opportunity for a hearing different terms applicable to different The Department has not identified on the petition. After the hearing, USDA parts of the production area as are any relevant Federal rules that would rule on the petition. The Act necessary to give due recognition to the duplicate, overlap or conflict with this provides that the district court of the differences in the production and proposed rule. These amendments are United States in any district in which marketing of pears grown in the designed to enhance the administration the handler is an inhabitant, or has his production area; and and functioning of the marketing order or her principal place of business, has to the benefit of the industry. (5) All handling of pears grown in the jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on production area is in the current of Committee meetings regarding these the petition, provided an action is filed proposals as well as the hearing dates interstate or foreign commerce or not later than 20 days after the date of directly burdens, obstructs, or affects were widely publicized throughout the the entry of the ruling. winter pear industry, and all interested such commerce. persons were invited to attend the Order Amending the Order Regulating (b) Additional findings. It is necessary meetings and the hearing and Winter Pears Grown in Oregon and and in the public interest to make the participate in Committee deliberations Washington amendments to this order effective not later than one day after publication in on all issues. All Committee meetings Findings and Determinations and the hearing were public forums and the Federal Register. A later effective all entities, both large and small, were The findings and determinations set date would unnecessarily delay able to express views on these issues. forth hereinafter are supplementary and implementation of the approved in addition to the findings and changes, which are expected to benefit Paperwork Reduction Act determination previously made in the Oregon and Washington pear In accordance with the Paperwork connection with the issuance of the industry. Making the amendments Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 35), order; and all of said previous findings effective as specified would allow the any reporting and recordkeeping and determinations are hereby ratified Oregon and Washington pear industries provision changes that are generated by and affirmed, except as such findings (all varieties of pears for the fresh the amendments will be submitted to and determinations may be in conflict market and pears for processing) to the Office of Management and Budget with the findings and determinations set proceed with the combining of (OMB). Current information collection forth herein. marketing orders 927 and 931 under the requirements for Part 927 are approved (a) Findings and Determinations Upon amended marketing order 927. by OMB under OMB number 0581– the Basis of the Hearing Record. Immediate implementation of the 0089. Any changes in those Pursuant to the provisions of the amendments is necessary in order to
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 29392 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
execute administrative changes Order Relative to Handling of Pears 927.43 Use of funds. necessary for the establishment of two Grown in Oregon and Washington 927.44 [Reserved]. 927.45 Contributions. administrative committees and It is therefore ordered, That on and incorporating pears for processing under after the effective date hereof, all Research and Development the provisions of the order. handling of pears grown in Washington 927.47 Research and development. In view of the foregoing, it is hereby shall be in conformity to, and in Regulation of Shipments found and determined that good cause compliance with, the terms and exists for making these amendments conditions of the said order as hereby 927.50 Marketing policy. effective one day after publication in the 927.51 Issuance of regulations; and amended as follows: modification, suspension, or termination Federal Register, and that it would be The provisions of the proposed thereof. contrary to the public interest to delay marketing order amending the order 927.52 Prerequisites to recommendations. the effective date for 30 days after contained in the Recommended 927.53 Notification. publication in the Federal Register (Sec. Decision issued by the Administrator on 927.54 [Reserved]. 553(d), Administrative Procedure Act; 5 January 5, 2005, and published in the Inspection U.S.C. 551–559). Federal Register on January 13, 2005, 927.60 Inspection and certification. (b) Determinations. It is hereby (70 FR 2520) shall be and are the terms determined that: and provisions of this order amending Exceptions (1) Handlers (excluding cooperative the order and set forth in full herein. 927.65 Exemption from regulation. associations of producers who are not List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 927 Miscellaneous Provisions engaged in processing, distributing, or Marketing agreements, Winter pears, 927.70 Reports. shipping pears covered by the order as Reporting and recordkeeping 927.71 Compliance. hereby amended) who, during the requirements. 927.72 Duration of immunities. period July 1, 2003, through June 30, 927.73 Separability. I 2004, handled 50 percent or more of the For the reasons set forth in the 927.74 Derogation. volume of such pears covered by said preamble, Title 7 of Chapter XI of the 927.75 Liability. order, as hereby amended, have not Code of Federal Regulations is amended 927.76 Agents. signed an amended marketing by revising part 927 to read as follows: 927.77 Effective time. agreement; 927.78 Termination. PART 927—PEARS GROWN IN 927.79 Proceedings after termination. (2) The issuance of this amendatory OREGON AND WASHINGTON 927.80 Amendments. order, further amending the aforesaid order, is favored or approved by at least Subpart—Order Regulating Handling Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. two-thirds of the producers who Definitions Subpart—Order Regulating Handling participated in a referendum on the Sec. question of approval and who, during 927.1 Secretary. Definitions the period of July 1, 2003, through June 927.2 Act. § 927.1 Secretary. 30, 2004 (which has been deemed to be 927.3 Person 927.4 Pears. a representative period), have been 927.5 Size. Secretary means the Secretary of engaged within the production area in 927.6 Grower. Agriculture of the United States, or any the production of such pears, such 927.7 Handler. officer or employee of the Department of producers having also produced for 927.8 Ship or handle. Agriculture who has been delegated, or market at least two-thirds of the volume 927.9 Fiscal period. to whom authority may hereafter be of such commodity represented in the 927.10 Production area. delegated, the authority to act for the 927.11 District. Secretary. referendum; 927.12 Export market. (3) The issuance of this amendatory 927.13 Subvariety. § 927.2 Act. order, further amending the aforesaid 927.14 Processor. Act means Public Act No. 10, 73d order, is favored or approved by at least 927.15 Process. Congress (May 12, 1933), as amended two-thirds of the producers of pears for Administrative Bodies and as reenacted and amended by the processing from each of the States of 927.20 Establishment and membership. Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act Oregon and Washington, who 927.21 Nomination and selection of of 1937, as amended (48 Stat. 31, as participated in a referendum on the members and their respective alternates. amended; 7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). question of approval and who, during 927.22 Meetings for elections of nominees. the period of July 1, 2003, through June 927.23 Voting. § 927.3 Person. 30, 2004 (which has been deemed to be 927.24 Eligibility for membership. Person means an individual a representative period), have been 927.25 Failure to nominate. 927.26 Qualifications. partnership, corporation, association, engaged within the production area in legal representative, or any other the production of such pears for 927.27 Term of office. 927.28 Alternates for members. business unit. processing, such producers having also 927.29 Vacancies. § 927.4 Pears. produced for market at least two-thirds 927.30 Compensation and expenses. of the volume of such commodity 927.31 Powers. (a) Pears means and includes any and represented in the referendum; and 927.32 Duties. all varieties or subvarieties of pears with (4) In the absence of a signed 927.33 Procedure. the genus Pyrus that are produced in the marketing agreement, the issuance of 927.34 Right of the Secretary. production area and are classified as: this amendatory order is the only 927.35 Funds and other property. (1) Summer/fall pears including practical means pursuant to the Expenses and Assessments Bartlett and Starkrimson pears; declared policy of the Act of advancing 927.40 Expenses. (2) Winter pears including Beurre the interests of producers of pears in the 927.41 Assessments. D’Anjou, Beurre Bosc, Doyenne du production area. 927.42 Accounting. Comice, Concorde, Forelle, Winter
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29393
Nelis, Packham, Seckel, and Taylor’s § 927.11 District. or in any other way convert pears Gold pears; and District means the applicable one of commercially into a processed product. (3) Other pears including any or all the following-described subdivisions of Administrative Bodies other varieties or subvarieties of pears the production area covered by the not classified as summer/fall or winter provisions of this subpart: § 927.20 Establishment and membership. pears. (a) For the purpose of committee There are hereby established two representation, administration and committees to administer the terms and (b) The Fresh Pear Committee and/or application of provisions of this subpart the Processed Pear Committee, with the provisions of this subpart as specifically as applicable to pears for the fresh provided in §§ 927.20 through 927.35: approval of the Secretary, may recognize market, districts shall be defined as (a) A Fresh Pear Committee, new or delete obsolete varieties or follows: consisting of 13 individual persons as subvarieties for each category. (1) Medford District shall include all its members is established to administer § 927.5 Size. the counties in the State of Oregon order provisions relating to the handling except for Hood River and Wasco of pears for the fresh market. Six Size means the number of pears counties. members of the Fresh Pear Committee which can be packed in a 44-pound net (2) Mid-Columbia District shall shall be growers, six members shall be weight standard box or container include Hood River and Wasco counties handlers, and one member shall equivalent, or as ‘‘size’’ means the in the State of Oregon, and the counties represent the public. For each member greatest transverse diameter of the pear of Skamania and Klickitat in the State there shall be two alternates, designated taken at right angles to a line running of Washington. as the ‘‘first alternate’’ and the ‘‘second from the stem to the blossom end, or (3) Wenatchee District shall include alternate,’’ respectively. Each district such other specifications more the counties of King, Chelan, Okanogan, shall be represented by one grower specifically defined in a regulation Douglas, Grant, Lincoln, and Spokane in member and one handler member, issued under this part. the State of Washington, and all other except that the Mid-Columbia District counties in Washington lying north § 927.6 Grower. and the Wenatchee District shall be thereof. represented by two grower members and Grower is synonymous with producer (4) Yakima District shall include all of two handler members. and means any person engaged in the the State of Washington, not included in (b) A Processed Pear Committee production of pears, either as owner or the Wenatchee District or in the Mid- consisting of 10 members is established as tenant. Columbia District. to administer order provisions relating (b) For the purpose of committee to the handling of pears for processing. § 927.7 Handler. representation, administration and Three members of the Processed Pear Handler is synonymous with shipper application of provisions of this subpart Committee shall be growers, three and means any person (except a as applicable to pears for processing, members shall be handlers, three common or contract carrier transporting districts shall be defined as follows: members shall be processors, and one pears owned by another person) who, as (1) The State of Washington. member shall represent the public. For (2) The State of Oregon. each member there shall be two owner, agent, broker, or otherwise, ships (c) The Secretary, upon or handles pears, or causes pears to be alternates, designated as the ‘‘first recommendation of the Fresh Pear alternate’’ and the ‘‘second alternate,’’ shipped or handled by rail, truck, boat, Committee or the Processed Pear or any other means whatsoever. respectively. District 1, the State of Committee, may reestablish districts Washington, shall be represented by two § 927.8 Ship or handle. within the production area. grower members, two handler members Ship or handle means to sell, deliver, § 927.12 Export market. and two processor members. District 2, consign, transport or ship pears within Export market means any destination the State of Oregon, shall be represented the production area or between the which is not within the 50 states, or the by one grower member, one handler production area and any point outside District of Columbia, of the United member and one processor member. (c) The Secretary, upon thereof, including receiving pears for States. recommendation of the Fresh Pear processing: Provided, That the term Committee or the Processed Pear ‘‘’handle’’’ shall not include the § 927.13 Subvariety. Committee may reapportion members transportation of pear shipments within Subvariety means and includes any among districts, may change the number the production area from the orchard mutation, sport, or other derivation of of members and alternates, and may where grown to a packing facility any of the varieties covered in § 927.4 change the composition by changing the located within the production area for which is recognized by the Fresh Pear ratio of members, including their preparation for market or delivery for Committee or the Processed Pear alternates. In recommending any such processing. Committee and approved by the Secretary. Recognition of a subvariety changes, the following shall be § 927.9 Fiscal period. shall include classification within a considered: (1) Shifts in pear acreage within Fiscal period means the period varietal group for the purposes of votes conducted under § 927.52. districts and within the production area beginning July 1 of any year and ending during recent years; June 30 of the following year or such § 927.14 Processor. (2) The importance of new pear may be approved by the Secretary Processor means any person who as production in its relation to existing pursuant to a joint recommendation by owner, agent, broker, or otherwise, districts; the Fresh Pear Committee and the commercially processes pears in the (3) The equitable relationship Processed Pear Committee. production area. between membership and districts; (4) Economies to result for growers in § 927.10 Production area. § 927.15 Process. promoting efficient administration due Production area means and includes Process means to can, concentrate, to redistricting or reapportionment of the States of Oregon and Washington. freeze, dehydrate, press or puree pears, members within districts; and
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 29394 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
(5) Other relevant factors. a combination thereof. Each grower, for whom he or she is an alternate handler and processor shall be entitled during such member’s absence. In the § 927.21 Nomination and selection of to cast one vote, on behalf of himself, event of the death, removal, resignation, members and their respective alternates. his agents, partners, affiliates, or disqualification of a member, his or Grower members and their respective subsidiaries, and representatives, for her first alternate shall act as a member alternates for each district shall be each nominee to be elected. until a successor for the member is selected by the Secretary from nominees selected and has qualified. The second § 927.24 Eligibility for membership. elected by the growers in such district. alternate for a member shall serve in the Handler members and their respective Each grower member and each of his place and stead of the member for alternates for each district shall be or her alternates shall be a grower, or an whom he or she is an alternate selected by the Secretary from nominees officer or employee of a corporate or whenever both the member and his or elected by the handlers in such district. LLC grower, who grows pears in the her first alternate are unable to serve. In Processor members and their respective district in which and for which he or the event that a member of the Fresh alternates shall be selected by the she is nominated and selected. Each Pear Committee or the Processed Pear Secretary from nominees elected by the handler member and each of his or her Committee and both that member’s processors. Public members for each alternates shall be a handler, or an alternates are unable to attend a committee shall be nominated by the officer or employee of a handler, meeting, the member may designate any Fresh Pear Committee and the Processed handling pears in the district in and for other alternate member from the same Pear Committee, each independently, which he or she is nominated and group (handler, processor, or grower) to selected. Each processor member and and selected by the Secretary. The Fresh serve in that member’s place and stead. Pear Committee and the Processed Pear each of their alternates shall be a Committee may, each independently, processor, or an officer or employee of § 927.29 Vacancies. prescribe such additional qualifications, a processor, who processes pears in the To fill any vacancy occasioned by the administrative rules and procedures for production area. failure of any person selected as a selection for each candidate as it deems § 927.25 Failure to nominate. member or as an alternate for a member necessary and as the Secretary approves. In the event nominations are not of the Fresh Pear Committee or the § 927.22 Meetings for election of made pursuant to §§ 927.21 and 927.22 Processed Pear Committee to qualify, or nominees. on or before June 1 of any year, the in the event of death, removal, resignation, or disqualification of any (a) Nominations for members of the Secretary may select members and qualified member or qualified alternate Fresh Pear Committee and their alternates for members without regard to for a member, a successor for his or her alternates shall be made at meetings of nominations. unexpired term shall be nominated and growers and handlers held in each of § 927.26 Qualifications. selected in the manner set forth in the districts designated in § 927.11 at Any person prior to or within 15 days §§ 927.20 to 927.35. If nominations to such times and places designated by the after selection as a member or as an fill any such vacancy are not made Fresh Pear Committee. alternate for a member of the Fresh Pear within 20 days after such vacancy (b) Nominations for grower and Committee or the Processed Pear occurs, the Secretary may fill such handler members of the Processed Pear Committee shall qualify by filing with vacancy without regard to nominations. Committee and their alternates shall be the Secretary a written acceptance of the made at meetings of growers and person’s willingness to serve. § 927.30 Compensation and expenses. handlers held in each of the districts The members and alternates for designated in § 927.11 at such times and § 927.27 Term of office. members shall serve without places designated by the Processed Pear The term of office of each member compensation, but may be reimbursed Committee. Nominations for processor and alternate member of the Fresh Pear for expenses necessarily incurred by members of the Processed Pear Committee and the Processed Pear them in the performance of their Committee and their alternates shall be Committee shall be for two years respective duties. made at a meeting of processors at such beginning July 1 and ending June 30: time and place designated by the Provided, That the terms of office of § 927.31 Powers. Processed Pear Committee. one-half the initial members and The Fresh Pear Committee and the alternates shall end June 30, 2006; and § 927.23 Voting. Processed Pear Committee shall have that beginning with the 2005–2006 Only growers in attendance at the following powers to exercise each fiscal period, no member shall serve independently: meetings for election of nominees shall more than three consecutive two-year (a) To administer, as specifically participate in the nomination of grower terms unless specifically exempted by provided in §§ 927.20 to 927.35, the members and their alternates, and only the Secretary. Members and alternate terms and provisions of this subpart: handlers in attendance at meetings for members shall serve in such capacities election of nominees shall participate in for the portion of the term of office for (b) To make administrative rules and the nomination of handler members and which they are selected and have regulations in accordance with, and to their alternates, and only processors in qualified and until their respective effectuate, the terms and provisions of attendance for election of nominees successors are selected and have this subpart; and shall participate in the nomination of qualified. The terms of office of (c) To receive, investigate, and report processor members and their alternates. successor members and alternates shall to the Secretary complaints of violations A grower may participate only in the be so determined that one-half of the of the provisions of this subpart. election held in the district in which he total committee membership ends each § 927.32 Duties. or she produces pears, and a handler June 30. may participate only in the election The duties of the Fresh Pear held in the district in which he or she § 927.28 Alternates for members. Committee and the Processed Pear handles pears. Each person may vote as The first alternate for a member shall Committee, each independently, shall a grower, handler or processor, but not act in the place and stead of the member be as follows:
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29395
(a) To act as intermediary between the require the concurring vote of at least 75 to cover such expenses shall be acquired Secretary and any grower, handler or percent of those members present, by the levying of assessments as processor; including alternates then serving in the provided in § 927.41. (b) To keep minutes, books, and place of any members. records which will reflect clearly all of (b) Mail voting. The Fresh Pear § 927.41 Assessments. the acts and transactions. The minutes, Committee or the Processed Pear (a) Assessments will be levied only books, and records shall be subject at Committee may provide for members upon handlers who first handle pears. any time to examination by the voting by mail, telecopier or other Each handler shall pay assessments on Secretary or by such person as may be electronic means, telephone, or all pears handled by such handler as the designated by the Secretary; telegraph, upon due notice to all pro rata share of the expenses which the (c) To investigate, from time to time, members. Promptly after voting by Secretary finds are reasonable and likely and to assemble data on the growing, telephone or telegraph, each member to be incurred by the Fresh Pear harvesting, shipping, and marketing thus voting shall confirm in writing, the Committee or the Processed Pear conditions relative to pears, and to vote so cast. Committee during a fiscal period. The furnish to the Secretary such available payment of assessments for the § 927.34 Right of the Secretary. information as may be requested; maintenance and functioning of the (d) To perform such duties as may be The members and alternates for Fresh Pear Committee or the Processed assigned to it from time to time by the members and any agent or employee Pear Committee may be required under Secretary in connection with the appointed or employed by the Fresh this part throughout the period such administration of section 32 of the Act Pear Committee or the Processed Pear assessments are payable irrespective of to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Committee shall be subject to removal whether particular provisions thereof Act, and for other purposes, Public Act or suspension by the Secretary at any are suspended or become inoperative. No. 320, 74th Congress, approved time. Each and every regulation, (b)(1) Based upon a recommendation August 24, 1935 (49 Stat. 774), as decision, determination, or other act of the Fresh Pear Committee or other amended; shall be subject to the continuing right available data, the Secretary shall fix (e) To cause the books to be audited of the Secretary to disapprove of the three base rates of assessment for pears by one or more competent accountants same at any time, and, upon such that handlers shall pay on pears at the end of each fiscal year and at such disapproval, shall be deemed null and handled for the fresh market during other times as the Fresh Pear Committee void, except as to acts done in reliance each fiscal period. Such base rates shall or the Processed Pear Committee may thereon or in compliance therewith include one rate of assessment for any deem necessary or as the Secretary may prior to such disapproval by the or all varieties or subvarieties of pears request, and to file with the Secretary Secretary. classified as summer/fall; one rate of copies of any and all audit reports assessment for any or all varieties or § 927.35 Funds and other property. subvarieties of pears, classified as made; (a) All funds received pursuant to any (f) To appoint such employees agents, winter; and one rate of assessment for of the provisions of this subpart shall be and representatives as it may deem any or all varieties or subvarieties of used solely for the purposes specified in necessary, and to determine the pears classified as other. Upon this subpart, and the Secretary may compensation and define the duties of recommendation of the Fresh Pear require the Fresh Pear Committee or the each; Committee or other available data, the Processed Pear Committee and its (g) To give the Secretary, or the Secretary may also fix supplemental members to account for all receipts and designated agent of the Secretary, the rates of assessment on individual disbursements. same notice of meetings as is given to varieties or subvarieties categorized (b) Upon the death, resignation, within the assessment classifications in the members of the Fresh Pear removal, disqualification, or expiration Committee or the Processed Pear this paragraph (b)(1) to secure sufficient of the term of office of any member or funds to provide for projects authorized Committee; employee, all books, records, funds, and (h) To select a chairman of the Fresh under § 927.47. At any time during the other property in his or her possession Pear Committee or the Processed Pear fiscal period when it is determined on belonging to the Fresh Pear Committee Committee and, from time to time, such the basis of a Fresh Pear Committee or the Processed Pear Committee shall other officers as it may deem advisable recommendation or other information be delivered to his or her successor in and to define the duties of each; and that different rates are necessary for (i) To submit to the Secretary as soon office or to the Fresh Pear Committee or fresh pears or for any varieties or as practicable after the beginning of Processed Pear Committee, and such subvarieties, the Secretary may modify each fiscal period, a budget for such assignments and other instruments shall those rates of assessment and such new fiscal year, including a report in be executed as may be necessary to vest rate shall apply to any or all varieties or explanation of the items appearing in such successor or in the Fresh Pear subvarieties that are shipped during the therein and a recommendation as to the Committee or Processed Pear Committee fiscal period for fresh market. rate of assessment for such period. full title to all the books, records, funds, (2) Based upon a recommendation of and other property in the possession or the Processed Pear Committee or other § 927.33 Procedure. under the control of such member or available data, the Secretary shall fix (a) Quorum and voting. A quorum at employee pursuant to this subpart. three base rates of assessment for pears a meeting of the Fresh Pear Committee Expenses and Assessments that handlers shall pay on pears or the Processed Pear Committee shall handled for processing during each consist of 75 percent of the number of § 927.40 Expenses. fiscal period. Such base rates shall committee members, or alternates then The Fresh Pear Committee and the include one rate of assessment for any serving in the place of any members, Processed Pear Committee are or all varieties or subvarieties of pears respectively. Except as otherwise authorized, each independently, to classified as summer/fall; one rate of provided in § 927.52, all decisions of the incur such expenses as the Secretary assessment for any or all varieties or Fresh Pear Committee or the Processed finds may be necessary to carry out their subvarieties of pears, classified as Pear Committee at any meeting shall functions under this subpart. The funds winter; and one rate of assessment for
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 29396 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
any or all varieties or subvarieties of § 927.42 Accounting. approval of the Secretary, may establish pears classified as other. Upon (a) If, at the end of a fiscal period, the or provide for the establishment of recommendation of the Processed Pear assessments collected are in excess of production and post-harvest research, or Committee or other available data, the expenses incurred, the Fresh Pear marketing research and development Secretary may also fix supplemental Committee or the Processed Pear projects designed to assist, improve, or rates of assessment on individual Committee may carryover such excess promote the marketing, distribution, varieties or subvarieties categorized into subsequent fiscal periods as a and consumption of pears. Such within the assessment classifications reserve: Provided, That funds already in projects may provide for any form of defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this the reserve do not exceed approximately marketing promotion, including paid section to secure sufficient funds to one fiscal period’s expenses. Such advertising. The expense of such provide for projects authorized under reserve may be used to cover any projects shall be paid from funds § 927.47. At any time during the fiscal expense authorized under this part and collected pursuant to §§ 927.41 and period when it is determined on the to cover necessary expenses of 927.45. Expenditures for a particular basis of a Processed Pear Committee liquidation in the event of termination variety or subvariety of pears shall recommendation or other information of this part. Any such excess not approximate the amount of assessments that different rates are necessary for retained in a reserve or applied to any and voluntary contributions collected pears for processing or for any varieties outstanding obligation of the person for that variety or subvariety of pears. from whom it was collected shall be or subvarieties, the Secretary may Regulation of Shipments modify those rates of assessment and refunded proportionately to the persons such new rate shall apply to any or all from whom it was collected. Upon § 927.50 Marketing policy. varieties or subvarieties of pears that are termination of this part, any funds not (a) It shall be the duty of the Fresh shipped during the fiscal period for required to defray the necessary Pear Committee to investigate, from processing. expenses of liquidation shall be time to time, supply and demand disposed of in such manner as the (c) Based on the recommendation of conditions relative to pears and each Secretary may determine to be the Fresh Pear Committee, the Processed grade, size, and quality of each variety appropriate: Provided, That to the extent Pear Committee or other available data, or subvariety thereof. Such practical, such funds shall be returned the Secretary may establish additional investigations shall be with respect to pro rata to the persons from whom such base rates of assessments, or change or the following: funds were collected. modify the base rate classifications (1) Estimated production of each (b) All funds received pursuant to the variety or subvariety of pears and of defined in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this provisions of this part shall be used section. each grade, size, and quality thereof; solely for the purpose specified in this (2) Prospective supplies and prices of (d) The Fresh Pear Committee or the part and shall be accounted for in the pears and other fruits, both in fresh and Processed Pear Committee may impose manner provided in this part. The processed form, which are competitive a late payment charge on any handler Secretary may at any time require the to the marketing of pears; who fails to pay any assessment within Fresh Pear Committee or the Processed (3) Prospective exports of pears and the time prescribed. In the event the Pear Committee and its members to imports of pears from other producing handler thereafter fails to pay the account for all receipts and areas; amount outstanding, including the late disbursements. (4) Probable harvesting period for payment charge, within the prescribed each variety or subvariety of pears; time, the Fresh Pear Committee or the § 927.43 Use of funds. (5) The trend and level of consumer Processed Pear Committee may impose From the funds acquired pursuant to income; an additional charge in the form of § 927.41 the Fresh Pear Committee and (6) General economic conditions; and interest on such outstanding amount. the Processed Pear Committee, each (7) Other relevant factors. The Fresh Pear Committee or the independently, shall pay the salaries of (b) On or before August 1 of each year, Processed Pear Committee, with the its employees, if any, and pay the the Fresh Pear Committee shall approval of the Secretary, shall expenses necessarily incurred in the recommend regulations to the Secretary prescribe the amount of such late performance of the duties of the Fresh if it finds, on the basis of the payment charge and rate of interest. Pear Committee or the Processed Pear investigations specified in this section, Committee. that such regulation as is provided in (e) In order to provide funds to carry § 927.51 will tend to effectuate the out the functions of the Fresh Pear § 927.44 [Reserved] declared policy of the act. Committee or the Processed Pear (c) In the event the Fresh Pear Committee prior to commencement of § 927.45 Contributions. Committee at any time finds that by shipments in any season, handlers may The Fresh Pear Committee or the reason of changed conditions any make advance payments of assessments, Processed Pear Committee may accept regulation issued pursuant to § 927.51 which advance payments shall be voluntary contributions, but these shall should be modified, suspended, or credited to such handlers and the only be used to pay expenses incurred terminated, it shall so recommend to the assessments of such handlers shall be pursuant to § 927.47. Furthermore, such Secretary. adjusted so that such assessments are contributions shall be free from any based upon the quantity of each variety encumbrances by the donor, and the § 927.51 Issuance of regulations; and or subvariety of pears handled by such Fresh Pear Committee or the Processed modification, suspension, or termination handlers during such season. Further, Pear Committee shall retain complete thereof. payment discounts may be authorized control of their use. (a) Whenever the Secretary finds, by the Fresh Pear Committee or the Research and Development from the recommendations and Processed Pear Committee upon the information submitted by the Fresh Pear approval of the Secretary to handlers § 927.47 Research and development. Committee, or from other available making such advance assessment The Fresh Pear Committee or the information, that regulation, in the payments. Processed Pear Committee, with the manner specified in this section, of the
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29397
shipment of fresh pears would tend to prescribed in paragraph (b) of this quantity as the committee, with the effectuate the declared policy of the act, section, of all members. approval of the Secretary, may he or she shall so limit the shipment of (b) With respect to a particular variety prescribe, exempt from the inspection such pears during a specified period or or subvariety of pears, the applicable and certification requirements of periods. Such regulation may: total number of votes shall be the paragraph (a) of this section. (1) Limit the total quantity of any aggregate of the votes allotted to the (c) The Fresh Pear Committee may, grade, size, quality, or combinations members in accordance with the with the approval of the Secretary, thereof, of any variety or subvariety of following: Each member shall have one prescribe rules and regulations pears grown in any district and may vote as an individual and, in addition, modifying or eliminating the prescribe different requirements shall have a vote equal to the percentage requirement for mandatory inspection applicable to shipments to different of the vote of the district represented by and certification of shipments: export markets; such member; and such district vote Provided, That an adequate method of (2) Limit, during any period or shall be computed as soon as practical ensuring compliance with quality and periods, the shipment of any particular after the beginning of each fiscal period size requirements is developed. grade, size, quality, or any combination on either: thereof, of any variety or subvariety, of (1) The basis of one vote for each Exceptions pears grown in any district or districts 25,000 boxes (except 2,500 boxes for § 927.65 Exemption from regulation. of the production area; and varieties or subvarieties with less than (a) Nothing contained in this subpart (3) Provide a method, through rules 200,000 standard boxes or container shall limit or authorize the limitation of and regulation issued pursuant to this equivalents) of the average quantity of shipment of pears for consumption by part, for fixing markings on the such variety or subvariety produced in charitable institutions or distribution by container or containers, which may be the particular district and shipped relief agencies, nor shall any assessment used in the packaging or handling of therefrom during the immediately be computed on pears so shipped. The pears, including appropriate logo or preceding three fiscal periods; or Fresh Pear Committee or the Processed other container markings to identify the (2) Such other basis as the Fresh Pear Pear Committee may prescribe contents thereof. Committee or the Processed Pear regulations to prevent pears shipped for (b) Whenever the Secretary finds, Committee may recommend and the from the recommendations and either of such purposes from entering Secretary may approve. The votes so commercial channels of trade contrary information submitted by the Fresh Pear allotted to a member may be cast by Committee, or from other available to the provisions of this subpart. such member on each recommendation (b) The Fresh Pear Committee or the information, that a regulation should be relative to the variety or subvariety of Processed Pear Committee may modified, suspended, or terminated pears on which such votes were prescribe rules and regulations, to with respect to any or all shipments of computed. become effective upon the approval of fresh pears grown in any district in the Secretary, whereby quantities of order to effectuate the declared policy of § 927.53 Notification. pears or types of pear shipments may be the act, he or she shall so modify, (a) The Fresh Pear Committee shall exempted from any or all provisions of suspend, or terminate such regulation. If give prompt notice to growers and this subpart. the Secretary finds, from the handlers of each recommendation to the recommendations and information Secretary pursuant to the provisions of Miscellaneous Provisions submitted by the Fresh Pear Committee, § 927.50. or from other available information, that (b) The Secretary shall immediately § 927.70 Reports. a regulation obstructs or does not tend notify the Fresh Pear Committee of the (a) Upon the request of the Fresh Pear to effectuate the declared policy of the issuance of each regulation and of each Committee or the Processed Pear act, he or she shall suspend or terminate modification, suspension, or Committee, and subject to the approval such regulation. On the same basis and termination of a regulation and the of the Secretary, each handler shall in like manner, the Secretary may Fresh Pear Committee shall give prompt furnish to the aforesaid committee, terminate any such modification or notice thereof to growers and handlers. respectively, in such manner and at suspension. such times as it prescribes, such § 927.54 [Reserved] information as will enable it to perform § 927.52 Prerequisites to Inspection its duties under this subpart. recommendations. (b) All such reports shall be held (a) Decisions of the Fresh Pear § 927.60 Inspection and certification. under appropriate protective Committee or the Processed Pear (a) Handlers shall ship only fresh classification and custody by the Fresh Committee with respect to any pears inspected by the Federal-State Pear Committee or the Processed Pear recommendations to the Secretary Inspection Service or under a program Committee, or duly appointed pursuant to the establishment or developed by the Federal-State employees thereof, so that the modification of a supplemental rate of Inspection Service: except, that such information contained therein which assessment for an individual variety or inspection and certification of may adversely affect the competitive subvariety of pears shall be made by shipments of pears may be performed by position of any handler in relation to affirmative vote of not less than 75 such other inspection service as the other handlers will not be disclosed. percent of the applicable total number Fresh Pear Committee, with the Compilations of general reports from of votes, computed in the manner approval of the Secretary, may data submitted by handlers are described in paragraph (b) of this designate. Promptly after shipment of authorized subject to the prohibition of section, of all members. Decisions of the any pears, the handler shall submit, or disclosure of individual handler’s Fresh Pear Committee pursuant to the cause to be submitted, to the Fresh Pear identities or operations. provisions of § 927.50 shall be made by Committee a copy of the inspection (c) Each handler shall maintain for at an affirmative vote of not less than 80 certificate issued on such shipment. least two succeeding years such records percent of the applicable total number (b) Any handler may ship pears, on of the pears received and of pears of votes, computed in the manner any one conveyance and in such disposed of, by such handler as may be
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 29398 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
necessary to verify reports pursuant to § 927.77 Effective time. Committee or the Processed Pear this section. The provisions of this subpart and of Committee then functioning shall any amendment thereto shall become continue as joint trustees for the § 927.71 Compliance. effective at such time as the Secretary purpose of liquidating all funds and Except as provided in § 927.65, no may declare, and shall continue in force property then in the possession or under handler shall ship any pears contrary to until terminated in one of the ways the control of the Fresh Pear Committee the applicable restrictions and specified in § 927.78. or the Processed Pear Committee, limitations specified in, or effective including claims for any funds unpaid pursuant to, the provisions of this § 927.78 Termination. or property not delivered at the time of subpart. (a) The Secretary may at any time such termination. terminate this subpart. § 927.72 Duration of immunities. (b) The joint trustees shall continue in (b) The Secretary shall terminate or such capacity until discharged by the The benefits, privileges, and suspend the operation of any or all of Secretary; from time to time account for immunities conferred by virtue of this the provisions of this subpart whenever all receipts and disbursements; deliver subpart shall cease upon termination he or she finds that such operation all funds and property on hand, together hereof, except with respect to acts done obstructs or does not tend to effectuate with all books and records of the Fresh under and during the existence of this the declared policy of the act. Pear Committee or the Processed Pear subpart. (c) The Secretary shall terminate the Committee and of the joint trustees, to provisions of this subpart applicable to § 927.73 Separability. such person as the Secretary shall fresh pears for market or pears for If any provision of this subpart is direct; and, upon the request of the processing at the end of any fiscal declared invalid, or the applicability Secretary, execute such assignments or period whenever the Secretary finds, by thereof to any person, circumstance, or other instruments necessary and referendum or otherwise, that such thing is held invalid, the validity of the appropriate to vest in such person full termination is favored by a majority of remaining provisions and the title and right to all of the funds, growers of fresh pears for market or applicability thereof to any other property, or claims vested in the Fresh pears for processing, respectively: person, circumstance, or thing shall not Pear Committee or the Processed Pear Provided, That such majority has during be affected thereby. Committee or in said joint trustees. such period produced more than 50 § 927.74 Derogation. percent of the volume of fresh pears for (c) Any funds collected pursuant to Nothing contained in this subpart is market or pears for processing, this subpart and held by such joint or shall be construed to be in derogation respectively, in the production area. trustees or such person over and above of, or in modification of, the rights of Such termination shall be effective only the amounts necessary to meet the Secretary or of the United States to if announced on or before the last day outstanding obligations and the exercise any powers granted by the act of the then current fiscal period. expenses necessarily incurred by the or otherwise, or, in accordance with (d) The Secretary shall conduct a joint trustees or such other person in the such powers, to act in the premises referendum within every six-year period performance of their duties under this whenever such action is deemed beginning on May 21, 2005, to ascertain subpart, as soon as practicable after the advisable. whether continuance of the provisions termination hereof, shall be returned to of this subpart applicable to fresh pears the handlers pro rata in proportion to § 927.75 Liability. for market or pears for processing are their contributions thereto. No member or alternate for a member favored by producers of pears for the (d) Any person to whom funds, of the Fresh Pear Committee or the fresh market and pears for processing, property, or claims have been Processed Pear Committee, nor any respectively. The Secretary may transferred or delivered by the Fresh employee or agent thereof, shall be held terminate the provisions of this subpart Pear Committee or the Processed Pear personally responsible, either at the end of any fiscal period in which Committee or its members, upon individually or jointly with others, in the Secretary has found that direction of the Secretary, as provided any way whatsoever, to any party under continuance of this subpart is not in this section, shall be subject to the this subpart or to any other person for favored by producers who, during a same obligations and duties with errors in judgment, mistakes, or other representative period determined by the respect to said funds, property, or acts, either of commission or omission, Secretary, have been engaged in the claims as are imposed upon the as such member, alternate for a member, production of fresh pears for market or members or upon said joint trustees. agent or employee, except for acts of pears for processing in the production dishonesty, willful misconduct, or gross area: Provided, That termination of the § 927.80 Amendments. negligence. order shall be effective only if Amendments to this subpart may be announced on or before the last day of § 927.76 Agents. proposed from time to time by the Fresh the then current fiscal period. Pear Committee or the Processed Pear The Secretary may name, by (e) The provisions of this part shall, Committee or by the Secretary. designation in writing, any person, in any event, terminate whenever the Dated: May 13, 2005. including any officer or employee of the provisions of the act authorizing them Government or any bureau or division cease to be in effect. Kenneth C. Clayton, in the Department of Agriculture to act Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing as his or her agent or representative in § 927.79 Proceedings after termination. Service. connection with any of the provisions of (a) Upon the termination of this [FR Doc. 05–9961 Filed 5–17–05; 9:47 am] this subpart. subpart, the members of the Fresh Pear BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:28 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR2.SGM 20MYR2 Friday, May 20, 2005
Part IV
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Iron and Steel Foundries; Final Rule and Proposed Rule
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 29400 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// docket and made available on the AGENCY www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line Internet. If you submit an electronic instructions for submitting comments. comment, EPA recommends that you 40 CFR Part 63 • Agency Web site: http:// include your name and other contact www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s [OAR–2002–0034; FRL–7911–8] information in the body of your electronic public docket and comment comment and with any disk or CD–ROM RIN 2060–AM85 system, is EPA’s preferred method for you submit. If EPA cannot read your receiving comments. Follow the on-line comment due to technical difficulties National Emission Standards for instructions for submitting comments. and cannot contact you for clarification, Hazardous Air Pollutants for Iron and • E-mail: [email protected]. EPA may not be able to consider your Steel Foundries • Fax: (202) 566–1741. comment. Electronic files should avoid • Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, AGENCY: the use of special characters, any form Environmental Protection Docket ID OAR–2002–0034, U.S. EPA, Agency (EPA). of encryption, and be free of any defects Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania or viruses. ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments. Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Docket: All documents in the docket Please include a total of two copies. SUMMARY: On April 22, 2004, the EPA • are listed in the EDOCKET index at Hand Delivery: EPA, 1301 http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although issued national emission standards to Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102, control hazardous air pollutants emitted listed in the index, some information is Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other from iron and steel foundries. This are only accepted during the Docket’s action amends the work practice information whose disclosure is normal hours of operation, and special restricted by statute. Certain other requirements for materials certification arrangements should be made for and scrap selection/inspection information, such as copyrighted deliveries of boxed information. materials, is not placed on the Internet programs. The direct final amendments Instructions: Direct your comments to add clarification and flexibility but do and will be publicly available only in Docket ID No. OAR–2002–0034. The hard copy form. Publicly available not materially change the requirements EPA’s policy is that all comments of the rule. docket materials are available either received will be included in the public electronically in EDOCKET or in hard DATES: The direct final rule docket without change and may be copy form at the Air and Radiation amendments will be effective on August made available online at http:// 18, 2005 without further notice, unless Docket, Docket ID No. OAR–2002–0034, www.epa.gov/edocket, including any EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 we receive adverse comments by June personal information provided, unless 20, 2005, or by July 5, 2005 if a public Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, the comment includes information DC. The Public Reading Room is open hearing is requested. If such comments claimed to be Confidential Business are received, we will publish a timely from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday Information (CBI) or other information through Friday, excluding legal withdrawal in the Federal Register whose disclosure is restricted by statute. indicating which amendments will holidays. The telephone number for the Do not submit information that you Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, become effective and which consider to be CBI or otherwise amendments are being withdrawn due and the telephone number for the Air protected through EDOCKET, Docket is (202) 566–1742. to adverse comment. Any distinct regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA amendment, paragraph, or section of the EDOCKET and the Federal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. direct final amendments for which we regulations.gov Web sites are Kevin Cavender, Emissions, Monitoring do not receive adverse comment will ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which and Analysis Division (C339–02), Office become effective on August 18, 2005. means EPA will not know your identity of Air Quality Planning and Standards, The incorporation by reference of or contact information unless you EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, certain publications listed in the direct provide it in the body of your comment. telephone number (919) 541–2364, fax final rule amendments is approved by If you send an e-mail comment directly number (919) 541–1903, e-mail address: the Director of the Federal Register as of to EPA without going through [email protected]. August 18, 2005. EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, mail address will be automatically Entities. Categories and entities identified by Docket ID No. OAR–2002– captured and included as part of the potentially regulated by this action 0034, by one of the following methods: comment that is placed in the public include:
Category NAICS Examples of regulated entities code 1
Industry ...... 331511 Iron foundries. Iron and steel plants. Automotive and large equipment manufacturers. 331512 Steel investment foundries. 331513 Steel foundries (except investment). Federal government ...... Not affected. State/local/tribal government ...... Not affected. 1 North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be examine the applicability criteria in to a particular entity, consult the person exhaustive, but rather provides a guide §§ 63.7681 and 63.7682 of the national listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER for readers regarding entities likely to be emission standards for hazardous air INFORMATION CONTACT section.Worldwide regulated by this action. To determine pollutants (NESHAP) for iron and steel Web (WWW). In addition to being whether your facility would be foundries. If you have any questions available in the docket, an electronic regulated by this action, you should regarding the applicability of this action copy of today’s direct final rule
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29401
amendments will be available on the C. Regulatory Flexibility Act operator to comply with the scrap WWW through the Technology Transfer D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act certification requirements in 40 CFR Network (TTN). Following the E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 63.7700(b) or the scrap selection/ Administrator’s signature, a copy of the F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation inspection requirements in 40 CFR and Coordination with Indian Tribal 63.7700(c). According to one petitioner, direct final rule amendments will be Governments placed on the TTN’s policy and G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of the requirements in 40 CFR 63.7700(a) guidance page for newly proposed or Children from Environmental Health and may be interpreted to require a foundry promulgated rules at http:// Safety Risks to either comply with the certification www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that requirements in 40 CFR 63.7700(b) for provides information and technology Significantly Affect Energy Supply, the entire foundry’s scrap material and exchange in various areas of air Distribution, or Use melt only those materials that are pollution control. If more information I. National Technology Transfer ‘‘certified,’’ or to comply with scrap regarding the TTN is needed, call the Advancement Act selection/inspection requirements in 40 J. Congressional Review Act TTN HELP line at (919) 541–5384. CFR 63.7700(c) for all scrap materials— Judicial Review. Under section I. Background even if a significant portion of the scrap 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), material used by the foundry meets the On April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21906), we judicial review of the direct final rule requirements in 40 CFR 63.7700(b). issued the NESHAP for iron and steel amendments is available only by filing The requirements in 40 CFR foundries (40 CFR part 63, subpart a petition for review in the U.S. Court 63.7700(a) were never intended to EEEEE). The NESHAP establish of Appeals for the District of Columbia prevent a foundry from having emissions limits and work practice Circuit by July 19, 2005. Under section segregated scrap storage areas, piles or standards for hazardous air pollutants 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an bins, with the scrap material in some of (HAP) from foundry operations. The objection to the direct final rule these areas being subject to scrap NESHAP implement section 112(d) of amendments that was raised with certification requirements in 40 CFR the CAA by requiring all iron and steel reasonable specificity during the period 63.7700(b) and scrap material in other foundries that are major sources of HAP for public comment can be raised during areas subject to scrap selection/ to meet standards reflecting the judicial review. Moreover, under section inspection requirements in 40 CFR application of the maximum achievable 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements 63.7700(c). For example, we did not control technology (MACT). intend to require inspections of pig iron established by the direct final rule After publication of the NESHAP, the amendments may not be challenged or other ‘‘certifiable’’ scrap simply American Foundry Society, the Alliance because a foundry also recycled internal separately in any civil or criminal of Automobile Manufacturers, and the proceedings brought by the EPA to oily turnings. Consequently, we have Steel Founders’ Society of America filed revised the language in 40 CFR enforce these requirements. petitions for reconsideration of the final Comments. We are issuing the 63.7700(a) to clarify that the scrap rule. One of the petitions requested amendments as a direct final rule requirements apply to each type of scrap clarification of certain aspects of the without prior proposal because we view material received or each scrap storage scrap certification and scrap selection/ the amendments as noncontroversial area, pile, or bin as long as the scrap inspection work practice standards in and do not anticipate adverse material subject to certification 40 CFR 63.7700 concerning: comments. However, in the Proposed requirements in 40 CFR 63.7700(b) • Use of multiple scrap acquisition Rules section of this Federal Register, remains segregated from scrap material options; we are publishing a separate document subject to selection/inspection plans in • Requirements for ‘‘certified’’ metal that will serve as the proposal for the 40 CFR 63.7700(c). ingots, oil filters, and organic liquids; amendments contained in the direct We have also clarified the and final rule in the event that adverse requirement in 40 CFR 63.7700(b) that • Classification of ‘‘cleaned’’ scrap comments are filed. If we receive any the foundry operate by a written materials. adverse comments on one or more certification that it purchases and uses We agree with the petitioner(s) that distinct amendments, we will publish a only ‘‘certified’’ metal ingots, pig iron, certain changes are needed to clarify slitter, or other materials that do not use timely withdrawal in the Federal these aspects of the work practice post-consumer automotive body scrap, Register informing the public which standards. The changes to the NESHAP post-consumer engine blocks, oil filters, amendments will become effective and in today’s direct final rule amendments oily turnings, lead components, mercury which amendments are being are expected to resolve issues associated switches, plastics, or organic liquids. withdrawn due to adverse comment. We with the work practice standards which The petitioner specifically asked EPA to will address all public comments in a require implementing guidance or identify who must certify the metal subsequent final rule based on the minor changes in regulatory language. ingots, to clarify the ‘‘no organic proposed rule. We will not institute a Because the work practice standards liquids’’ restriction, and to modify the second comment period on the direct will become effective on April 22, 2005 regulatory language to clarify that the final rule. Any parties interested in (1 year after promulgation), the prohibited material include only ‘‘used’’ commenting must do so at this time. clarifications contained in the direct oil filters. Outline. The information presented in We agree with the petitioner’s this preamble is organized as follows: final rule amendments are time-critical. Today’s direct final rule amendments concerns and have clarified the I. Background will reduce compliance uncertainties regulatory text of 40 CFR 63.7700(b). It II. Summary of the Direct Final Rule and improve understanding of the rule is not our intent to require a separate Amendments certification for metal ingots. III. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and requirements. Economic Impacts Accordingly, we have deleted the word II. Summary of Direct Final Rule ‘‘certified’’ from 40 CFR 63.7700(b). We IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Amendments A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory have clarified the restriction on oil Planning and Review The work practice standards in 40 filters by adding the term ‘‘post- B. Paperwork Reduction Act CFR 63.7700(a) require the owner or consumer’’ to signify that used filters
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 29402 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
are the materials of concern. We have During discussions with the (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues clarified the ‘‘no organic liquids’’ petitioners regarding clarification of the arising out of legal mandates, the requirement by using the term ‘‘free work practice requirements, questions President’s priorities, or the principles organic liquids.’’ The direct final rule were raised regarding the ability to set forth in the Executive Order. amendments define ‘‘free organic perform inspections at the scrap It has been determined that this action liquids’’ as any material that fails the supplier’s facility. In many cases, is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ ‘‘Paint Filter Liquids Test’’ by EPA foundry representatives visit the under the terms of Executive Order Method 9095A (incorporated by supplier’s facility to personally select 12866, and is, therefore, not subject to reference-see 40 CFR 63.14). If any and inspect scrap materials. To clarify OMB review. portion of the material passes through our intent that the NESHAP allow B. Paperwork Reduction Act and drips from the filter within the 5- inspections to take place at the minute test period, the material contains supplier’s facility, we have expanded 40 This action does not impose any new free liquids. EPA Method 9095A is CFR 63.7700(c)(3) to specifically information collection burden. The available in EPA publication SW–846, address this situation. The direct final OMB has previously approved the ‘‘Test Methods for Evaluating Solid rule amendments state that the visual information collection requirements Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,’’ inspections may be performed at the contained in the existing rule (40 CFR (Revision 1, December 1996). scrap supplier’s facility. However, the part 63, subpart EEEEE) under the The petitioner also stated that the inspection procedures in the foundry’s provisions of the Paperwork Reduction regulatory language in 40 CFR scrap inspection/selection plan must Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has 63.7700(b) does not allow for the include an explanation of how the assigned OMB control number 2060– recycling and use of materials if they periodic inspections ensure that not less 0543, EPA ICR number 2096.02. A copy have been processed to remove than 10 percent of scrap purchased from of the approved Information Collection contaminants of concern. In support, the each supplier is subject to inspection. Request (ICR) may be obtained from petitioner explained that some suppliers This provision is needed to maintain Susan Auby, Collection Strategies dismantle or crush and then wash post- consistency with the inspection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection consumer engine blocks prior to requirements for scrap received at the Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania shipment as scrap material. Similarly, facility gate. Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by some scrap suppliers process oily calling (202) 566–1672. turnings or used oil filters to make them III. Summary of Environmental, Burden means the total time, effort, or environmentally acceptable for melting. Energy, and Economic Impacts financial resources expended by persons In response to the petitioner’s concerns, The direct final rule amendments will to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose we have added a provision to 40 CFR have no effect on environmental, or provide information to or for a 63.7700(b) to allow for the use of energy, or non-air health impacts Federal agency. This includes the time ‘‘cleaned’’ scrap material. The new because none of the changes affect the needed to review instructions; develop, provision states that any post-consumer stringency of the existing work practice acquire, install, and utilize technology engine blocks, post-consumer oil filters, standards. No costs or economic and systems for the purposes of or oil turnings that are processed and/ impacts are associated with the direct collecting, validating, and verifying or cleaned to the extent practicable such final rule amendments. information, processing and that the materials do not include lead maintaining information, and disclosing components, mercury switches, plastics, IV. Statutory and Executive Order and providing information; adjust the or free organic liquids can be included Reviews existing ways to comply with any in the certification. A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory previously applicable instructions and The work practice standards in 40 Planning and Review requirements; train personnel to be able CFR 63.7700(c)(1) require the owner or to respond to a collection of operator to operate according to a Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR information; search data sources; materials acquisition program to limit 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA must complete and review the collection of the organic contaminants in the scrap. determine whether the regulatory action information; and transmit or otherwise The requirements for material to be is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to disclose the information. charged to a scrap preheater, electric arc review by the Office of Management and An agency may not conduct or furnace, or electric induction furnace Budget (OMB) and the requirements of sponsor, and a person is not required to are more stringent than those required the Executive Order. The Executive respond to, a collection of information for scrap material that is to be charged Order defines a ‘‘significant regulatory unless it displays a currently valid OMB to a cupola furnace. During action’’ as one that is likely to result in control number. The OMB control conversations with the petitioners, a rule that may: numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 concerns were raised that the (1) Have an annual effect on the CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. requirements in 40 CFR 63.7700(c)(1) economy of $100 million or more or may be interpreted to require a foundry adversely affect in a material way the C. Regulatory Flexibility Act to exclusively comply with either the economy, a sector of the economy, The EPA has determined that it is not requirements in 40 CFR 63.7700(c)(1)(i) productivity, competition, jobs, the necessary to prepare a regulatory or (ii) for the entire foundry’s scrap environment, public health or safety, or flexibility analysis in connection with material—even if the foundry operates State, local, or tribal governments or the direct final rule amendments. both a cupola and one of the other communities; For the purposes of assessing the furnace types. This was not our intent. (2) Create a serious inconsistency or impacts of today’s direct final rule As such, we have added the words ‘‘as otherwise interfere with an action taken amendments on small entities, small applicable’’ to 40 CFR 63.7700(c)(1) to or planned by another agency; entity is defined as: (1) A small business clarify that a foundry may process scrap (3) Materially alter the budgetary having 500 or fewer employees, as that meets 40 CFR 63.7700(c)(1)(i) and impact of entitlement, grants, user fees, defined by the Small Business scrap that meets 40 CFR 63.7700(c)(1)(ii) or loan programs or the rights and Administration for NAICS codes in the appropriate furnaces. obligations of recipients thereof; or 331511, 331512 and 331513; (2) a
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29403
government jurisdiction that is a of the rule. The provisions of section on the States, on the relationship government of a city, county, town, 205 do not apply when they are between the national government and school district or special district with a inconsistent with applicable law. the States, or on the distribution of population of less than 50,000; and (3) Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA to power and responsibilities among the a small organization that is any not-for- adopt an alternative other than the least- various levels of government, as profit enterprise which is independently costly, most cost-effective, or least- specified in Executive Order 13132. owned and operated and that is not burdensome alternative if the None of the affected plants are owned dominant in its field. Administrator publishes with the final or operated by State governments. Thus, After considering the economic rule an explanation why that alternative Executive Order 13132 does not apply impacts of today’s direct final rule was not adopted. Before the EPA to the direct final rule amendments. amendments on small entities, the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation has concluded that this action will not that may significantly or uniquely affect and Coordination With Indian Tribal have a significant economic impact on small governments, including tribal Governments a substantial number of small entities. governments, it must have developed In determining whether a rule has a under section 203 of the UMRA a small Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, significant economic impact on a government agency plan. The plan must November 6, 2000) requires EPA to substantial number of small entities, the provide for notifying potentially develop an accountable process to impact of concern is any significant affected small governments, enabling ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by adverse economic impact on small officials of affected small governments tribal officials in the development of entities, since the primary purpose of to have meaningful and timely input in regulatory policies that have tribal the regulatory flexibility analyses is to the development of EPA regulatory implications.’’ The direct final rule identify and address regulatory proposals with significant Federal amendments do not have tribal alternatives ‘‘which minimize any intergovernmental mandates, and implications, as specified in Executive significant economic impact of the informing, educating, and advising Order 13175, because tribal proposed rule on small entities’’ (5 small governments on compliance with governments do not own or operate any U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, an agency the regulatory requirements. sources subject to the direct final rule may conclude that a rule will not have The EPA has determined that the amendments. Thus, Executive Order a significant economic impact on a direct final rule amendments do not 13175 does not apply to the direct final substantial number of small entities if contain a Federal mandate that may rule amendments. the rule relieves regulatory burden, or result in expenditures of $100 million or G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of otherwise has a positive economic effect more for State, local, and tribal Children From Environmental Health on all of the small entities subject to the governments, in the aggregate, or to the and Safety Risks rule. private sector in any 1 year. No new We conclude that there will be a costs are attributable to the direct final Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, positive impact on small entities rule amendments. Thus, the direct final April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: because the direct final rule rule amendments are not subject to the (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically amendments clarify the rule requirements of sections 202 and 205 of significant,’’ as defined under Executive requirements to reduce compliance the UMRA. The EPA has also Order 12866, and (2) concerns an uncertainties. The changes do not determined that the direct final rule environmental health or safety risk that impose new costs or requirements. We amendments contain no regulatory EPA has reason to believe may have a have, therefore, concluded that today’s requirements that might significantly or disproportionate effect on children. If direct final rule amendments will uniquely affect small governments the regulatory action meets both criteria, relieve regulatory burden for all small because they contain no requirements the EPA must evaluate the entities. that apply to such governments or environmental health or safety effects of D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act impose obligations upon them. the planned rule on children and Therefore, the direct final rule explain why the planned regulation is Title II of the Unfunded Mandates amendments are not subject to section preferable to other potentially effective Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 203 of the UMRA. and reasonably feasible alternatives Law 104–4, establishes requirements for considered by the Agency. Federal agencies to assess the effects of E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism We interpret Executive Order 13045 their regulatory actions on State, local, Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, as applying only to those regulatory and tribal governments and the private August 10, 1999) requires EPA to actions that are based on health or safety sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, develop an accountable process to risks, such that the analysis required the EPA generally must prepare a ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by under section 5–501 of the Executive written statement, including a cost- State and local officials in the Order has the potential to influence the benefit analysis, for proposed and final development of regulatory policies that regulation. The direct final rule rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies amendments are not subject to result in expenditures by State, local, that have federalism implications’’ is Executive Order 13045 because the and tribal governments, in the aggregate, defined in the Executive Order to NESHAP (and the direct final rule or by the private sector, of $100 million include regulations that have amendments) are based on technology or more in any 1 year. Before ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, performance and not on health or safety promulgating an EPA rule for which a on the relationship between the national risks. written statement is needed, section 205 government and the States, or on the of the UMRA generally requires the EPA distribution of power and H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That to identify and consider a reasonable responsibilities among the various Significantly Affect Energy Supply, number of regulatory alternatives and levels of government.’’ Distribution, or Use adopt the least costly, most cost- The direct final rule amendments do These direct final rule amendments effective, or least-burdensome not have federalism implications. They are not subject to Executive Order 13211 alternative that achieves the objectives will not have substantial direct effects (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 29404 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
they are not a significant regulatory substances, Incorporation by reference, lead components, mercury switches, action under Executive Order 12866. Reporting and recordkeeping plastics, or free organic liquids. For the requirements. purpose of this paragraph (b), ‘‘free I. National Technology Transfer organic liquids’’ is defined as material Advancement Act Dated: May 6, 2005. Stephen L. Johnson, that fails the paint filter test by EPA Section 112(d) of the National Method 9095A, ‘‘Paint Filter Liquids Administrator. Technology Transfer and Advancement Test’’ (Revision 1, December 1996), as Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–113; I For the reasons stated in the preamble, published in EPA Publication SW–846 15 U.S.C 272 note) directs the EPA to title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of ‘‘Test Methods for Evaluating Solid use voluntary consensus standards in Federal Regulations is amended as Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods’’ their regulatory and procurement follows: (incorporated by reference—see § 63.14). activities unless to do so would be Any post-consumer engine blocks, post- inconsistent with applicable law or PART 63—[AMENDED] consumer oil filters, or oily turnings that otherwise impracticable. Voluntary I 1. The authority citation for part 63 are processed and/or cleaned to the consensus standards are technical continues to read as follows: extent practicable such that the standards (e.g., material specifications, materials do not include lead Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. test methods, sampling procedures, components, mercury switches, plastics, business practices) developed or Subpart A—[Amended] or free organic liquids can be included adopted by one or more voluntary in this certification. consensus bodies. The NTTAA requires I 2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding (c) * * * EPA to provide Congress, through the new paragraph (k)(2) to read as follows: (1) A materials acquisition program to OMB, explanations when the Agency limit organic contaminants according to decides not to use available and § 63.14 Incorporations by reference. the requirements in paragraph (c)(1)(i) applicable voluntary consensus * * * * * or (ii) of this section, as applicable. standards. (k) * * * The direct final rule amendments * * * * * (2) Method 9095A, ‘‘Paint Filter (3) * * * involve technical standards. The direct Liquids Test,’’ (Revision 1, December (i) The inspection procedures must final rule amendments incorporate by 1996) as published in EPA Publication identify the location(s) where reference the ‘‘Paint Filter Liquids Test’’ SW–846: ‘‘Test Methods for Evaluating inspections are to be performed for each of EPA Method 9095A in EPA Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical type of shipment. Inspections may be Publication SW–846, ‘‘Methods for Methods,’’ IBR approved for performed at the scrap supplier’s Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ §§ 63.7700(b) and 63.7765. Chemical Methods (Revision 1, facility. The selected location(s) must December 1996). Consistent with the Subpart EEEEE—[Amended] provide a reasonable vantage point, NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to considering worker safety, for visual identify voluntary consensus standards I 3. Section 63.7700 is amended by: inspection. in addition to these EPA methods. No I a. Revising paragraph (a). * * * * * applicable voluntary consensus I b. Revising paragraph (b). (iv) If the inspections are performed at standards were identified for EPA I c. Revising the introductory text of the scrap supplier’s facility, the Method 9095A. The search and review paragraph (c)(1). inspection procedures must include an results have been documented and I d. Revising paragraph (c)(3)(i) explanation of how the periodic placed in the docket for public review. I e. Adding paragraph (c)(3)(iv). inspections ensure that not less than 10 The revisions and additions read as J. Congressional Review Act percent of scrap purchased from each follows: supplier is subject to inspection. The Congressional Review Act, 5 * * * * * U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small § 63.7700 What work practice standards Business Regulatory Enforcement must I meet? I 4. Section 63.7735 is amended by Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (a) For each segregated scrap storage revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: area, bin or pile, you must either that before a rule may take effect, the § 63.7735 How do I demonstrate initial agency promulgating the rule must comply with the certification compliance with the work practice submit a rule report, which includes a requirements in paragraph (b) of this standards that apply to me? section, or prepare and implement a copy of the rule, to each House of the (a) For each iron and steel foundry Congress and to the Comptroller General plan for the selection and inspection of scrap according to the requirements in subject to the certification requirement of the United States. The EPA will in § 63.7700(b), you have demonstrated submit a report containing this direct paragraph (c) of this section. You may have certain scrap subject to paragraph initial compliance if you have certified final rule and other required in your notification of compliance status information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. (b) of this section and other scrap subject to paragraph (c) of this section that: ‘‘At all times, your foundry will House of Representatives, and the purchase and use only metal ingots, pig Comptroller General of the United at your facility provided the scrap remains segregated until charge make- iron, slitter, or other materials that do States prior to publication of the direct not include post-consumer automotive final rule in the Federal Register. A up. (b) You must prepare and operate at body scrap, post-consumer engine ‘‘major rule’’ cannot take effect until 60 blocks, post-consumer oil filters, oily days after it is published in the Federal all times according to a written certification that the foundry purchases turnings, lead components, mercury Register. This action is not a ‘‘major switches, plastics, or free organic rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). and uses only metal ingots, pig iron, slitter, or other materials that do not liquids.’’ List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 include post-consumer automotive body * * * * * Environmental protection, Air scrap, post-consumer engine blocks, I 5. Section 63.7765 is amended by pollution control, Hazardous post-consumer oil filters, oily turnings, adding, in alphabetical order, a
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 29405
definition for the term, ‘‘Free organic Free organic liquids means material minute test period, the material contains liquids’’ to read as follows: that fails the paint filter test by EPA free liquids. Method 9095A (incorporated by * * * * * § 63.7765 What definitions apply to this reference—see § 63.14). That is, if any [FR Doc. 05–9591 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] subpart? portion of the material passes through BILLING CODE 6560–50–P * * * * * and drops from the filter within the 5-
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:29 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYR3.SGM 20MYR3 29406 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION further supplementary information, see to EPA without going through AGENCY the direct final rule. EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e- DATES: Comments. Comments must be mail address will be automatically 40 CFR Part 63 received on or before June 20, 2005, captured and included as part of the [OAR–2002–0034; FRL–7911–9] unless a hearing is held. If a hearing is comment that is placed in the public held, comments must be received on or docket and made available on the RIN 2060–AM85 before July 5, 2005. Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you National Emission Standards for ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, include your name and other contact Hazardous Air Pollutants for Iron and identified by Docket ID No. OAR–2002– information in the body of your Steel Foundries 0034, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// comment and with any disk or CD–ROM AGENCY: Environmental Protection www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line you submit. If EPA cannot read your Agency (EPA). instructions for submitting comments. comment due to technical difficulties ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments. • Agency Web site: http:// and cannot contact you for clarification, www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s EPA may not be able to consider your SUMMARY: On April 22, 2004, the EPA electronic public docket and comment comment. Electronic files should avoid issued national emission standards for system, is EPA’s preferred method for the use of special characters, any form hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for receiving comments. Follow the on-line of encryption, and be free of any defects iron and steel foundries. This proposed instructions for submitting comments. or viruses. action would amend the work practice • E-mail: [email protected]. Docket: All documents in the docket requirements for materials certification • Fax: (202) 566–1741. are listed in the EDOCKET index at and scrap selection/inspection • Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although programs. The proposed amendments Docket ID OAR–2002–0034, U.S. EPA, listed in the index, some information is add clarification and flexibility but do Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other not materially change the requirements Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. information whose disclosure is of the rule. Please include a total of two copies. restricted by statute. Certain other In the Rules and Regulations section • Hand Delivery: U.S. EPA, 1301 information, such as copyrighted of this Federal Register, we are issuing Constitution Ave., NW., Room B102, materials, is not placed on the Internet these amendments as a direct final rule. Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries and will be publicly available only in We are making these amendments as a are only accepted during the Docket’s hard copy form. Publicly available direct final rule without prior proposal normal hours of operation, and special docket materials are available either because we view the revisions as arrangements should be made for electronically in EDOCKET or in hard noncontroversial and anticipate no deliveries of boxed information. copy form at the Air and Radiation adverse comments. We have explained Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket, Docket ID No. OAR–2002–0034, our reasons for these revisions in the Docket ID No. OAR–2002–0034. The EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 direct final rule amendments. EPA’s policy is that all comments Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, If we receive any significant, adverse received will be included in the public DC. The Public Reading Room is open comments on one or more distinct docket without change and may be from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday amendments in the direct final rule, we made available online at http:// through Friday, excluding legal will publish a timely notice of www.epa.gov/edocket, including any holidays. The telephone number for the withdrawal in the Federal Register personal information provided, unless Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, informing the public which the comment includes information and the telephone number for the Air amendments will become effective and claimed to be Confidential Business Docket is (202) 566–1742. which amendments are being Information (CBI) or other information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: withdrawn due to adverse comment. We whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Mr. will address all public comments in a Do not submit information that you Kevin Cavender, Emissions, Monitoring subsequent final rule. If no significant consider to be CBI or otherwise and Analysis Division (C339–02), Office adverse comments are received, no protected through EDOCKET, of Air Quality Planning and Standards, further action will be taken on this regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, proposal, and the direct final rule will EDOCKET and the Federal telephone number (919) 541–2364, fax become effective as provided in that regulations.gov Web sites are number (919) 541–1903, e-mail address: notice. ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which [email protected]. The regulatory text for the proposal is means EPA will not know your identity SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated identical to that for the direct final rule or contact information unless you Entities. Categories and entities published in the Rules and Regulations provide it in the body of your comment. potentially regulated by this action section of this Federal Register. For If you send an e-mail comment directly include:
Category NAICS Examples of regulated entities code 1
Industry ...... 331511 Iron foundries. Iron and steel plants. Automotive and large equipment manufacturers. 331512 Steel investment foundries. 331513 Steel foundries (except investment). Federal government ...... Not affected. State/local/tribal government ...... Not affected. 1 North American Industry Classification System.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:30 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM 20MYP3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29407
This table is not intended to be associated with this action, please see according to the U.S. Small Business exhaustive, but rather provides a guide the direct final rule amendments located Administration size standards for for readers regarding entities likely to be in the Rules and Regulations section of NAICS codes 331511, 331512, and regulated by this action. To determine today’s Federal Register. 331513 of 500 or fewer employees; (2) whether your facility would be A. Paperwork Reduction Act a government jurisdiction that is a regulated by this action, you should government of a city, county, town, examine the applicability criteria in This proposed action does not impose school district or special district with a § 63.7682 of the NESHAP for iron and any new information collection burden. population of less than 50,000; and (3) The Office of Management and Budget steel foundries. If you have any a small organization that is any not-for- has previously approved the questions regarding the applicability of profit enterprise which is independently information collection requirements this action to a particular entity, consult owned and operated and that is not FOR contained in the existing rule (40 CFR the person listed in the preceding dominant in its field. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. part 63, subpart EEEEE) under the Comments. Do not submit information provisions of the Paperwork Reduction After considering the economic containing CBI to EPA through Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has impacts of today’s proposed EDOCKET, regulations.gov or e-mail. assigned OMB control number 2060– amendments on small entities, I certify Send or deliver information identified 0543, EPA ICR number 2096.02. A copy that this action will not have a as CBI only to the following address: of the approved Information Collection significant economic impact on a Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Request (ICR) may be obtained from substantial number of small entities. In Control Officer (C404–02), U.S. EPA, Susan Auby, Collection Strategies determining whether a rule has a Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 significant economic impact on a Attention Docket ID No. OAR–2004– Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, substantial number of small entities, the 0034. Clearly mark the part or all of the DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566–1672. impact of concern is any significant information that you claim to be CBI. Burden means the total time, effort, or adverse impact on small entities, since For CBI information in a disk or CD financial resources expended by persons the primary purpose of the regulatory ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose flexibility analyses is to identify and outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI or provide information to or for a address regulatory alternatives ‘‘which and then identify electronically within Federal agency. This includes the time minimize any significant economic the disk or CD ROM the specific needed to review instructions; develop, impact of the proposed rule on small acquire, install, and utilize technology information claimed as CBI. In addition entities’’ (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, and systems for the purposes of to one complete version of the comment an agency may certify that a rule will collecting, validating, and verifying that includes information claimed as not have a significant economic impact CBI, a copy of the comment that does information, processing and on a substantial number of small entities not contain the information claimed as maintaining information, and disclosing if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or CBI must be submitted for inclusion in and providing information; adjust the otherwise has a positive effect on the the public docket. Information so existing ways to comply with any marked will not be disclosed except in previously applicable instructions and small entities subject to the rule. The accordance with procedures set forth in requirements; train personnel to be able proposed amendments would clarify the 40 CFR part 2. to respond to a collection of rule requirements to reduce compliance Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition information; search data sources; uncertainties. The changes do not to being available in the docket, an complete and review the collection of impose new costs or requirements. electronic copy of today’s proposed information; and transmit or otherwise Although the proposed rule amendments will also be available on disclose the information. amendments would not have a the WWW through the Technology An agency may not conduct or significant economic impact on a Transfer Network (TTN). Following the sponsor, and a person is not required to substantial number of small entities, we Administrator’s signature, a copy of the respond to, a collection of information nonetheless tried to reduce the impact proposed amendments will be placed on unless it displays a currently valid OMB of the proposed amendments on small the TTN’s policy and guidance page for control number. The OMB control entities. We held meetings with the newly proposed or promulgated rules at numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 petitioners to discuss the proposed http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. amendments and have included provides information and technology B. Regulatory Flexibility Act provisions that address their concerns. exchange in various areas of air We continue to be interested in the The Regulatory Flexibility Act pollution control. If more information potential impacts of the proposed generally requires an agency to prepare regarding the TTN is needed, call the amendments on small entities and a regulatory flexibility analysis of any TTN HELP line at (919) 541–5384. welcome comments on issues related to rule subject to notice and comment Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the such impacts. EPA requesting to speak at a public rulemaking requirements under the hearing by May 31, 2005, a public Administrative Procedure Act or any List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 hearing will be held on June 3, 2005. If other statute unless the agency certifies a public hearing is requested, it will be that the rule will not have a significant Environmental protection, Air held at 10 a.m. at the EPA Facility economic impact on a substantial pollution control, Hazardous Complex in Research Triangle Park, number of small entities. Small entities substances, Reporting and North Carolina or at an alternate site include small businesses, small not-for- recordkeeping requirements. nearby. profit enterprises, and small Dated: May 6, 2005. governmental jurisdictions. I. Statutory and Executive Order For the purposes of assessing the Stephen L. Johnson, Reviews impacts of today’s proposed Administrator. For information regarding other amendments on small entities, small [FR Doc. 05–9592 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] statutory and executive order reviews entity is defined as: (1) A small business BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:30 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP3.SGM 20MYP3 Friday, May 20, 2005
Part V
Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Parts 1005 and 1007 Milk in the Appalachian and Southeast Marketing Areas; Partial Recommended Decision and Opportunity To File Written Exceptions on Proposed Amendments to Tentative Marketing Agreements and to Orders; Proposed Rule
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29410 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE provisions of Sections 556 and 557 of size, if the plant is part of a larger Title 5 of the United States Code and, company operating multiple plants that Agricultural Marketing Service therefore, is excluded from the collectively exceed the 500-employee requirements of Executive Order 12866. limit, the plant will be considered a 7 CFR Parts 1005 and 1007 The amendments to the rules large business even if the local plant has [Docket No. AO–388–A15 and AO–366–A44; proposed herein have been reviewed fewer than 500 employees. DA–03–11] under Executive Order 12988, Civil During February 2004, the milk of Justice Reform. They are not intended to 7,311 dairy farmers was pooled on the Milk in the Appalachian and Southeast have a retroactive effect. If adopted, the Appalachian (Order 5) and Southeast Marketing Areas; Partial proposed amendments would not (Order 7) milk orders (3,395 Order 5 Recommended Decision and preempt any state or local laws, dairy farmers and 3,916 Order 7 dairy Opportunity To File Written Exceptions regulations, or policies, unless they farmers). Of the total, 3,252 dairy on Proposed Amendments to Tentative present an irreconcilable conflict with farmers (or 96 percent) and 3,764 dairy Marketing Agreements and to Orders this rule. farmers (or 96 percent) were considered The Agricultural Marketing small businesses on the Appalachian AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 and Southeast orders, respectively. USDA. U.S.C. 601–674), provides that During February 2004, there were a ACTION: Proposed rule; partial administrative proceedings must be total of 36 plants regulated by the recommended decision. exhausted before parties may file suit in Appalachian order (25 fully regulated court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the plants, 7 partially regulated plants, 1 SUMMARY: This document recommends Act, any handler subject to an order may producer-handler, and 3 exempt plants) adoption of provisions that would request modification or exemption from and a total of 51 plants regulated by the expand the Appalachian milk marketing such order by filing with the Southeast order (32 fully regulated area, eliminate the ability to Department a petition stating that the plants, 6 partially regulated plants, and simultaneously pool the same milk on order, any provision of the order, or any 13 exempt plants). The number of plants the Appalachian or Southeast order and obligation imposed in connection with meeting the small business criteria a State-operated milk order that has the order is not in accordance with the under the Appalachian and Southeast marketwide pooling, and amend the law. A handler is afforded the orders were 13 (or 36 percent) and 13 transportation credit provisions of the opportunity for a hearing on the (or 25 percent), respectively. Southeast and Appalachian orders. This petition. After a hearing, the Department The proposed amendments adopted decision does not recommend adopting would rule on the petition. The Act in this proposed rule would expand the a proposal that would merge the provides that the district court of the Appalachian milk marketing area to Appalachian and Southeast milk United States in any district in which include 25 counties and 14 cities in the marketing areas and a proposal that the handler is an inhabitant, or has its State of Virginia that currently are not would create a ‘‘Mississippi Valley’’ principal place of business, has in any Federal milk marketing area. This marketing order. Proposals regarding the jurisdiction in equity to review the decision recommends the adoption of a producer-handler provisions of the Department’s ruling on the petition, proposal that would amend the Appalachian and Southeast orders will provided a bill in equity is filed not producer milk provisions of the be addressed in a separate decision. later than 20 days after the date of the Appalachian and Southeast milk orders DATES: Comments must be submitted on entry of the ruling. to prevent producers who share in the or before July 19, 2005. proceeds of a state marketwide pool Comments (6 copies) should be filed Regulatory Flexibility Act and from simultaneously sharing in the with the Hearing Clerk, United States Paperwork Reduction Act proceeds of a Federal marketwide pool Department of Agriculture, STOP 9200– In accordance with the Regulatory on the same milk. In addition, this Room 1083, 1400 Independence Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the decision recommends adopting Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– Agricultural Marketing Service has proposed amendments to the 9200. You may send your comments by considered the economic impact of this transportation credit provisions of the the electronic process available at the action on small entities and has certified Appalachian and Southeast orders. Federal eRulemaking portal: http:// that this proposed rule will not have a The proposed amendments to expand www.regulations.gov or by submitting significant economic impact on a the Appalachian marketing area would comments to substantial number of small entities. For likely continue to regulate under the [email protected]. the purpose of the Regulatory Flexibility Appalachian order two fluid milk Reference should be made to the title of Act, a dairy farm is considered a ‘‘small distributing plants located in Roanoke, action and docket number. business’’ if it has an annual gross Virginia, and Lynchburg, Virginia, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: revenue of less than $750,000, and a shift the regulation of a distributing Antoinette M. Carter or Jack Rower or dairy products manufacturer is a ‘‘small plant located in Mount Crawford, Gino M. Tosi, Marketing Specialist, business’’ if it has fewer than 500 Virginia, from the Northeast order to the USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, Order employees. Appalachian order. Formulation and Enforcement Branch, For the purposes of determining The proposed amendments would STOP 0231–Room 2971, 1400 which dairy farms are ‘‘small allow the Kroger Company’s (Kroger) Independence Avenue, SW., businesses,’’ the $750,000 per year Westover Dairy plant, located in Washington, DC 20250–0231, (202) 690– criterion was used to establish a Lynchburg, Virginia, that competes for a 3465 or (202) 720–3257 or (202) 690– marketings guideline of 500,000 pounds milk supply with other Appalachian 1366, e-mail address: per month. Although this guideline does order plants to continue to be regulated [email protected], or not factor in additional monies that may under the order if it meets the order’s [email protected] or be received by dairy producers, it minimum performance standards. The [email protected]. should be an inclusive standard for plant has been regulated by the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This most ‘‘small’’ dairy farmers. For Appalachian order since January 2000. administrative action is governed by the purposes of determining a handler’s In addition, the proposed amendments
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29411
would remove the disruption that months of February through May but remain identical to the current occurs as a result of the Dean Foods not more than 50 percent of the milk requirements. No new forms are Company’s (Dean Foods) Morningstar production of the dairy farmer, in proposed and no additional reporting Foods plant, located in Mount aggregate, was received as producer requirements would be necessary. Crawford, Virginia, shifting its milk under the order during those two This notice does not require regulatory status under the Northeast months. The proposed amendments additional information collection that order. recommended for adoption in this requires clearance by the Office of The Appalachian order currently decision would provide the Market Management and Budget (OMB) beyond contains a ‘‘lock-in’’ provision that Administrator of the Appalachian order currently approved information provides that a plant located within the and the Market Administrator of the collection. The primary sources of data marketing area that meets the order’s Southeast order the discretionary used to complete the forms are routinely minimum performance standard will be authority to adjust the 50 percent milk used in most business transactions. regulated by the Appalachian order production standard. Forms require only a minimal amount of even if the majority of the plant’s Class This decision recommends adoption information which can be supplied I route sales are in another marketing of proposals seeking to prohibit the without data processing equipment or a area. The proposed expansion along simultaneous pooling of the same milk trained statistical staff. Thus, the with the lock-in provision would on the Appalachian or Southeast milk information collection and reporting regulate fluid milk distributing plants marketing orders and on a State- burden is relatively small. Requiring the physically located in the marketing area operated order that provides for the same reports for all handlers does not that meet the order’s minimum marketwide pooling of milk. Since the significantly disadvantage any handler performance standard even if the 1960’s, the Federal milk order program that is smaller than the industry majority of their sales are in another has recognized the harm and disorder average. Federal order marketing area. that result to both producers and Interested parties are invited to Accordingly, the proposed amendments handlers when the same milk of a submit comments on the probable would regulate under the Appalachian producer is simultaneously pooled on regulatory and informational impact of order Kroger’s Westover Dairy, located more than one Federal order. When this this proposed rule on small entities. in Lynchburg, Virginia; Dean Foods’ occurs, producers do not receive Also, parties may suggest modifications Morningstar Foods plant, located in uniform minimum prices, and handlers of this proposal for the purpose of Mount Crawford, Virginia; and National receive unfair competitive advantages. tailoring their applicability to small Dairy Holdings’ Valley Rich Dairy, The need to prevent ‘‘double pooling’’ businesses. located in Roanoke, Virginia. Based on became critically important as Prior documents in this proceeding: Small Business Administration criteria distribution areas expanded, orders these are all large businesses. merged, and a national pricing surface Notice of Hearing: Issued January 16, This decision recommends proposed was adopted. Milk already pooled under 2004; published January 23, 2004 (69 FR amendments to the transportation credit a State-operated program and able to 3278). provisions of the Appalachian and simultaneously be pooled under a Preliminary Statement Southeast orders. The Appalachian and Federal order has essentially the same Southeast orders contain provisions for undesirable outcomes that Federal Notice is hereby given of the filing a transportation credit balancing fund orders once experienced and with the Hearing Clerk of this from which payments are made to subsequently corrected. Accordingly, recommended decision with respect to handlers to partially offset the cost of proposed amendments to eliminate the proposed amendments to the tentative moving bulk milk into each marketing ‘‘double pooling’’ of the same milk on marketing agreements and the orders area to meet fluid milk demands. the Appalachian or Southeast order and regulating the handling of milk in the The proposed amendments would a State-operated milk order that has Appalachian and Southeast marketing increase the maximum rate of the marketwide pooling is recommended for areas. This notice is issued pursuant to transportation credit assessment of the adoption. the provisions of the Agricultural Appalachian and Southeast orders by 3 The proposed amendments would be Marketing Agreement Act and the cents per hundredweight. Specifically, applied to all Appalachian and applicable rules of practice and the proposed amendments would Southeast order participants (producers procedure governing the formulation of increase the maximum rate of and handlers), which consist of both marketing agreements and marketing assessment for the Appalachian order large and small business. Since the orders (7 CFR Part 900). from 6.5 cents per hundredweight to 9.5 proposed amendments recommended Interested parties may file written cents per hundredweight while for adoption would be subject to all the exceptions to this decision with the increasing the maximum rate of orders’ producers and handlers Hearing Clerk, U.S. Department of assessment for the Southeast order from regardless of their size, the provisions Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250– 7 cents per hundredweight to 10 cents are not expected to provide a 9200, by the 60th day after publication per hundredweight. Increasing the competitive advantage to any of this decision in the Federal Register. transportation assessment rates will participant. Accordingly, the proposed Six copies of the exceptions should be tend to minimize the exhaustion of the amendments should not have a filed. All written submissions made transportation credit balancing fund significant economic impact on a pursuant to this notice will be made when there is a need to import substantial number of small entities. available for public inspection at the supplemental milk from outside the A review of reporting requirements office of the Hearing Clerk during marketing areas to meet Class I needs. was completed under the Paperwork regular business hours (7 CFR 1.27(b)). Currently, the Appalachian and Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. The proposed amendments set forth Southeast orders provide that Chapter 35). It was determined that below are based on the record of a transportation credits shall apply to the these proposed amendments would public hearing held at Atlanta, Georgia, milk of a dairy farmer who was not a have no impact on reporting, on February 23–26, 2004, pursuant to a ‘‘producer’’ under the order during more recordkeeping, or other compliance notice of hearing issued January 16, than two of the immediately preceding requirements because they would 2004 (69 FR 3278).
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29412 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
The material issues on the hearing the proposed merged milk order) and returns from sales of milk including record relate to: Proposal 2 would combine the milk not needed for fluid use. The 1. Merger of the Appalachian and remaining balances of funds of the witness further stated that handlers Southeast Marketing Areas. current Appalachian and Southeast would be assured that competitors a. Merging the Appalachian and orders if the proposed merged order was would pay a single set of minimum Southeast milk marketing areas and adopted. According to the witness, SMA prices for milk set by the established remaining fund balances. is a marketing agency whose order. The witness stated that a merged b. Expansion of the Appalachian cooperative members include Arkansas order is in the public interest because it marketing area. Dairy Cooperative Association, Inc., assures that an adequate supply of high c. Transportation credits provisions. Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. (DFA), quality milk will be available for 2. Promulgation of a new ‘‘Mississippi Dairymen’s Marketing Cooperative, Inc., consumers. Valley’’ milk order. Lone Star Milk Producers, Inc., The proponent cooperatives’ witness 3. Eliminating the simultaneous Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers noted that the adoption of a new Federal pooling of the same milk on a Federal Cooperative Association, Inc. (MD&VA), order is contingent upon being able to milk order and a State-operated milk and Southeast Milk, Inc. (SMI) show that interstate commerce occurs in order that provides for marketwide (proponent cooperatives). the proposed marketing area. It is the pooling. The witness for the proponent opinion of the witness that ‘‘interstate 4. Producer-handler provisions. cooperatives said SMA was created in commerce’’ does exist due to the This partial recommended decision response to a changing market structure movement of bulk and packaged milk deals only with Issues 1 through 3. Issue and is an extension of the cooperatives’ products within, into, and out of the No. 4 will be addressed separately in a initiative to consolidate and seek Appalachian and the Southeast forthcoming decision. enhanced marketing efficiencies. The marketing areas—the proposed witness indicated that SMA pools Findings and Conclusions marketing area. certain costs and returns for its The proponent cooperatives’ witness The following findings and cooperative member producers noted a trend of larger geographical supplying distributing plants fully conclusions on the material issues are areas being served by fewer Federal regulated under the Appalachian and based on evidence presented at the milk marketing orders. Specifically, the Southeast milk orders. SMA considers hearing and the record thereof: witness said between 1996 and 2003 the the Appalachian and Southeast orders number of dairy farmers in the 1. Merger of the Appalachian and one market in terms of the distribution southeastern states of Alabama, Southeast Marketing Areas of revenues, the allocation and pooling Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, of marketing costs, milk supply and 1a. Merging the Appalachian and Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, demand, and the development of its Southeast Milk Marketing Areas and South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia Remaining Fund Balances annual budget, the witness explained. The proponent cooperatives’ witness declined from 11,712 to 7,180. This This decision recommends denial of a stated that the proposed order merger decrease, the witness explained, proposal that would merge the current would create a milk market which parallels the trend of a drop in the Appalachian marketing area and would be commonly supplied and number of dairy farmers pooled on the Southeast milk marketing area into a deserving of a common blend price. The current Appalachian and Southeast single marketing area under a proposed witness testified that the continued orders. The witness stated that based on order. Accordingly, a proposal that existence of the separate Appalachian the final decision for Federal Order would combine the fund balances of the and Southeast Federal milk orders Reform (issued March 12, 1999, and current Appalachian and Southeast across a functionally single fluid milk published April 2, 1999 (64 FR 16025)) orders is rendered moot and is not marketing area inhibits market 8,180 dairy farmers were expected to recommended for adoption. efficiency in supplying and balancing pool their milk on the consolidated The Appalachian marketing area the market, creates unjustified blend Appalachian and Southeast orders. consists of the States of North Carolina price differences, encourages However, the witness noted only 7,243 and South Carolina, parts of eastern uneconomic movements of milk, and dairy producers supplied milk to the Tennessee, Kentucky excluding results in the inequitable sharing of the two orders during December 2003. southwest counties, 7 counties in Class I proceeds of what should be a The proponent cooperatives’ witness northwest/central Georgia, 20 counties single market. stressed that there is an acute milk in southern Indiana, 8 counties and 2 The proponent cooperatives’ witness deficit in the Appalachian and cities in Virginia, and 2 counties in stated that different blend prices and Southeast Federal orders. Referencing West Virginia. The Southeast order different and separate pool qualification data obtained from the USDA National marketing area consists of the entire requirements constitute disruptive Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) States of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, conditions that would be removed by a for the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Georgia (excluding 4 merger of the orders. The witness Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, northern counties), southern Missouri, asserted that the proposed merger Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, western/central Tennessee, and would allow producer milk to flow South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia southern Kentucky. more freely between pool plants and (southeast region), the witness testified A witness testifying on behalf of provide for the equal sharing of that a decline in dairy farmers led to a Southern Marketing Agency, Inc. balancing costs across all producers in decline in milk production in the (SMA), presented testimony in support the proposed merged order. southeast region. The witness noted of Proposals 1 and 2 as contained in the The proponent cooperatives’ witness milk production decreased from 13,518 hearing notice published in the Federal stressed that the adoption of the million pounds in 1996 to 10,671 Register (69 FR 3278). Proposal 1 would proposed merged order would assure million pounds in 2003 a decline of 21 merge the current Appalachian and producers that milk would be sold at percent. The witness asserted that this Southeast marketing areas into a single reasonable minimum prices and decline coupled with an increase in marketing area (hereafter referred to as producers would share pro rata in the population has resulted in a major
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29413
expansion of the milkshed for the According to the proponent Class III. For 2003, the witness noted southeastern region of the United States. cooperatives’ witness, all of the that non-fluid milk utilization for the According to the proponent distributing plants currently regulated Appalachian order was 14.41 percent cooperatives’ witness, 9,071.9 million under the Appalachian and Southeast Class II, 7.11 percent Class III, and 8.12 pounds of Class I producer milk was orders are expected to be fully regulated percent Class IV, while the non-fluid pooled on the combined Appalachian by the proposed merged order. Using milk utilization for the Southeast order and Southeast orders during 2003. The December 2003 data, the witness stated was 9.97 percent Class II, 17.79 percent witness said marketings of milk that the proposed merged order would Class III, and 6.78 percent Class IV. The produced in the southeastern region was have had a Class I route distribution of witness stressed that these differing uses 10,671 million pounds in 2003, which 773.4 million pounds. The witness of milk result in different blend prices means 85 percent of Grade A milk added that 86.58 percent of Class I sales between the Appalachian and Southeast production was needed for Class I use would have been from milk produced in orders which leads to disorderly on an annual basis. the proposed marketing area. The marketing conditions. The witness In 1996, the proponent witness witness stated that the proposed emphasized that differences in blend testified, it was anticipated that 72 fluid Southeast order would rank third in the prices between the two orders is largely milk processing plants were or would total number of pool plants regulated by due to significant differences in uses become fully regulated distributing a Federal milk order. and prices in the manufacturing classes plants on the consolidated Appalachian The proponent cooperatives’ witness and is not necessarily due to significant and Southeast orders. However, the stated that there is substantial and differences in Class I milk utilization. witness noted, only 52 remained significant overlap of the supply of The witness explained that SMA in regulated by the orders during producer milk for the Appalachian and April 2002 began the common pooling December 2003. The witness indicated Southeast orders. The witness noted of the costs and returns to supply the that of the fully regulated pool plants Federal order data for 2000 through customers of member cooperatives in existing in both January 1996 and 2003 shows that dairy farmers located in the separate orders in an effort to December 2003, more than two-thirds southern Indiana, central Kentucky, alleviate disruptive blend price have experienced at least one ownership central Tennessee, central North differences. The witness testified that change and some have experienced Carolina, western South Carolina, and while this procedure has resolved some several ownership changes. central and southern Georgia have The proponent cooperatives’ witness blend price differences, their procedure supplied milk to plants regulated under does not result in removing inequitable cited a set of criteria used for Appalachian or Southeast orders. The consolidation of orders during the blend prices for all producer milk witness said milk of dairy farmers pooled on the separate orders. reform process. The witness said this located in the Central marketing area Regarding the commonality of list included overlapping route sales and Southwest marketing area, and cooperative associations in the two and areas of milk supply, the number of dairy farmers located in northwestern marketing areas, the proponent handlers within a market, the natural Indiana and south central Pennsylvania, boundaries, the cooperative associations have supplied fluid milk plants cooperatives’ witness stated that operating in the service area, provisions regulated by the Appalachian and cooperative membership is an common to the existing orders, milk Southeast orders. indication of market association and utilization in common dairy products, In December 2003, the witness stated, provides support for the consolidation disruptive marketing conditions, and dairy farmers located in 28 states of marketing areas. The witness noted transportation differences. supplied milk to handlers under the that the six SMA member cooperatives The proponent cooperatives’ witness Appalachian or Southeast orders. accounted for approximately 734 testified that significant competition for Sixteen of the 28 states supplied milk to million pounds of producer milk during sales between plants exists between the both orders and 13 states were located November 2003, which represents about Appalachian and Southeast orders. The wholly or partially within the proposed 67 percent of the total producer milk witness noted that the ‘‘corridor of merged order marketing area, the that would be pooled on the proposed competition’’ is the shared border of the witness noted. Southeast order. Also, the witness stated Appalachian and Southeast. The The witness for the proponent these cooperatives market milk of other witness testified that Federal milk order cooperatives testified that the proposed cooperatives whose member producers’ data for 2003 shows Class I disposition order would rank second in Class I milk would be pooled on the proposed on routes inside the Southeast order by utilization representing 19.5 percent of Southeast order. Using November 2003, Appalachian order pool plants was total Class I sales in all Federal milk the witness stated approximately 871 11.25 percent of the total Class I route orders. Using annual Federal milk order million pounds or 79 percent of the disposition by all plants in the data, the witness noted that for 2003, producer milk pooled under the Southeast order. According to the Class I utilization for the Appalachian proposed Southeast order would be witness, Class I route disposition in the and Southeast orders was 70.36 percent represented by these proponent Southeast order by Appalachian order and 65.47 percent, respectively. The cooperatives. pool plants has increased in total by witness said the combined Class I The witness for the proponent 11.1 percentage points since January utilization for the proposed merged cooperatives pointed out that the 2000 (i.e., 5.9 percentage points from order would have been 67.77 percent for regulatory provisions of the 2000 to 2001, 2.1 percentage points from 2003 or 9,071.9 million pounds of Appalachian and Southeast orders are 2001 to 2002, and 1.9 percentage points 13,385.7 million pounds of producer similar in most respects except for the from 2002 to 2003). In addition, the milk pooled. qualification standards for producer stated record data reveals that Class I The proponent cooperatives’ witness milk and a producer. While not a route disposition by Appalachian order noted that milk not needed for fluid Federal milk order regulatory provision, pool plants into the Southeast order was uses in the Appalachian order is the proponent witness stated that the 63.9 percent of the total Class I primarily used in Class II and Class IV common handling of cost and returns disposition by all nonpool plants for the while milk not needed for fluid uses in for milk that would be pooled on the Southeast order during 2003. the Southeast order is primarily used in proposed merged order recognized
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29414 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
similar marketing conditions within the production during the months of July The witnesses indicated that all of the proposed order marketing area. through December. The witness stated cooperatives are members of SMA and The proponent cooperative witness that the 33 percent production standard that the milk of their dairy farmer testified that the proposed merged order is a reasonable minimum requirement members is shipped to plants regulated should retain the Appalachian order for establishing a producer’s association by the Appalachian or Southeast orders. pool plant provisions. The witness with the market during the short The MD&VA witness asserted that the recommended adopting provisions that production months of July through consolidation of the current would allow the pooling of a supply December. Under their proposal, the Appalachian and Southeast orders is plant operated by a cooperative milk of a dairy farmer would be eligible necessary due to changes in the association that is located outside the for diversion to a nonpool plant the first marketing structure (i.e., milk marketing area but within the State of day of the month during which the milk production and processing sectors) in Virginia. The witness stated that the of such dairy farmer meets the order’s the southeastern United States. The proposed merged order should include touch base requirements. witness was of the opinion that the area the Appalachian order ‘‘split’’ pool The proponent cooperatives’ witness covered by the two current orders is plant provision which would continue indicated that their proposal contains essentially a single market and that all to provide for defining that portion of a current Southeast order language that of the producers delivering milk to the pool plant designated as a ‘‘nonpool limits the total amount of producer milk market should share a common Federal plant’’ that is physically separate and that may be diverted by a pool plant order blend price. operates separately from the pool operator or cooperative association to 33 The witnesses for MD&VA, ADC, portion of such plant. percent during the months of July Lone Star, and DMC stated the producer The proponent cooperatives’ witness through December and 50 percent milk requirements under the current stated that lock-in provisions be during January through June. Appalachian and Southeast Orders included in the proposed merged order. The proponent cooperatives’ witness make it difficult to ensure the pooling According to the witness, distributing proposed that the reserve balances of of milk on the orders. The witnesses plants in the Southeastern markets have the marketing services, administrative contended a merger of the Appalachian been ‘‘locked in’’ or fully regulated as expense, producer-settlement funds, and Southeast orders would enhance pool plants under the order in which and the transportation credit balancing market equity, allow for increased they are physically located since the funds that have accrued in the efficiencies in supplying a deficit milk mid-1980s. The witness testified that individual Appalachian and Southeast region, and eliminate the disruptive and unit pooling distributing plants on the orders, be merged or combined in their disorderly marketing conditions that basis of their physical location should entirety if the proposed merged order is currently exist in the Appalachian and be retained in the merged order. The adopted. The witness explained that the Southeast orders by eliminating blend witness noted that the Appalachian and handlers and producers servicing the price differences. Southeast orders currently provide that milk needs of the individual orders Witnesses representing Georgia Milk two or more plants operated by the same would continue to furnish the milk Producers, Inc. (GMP), testified in handler that are located within the needs of the proposed marketing area. opposition to the merger as proposed in marketing area may qualify for pool According to the proponent Proposals 1 and 2. The witness was of status as a unit by meeting the in-area cooperatives’ witness, it would be the opinion that USDA had made a Class I route disposition standards appropriate to combine the reserve mistake in 2000 when the western part specified for pool distributing plants. balances of the orders’ marketing service of the current Southeast order, which The witness for the proponent funds since marketing service programs had a lower Class I utilization, was cooperatives explained that lock-in for producers would continue under the added to the Southeast order which had provisions help to preserve the viability proposed order. In regards to the a higher Class I utilization. of capital investments in pool administrative expense funds, the Other testimony presented on behalf distributing plants. The witness witness stated that it would be equitable of GMP, and relying on 1997 data, indicated that lock-in provisions in the and more efficient to combine the indicated that milk production in Southeast and Appalachian orders remaining administrative funds Georgia fell short of Georgia’s fluid milk adequately provide for regulatory accumulated under the individual demand by about 122 million pounds as stability for pool plants on the edge of orders. In addition, the witness compared to only 4 to 11 million pound a market area that may shift regulatory indicated that this would enable the supply shortfalls in the other states status between two orders due to producer-settlement funds and the included in the proposed merged order changes in route disposition patterns. transportation credit funds of the area. The witness stated that the The proponent cooperatives’ witness proposed merged order to continue widening supply-demand gap will recommended changing the ‘‘touch without interruption. accelerate as population increases and base’’ requirement of the producer milk Witnesses for Maryland & Virginia milk production declines in Georgia. provision from a ‘‘days’’ production Milk Producers Cooperative, Inc. The GMP witness stated that: ‘‘Based on standard to a ‘‘percentage’’ production (MD&VA), Arkansas Dairy Cooperative, the decline in production in the region standard. This change, the witness Inc. (ADC), Lone Star Milk Producers, compared to the growth in demand, stated, will accommodate pooling the Inc. (Lone Star), and Dairymen’s USDA has not sufficiently considered milk of large producers who ship Marketing Cooperative, Inc. (DMC), the needs of the dairy farmers in the multiple loads of milk per day. The testified in support of consolidating the states covered by the Order.’’ According witness proposed that individual current Appalachian and Southeast milk to the witness, GMP dairy farmers have producers deliver 15 percent of their orders into a single milk order. lost income each time the Southeast monthly milk production (equivalent to According to witnesses, MD&VA is Federal Order has been expanded. approximately 4.5 days of milk comprised of 1,450 to 1,500 dairy The GMP witness testified that a production) to a pool plant during farmers, ADC has 160 member dairy rejection of the proposed merged order January through June and 33 percent farmers, Lone Star is comprised of about together with the creation of a new (equivalent to about 10 days of milk 160 member dairy farmers, and DMC is Mississippi Valley Order, as offered by production) of their monthly milk comprised of 168 member dairy farmers. Proposal 5, would be the first step to
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29415
help rectify the mistake made in Federal blend price. The witness requested that considered when revising or merging milk order reform. The witness the current Appalachian order pool orders. The witness indicated that supported raising the utilization in the plant definition be included in the market efficiency suffers and difficulties most deficit areas of the Southeastern proposed merged order. This request, occur in supplying and balancing the States by creating a Mississippi Valley according to the witness, would permit market at all Federal milk order borders. order and combining the high their plant located in Winchester, The witness indicated that the lines utilization areas of the remainder of Kentucky, to continue its association drawn between marketing areas create Order 7 into a new smaller Southeast with the proposed merged order rather unjustified blend price differences, Order. than with the Mideast order. encourage uneconomic movements of The GMP witness asserted that A witness representing Dairy Farmers milk, and result in the inequitable historically, the larger the marketing of America (DFA) testified that the sharing of Class I proceeds. area, the higher the balancing costs in a proponents do not anticipate any A witness representing Dean Foods deficit market. The witness further difficulties from merging of the two testified in opposition to the proposed asserted that transportation credits shift orders or expanding the proposed merger of the Appalachian and the part of that cost to the entire market merged area to include additional Southeast market areas. According to rather than to the dairy farmers in the Virginia counties. According to the the witness, more and smaller order order who are members of cooperatives. witness, the Virginia State Milk areas create more flexible incentives to The witness testified that transportation Commission has been able to deliver milk to Federal order pool credits unintentionally encourage the simultaneously operate a producer base plants. According to the witness, importation of milk rather than milk pricing program for producers relative blend prices determine where encourage increased production of local supplying milk to plants with Class I milk is shipped and pooled. According milk. sales within the State. The witness to the witness the disincentives A witness representing the Kroger indicated that DFA opposes any change associated with increased transportation Company (Kroger) testified in support of to the proposed merged order provisions costs increase faster than the incentives the proposed merger of the Appalachian that may cause conflicts between the from the higher location value of the and Southeast orders. According to the operations of the Virginia State Milk merged order blend price. The witness witness, Kroger owns and operates Commission and the Federal milk cited the St. Louis/southern Illinois area Winchester Farms Dairy, in Winchester, marketing order program. and its chronic milk deficit as a prime Kentucky, and Westover Dairy, in A witness representing Prairie Farms example of these phenomena. Lynchburg, Virginia. The witness stated testified in opposition to Proposals 1 Post-hearing briefs addressing that both plants are pool distributing and 2. The witness indicated that the Proposals 1 and 2 were submitted by plants regulated on the Appalachian fluid milk industry would be better SMA, Dean Foods, and Prairie Farms. Federal milk order. The witness stated served by more Federal milk marketing The proponent cooperatives for the that Kroger owns and operates Heritage orders covering smaller areas rather proposed order merger, submitted a Farms Dairy in Murfreesboro, than fewer Federal milk marketing post-hearing brief reiterating their Tennessee, and Centennial Farms Dairy orders covering large areas. The witness support for the merger of the in Atlanta, Georgia, both fully regulated indicated that Federal milk order reform Appalachian and Southeast orders. The distributing plants under the Southeast left ‘‘dead zones’’ in the State of Illinois brief described conditions existing in milk order. and Missouri, near St Louis. According the Appalachian and Southeast orders According to the Kroger witness, their to the witness, this area is not able to as disruptive and disorderly, and Winchester, Kentucky, plant was attract a fluid milk supply and asserted that these conditions are associated with the Ohio Valley order experiences weekly fluid milk deficits. symptoms of a market that has changed (now part of the Mideast order) from The Prairie Farms witness indicated significantly since the orders were 1982 to 1988, with the Louisville- that the low per capita milk production promulgated by Federal order reform, Lexington-Evansville order from 1988 in Illinois, in combination with effective January 1, 2000. through 1999, and with the Appalachian economic incentives to move the milk According to the proponent order since 2000. The witness indicated produced in Illinois and eastern cooperatives’ brief, a merger of the that previous decisions by USDA Missouri into the Appalachian and existing orders would bring blend price adopted pool plant provisions that Southeast orders, has caused disorderly uniformity, recognize inter-order allowed their Winchester, Kentucky, marketing conditions. The witness competition and integrate Class I sales plant to be regulated under the indicated that the blend price within the proposed merged order, Appalachian order. According to the differences between the Upper Midwest recognize common supply areas within witness, being regulated by the order and the Central order are not the proposed merged order, and allow Appalachian order retains that plants sufficient to cover the transportation producer milk to move more freely ability to procure milk with a higher cost of moving milk to the ‘‘dead between pool plants within the blend price when compared with the zones’’. The witness testified that at an proposed marketing areas. In addition, Mideast order. October 31, 2001, meeting, DFA— proponents contended it would equalize The Kroger witness indicated that Prairie Farms’ major supplier— the costs of balancing within the with the exception of the Murfeesboro, indicated that they would no longer be proposed marketing area, erase the Tennessee, plant, which has a minority able to provide supplemental milk artificial line that separates a common supply of milk from independent supplies to Prairie Farms due to the lack milk market, and recognize the common producers, all of the Kroger pool of incentives and expenses. pooling of costs and returns for distributing plants are supplied by Dairy The Prairie Farms witness stated that producer milk within the proposed Farmers of America. The witness today’s dairy environment shows that merged order. The brief asserts that no indicated that if their Winchester plant the current order system needs to be additional parties would become were to again be associated with the reconfigured and inequities fixed regulated as a result of the proposed Mideast order, the returns to the milk system-wide. The witness asserted that merged order. According to the supplying cooperative would be the consequences for nearby marketing proponent cooperatives’ brief, other reduced due to the lower Mideast order areas and adjacent orders must be options that forestall a complete merger
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29416 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
are inadequate to correct the present allow payments due to the fund to be commonly shared structural disruptive and disorderly conditions in submitted overnight instead of through relationships. The most important of the separate orders. the electronic wiring of funds. However, these factors are evidence of Opposition to proposal 1 was this was not a noticed proposal and no overlapping sales patterns among reiterated by Dean Foods and Prairie evidence or witness was available to handlers of Class I milk and overlapping Farms in a joint post-hearing brief. The testify regarding this written request. milk procurement area. The measures of brief suggested that blend price The 1996 Farm Bill mandated that association between the Appalachian differences between orders cause milk Federal milk orders be consolidated to and Southeast milk order marketing to move to where it is most needed. The not less than 10 or more than 14. The areas in terms of overlapping route sales Dean Foods and Prairie Farms stated Federal order reform final decision and milk procurement have not change that without blend price differences issued March 12, 1999 and published in significantly since the consolidated milk movements between and within the Federal Register April 2, 1999, (64 orders became effective in January 2000. marketing areas are impaired. The FR 16026) meet the requirements set Several criteria were used by the opponents brief suggested a national forth in the 1996 Farm Bill through the Department in determining which of the hearing in order to consider consolidation of the 31 Federal milk 31 milk order marketing areas exhibited simultaneously all marketing regions orders into 11 orders. The Agricultural a sufficient measure of association in because the results of one proceeding Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 terms of sales, procurement area, and directly affects other regions. The brief (AMAA), as amended, provides the other structural relationships to warrant stated that combining the Appalachian Department the authority to issue and consolidation or mandated by the 1996 and Southeast marketing areas was amend orders. Accordingly, the merger Farm Bill into the current 10 milk considered but was not adopted under proposal may be considered by the marketing areas. These criteria included Federal milk order reform. Department. overlapping route disposition, The Dean Foods and Prairie Farms This decision does not recommend overlapping areas of milk supply, joint brief stated that market merging the Southeast and Appalachian number of handlers within a market, administrator data demonstrates that marketing areas. Record evidence of this natural boundaries, cooperative moving milk to where it is needed proceeding does not substantiate the associations, common regulatory through blend price differences need for merging these two separate provisions, and milk utilization in effectively moves milk from the west to marketing order areas. Overlap of Class common dairy products. the east for the Southeast marketing area I route disposition between the two and from north to south for the orders is relatively unchanged since the The primary factors during reform Appalachian marketing area. The brief separate orders were created in 2000. that supported the creation of the offered the St. Louis area as an example The overlap in milk supply areas for consolidated Appalachian milk order of blend price differences that are plants in the Appalachian and and the consolidated Southeast milk sometimes too small to cover additional Southeast orders remains minimal and order were overlapping route sales and costs of transporting milk to major unchanged since 2000. Blend price milk procurement areas between the metropolitan area for fluid use. The differences and other marketing marketing areas. The determinations brief indicated that similar problems conditions of the two orders raised by were based on an analysis of milk sales could result elsewhere if the two orders the proponents are not significantly and procurement area overlap between are merged. different from conditions existing in the pre-reform orders using 1997 data. In their joint brief, Dean Foods and 2000. The proponents have not Specifically, the Federal order reform Prairie Farms suggested that although a demonstrated that the current marketing final decision issued March 1999, stated majority of dairy market participants conditions are disorderly. The that the primary factors for the may favor a merger, it is important to proponents have not made a convincing consolidation of the (1) Tennessee consider the minority opinion. The brief case that the current marketing Valley, (2) Louisville-Lexington- also requested the inclusion of the conditions are disorderly. Evansville, and the (3) Carolina Kentucky counties of Ballard, Calloway, The AMAA provides that milk orders marketing areas into the current Carlisle, Fulton, Graves, Hickman, may be issued where the marketing of Appalachian milk order were Marshall, and McCracken in the milk is in the current of interstate or commonality of overlapping route Southeast marketing area if Proposal 1 foreign commerce or where it directly disposition and milk procurement is denied and Proposal 5 is adopted. burdens, obstructs, or affects interstate between the two marketing areas. The Dean Foods and Prairie Farms’ joint or foreign commerce. Federal milk decision found that there was ‘‘a brief contended that the proposal to orders define the terms under which stronger relationship between the three merger the Appalachian and Southeast handlers in a specified market purchase marketing areas involved than between orders brings forth a significant policy milk from dairy farmers. The orders are any one of them and any other and legal question the Department must designed to promote the orderly marketing area on the basis of both address prior to issuing a decision on exchange of milk between dairy farmers criteria.’’ (64 FR 16059) the merits of the proposal. The proposed (producers) and the first buyers For the Southeast order, the Federal merger, if adopted, would cause the (handlers) of milk. Record evidence of order reform final decision stated that number of Federal orders to fall to this proceeding does not support a the basis for the adopted Southeast below the minimum number of 10 finding that the current Appalachian marketing area which consolidated the required by Congress in the 1996 Farm and Southeast milk orders are not former Southeast marketing area with Bill, they stated. achieving the goal of orderly marketing. additional counties in Arkansas, A written statement submitted on In determining whether Federal milk Kentucky, and Missouri was behalf of LuVel Dairy Products, Inc., order marketing areas should be merged, ‘‘overlapping route dispositions within requested that the administrative the Department generally has the marketing area to a greater extent requirements of the producer-settlement considered the extent to which Federal than with other marketing areas. fund be modified to extend the time order markets share common Procurement of producer milk also period in which payments to the fund characteristics such as overlapping sales overlaps between the states within the are due by one full business day and to and procurement areas, and other market.’’ (64 FR 16064)
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29417
Proposals to merge the Appalachian producer milk between these areas.’’ neighboring dairy farmers. As discussed and Southeast order marketing areas Accordingly, the merger proposals were later in this decision, there is no into a single marketing area were not adopted during Federal order evidence of disorder occurring within considered during the Federal order reform. the Appalachian and Southeast order reform process. Dairy Farmers of Record evidence indicates that the marketing areas as a result of plants America, Inc., and Carolina-Virginia Appalachian and Southeast order shifting regulation to other orders. Milk Producers Association submitted marketing areas share minor and Overlapping milk supply principally comments requesting that the proposed unchanged commonality in sources of applies when the major proportions of consolidated Appalachian order milk supply, fluid milk route sales, and a market’s milk is supplied by the same marketing area and the proposed market participants (cooperative area. The cost of a handler’s milk is consolidated Southeast order marketing associations and handlers). However, as influenced by the location of the milk area be combined into a single discussed later in this decision, such supply which affects other competitive consolidated Southeast marketing area. measures of association between the factors. The common pooling of milk Also, the Kentucky Farm Bureau Appalachian and Southeast orders can produced within the same procurement Federation requested a single Federal only support a finding to maintain two area facilitates the uniform pricing of order consisting of the proposed separate Federal orders with some producer milk among dairy farmers. consolidated Appalachian and minor modifications. However, all marketing areas having Southeast marketing areas including all Overlapping Route Sales and Milk overlapping procurement areas do not of the State of Kentucky. Supply. Current proponents of merging warrant consolidation. An area that The proponents for merging the two the Appalachian and Southeast supplies a minor proportion of an consolidated marketing areas contended marketing areas contend that there is adjoining area’s milk needs from minor that common procurement areas substantial overlap in route sales and proportions of its own total milk supply between the orders would result in milk supply areas between the orders. and has minimal competition among different blend prices paid to producers The movements of packaged fluid milk handlers in the adjacent marketing area if the orders were not consolidated. The between Federal milk order marketing for fluid sales, supports concluding that Federal order reform final decision areas provide evidence that plants from the two marketing areas are clearly rejected this assertion stating that ‘‘As more than one Federal milk order are in separate and distinct. discussed in the proposed rule, competition with each other for fluid Based on record evidence of Federal consolidating the Carolina and milk sales. Overlapping sales patterns milk order data, Table 1 illustrates that Tennessee Valley markets with the can result in the regulatory shifting of the Appalachian and Southeast milk Southeast does not represent the most handlers between orders and tends to orders have experienced no significant appropriate consolidation option cause disorderly marketing conditions change in overlapping route disposition because of the minor degree of by the changed price relationships or milk procurement since the orders overlapping route disposition and between competing handlers and were consolidated.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29418 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
For the 2000 through 2003 period, order accounted for about 85 percent of to 2003, while route sales from the route sales by distributing plants the order’s total Class I sales. Southeast order regulated plants into regulated by the Appalachian order into Of the total producer milk pooled on the Appalachian marketing area the Southeast marketing area averaged the Appalachian order, the amount of remained relatively unchanged for the about 12 percent, while the route sales producer milk produced in the 4-year period. Likewise, the data in from plants regulated by the Southeast Southeast marketing area decreased Table 1 shows that producer milk order into the Appalachian marketing from 8.5 percent in 2000 to 4.3 percent pooled on the Appalachian order that area averaged about 2 percent. Record in 2003. The milk produced in the originated from the Southeast marketing Appalachian marketing area that was data also indicates that the majority of area declined each year since 2000, pooled on the Southeast order the Class I sales by distributing plants while the producer milk pooled on the accounted for about 3.2 percent of the Southeast order that originated from the regulated by the Appalachian and total producer milk pooled on the Appalachian marketing area has Southeast orders are within each of the Appalachian order for the same 4-year remained unchanged since the orders respective orders. For the 4-year period, period. Appalachian order handlers accounted In summary, the Table 1 data were consolidated in January 2000. for about 75 percent of the total Class I illustrates that route sales from Table 2, which is based on Federal sales within the order’s marketing area Appalachian order handlers into the milk order record data, further details and plants regulated by the Southeast Southeast marketing area increased the source of producer milk pooled on slightly (1 percentage point) from 2000 the Appalachian and Southeast orders.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 EP20MY05.000 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29419
The Table 2 data illustrates that the Appalachian order that was produced producer milk that was produced in the share of total producer milk pooled on outside the Appalachian marketing area Appalachian marketing area which the Appalachian order produced within during this period, 12.7 percent was remained relatively unchanged at about the marketing area during 2000 through produced in the Southeast marketing 3 percent from 2000 through 2003. 2003 has declined from about 51 area and 12.8 percent in the Northeast Record data reveals that the percent to about 45 percent. The amount marketing area, and 26 percent in the supplemental milk for the Southeast of producer milk produced in the Mideast marketing area. In addition, order is produced primarily in the Southeast marketing area as a share of record data indicates that approximately Central and Southwest marketing areas. the total amount of producer milk half of the pooled milk on the Specifically, the share of producer milk pooled on the Appalachian order also Appalachian order is produced in produced in the Central marketing area has declined from 8.5 percent in 2000 counties within the marketing area and that was pooled on the Southeast order to 4.3 percent in 2003. At the same time, 20 percent to 25 percent of the total increased from 8.9 percent in 2000 to the amount of producer milk produced pooled milk is supplied by Federally 14.2 percent in 2003. In addition, in the Mideast marketing area that was unregulated areas, mainly from counties producer milk produced in the pooled on the Appalachian order in the State of Virginia, Pennsylvania Southwest marketing area that was increased from 9.1 percent in 2000 to and New York. pooled on the Southeast order was 19.2 percent in 2003. For the 4-year period of 2000 through about 17 percent in 2000, increased to During 2000 through 2003, the 2003, record data reveals the share of about 22 percent in 2002, and declined Northeast, Southeast, and Mideast the total Southeast order producer milk to about 17 percent in 2003. marketing areas accounted for about 27 produced within the marketing area The record data clearly reveals the percent of the total producer milk declined from about 67 percent in 2000 degree of overlap in milk supply pooled on the Appalachian order. Of the to about 58 percent in 2003. However, between the Appalachian and Southeast total producer milk pooled on the this decline was not supplied by milk order marketing areas has
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 EP20MY05.001 29420 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
decreased over the 4-year period since utilization rates for the Southeast order unregulated counties of four states to Federal order reform while the degree of averaged 10.8 percent, 17.3 percent, and form the Southeast order addressed the overlap between the Appalachian and 8.5 percent, respectively. This data issue of blend price differences among Mideast orders has increased each year. illustrates that the Appalachian orders (60 FR 25014). The decision The data further reveals that the primary marketing area is balanced primarily by stated that blend price differences out-of-area sources of supplemental Class II and Class IV while in the between orders may be caused by a milk for the Appalachian order Southeast marketing area is balanced by number of factors including order marketing area are the Northeast and Class II and Class III. provisions, institutional factors, the Mideast regions. In contrast, the primary Blend Prices. Proponent cooperatives location of surplus milk and differences out-of-area sources of milk supply for contend that the differences in blend in class prices. The decision concluded the Southeast order marketing area are prices between the Appalachian and that the five separate orders were the Southwest and Central marketing Southeast milk orders result in encouraging plants to shift regulation areas. disruptive marketing conditions. The among the orders which resulted in Record data reveals that the minimal blend price of an order is a function of disorderly marketing conditions as overlap in milk supply areas that exists the utilization of milk in the respective producers and handler inequity greatly between the Appalachian and Southeast classes (Class I, Class II, Class III, and increased. milk order marketing areas is primarily Class IV) at the corresponding class The current Southeast and concentrated along the Tennessee and prices. The blend prices for the Appalachian orders do not experience Kentucky borders. Such overlap is Appalachian and Southeast order have disorderly marketing conditions as a typical for adjoining marketing areas. differed due to the Orders’ different result of plants shifting regulation The Federal order reform final decision class utilization of milk. The magnitude between orders. This may be attributed addressed the issue of overlapping milk of the blend price differences is to the current lock-in and unit pooling supply areas among adjacent orders by primarily attributed to the differences provisions contained in the stating that ‘‘an area that supplies a between the class prices since the Appalachian and Southeast orders’ minor proportion of an adjoining area’s Appalachian marketing area is mainly pooling provisions. The lock-in milk supply with a minor proportion of balanced by Class II and Class IV and provisions provide that a plant located its own total milk production while the Southeast marketing area by Class II within a marketing area that meets the handlers located in the area are engaged and Class III. The blend price difference minimum performance standards of the in minimal competition with handlers further illustrates that the Appalachian order will be regulated by that order located in the adjoining area likely does and Southeast milk orders have separate even if the majority of its sales occur in not have a strong enough association and distinct market characteristics. another marketing area. Also, the unit with the adjoining area to require For the 5-year period of 2000 to 2004, pooling provisions allow two or more consolidation. For a number of the the annual average blend price of the plants located in the marketing area and consolidated areas it would be very Appalachian order has been higher than operated by the same handler to qualify difficult, if not impossible, to find a that of the Southeast order blend price. for pool status as a unit by meeting the boundary across which significant This is in part due to the Appalachian order’s total and in-area route quantities of milk are not procured for order having a greater percentage of disposition standards as if they were a other marketing areas.’’ (64 FR 16045) milk utilized in Class I compared to the single distributing plant. Accordingly, the overlap existing Southeast order over the past five years. A plant shifting regulation to an order between the Appalachian and Southeast The range of the blend price differences with a lower blend price could milk order marketing areas does not for the Appalachian and Southeast jeopardize the plant’s ability to maintain warrant an order merger. orders is mainly due to differences in a milk supply. Current Appalachian and Based on the record data, this the Class III and Class IV prices (i.e., the Southeast order provisions allow a plant decision finds that the overlap in route ‘‘balancing’’ class of milk). When the that meets the performance standards of sales and milk procurement areas Class III price goes up relative to the the order and is physically located between the Appalachian and Southeast Class IV price, the blend price within the order marketing area to be milk order marketing areas does not difference between the two orders regulated by the order even if the support merging the two orders. narrows due to the predominance of majority of its sales are in another Milk Utilization. During 2000 through milk utilized in Class III among the non- marketing area. The provisions were 2003, the 4-year weighted average Class Class I uses in the Southeast marketing adopted into the southeastern orders I utilizations for the Appalachian and area. and retained in the consolidated Southeast orders were 66.9 percent and Blend price differences between the Appalachian and Southeast orders to 63.1 percent, respectively. The level of Appalachian and Southeast orders have allow plants that are associated with the Class I utilization is a factor considered narrowed since the orders were market and are servicing the market’s in determining whether orders should consolidated in 2000. The differences in fluid needs to be regulated under the be merged but does not form the basis the weighted average blend prices for order in which they are physically for adopting a merger because it is a the two orders was $0.36 per cwt in located. function of how much milk is pooled on 2000, $0.24 per cwt in 2001, $0.21 per If these provisions were not present in an order. cwt in 2002, $0.09 per cwt in 2003, and the Appalachian and Southeast orders, From 2000 through 2004, the non- $0.08 per cwt in 2004. Over the 2000 to then plants could shift regulation Class I use of milk (Class II, Class III, 2004 period, the Appalachian order between orders because of blend price and Class IV) of the Appalachian and blend price exceeded the Southeast differences which could cause Southeast marketing areas have been order blend price by an average of $0.20 disorderly marketing conditions to different. During this 5-year period, per cwt. occur. Since record data indicates that Appalachian order Class II, Class III and A 1995 final decision that the Appalachian and Southeast orders’ Class IV utilization rates averaged 14.5 consolidated five former Southeastern blend price differences are continuing to percent, 7.30 percent, and 10.1 percent, orders (Georgia, Alabama-West Florida, decrease and there are provisions that respectively. For the same period, the New Orleans-Mississippi, Greater prevent plants from shifting regulation Class II, Class III, and Class IV Louisiana, and Central Arkansas) with among orders, this decision finds that
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29421
the blend price differences between the orders. A number of these cooperatives respectively. In 2002, five cooperative two orders do not form a contributing are members of SMA and others associations formed SMA, which basis for merging the two marketing cooperatives have the milk of their markets the majority of the raw milk areas. members that is pooled on the supplied to plants regulated by the An analysis of the record data reveals Appalachian and Southeast orders Appalachian and Southeast orders. that the proposed order merger would marketed by SMA. The number of pool distributing likely lower the blend price paid to The evidence indicates that plants on the Appalachian and dairy farmers of the Appalachian milk proponent cooperatives market the Southeast orders for 1996 was 29 and order and increase the blend price paid majority of the milk pooled on the 36, respectively. For December 2003 the to dairy farmers of the Southeast order. Appalachian and Southeast orders. For number of pool distributing plants for The gains to Southeast order dairy example, for December 2003, proponent the orders was 24 and 27, respectively. farmers would be offset by losses to cooperatives marketed 62.23 percent of The plant changes that have occurred Appalachian order dairy farmers by a the total producer milk pooled on the include ownership changes, new plant similar magnitude. Appalachian order and 69.68 percent of openings, as well as plant closings. If the two orders are merged and the total producer milk pooled on the Taken singularly or as a whole, the assuming no significant depooling in Southeast order. While commonality of structural changes that have occurred the Federal order system, it is projected cooperative associations can be from 1996 to present have had no that for the period of 2005 through 2009 significant it is not a primary criteria significant impact on overlapping route the blend price paid to dairy farmers of used to determine whether orders disposition and overlapping the current Appalachian order would be should be merged. procurement patterns of the reduced by about $0.07 per cwt on The record indicates that the Appalachian and Southeast orders. average, while the blend price paid to proposed merger could likely provide Other order provisions. Proponent dairy farmers of the current Southeast some administrative relief to SMA in cooperatives’ proposal to combine the order would be increased by $0.07 per marketing the milk of their cooperative balances of the Producer Settlement cwt on average. The $0.07 per cwt members. However, this outcome is at Funds, the Transportation Credit decline in the current Appalachian the expense of independent dairy Balancing Funds, the Administrative order blend price would cause average farmers who are currently associated Assessment Funds, and the Marketing order pool receipts to decline by about with the Appalachian order. Service Funds of the Appalachian and 11 million pounds and average order Market and Structural Changes. Southeast milk orders for the proposed pool revenues to fall by $6.6 million. Record evidence indicates that there merged order is not adopted in this For the current Southeast order, the have been several market and structural decision. The proposal is moot since $0.07 per cwt blend price increase changes in the Southeast and this decision does not recommend would increase average order pool Appalachian markets since the Federal merging the two orders. receipts by an average of 11 million Order Reform process began in 1996 and Proponent cooperatives offered order pounds, resulting in an average gross the implementation of the consolidated provisions for inclusion in the proposed pool revenue increase of $6.5 million orders in January 2000. These changes merged order. These recommendations per year. include fewer and larger producers and included adopting for the proposed Record testimony by proponent producer organizations, handler merged order provisions that currently cooperatives indicates that SMA has, consolidations, and other plant are included in the Appalachian order through its pooling of costs and returns, ownership changes. and/or the Southeast order. The reduced their pay price differences to From January 2000 through December proponent cooperatives recommended their member producers. Thus, a merger 2003, the number of dairy farmers that the proposed merged order include of the Appalachian and Southeast pooled on the Appalachian and pool plant provisions currently in the orders would merely increase the blend Southeast milk orders decreased. For Appalachian order, and proposed the price for Southeast order nonmember the Southeast, the decline was 13.6 ‘‘touch-base’’ requirement of the producers while reducing the blend percent from 4,213 to 3,658, and the producer milk provisions include a price received by Appalachian order number of dairy farmers pooled on the ‘‘percentage’’ production standard nonmember producers. In effect, while Appalachian order decrease by 15.6 instead of a ‘‘days’’ production benefiting certain producers, the percent from 4,974 to 4,200. Milk standard. Since this decision does not proposed merged order would production in the Appalachian and recommend adopting the proposal to negatively affect certain other dairy Southeast marketing areas has decreased merge the Appalachian and Southeast farmers. since the Federal orders were marketing areas, the recommendations Based on this analysis, the absence of consolidated. This decrease in milk concerning order provisions for the disorderly marketing conditions, production has caused additional proposed merged order are moot. together with the minimal and supplemental milk to be imported into The proponent cooperatives requested unchanged overlap between the these deficit milk production markets. that the proposed merged order contain Appalachian and Southeast orders in The record reveals that producer transportation credit provisions Class I sales and milk procurement area, organizations associated with the currently applicable to the Appalachian the two orders should not be merged. Appalachian and Southeast order and Southeast milk orders, with certain Cooperative Associations. Record marketing areas changed since the modifications. The proponent evidence clearly demonstrates that there Federal order reform process. In 1996, cooperatives requested the is a strong cooperative association there were 14 cooperative associations transportation credit provisions be commonality between the Appalachian marketing the milk of their members on modified to increase the maximum rate and Southeast order marketing areas. what is now the Appalachian order and of assessment to $0.10 per cwt, change During December 2003, there were a nine Southeast order cooperatives. the months a producer’s milk is not total of 14 cooperatives marketing the During December 2003, the number of allowed to be associated with the milk of members on the Appalachian cooperative associations marketing market for such producer to be eligible and Southeast orders and 9 of these members’ milk on the Appalachian and for transportation credits, and provide cooperatives marketed milk on both Southeast orders was 12 and 11, the Market Administrator the authority
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29422 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
to adjust the 50-percent production expanded the proposed merged order to Commission and Virginia base-holder eligibility standard. They also supported included 25 currently unregulated producers would be insignificant. The the proposed changes for the individual counties and 14 currently unregulated witness was of the opinion that, if there orders if their order merger proposal cities in the State of Virginia. Similarly, were any impact on Virginia base- was not adopted. a proposal published in the notice of holders producers, it would be Proponent cooperatives contended hearing as Proposal 4 sought the positive—reflecting the higher blend that by adopting transportation credits expansion of the marketing area by price at Mount Crawford, Virginia, for provisions in the Appalachian and adding an area adjoining the the plants under the proposed merged Southeast orders the Secretary Appalachian marketing area that order versus the Northeast order. established the inextricable and includes two unregulated cities and two The proponent cooperatives common supply relationship between unregulated counties in State of submitted a post-hearing brief the orders. The proponents state that the Virginia. Proposal 3, which also was supporting the expansion of the proposed merger simply extends that supported by proponents of Proposal 4, proposed merged order area to include recognition to provide common uniform is adopted. the additional 25 counties and 14 cities prices and terms of trade for all dairy Proponent cooperatives of Proposal 3 in Virginia. farmers delivering milk to the market, offered that the merger of the A witness representing the Kroger and a common set of producer Appalachian and Southeast marketing Company (Kroger) testified in support of qualification requirements. area be expanded to include the Virginia Proposal 4 to expand the proposed This decision finds that the inclusion counties of Allegheny, Amherst, merged order to include two currently of transportation credit provisions in the Augusta, Bathe, Bedford, Bland, unregulated counties (Campbell and Appalachian and Southeast orders is not Botetourt, Campbell, Carroll, Craig, Pittsylvania), and two currently a basis for merging the two orders. Such Floyd, Franklin, Giles, Grayson, Henry, unregulated cities (Lynchburg and provisions were incorporated and Highland, Montgomery, Patrick, Danville) in the State of Virginia. The established in the orders based on the Pittsylvania, Pulaski, Roanoke, witness stated that Kroger owns and prevailing marketing conditions of each Rockbridge, Rockingham, Smyth, and operates four pool distributing plants individual order. Also, record indicates Wythe) and Virginia cities of Bedford, associated with the Southeast and that the orders’ transportation credit Buena Vista, Clinton Forge, Covington, Appalachian milk orders, including balancing funds have functioned Danville, Galax, Harrisonburg, Westover Dairy located in Lynchburg, differently since 2000 with respect to Lexington, Lynchburg, Martinsville, Virginia. The witness also testified in the assessment rates at which handlers Radford, Roanoke, Salem and Staunton. support of adopting the current made payments and the payments from The proponent cooperatives’ witness Appalachian order pool plant the orders’ transportation credit testified that the addition of the 25 definition. balancing fund for each year since 2001. counties and the 14 cities would The Appalachian order waived the properly change the regulatory status of According to the Kroger witness, the collection of assessments at least two a Dean Foods’ Morningstar Foods plant Appalachian order pool distributing months of each year from 2001 through located at Mount Crawford, Virginia, plant provisions require that at least 25 2003. The Southeast order, while from the Northeast order to the percent of a plant’s total route collecting assessments at the maximum Appalachian order. Also, the witness disposition must be to outlets within the rate of $0.07 per cwt, has prorated stated the proposed expansion would marketing area. This requirement, payments from the fund each year since have the effect of fully and continuously explained the witness, has restricted 2001. regulating under the Appalachian order Kroger’s ability to expand its Class I As discussed later in this decision, two fluid milk distributing plants (the sales into areas outside the Appalachian proposed amendments to the Kroger Company’s Westover Dairy marketing area, including the area transportation credit provision of the plant, located in Lynchburg, Virginia, directly associated with the plant’s Appalachian and Southeast orders are and the National Dairy Holdings’ Valley physical location (Lynchburg, Virginia). recommended for adoption. The Rich Dairy plant, located in Roanoke, The Kroger witness noted that proposed amendments are warranted Virginia) under the proposed merged Westover Dairy has been a fully due to the declining milk production order. regulated plant on the Appalachian within the Appalachian and Southeast The witness said the Dean Foods order since January 2000, and prior to marketing areas and the anticipated Company’s Mount Crawford plant reform, the plant was regulated on the growing need of importing milk alternates between partially regulated Carolina order—one of the former orders produced outside the marketing areas to and fully regulated status under the combined to form the Appalachian supply the fluid needs of the markets. Northeast milk order. According to the order. According to the Kroger witness, witness, in order for the plant to procure the total in-area route disposition 1b. Expansion of the Appalachian an adequate supply of milk, producers standard increased from 15 percent to Marketing Area delivering to it must receive a blend 25 percent when the consolidated and While the proposal for merging the price comparable with the blend price reformed Appalachian order became Appalachian and Southeast milk generated under the proposed merged effective in January 2000. This change, marketing area is not recommended for order, if adopted. the witness contended, has created an adoption, this decision recommends The proponent cooperatives’ witness undue hardship on Westover Dairy and expanding the current boundaries of the stated that the milk supply located near has force it to relinquish sales in areas Appalachian milk marketing area to Dean Foods’ Mount Crawford, Virginia, outside of the Appalachian market to include certain unregulated counties plant is an attractive source of supply maintain its pool status under the order. and cities in the State of Virginia. for plants that are fully regulated by the The witness concluded by stating that Expansion of the marketing area Appalachian order that are located in Kroger prefers Proposal 3—the larger adjoining the Appalachian marketing southern Virginia, North Carolina, expansion—which would not only area was contained in the proposal South Carolina, and eastern Tennessee. expand the order area to include their published in the hearing notice as The witness indicated that the impact of plant located at Lynchburg, Virginia, but Proposal 3. The proposal would have this proposal on the Virginia State Milk would allow a further expansion of
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29423
Class I sales into other surrounding Crawford, Virginia, from the Northeast transportation assessment rates will areas. order to the Appalachian order. tend to minimize the exhaustion of the The witnesses for MD&VA, ADC, The Kroger’s Westover Dairy plant has transportation credit balancing fund Lone Star, and DMC testified in support been regulated by the Appalachian when the need for importing of Proposal 3 to expand the proposed order since the order was consolidated supplemental bulk milk from outside of Southeast milk order area to include in January 2000. Current Appalachian the marketing areas to meet Class I certain unregulated counties and cities order pool plant provisions require that needs occurs. Additionally, the Market in the State of Virginia as proposed by at least 25 percent of a distributing Administrators of the orders should be the proponent cooperatives. The plant’s total Class I sales be to outlets given the discretionary authority to witnesses stated that the cooperatives within the marketing area. Prior to the increase or decrease the 50 percent were not opposed to the expansion of reform of Federal milk orders, the production standard for determining the the proposed Southeast milk marketing former orders that were combined into milk of a dairy farmer that is eligible for area into the smaller territory in the the Appalachian order contained a 15 transportation credits. Such dairy State of Virginia as proposed by Kroger percent in-area route disposition farmer should not have been a producer but stated the larger expanded area in standard for pool distributing plants. under the order during more than two Proposal 3 was preferable. Record evidence indicates that the of the immediately preceding months of The MD&VA witness explained that current in-area Class I route sales February through May for the milk of some of the its member producers are standard likely is limiting the growth the dairy farmer to be eligible for receipt located in the proposed expanded area potential of Kroger’s Westover Dairy of a transportation credit. and that the cooperative delivers the plant, located in Lynchburg, Virginia. It The Appalachian and Southeast milk of producers holding Virginia Milk is not the intent of Federal milk orders orders each contain a transportation Commission base to plants fully to inhibit the growth of handlers. credit balancing fund from which a regulated under the Appalachian milk Federal orders are designed to provide payment is made to partially offset the for the orderly exchange of milk from order. According to the witness, the cost of moving milk into each marketing the dairy farmer to the first buyer milk of MD&VA member producers is area to meet fluid milk demands. The (handler). The orders also provide marketed to Dean Foods’ Morningstar fund is the mechanism through which minimum performance standards to Foods plant located in Mount Crawford, handlers deposit on a monthly basis ensure that the fluid needs of the market Virginia, which would become a pool payment at specified rates for eventual are satisfied. Accordingly, the adoption distributing plant if the proposed payout as defined by a specified of the expansion proposal should ensure merged order and the expansion to formula. The orders’ transportation that Kroger’s Westover Dairy plant is credit provisions provide payments Virginia counties and cities are adopted. able to maintain a milk supply in typically during the short production Witness appearing on behalf of Dean competition with nearby Appalachian months of July through December to Foods and Prairie Farms stated they order plants. handlers who incur hauling costs were not opposed to Proposals 3 and 4. In the case of Dean Foods’ importing supplemental milk to meet Thus, there was no opposition to the Morningstar Foods plant in Mount the fluid demands of the market. adoption of these proposals. Crawford, Virginia, the proposed Transportation credit payments are This decision recommends adopting amendments would eliminate the restricted to bulk milk received from proposed amendments to the current disruption and disorder caused plants regulated by other Federal orders Appalachian order that would expand by the plant shifting its regulatory status or shipped directly from farms of dairy the marketing area to include 25 from fully to partially regulated under farmers located outside the marketing currently unregulated counties and 14 the Northeast order. Such shifting from areas and who are not regularly cities in the State of Virginia. The fully to partially regulated status under associated with the market. The handler proposed amendments would cause the an order may cause financial harm to payments into the funds are applicable full and continuous regulation under producers supplying that plant. to the Class I milk of producers who the Appalachian order of three fluid The record indicates that the Kroger’s supply the market throughout the year. milk distributing plants, one of which Westover Dairy plant and Dean Foods’ The Market Administrators of the orders has been shifting regulatory status under Morningstar plant are supplied by are authorized to adjust payments to the Northeast order. The plants are producers located near the plants and and from the relevant transportation located in Lynchburg, Virginia, that the plants compete with other credit balancing fund. Roanoke, Virginia, and Mount, Appalachian order plants in milk The transportation credit provisions Crawford, Virginia. Because of procurement. This decision finds that of the Appalachian and Southeast Appalachian order’s lock-in provision, orderly market conditions would be orders differ by the assessment rate at these plants, which would be physically preserved by the adoption of the which handlers make payments to the located within the Appalachian proposed expansion amendments. The transportation credit balancing fund. marketing area, would continue to be regulation of no other plants should be The maximum rate of assessment for the regulated under the Appalachian order affected by the adoption of these Appalachian order is $0.06 per cwt even if the majority of their sales are in proposed amendments. In addition, the while the maximum rate of assessment another Federal order marketing area. proposed expansion of the Appalachian for the Southeast order is $0.07 per cwt. The proposed expansion would marketing area is not expected to have A feature of the proposal for merging continue the regulation of two fluid a negative impact on the blend price the Appalachian and Southeast orders milk distributing plants (Kroger’s paid to producers. was providing for a maximum Westover Dairy plant, Lynchburg, transportation assessment rate of 10- Virginia, and National Dairy Holdings’ 1c. Transportation Credits Provisions cents for the proposed Southeast order. Valley Rich Dairy plant, Roanoke, The maximum rates of the This would essentially represent a 3- Virginia) under the Appalachian order. transportation credit assessment for the cent per cwt increase from the current The proposed expansion also would Appalachian and Southeast orders Southeast order, and a 3.5-cent increase shift the regulation of the Dean Foods’ should each be increased by 3-cents per from the Appalachian order. While Morningstar Foods plant, Mount hundredweight. Increasing the there was no separate proposal for
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29424 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
increasing the assessment rate for the In their brief, Dean Foods and Prairie Southeast orders, the maximum transportation credit fund, it was made Farms stated there is no reason to assessment rate at which payments are clear by the proponents that in the increase the rate of assessment. collected was not modified. The current absence of adopting the proposed Changing the rate of assessment, they maximum rate of $0.065 cents per cwt merger an increase in the transportation contended, would effectively change the for the Appalachian order has been credit assessment rate was warranted system of pricing without considering sufficient to meet most of the claims and supported for the current orders. the impact on other marketing orders. made by handlers applying for With regard to the transportation In opposition to any change in the transportation credit. The record reveals credit issue, the proponent cooperatives’ rate of transportation credits, a witness that since implementation of milk order witness testified that the maximum for Georgia Milk Producers, Inc. (GMP), reform in January 2000, the market transportation credit assessment rate testified that increasing the assessment administrator for the Appalachian order should be increased to $0.10 per cwt. rate would generate more revenue to be waived assessing handlers in at least According to the witness, the increase is paid to truck drivers instead of paying two months of each year from 2001 necessary to eliminate insufficient higher prices to local dairy farmers. through 2003. funding for transportation credit claims According to the witness, the price of For the current Southeast order, the that would likely have been paid had milk paid to local dairy farmers should current maximum transportation credit sufficient funds been available. be increased rather than subsidizing rate of $0.07 per cwt has not been According to the witness, that the additional outlays for transportation sufficient to cover hauling cost claims transportation credit rate of $0.07 per costs. by handlers. As a result, the market cwt for the current Southeast order has The GMP witness suggested that administrator of the Southeast order has been at the maximum rate since the instead of increasing the transportation prorated payments from the inception of the order, but that credit assessment rate, a financial transportation credit balancing fund payments from the transportation credit incentive should be initiated for dairy since 2001. balancing fund were exhausted in 2001, farmers to encourage milk production Even though this decision does not 2002, and 2003 resulting in a prorating during the fall months when fluid milk recommend the merging of the current of dollars from the transportation credit demands are highest. According to the Southeast and Appalachian marketing balancing fund to the amount of witness, if the incentive plan still does area, the fundamental purposed of the transportation claims submitted for not cover the local milk production transportation credit fund provisions of receipt of the credit. In contrast, the deficits, only then should the the orders are strongly supported by the witness noted, the transportation credit assessment rate for transportation proponent cooperatives. This support is fund for the Appalachian order has been credits be increased. The witness was of independent of providing for a new and sufficiently funded since 2000 thus the opinion that an incentive plan larger Southeast milk marketing order. enabling the payment of all claims. encouraging local milk production An increase in the maximum The proponent cooperatives’ witness would reduce hauling costs because less transportation credit assessment rate for was of the opinion that the exhaustion milk would be imported into the the Appalachian and Southeast orders is of transportation credit funding in the Southeast market. The witness also was warranted on the basis of declining milk Southeast order resulted in inequitable of the opinion that a financial incentive production within the Appalachian and supplemental milk costs to handlers plan would lower balancing costs by Southeast marketing areas. For example, between the two orders. The witness encouraging the movement of milk the final decision of Federal milk order testified that handlers procuring supplies located near processing plants. reform anticipated that the about two- supplemental milk supplies for the Current Appalachian and Southeast thirds of the milk supply for the Appalachian order were reimbursed at order transportation credit provisions Appalachian order would be produced 100 percent of their claimed credits have been a feature of the orders, or within the marketing areas, with while handlers procuring supplemental predecessor orders, since 1996. The supplemental milk supplies from milk supplies for the Southeast order need for transportation credits arose unregulated area to the north in Virginia were reimbursed at approximately 50 from the consistent need to import milk and Pennsylvania (based on 1997 data). percent of their claimed credits. from many areas outside of these Since implementation of order reform in According to the witness, the unequal marketing areas during certain months January 2000, record evidence reveals payout between the two orders results of the year when milk production in the that only 50 percent of the Appalachian in disorderly marketing conditions areas is not sufficient to meet Class I milk supply is produced within the exhibited by inequitable costs for demands. The transportation credit marketing area. The trend of lower in- producer milk among handlers. provisions provide payments to area milk production strongly suggests Dean Foods and Prairie Farms voiced handlers to cover some of the costs of that the anticipated future needs of opposition to the proponents’ proposed importing supplemental milk supplies relying on milk supplies from outside amendments to increase the maximum into the Appalachian and Southeast the marketing area will only grow and rate of assessments and increase the marketing areas need during the short that such growth necessarily warrants amount of milk that would be eligible production months of July through an increase in the Appalachian for transportation credits. Dean Foods December. The provisions also are transportation credit assessment rate. and Prairie Farms pointed out that the designed to limit the ability of The Southeast marketing area exhibits proposals to incorporate transportation producers who are not normally pooled the same trend. credit provisions into the Southeastern on these orders from pooling their milk To the extent that assessments are not orders were strongly opposed by some on the Appalachian and Southeast needed to meet expected transportation fluid milk processors and some dairy orders during the flush production credit claims, provisions that provide farmers. They noted that the intent and months when such milk is not needed authority to the market administrator to purpose of transportation credit to supply fluid needs. set the assessment rate at a level deemed provisions was to only pay a portion of While Federal milk order reform sufficient or to waive assessments the cost associated with hauling made modifications to certain features should be allowed. Additionally, the supplemental milk to the markets to of the transportation credit fund transportation credit provisions of the meet fluid needs. provisions of the Appalachian and Appalachian and Southeast orders
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29425
prevent the accumulation of funds and April, the definition of credit balancing fund in each proposed beyond actual handler claims. In this supplemental milk under the new marketing area by more efficiently regard, increasing the transportation transportation credit provisions would attracting milk to the Class I market and credit rate will not result in an effectively change. Supplemental milk decreasing the need for hauling milk unwarranted accumulation of funds for purposes of determining the from longer distances. beyond what is needed to pay handler eligibility of transportation credits is The Dean Foods-Prairie Farms claims. that milk that is not regularly associated witness testified that there are two As part of the proposed merged with the market. The proposed change major incentives to ship milk to marketing areas and orders, the would allow supplemental milk to be distributing plants—the blend price proponent cooperatives’ witness delivered to a pool plant all twelve paid by pool distributing plants and the proposed that any producer that is months, potentially lowering the blend price paid for diverted milk. located outside of the marketing area, uniform price during those high According to the witness, there are two would be eligible for transportation production months by pooling disincentives to ship milk to a pool credits if that producer did not pool additional milk when is not needed for distributing plant under any order—the more than 50 percent of the producers fluid use. net transportation cost of shipping milk farm milk production during the months By retaining the months of February and the alternative blend prices in other of March and April. The witness through May and allowing the Market markets that may attract milk to plants testified that the market administrator Administrators of the Appalachian and in those other markets. The witnesses should also be given the discretionary Southeast orders to adjust the 50 cited milk deficit areas in southern authority to adjust the 50 percent limit percent production standard, the Illinois and St. Louis, Missouri, as based on the prevailing supply and current definition of supplemental milk examples of areas where, in the opinion demand conditions for milk in the area. remains intact. The orders’ market of the witnesses, blend price differences The current transportation credit administrator would be allowed to result in a failure to attract enough milk provisions of the Appalachian and increase or decrease the 50 percent to adequately serve the Class I market. Southeast orders specify that production standard, if warranted, The witness asserted that the transportation credits will apply to the based on current marketing conditions. establishment of a Mississippi Valley milk of a dairy farmer who was not a order would likely result in blend price ‘‘producer’’ under the order during more 2. Promulgation of a New ‘‘Mississippi differences between the new areas than 2 of the immediately preceding Valley’’ Milk Order which would provide producers the months of February through May, and A proposal, published in the hearing economic incentives of receiving higher not more than 50 percent of the notice as Proposal 5, seeking to split blend prices while incurring lower production of the dairy farmer during from the current Southeast marketing transportation costs. those two months, in aggregate, was area and forming a new Mississippi received as producer milk under the Valley milk marketing area and order is The Dean Foods-Prairie Farms orders during those two months. These not recommended for adoption. witness testified that a national hearing provisions provide the basis for A witness appearing on behalf of may be justified to more fully consider determining the milk of a dairy farmer Dean Foods and Prairie Farms testified the border, pricing, and milk deficit that is truly supplemental to the in support of Proposal 5. In splitting the issues and alternatives to proposals (like market’s fluid needs. The provision current Southeast marketing area, a new Proposals 1 and 5) advanced to merge or specifies the months of February marketing area, to be named the to split the Southeast marketing area. through May—the period when milk Mississippi Valley order, would include According to the witness, when production is greatest—as the months the area of the existing Southeast marketing area borders are changed, used to determine the eligibility of a marketing area west of the Alabama- such change affects all marketing areas producer whose milk is needed on the Mississippi borderline including the in the Federal order milk order system. market. States of Mississippi, Louisiana, The witness was of the opinion that The market administrators of the Arkansas. According to the witness, this considering border issues would orders should be given discretional new marketing area would extend necessarily require a broad rethinking of authority to adjust the 50 percent northward through the relevant portions the marketing areas of the entire Federal eligibility standard for producer milk of Tennessee and Kentucky, and would order program and that a national receiving transportation credits based include southern Missouri. The second hearing may be the most appropriate on the prevailing marketing conditions order, according to the witness, would venue to consider these affects. within the marketing area. The market consist of the remainder of the current A witness for GMP testified that the administrator should have the authority Southeast marketing area, i.e., Georgia, expansions of the Southeast marketing to increase or decrease this requirement a portion of the western panhandle of area prior to Federal milk order reform, because it is consistent with authorities Florida, and Alabama. and as a result of Federal order reform, already provided for supply plant The Dean Foods-Prairie Farms have successively reduced income to performance standards and diversion witness, and others supporting the Georgia producers. The witness limit standards. Accordingly, the adoption of Proposal 5, asserted that explained that the expansions of the proposed change to the transportation increasing the number of Federal milk marketing area have discouraged local credit provisions of the Appalachian marketing areas and orders would milk production and encouraged and Southeast orders is recommended provide the economic incentives for movements of milk from outside the for adoption. more efficient movement of milk and marketing area. According to the This decision does not recommend increase the blend price received by witness, the declining ability of local changing the period the milk of a dairy producers who supply the needs of the production to meet the Class I needs of farmer is not allowed to be associated Class I market. According to the the market, and the increased balancing with the market for such dairy farmer’s witnesses, splitting the Southeast order requirements of an expanded marketing milk to be eligible for transportation into two orders would reduce area, have increased costs while credits. If the months were modified transportation costs and improve the reducing revenues to Georgia dairy from February through May to March efficient operation of the transportation farmers.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29426 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
In the opinion of the GMP witness, including the Kentucky counties of inadvertently created during the the establishment of a separate Ballard, Calloway, Carlisle, Fulton, consolidation of Federal orders Mississippi Valley marketing area and Graves, Hickman, Marshall, and permitting double pooling of the same order and a smaller Southeast marketing McCracken into the smaller Southeast milk on a Federal milk marketing order area would have positive benefits for order if Proposal 5 is adopted. and on a State-operated order that, like Georgia milk producers. The witness The proposal to split the current a Federal order, provides for the explained that as a smaller Southeast Southeast marketing area hinges on the marketwide pooling of producer milk. marketing area, the Georgia market assertions that geographically smaller (The double pooling of milk has become would likely experience lower marketing areas tend to reduce known as ‘‘double dipping’’) balancing costs and expanded local transportation and balancing costs and According to the Dean Food-Prairie production to meet the growing Class I increase blend prices for pooled Farms’ witnesses, this loophole has needs of the market. producers in each of the newly defined been exploited for financial gain by A witness for proponents of Proposal marketing areas. The record does not some parties at the expense of pooled 1 testified in opposition to adopting a contain specific evidence to support producers in other Federal orders until new Mississippi Valley marketing area these conclusions. The record lacks prohibited by subsequent milk order by splitting it from the current evidence to support concluding that the amendments. The proponents testified Southeast marketing area. According to adoption of Proposal 5 would lower that proposals similar to Proposal 6 the witness, the proposed new transportation costs, increase local milk have been adopted in the Upper marketing area would not lead to lower production, and reduce balancing costs. Midwest, Pacific Northwest, and Central transportation costs but instead may The same is true for concluding that Federal milk orders. lead to increased administrative local milk production would be Proponents testified that prohibition difficulties with transportation credit encouraged and increased to the extent of double dipping in the Southeast and balancing funds. The witness was of the that transportation expenses, and the Appalachian orders would close a opinion that blend price enhancement need for continued transportation credit potential loophole in these orders or in for the proposed smaller Southeast fund payments, would be significantly a successor order if these orders were marketing area would be achieved at the reduced while bringing forth a sufficient merged. The witnesses testified that the expense of producers pooled on the supply of milk to meet the Class I needs pooling of milk regulated by Virginia proposed new Mississippi Valley order. of the proposed marketing areas. and Pennsylvania milk programs would The opposition witness was of the Opponents of Proposal 5 argued that not be affected by the prohibition of opinion that blend prices for the blend price increases from splitting the double pooling. According to the proposed smaller Southeast marketing Southeast marketing area may not occur witnesses, milk that is pooled on these area may increase to levels that would and that lower transportation cost may State milk programs does not receive exacerbate differences between the not be realized. However, the record extraordinary benefits that would have blend prices of the new smaller does not contain information necessary an impact on Federal milk order pools. Southeast and the Appalachian order for determining if either the positions of No opposition testimony was presented. and may give rise to unintended market the proponents or opponents of Since the 1960’s the Federal milk disruptions. The witness was of the Proposal 5 are valid. order program has recognized the harm opinion that a smaller Southeast This decision does not recommend and disorder that resulted to both marketing area and order also may the adoption of Proposal 5. The record producers and handlers when the same result in administrative difficulties in is insufficiently persuasive in milk of a producer was simultaneously the operation of transportation credit demonstrating the efficiencies in milk pooled on more than one Federal order. balancing funds among the three orders movements for handlers as advanced by When this occurs, producers do not and may lead to the inefficient its proponents. receive uniform minimum prices, and movements of milk. The witness some handlers receive unfair 3. Eliminating the Simultaneous Pooling expressed the opinion that splitting the competitive advantages. The need to of the Same Milk on a Federal Milk Southeast marketing area would not prevent ‘‘double pooling’’ became address the concerns that proponents of Order and a State-operated Milk Order critically important as distribution areas Proposal 1 have raised regarding that Provides for Marketwide Pooling expanded, orders merged, and a overlapping sales and inefficient milk A proposal, published in the hearing national pricing system was adopted. movement issues between the notice as Proposal 6, seeking to prohibit Milk already pooled under a State- Appalachian and Southeast marketing the simultaneous pooling of the same operated program and able to areas. The witness indicated that these milk on the Appalachian or Southeast simultaneously be pooled under a issues would remain unresolved if the milk marketing orders and on a State- Federal order creates the same Southeast marketing area was split and operated order that provides for the undesirable outcomes that allowing if the Southeast and Appalachian marketwide pooling of milk is milk to be pooled on two Federal orders marketing areas were not merged. recommended for adoption. Currently, used to cause and subsequently A post hearing brief by the neither the Appalachian or Southeast corrected. proponents of Proposal 5 reiterated their orders have a provision that would There are other State-operated milk position that creating more, rather than prevent the simultaneous pooling of the order programs that provide for fewer, blend price differences will same milk on the order and on a State- marketwide pooling. For example, New provide incentives to ship milk to operated order that provides for York operates a milk order program for markets where the milk is demanded. In marketwide pooling. the western region of that State. A key addition, the brief reiterated that The proponents of Proposal 6, Deans feature explaining why this State- splitting the Southeast marketing area Foods and Prairie Farms testified that operated program has operated for years will reduce transportation costs and the simultaneous pooling of milk on alongside the Federal milk order result in more efficient movement of more than one marketing order was program is the provision in the State milk in a smaller Southeast marketing prohibited between all Federal milk pool that excludes milk from the State area and a Mississippi Valley marketing orders. According to the Dean Food- pool when the same milk is already area. The brief also called for the Prairie Farms’ witnesses, a loophole was pooled under a Federal order. Other
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 29427
States with marketwide pooling conclusions set forth above. To the For the reasons set forth in the similarly do not allow double-pooling of extent that the suggested findings and preamble 7 CFR Parts 1005 and 1007 are Federal order milk. conclusions filed by interested parties amended as follows: The record supports that the are inconsistent with the findings and Appalachian, Southeast, and possible conclusions set forth herein, the PART 1005—MILK IN THE successor orders should be amended to requests to make such findings or reach APPALACHIAN MARKETING AREA preclude the ability to simultaneously such conclusions are denied for the pool the same milk on the order if the reasons previously stated in this 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR milk is already pooled on a State- decision. part 1005 continues to read as follows: operated order that provides for Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. General Findings marketwide pooling. Proposal 6 offers a 2. Section 1005.2 is amended by reasonable solution for prohibiting the The findings and determinations revising the Virginia counties and cities same milk to draw pool funds from hereinafter set forth supplement those to read as follows: Federal and State marketwide pools that were made when the Appalachian simultaneously. It is consistent with the and Southeast orders were first issued § 1005.2 Appalachian marketing area. current prohibition against allowing the and when they were amended. The * * * * * same milk to participate simultaneously previous findings and determinations Virginia Counties and Cities in more than one Federal order pool. are hereby ratified and confirmed, Adoption of Proposal 6 will not except where they may conflict with Alleghany, Amherst, Augusta, Bath, establish any barrier to the pooling of those set forth herein. Bedford, Bland, Botetourt, Buchanan, milk from any source that actually (a) The tentative marketing Campbell, Carroll, Craig, Dickenson, demonstrates performance in supplying agreements and the orders, as hereby Floyd, Franklin, Giles, Grayson, Henry, the Appalachian and Southeast markets’ proposed to be amended, and all of the Highland, Lee, Montgomery, Patrick, Class I needs. terms and conditions thereof, will tend Pittsylvania, Pulaski, Roanoke, Evidence presented at the hearing to effectuate the declared policy of the Rockbridge, Rockingham, Russell, Scott, establishes that milk that can be pooled Act; Smyth, Tazewell, Washington, Wise, simultaneously on a State-operated (b) The parity prices of milk as and Wythe; and the cities of Bedford, order and a Federal order, would render determined pursuant to section 2 of the Bristol, Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, the Appalachian and Southeast milk Act are not reasonable in view of the Covington, Danville, Galax, orders unable to establish prices that are price of feeds, available supplies of Harrisonburg, Lexington, Lynchburg, uniform to producers and to handlers. feeds, and other economic conditions Martinsville, Norton, Radford, Roanoke, This shortcoming of the pooling which affect market supply and demand Salem, Staunton, and Waynesboro. provisions allows milk which was for milk in the marketing areas, and the * * * * * pooled on a state order to be pooled minimum prices specified in the milk on a Federal order. Such milk tentative marketing agreements and the 3. Section 1005.13 is amended by therefore could not provide a reasonable orders, as hereby proposed to be revising the introductory text and or consistent service to meet the needs amended, are such prices as will reflect adding a new paragraph (e), to read as of the Class I market because it was the aforesaid factors, insure a sufficient follows: quantity of pure and wholesome milk, committed to the State order. § 1005.13 Producer milk. No record evidence was presented and be in the public interest; and illustrating or documenting current (c) The tentative marketing Except as provided for in paragraph double pooling of milk in the agreements and the orders, as hereby (e) of this section, Producer milk means Appalachian and Southeast orders. proposed to be amended, will regulate the skim milk (of the skim equivalent of Consequently, it is determined that the handling of milk in the same components of skim milk) and butterfat emergency marketing conditions do not manner as, and will be applicable only contained in milk of a producer that is: exist and the adoption of Proposal 6 to persons in the respective classes of * * * * * should be included as part of the industrial and commercial activity (e) Producer milk shall not include issuance of a recommended decision. specified in, marketing agreements upon milk of a producer that is subject to which a hearing has been held. 4. Producer-Handler Provisions inclusion and participation in a Recommended Marketing Agreements marketwide equalization pool under a A decision considered at the hearing and Order Amending the Orders milk classification and pricing program regarding the regulatory status of The recommended marketing imposed under the authority of a State producer-handlers will be addressed in government maintaining marketwide a separate decision. agreements are not included in this decision because the regulatory pooling of returns. Conforming Change provisions thereof would be the same as * * * * * This decision recommends amending those contained in the orders, as hereby § 1005.81 [Amended] the Appalachian and Southeast orders proposed to be amended. The following to appropriately reference the Deputy order amending the orders, as amended, 4. In § 1005.81(a), remove ‘‘$0.065’’ Administrator of Dairy Programs. regulating the handling of milk in the and add, in its place, ‘‘$0.095’’. Appalachian and Southeast marketing Rulings on Proposed Findings and § 1005.82 [Amended] areas is recommended as the detailed Conclusions and appropriate means by which the 5. In § 1005.82, paragraph (b) is Briefs and proposed findings and foregoing conclusions may be carried revised by removing the words conclusions were filed on behalf of out. ‘‘Director of the Dairy Division’’ and certain interested parties. These briefs, adding, in their place, the words proposed findings and conclusions, and List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1005 and ‘‘Deputy Administrator of Dairy the evidence in the record were 1007 Programs’’ and adding a new paragraph considered in making the findings and Milk marketing orders. (c)(2)(iv) to read as follows:
VerDate jul<14>2003 17:19 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 29428 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules
§ 1005.82 Payments from the adding a new paragraph (e), to read as (c) * * * transportation credit balancing fund. follows: (2) * * * * * * * * § 1007.13 Producer milk. (iv) The market administrator may (c) * * * Except as provided for in paragraph increase or decrease the milk (2) * * * (e) of this section, Producer milk means production standard specified in (iv) The market administrator may the skim milk (of the skim equivalent of paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section if the increase or decrease the milk components of skim milk) and butterfat market administrator finds that such production standard specified in contained in milk of a producer that is: revision is necessary to assure orderly paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section if the * * * * * marketing and efficient handling of milk market administrator finds that such (e) Producer milk shall not include in the marketing area. Before making revision is necessary to assure orderly milk of a producer that is subject to such a finding, the market administrator marketing and efficient handling of milk inclusion and participation in a shall investigate the need for the in the marketing area. Before making marketwide equalization pool under a revision either on the market such a finding, the market administrator milk classification and pricing program administrator’s own initiative or at the shall investigate the need for the imposed under the authority of a State request of interested persons. If the government maintaining marketwide revision either on the market investigation shows that a revision pooling of returns. administrator’s own initiative or at the might be appropriate, the market request of interested persons. If the * * * * * administrator shall issue a notice stating investigation shows that a revision § 1007.81 [Amended] that the revision is being considered and might be appropriate, the market inviting written data, views, and administrator shall issue a notice stating 7. In § 1007.81(a), remove ‘‘$0.07’’ and add, in its place, ‘‘$0.10’’. arguments. Any decision to revise an that the revision is being considered and applicable percentage must be issued in inviting written data, views, and § 1007.82 [Amended] writing at least one day before the arguments. Any decision to revise an 8. In § 1007.82, paragraph (b) is effective date. applicable percentage must be issued in revised by removing the words * * * * * writing at least one day before the ‘‘Director of the Dairy Division’’ and effective date. adding, in their place, the words Dated: May 13, 2005. * * * * * ‘‘Deputy Administrator of Dairy Kenneth C. Clayton, Programs’’ and adding a new paragraph Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing PART 1007—MILK IN THE SOUTHEAST (c)(2)(iv) to read as follows: MARKETING AREA Service. § 1007.82 Payments from the [FR Doc. 05–9962 Filed 5–19–05; 8:45 am] 6. Section 1007.13 is amended by transportation credit balancing fund. BILLING CODE 3410–02–P revising the introductory text and * * * * *
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:31 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20MYP4.SGM 20MYP4 Friday, May 20, 2005
Part VI
The President Memorandum of May 13, 2005— Assignment of Function To Submit a Report to the Congress
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:32 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYO0.SGM 20MYO0 VerDate jul<14>2003 16:32 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYO0.SGM 20MYO0 29431
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 70, No. 97
Friday, May 20, 2005
Title 3— Memorandum of May 13, 2005
The President Assignment of Function to Submit a Report to the Congress
Memorandum for the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, the function of the President of providing to the Congress a report under section 9012 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–287) is assigned to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register. W THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, May 13, 2005.
[FR Doc. 05–10284 Filed 5–19–05; 9:25 am] Billing code 3110–01–P
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:32 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\20MYO0.SGM 20MYO0 Friday, May 20, 2005
Part VII
The President Notice of May 19, 2005—Continuation of the National Emergency Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:35 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYO1.SGM 20MYO1 VerDate jul<14>2003 16:35 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\20MYO1.SGM 20MYO1 29435
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 70, No. 97
Friday, May 20, 2005
Title 3— Notice of May 19, 2005
The President Continuation of the National Emergency Protecting the Devel- opment Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest
On May 22, 2003, by Executive Order 13303, I declared a national emergency protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and certain other property in which Iraq has an interest, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706) (IEEPA). I took this action to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the obstacles to the orderly reconstruc- tion of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq constituted by the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petro- leum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any finan- cial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof. On August 28, 2003, in Executive Order 13315, I expanded the scope of this national emergency to block the property of the former Iraqi regime, its senior officials and their family members as the removal of Iraqi property from that country by certain senior officials of the former Iraqi regime and their immediate family members constitutes an obstacle to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and eco- nomic institutions in Iraq. On July 29, 2004, in Executive Order 13350, I amended the Annex to Executive Order 13315 to include certain persons determined to have been subject to economic sanctions pursuant to Executive Orders 12722 and 12724. Because of their association with the prior Iraqi regime, I determined that these persons present an obstacle to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in that country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq and, therefore, such persons should be subject to sanctions under Executive Order 13315. Executive Order 13350 also amended Executive Order 13290 of March 20, 2003, in which, consistent with section 203(a)(1)(C) of IEEPA, 50 U.S.C. 1702(a)(1)(C), I ordered that certain blocked funds held in the United States in accounts in the name of the Government of Iraq, the Central Bank of Iraq, Rafidain Bank, Rasheed Bank, or the State Organization for Marketing Oil be confiscated and vested in the Department of the Treasury. I originally exercised these authorities pursuant to Executive Order 12722. In light of the changed circumstances in Iraq and my decision to terminate the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12722, I determined that the exercise of authorities in Executive Order 13290 should continue in order to address the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, as expanded in scope in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, regarding the obstacles posed to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq. Executive Order 13350 amends Executive Order 13290 to that effect. On November 29, 2004, in Executive Order 13364, I modified the scope of this national emergency to address the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:35 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\20MYO1.SGM 20MYO1 29436 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Presidential Documents
the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Central Bank of Iraq. I also determined that, consistent with United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1483 and 1546, the steps taken in Executive Order 13303 to deal with this national emergency need to be limited so that such steps do not apply with respect to any final judgment arising out of a contractual obligation entered into by the Government of Iraq, including any agency or instrumentality thereof, after June 30, 2004, and so that, with respect to Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products and interests therein, such steps shall apply only until title passes to the initial purchaser. Because the obstacles to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, the national emergency declared on May 22, 2003, and the measures adopted on that date, August 28, 2003, July 29, 2004, and November 29, 2004, to deal with that emergency must continue in effect beyond May 22, 2005. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and certain other property in which Iraq has an interest. This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress. W THE WHITE HOUSE, May 19, 2005. [FR Doc. 05–10373 Filed 5–19–05; 2:45 pm] Billing code 3195–01–P
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:35 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\20MYO1.SGM 20MYO1 i
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 97 Friday, May 20, 2005
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MAY
Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–741–6000 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 741–6000 the revision date of each title. Notice of May 19, Presidential Documents 3 CFR 2005 ...... 29435 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: The United States Government Manual 741–6000 7890...... 23007 5 CFR 7891...... 23771 Other Services 213...... 28775 7892...... 23773 297...... 28775 741–6020 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 7893...... 23915 315...... 28775 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 7894...... 23917 334...... 28775 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 7895...... 23919 362...... 28775 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 7896...... 23921 530...... 25732 7897...... 24475 532...... 28425 7898...... 24695 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 537...... 28775 7899...... 25459 550...... 24477, 28775 World Wide Web 7900...... 28411 575...... 25732 7901...... 28765 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 1207...... 24293 7902...... 28767 is located at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html Proposed Rules: Administrative Orders: Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 532...... 28488 Presidential Ch. LXXXI...... 23065 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: Determinations: http://www.archives.gov/federallregister/ No. 2005–23 of April 7 CFR E-mail 29, 2005 ...... 25457 1...... 24935 FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is Executive Orders: 2...... 23927 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 12722 (See Notice of 97...... 28783 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form May 19, 2005)...... 29435 301...... 24297 of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 12724 (See Notice of 319...... 22585 PDF links to the full text of each document. May 19, 2005)...... 29435 340...... 23009 12788 (Amended by 905...... 23928 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select EO 13378)...... 28413 927...... 29388 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 13047 (See Notice of 1435...... 28181 (or change settings); then follow the instructions. May 17, 2005)...... 28771 1770...... 25753 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 13290 (See Notice of 1776...... 28786 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. May 19, 2005)...... 28413 Proposed Rules: 13303 (See Notice of To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 319...... 22612, 29212 May 19, 2005)...... 29435 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 946...... 25790 13310 (See Notice of the instructions. 948...... 23942 May 17, 2005)...... 28771 983...... 23065 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 13315 (See Notice of respond to specific inquiries. 1005...... 29410 May 19, 2005)...... 29435 1007...... 29410 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 13338 (See Notice of Federal Register system to: [email protected] May 5, 2005)...... 24697 8 CFR 13350 (See Notice of The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 214...... 23775 May 19, 2005)...... 29435 regulations. 13364 (See Notice of 9 CFR May 19, 2005)...... 29435 78...... 22588 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, MAY 13378...... 28413 Proposed Rules: Administrative Orders: 22585–22780...... 2 94...... 23809 Memorandums: 22781–23008...... 3 327...... 24485 Memorandum of March 410...... 29214 23009–23774...... 4 11, 2003 23775–23926...... 5 (Superceded by 10 CFR 23927–24292...... 6 Memorandum of 72...... 22781, 24936 24293–24476...... 9 May 5, 2005)...... 28773 300...... 24302 24477–24698...... 10 Memorandum of April Proposed Rules: 24699–24934...... 11 21, 2005 ...... 23925 71...... 23303 24935–25456...... 12 Memorandum of May 25457–25752...... 13 5, 2005 ...... 28773 11 CFR 25753–28180...... 16 Memorandum of May Proposed Rules: 13, 2005 ...... 29431 28181–28414...... 17 100...... 23068 Notices: 106...... 23072 28415–28772...... 18 Notice of May 5, 300...... 23072 28773–29188...... 19 2005 ...... 24697 29189–29436...... 20 Notice of May 17, 12 CFR 2005 ...... 28771 201...... 24303
VerDate Aug 04 2004 21:06 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\20MYCU.LOC 20MYCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Reader Aids
748...... 22764 284...... 23945, 28221 4044...... 25470 80...... 28606 300...... 23945, 28221 Proposed Rules: 81...... 22801, 22803 14 CFR 341...... 23945, 28221 1910...... 22828 93...... 24280 25...... 24478 344...... 23945, 28221 96...... 25162 39 ...... 23783, 23784, 23911, 346...... 23945, 28221 30 CFR 180 ...... 24709, 28436, 28443, 23930, 24304, 24305, 24307, 347...... 23945, 28221 913...... 28820 28447, 28452, 28455 24480, 24481, 24699, 24701, 348...... 23945, 28221 915...... 22792 300...... 22606, 24314 24703, 24936, 24937, 28181, 375...... 23945, 28221 917...... 22795 Proposed Rules: 28184, 28186, 28187, 28188, 385...... 23945, 28221 938...... 25472 51...... 25408 28415, 28417, 28419, 28420, 52 ...... 22623, 23075, 24347, 28791, 28793, 28795, 28797, 19 CFR 31 CFR 24348, 24734, 25000, 25004, 28800, 28803, 28806 122...... 22782, 22783 10...... 28824 25008, 25516, 25794, 28233, 61...... 25761 285...... 22797 28239, 28252, 28256, 28260, 63...... 25761 28264, 28267, 28495, 28878, 65...... 25761 20 CFR 32 CFR 29238, 29239, 29243 71 ...... 22590, 23002, 23786, 404...... 28809 701...... 25492 63 ...... 25671, 25684, 28366, 23787, 23788, 23789, 23790, 1001...... 28402 29406 23934, 23935, 24677, 24939, 33 CFR 70...... 22623 24940, 28423 21 CFR 81...... 29243 93...... 29062 100 ...... 23936, 25778, 25780, 1...... 25461 29195, 29197 82...... 25726 97 ...... 22781, 23002, 25764 1300...... 22591, 25462 96...... 25408 121...... 23935 110...... 28424 1301...... 22591, 25462 117 ...... 24482, 25781, 25783, 141...... 25520 129...... 23935 1304...... 22591, 25462 180...... 28497 150...... 29066 28426 1305...... 22591 150...... 24707 271...... 25795 201...... 25765 1307...... 22591, 25462 300...... 22624 203...... 25765 165 ...... 22800, 24309, 24955, Proposed Rules: 28426, 28428, 28826, 29200, 205...... 25765 41 CFR 1...... 24490 29202 215...... 25765 101...... 23813, 25496 301–2...... 28459 298...... 25765 402...... 28212 130...... 29214 Proposed Rules: 301–10...... 28459 380...... 25765 361...... 24491 301–11...... 28459 385...... 25765 100...... 23821, 23946 1308...... 25502 117...... 24492 301–13...... 28459 389...... 25765 301–50...... 28459 1260...... 28808 22 CFR 165 ...... 23821, 23824, 23948, 23950, 24342, 24344, 25505, 301–70...... 28459 1273...... 28808 62...... 28815 301–71...... 28459 1274...... 28808 25507, 25509, 25511, 25514, 203...... 25466 29235 304–3...... 28459 Proposed Rules: 304–5...... 28459 39 ...... 22613, 22615, 22618, 23 CFR 36 CFR Proposed Rules: 22620, 22826, 24326, 24331, 771...... 24468 1253...... 22800 102–117...... 23078 24335, 24338, 24341, 24488, 294...... 25654 102–118...... 23078 24731, 24994, 24997, 28220, 24 CFR 28489, 28491, 28854, 28857, Proposed Rules: 37 CFR 42 CFR 28988 115...... 28748 270...... 24309 50...... 28370 71...... 23810 207...... 24272 93...... 28370 401...... 29164 37 CFR 412...... 24168 404...... 29164 25 CFR 416...... 23690 413...... 29164 Proposed Rules: 542...... 23011 Proposed Rules: 415...... 29164 258...... 28231 Proposed Rules: 405...... 23306 420...... 29164 61...... 28859 38 CFR 412...... 23306 15 CFR 3...... 23027 413...... 23306 26 CFR 30...... 25773 17...... 22595 415...... 23306 335...... 24941, 25774 1 ...... 23790, 28211, 28702, 21...... 25785 419...... 23306 340...... 24941, 25774 28818 36...... 22596 422...... 23306 31...... 28211 424...... 29070 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 301...... 28702 485...... 23306 801...... 23811 5...... 24680 602...... 28702 960...... 29380 43 CFR Proposed Rules: 39 CFR 16 CFR 1 ...... 24999, 28230, 28743 254...... 28213 1600...... 29207 31...... 28231 Proposed Rules: 44 CFR 316...... 25426 301...... 24999, 28743 40 CFR 51...... 25162 64...... 25787 17 CFR 27 CFR 52 ...... 22597, 22599, 22603, 45 CFR 1...... 28190 Proposed Rules: 23029, 24310, 24959, 24970, 150...... 24705 9 ...... 25000, 28861, 28865, 24979, 29487, 24991, 25688, 80...... 24314 28870, 28873 25719, 28215, 28429, 28826, 84...... 24314 18 CFR 28988, 29202 86...... 24314 284...... 28204 28 CFR 60...... 28436 90...... 24314 Proposed Rules: 501...... 29189 63 ...... 25666, 25676, 28360, 91...... 24314 35 ...... 23945, 28221, 28222 549...... 29191, 29194 29400 46 CFR 37...... 28222 571...... 29195 70...... 22599, 22603 38...... 28222 72...... 25162, 28606 310...... 24483, 28829 131...... 23945, 28221 29 CFR 73...... 25162 Proposed Rules: 154...... 23945, 28221 1952...... 24947 74...... 25162 388...... 25010 157...... 23945, 28221 2200...... 22785, 25652 75...... 28606 250...... 23945, 28221 2204...... 22785 77...... 25162 47 CFR 281...... 23945, 28221 4022...... 25470 78...... 25162 0...... 23032
VerDate Aug 04 2004 21:06 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\20MYCU.LOC 20MYCU Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Reader Aids iii
1...... 24712 211...... 23804 565...... 23938 50 CFR 2...... 23032, 24712 212...... 23790 571...... 25788 229...... 25492 15...... 23032 217...... 24323 622...... 24468 635...... 28218 25...... 24712 225...... 23790 Proposed Rules: 648...... 22806, 23939 27...... 22610 252...... 23790 Subt. A...... 23953 660 ...... 22808, 23040, 23054, 73 ...... 24322, 24727, 28461, 1437...... 29208 171...... 29170 23804, 24728, 25789, 28852 28462, 28463 1452...... 29208 172...... 29170 679 ...... 23940, 24992, 28486 76...... 24727 Proposed Rules: 173...... 29170 90...... 24712, 28463 204...... 23826 175...... 29170 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 232...... 23827 360...... 28990 17 ...... 22835, 23083, 24750, 64...... 24740 365...... 28990 24870, 28895, 29253 73 ...... 24748, 24749, 24750, 49 CFR 366...... 28990 20 ...... 22624, 22625, 23954 28503 192...... 28833 368...... 28990 223...... 24359 76...... 24350, 29252 195...... 28833 383...... 24358 622...... 25012 90...... 23080 386...... 28467 387...... 28990 635...... 24494 541...... 28843 390...... 28990 648...... 29265 48 CFR 543...... 28843 571 ...... 23081, 23953, 28878, 679...... 23829 207...... 23790 545...... 28843 28888 697...... 24495
VerDate Aug 04 2004 21:06 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\20MYCU.LOC 20MYCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Reader Aids
REMINDERS Open for comments Meat and poultry products The items in this list were RULES GOING INTO until further notice; processing facilities; Open editorially compiled as an aid EFFECT MAY 21, 2005 published 2-25-05 [FR for comments until further to Federal Register users. E5-00767] notice; published 9-8-04 ENERGY DEPARTMENT [FR 04-12017] Inclusion or exclusion from AGRICULTURE this list has no legal DEPARTMENT Meetings: FARM CREDIT significance. ADMINISTRATION Agricultural Marketing Environmental Management Service Site-Specific Advisory Corporate governance; Board— comments due by 5-20-05; Pears (winter) grown in— RULES GOING INTO Oak Ridge Reservation, published 2-24-05 [FR 05- Oregon and Washington; EFFECT MAY 20, 2005 TN; Open for comments 03475] published 5-20-05 until further notice; FEDERAL published 11-19-04 [FR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMENTS DUE NEXT 04-25693] PROTECTION AGENCY COMMISSION WEEK ENERGY DEPARTMENT Committees; establishment, Air quality implementation renewal, termination, etc.: plans; approval and Energy Efficiency and AGRICULTURE Renewable Energy Office Technological Advisory promulgation; various DEPARTMENT States: Commercial and industrial Council; Open for Agricultural Marketing equipment; energy efficiency comments until further Guam; published 4-20-05 Service program: notice; published 3-18-05 HOMELAND SECURITY Cotton classing, testing and Test procedures and [FR 05-05403] DEPARTMENT standards: efficiency standards— Common carrier services: Coast Guard Classification services to Commercial packaged Interconnection— growers; 2004 user fees; Drawbridge operations: boilers; Open for Incumbent local exchange Open for comments until comments until further carriers unbounding Louisiana; published 4-20-05 further notice; published notice; published 10-21- obligations; local New Jersey; published 4-20- 5-28-04 [FR 04-12138] 04 [FR 04-17730] competition provisions; 05 AGRICULTURE ENERGY DEPARTMENT wireline services Ports and waterways safety: DEPARTMENT Federal Energy Regulatory offering advanced Tongass Narrows and Grain Inspection, Packers Commission telecommunications Ketchikan, AK; safety and Stockyards Electric rate and corporate capability; Open for zone; published 4-20-05 Administration regulation filings: comments until further Regattas and marine parades: Fees: Virginia Electric & Power notice; published 12-29- 04 [FR 04-28531] Fort Myers Beach Air Show; Official inspection and Co. et al.; Open for published 5-20-05 weighing services; comments until further HEALTH AND HUMAN comments due by 5-20- notice; published 10-1-03 SERVICES DEPARTMENT INTERIOR DEPARTMENT 05; published 3-21-05 [FR [FR 03-24818] Food and Drug Acquisition regulations: 05-05501] ENVIRONMENTAL Administration Woody biomass utilization; AGRICULTURE PROTECTION AGENCY Reports and guidance published 5-20-05 DEPARTMENT Air quality implementation documents; availability, etc.: NUCLEAR REGULATORY Natural Resources plans; approval and Evaluating safety of COMMISSION Conservation Service promulgation; various antimicrobial new animal Reports and guidance States; air quality planning Domestic licensing drugs with regard to their documents; availability, etc.: purposes; designation of microbiological effects on proceedings and issuance of areas: orders; practice rules: National Handbook of bacteria of human health Conservation Practices; Georgia; comments due by concern; Open for Adjudicatory proceedings; Open for comments until 5-20-05; published 4-20- comments until further model milestones; further notice; published 05 [FR 05-07936] notice; published 10-27-03 published 4-20-05 5-9-05 [FR 05-09150] Environmental statements; [FR 03-27113] PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT COURT SERVICES AND availability, etc.: Medical devices— OFFICE OFFENDER SUPERVISION Coastal nonpoint pollution Dental noble metal alloys Employment: AGENCY FOR THE control program— and base metal alloys; Relatives of Federal DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Minnesota and Texas; Class II special employees; published 4- Semi-annual agenda; Open for Open for comments controls; Open for 20-05 comments until further until further notice; comments until further notice; published 12-22-03 published 10-16-03 [FR notice; published 8-23- SECURITIES AND [FR 03-25121] 03-26087] 04 [FR 04-19179] EXCHANGE COMMISSION DEFENSE DEPARTMENT Water pollution control: HOMELAND SECURITY Securities: Acquisition regulations: National Pollutant Discharge DEPARTMENT International financial Elimination System— Pilot Mentor-Protege Coast Guard reporting standards; first Program; Open for Concentrated animal time-application; Form 20- Anchorage regulations: comments until further feeding operations in F amendment; published Maryland; Open for notice; published 12-15-04 New Mexico and 4-20-05 comments until further [FR 04-27351] Oklahoma; general permit for discharges; notice; published 1-14-04 TRANSPORTATION EDUCATION DEPARTMENT [FR 04-00749] DEPARTMENT Open for comments Grants and cooperative until further notice; Drawbridge operations and Federal Aviation agreements; availability, etc.: published 12-7-04 [FR ports and waterways safety: Administration Vocational and adult 04-26817] Port Everglades, FL; Airworthiness directives: education— Water pollution; effluent security zone; comments McDonnell Douglas; Smaller Learning guidelines for point source due by 5-20-05; published published 5-5-05 Communities Program; categories: 4-29-05 [FR 05-08570]
VerDate Aug 04 2004 21:06 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\20MYCU.LOC 20MYCU Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 97 / Friday, May 20, 2005 / Reader Aids v
Drawbridge operations: 05; published 3-21-05 [FR TRANSPORTATION (phone, 202–512–1808). The Maine; comments due by 5- 05-05508] DEPARTMENT text will also be made 20-05; published 4-20-05 SMALL BUSINESS Federal Aviation available on the Internet from [FR 05-07892] ADMINISTRATION Administration GPO Access at http:// www.gpoaccess.gov/plaws/ Ports and waterways safety: Disaster loan areas: Airworthiness directives: Boeing; Open for comments index.html. Some laws may Legal Seafood Fireworks Maine; Open for comments until further notice; not yet be available. Display, Boston, MA; until further notice; published 8-16-04 [FR 04- safety zone; comments published 2-17-04 [FR 04- H.R. 1268/P.L. 109–13 18641] due by 5-20-05; published 03374] 5-5-05 [FR 05-08927] McDonnell Douglas; Emergency Supplemental OFFICE OF UNITED STATES Appropriations Act for INTERIOR DEPARTMENT comments due by 5-20- TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Defense, the Global War on Fish and Wildlife Service 05; published 4-5-05 [FR Trade Representative, Office 05-06679] Terror, and Tsunami Relief, Endangered and threatened of United States 2005 (May 11, 2005; 119 species permit applications Stat. 231) Generalized System of Recovery plans— Preferences: LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Last List May 9, 2005 Paiute cutthroat trout; 2003 Annual Product Open for comments This is a continuing list of Review, 2002 Annual until further notice; public bills from the current Country Practices Review, Public Laws Electronic published 9-10-04 [FR session of Congress which and previously deferred 04-20517] have become Federal laws. It Notification Service product decisions; may be used in conjunction (PENS) NUCLEAR REGULATORY petitions disposition; Open with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws COMMISSION for comments until further Update Service) on 202–741– Environmental statements; notice; published 7-6-04 6043. This list is also PENS is a free electronic mail availability, etc.: [FR 04-15361] available online at http:// notification service of newly Fort Wayne State TRANSPORTATION www.archives.gov/ enacted public laws. To Developmental Center; DEPARTMENT federal—register/public—laws/ subscribe, go to http:// listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ Open for comments until Air travel; nondiscrimination on public—laws.html. publaws-l.html further notice; published basis of disability: 5-10-04 [FR 04-10516] The text of laws is not Individuals with disabilities; published in the Federal Note: This service is strictly PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT rights and Register but may be ordered for E-mail notification of new OFFICE responsibililities; technical in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual laws. The text of laws is not Absence and leave: assistance manual; pamphlet) form from the available through this service. Senior Executive Service; comments due by 5-20- Superintendent of Documents, PENS cannot respond to accrual and accumulation; 05; published 4-20-05 [FR U.S. Government Printing specific inquiries sent to this comments due by 5-20- 05-07544] Office, Washington, DC 20402 address.
VerDate Aug 04 2004 21:06 May 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\20MYCU.LOC 20MYCU