5–17–07 Thursday Vol. 72 No. 95 May 17, 2007

Pages 27721–27948

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:47 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\17MYWS.LOC 17MYWS sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES II Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007

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, June 12, 2007 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: 72 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 Aug 31 2005 18:47 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\17MYWS.LOC 17MYWS sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 95

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Agriculture Department Environmental Protection Agency See Forest Service PROPOSED RULES Air quality implementation plans; approval and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention promulgation; various States: NOTICES Delaware, 27787–27789 Meetings: Water programs: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Water quality standards— Special Emphasis Panels, 27817 Puerto Rico, 27789–27798 Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Committee, 27817 submissions, and approvals, 27809–27811 Air pollution control: Coast Guard State operating permits programs— RULES Idaho, 27811 Pollution: Meetings: Vessels carrying oil, noxious liquid substances, garbage, Gulf of Mexico Program Citizens Advisory Committee, municipal or commercial waste, and ballast water, 27811 27738–27739 Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, Federal Aviation Administration safety zones, security zones, etc.: RULES Atchafalaya River, Berwick Bay, LA, 27740–27741 Agency information collection activities; proposals, Regattas and marine parades: submissions, and approvals, 27732–27733 ULHRA Hydroplane Races; withdrawn, 27735–27738 Airworthiness directives: NOTICES APEX Aircraft, 27721–27722 Agency information collection activities; proposals, Boeing, 27723–27725 submissions, and approvals, 27832–27833 Cessna Aircraft Co., 27725–27730 Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Docket Operations Facility; relocation, 27833–27834 27730–27732 PROPOSED RULES Commerce Department Airworthiness directives: See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Cirrus Design Corp., 27766–27768 See International Trade Administration Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH, 27768–27770 See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 27898

Corporation for National and Community Service Federal Bureau of Investigation NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Meetings: submissions, and approvals, 27805–27806 Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Board, 27851 Defense Department NOTICES Federal Communications Commission Meetings: NOTICES National Defense University Board of Visitors, 27806 Television broadcasting: President’s Commission on Care for America’s Returning Home shopping stations; reconsideration petition; update, Wounded Warriors, 27806 27811–27813 Federal Emergency Management Agency Employment and Training Administration RULES RULES Flood elevation determinations: Aliens; permanent employment in U.S.; labor certification: Illinois and North Carolina, 27752–27759 Fraud and abuse incentives and opportunities reduction; Various States, 27741–27752 program integrity enhancement, 27904–27947 NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Adjustment assistance; applications, determinations, etc.: submissions, and approvals, 27834 Bayer Clothing Group, Target Sales Corp., 27851 Disaster and emergency areas: Best Artex, LLC, et al., 27851–27853 Kansas, 27834–27835 Intel Corp., 27853 Maine, 27835 Tool Dex, Inc., et al., 27853–27856 New Hampshire, 27835–27836 New York, 27836 Energy Department Texas, 27836 See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Vermont, 27836–27837

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:48 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\17MYCN.SGM 17MYCN sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES IV Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Contents

West Virginia, 27837 National Toxicology Program: Alternative toxicological methods evaluation— Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Murine local lymph node assay; comment request, NOTICES scientific experts nominations, and data Hydroelectric applications, 27807–27809 submission, 27815–27817 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: CenterPoint Energy - Mississippi River Transmission Homeland Security Department Corp., 27806 See Coast Guard Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., 27806–27807 See Federal Emergency Management Agency

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Interior Department NOTICES See Fish and Wildlife Service Motor carrier safety standards: See Land Management Bureau Driver qualifications; diabetes exemptions; correction, See National Park Service 27901 See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office Internal Revenue Service Federal Reserve System NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 27899–27900 submissions, and approvals, 27813–27814 Meetings: Banks and bank holding companies: Taxpayer Advocacy Panels, 27900 Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 27814–27815 International Trade Administration Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES NOTICES Antidumping: Comprehensive conservation plans; availability, etc.: Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from— Holla Bend National Wildlife Refuge, AR, 27837–27838 Mexico, 27801–27802 Long Lake National Wildlife Refuge Complex, ND, Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— 27838–27839 Thailand, 27802–27804 Endangered and threatened species: Incidental take permits— International Trade Commission Brevard County, FL; Florida scrub jay, 27839–27840 NOTICES Escambia County, FL; Perdido Key beach mice, 27840– Import investigations: 27841 Sucralose, sweeteners containing sucralose, and related Lake County, FL; sand skink, 27840 intermediate compounds; correction, 27848

Food and Drug Administration Justice Department RULES See Federal Bureau of Investigation Animal drugs, feeds, and related products: NOTICES Ivermectin; implantation or injectable dosage form, Pollution control; consent judgments: 27734–27735 F.A.G. Bearings LLC, 27848 Ivermectin and clorsulon; implantation or injectable Honolulu, 27849 dosage form, 27733–27734 Hudson Sand and Gravel, Inc., et al., 27849 Pimobendan; oral dosage form, 27733 Keystone Environmental Services, Inc., 27849–27850 Pursue Energy Corp., 27850 Foreign-Trade Zones Board Tire Depot, Inc., et al., 27850–27851 NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Labor Department Puerto Rico See Employment and Training Administration Merck Sharpe & Dohme Auimica De Puerto Rico, Inc.; See Occupational Safety and Health Administration pharmaceutical manufacturing facility, 27801 Land Management Bureau Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.: Environmental statements; notice of intent: New Mexico, 27841–27842 Nez Perce National Forest; Idaho County, ID; designated Wyoming, 27842–27843 route and motorized vehicle use, 27800–27801 Legal Services Corporation Health and Human Services Department NOTICES See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Meetings; Sunshine Act, 27856 See Food and Drug Administration See National Institutes of Health National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Meetings: submissions, and approvals, 27815 Advisory Council; Science Committee, 27856–27857

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:48 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\17MYCN.SGM 17MYCN sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Contents V

National Institutes of Health Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Geologic repository operations area; security requirements submissions, and approvals, 27817–27818 and material control and accounting requirements, Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, 27766 27818–27821 NOTICES Meetings: Environmental statements; availability, etc.: National Center for Complementary and Alternative GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals-Hamilton facility, MT, Medicine, 27821 27858–27859 National Eye Institute, 27821–27822 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 27860 National Human Genome Research Institute, 27822 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, L.L.C., et al, 27857– 27822–27823, 27826 27858 National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, 27823–27824 National Institute of Child Health and Human Occupational Safety and Health Administration Development, 27824 PROPOSED RULES National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, Safety and health standards, etc.: 27825–27826 Personal protective equipment; agency standards update, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney 27771–27782 Diseases, 27823 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Securities and Exchange Commission 27823 NOTICES National Institute on Aging, 27826–27827 Investment Company Act of 1940: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Lincoln Variable Insurance Products Trust, et al., 27860– 27824–27825 27867 Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, 27827 Joint Industry Plan: Scientific Counselors Boards; Chairpersons, 27827–27828 American Stock Exchange LLC, et al., 27867–27868 Scientific Review Center, 27828–27832 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 27868–27881 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Chicago Mercantile Exchange, 27881–27884 RULES International Securities Exchange, LLC, 27884–27885 Fishery conservation and management: NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 27885–27891 West Coast States and Western Pacific fisheries— National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., 27891– Pacific Coast groundfish, 27759–27765 PROPOSED RULES 27893 Fishery conservation and management: New York Stock Exchange LLC, 27893–27895 Alaska; fisheries of Exclusive Economic Zone— NYSE Arca Inc., 27895–27896 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Limited Access Privilege Program; public workshop, 27798–27799 Small Business Administration NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Disaster loan areas: Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, Maine, 27896–27897 27804–27805 New York, 27897 National Park Service NOTICES Social Security Administration Native American human remains, funerary objects; NOTICES inventory, repatriation, etc.: Privacy Act; computer matching programs, 27897–27898 Forest Service, Cibola National Forest, Albuquerque, NM, 27843–27844 Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office History, and Anthropology, and Philosophy Department PROPOSED RULES Archaeology Laboratory; Augusta State University; Permanent program and abandoned mine land reclamation Augusta, GA, 27844 plan submissions: Indian Affairs Bureau, Washington, DC and University of West Virginia, 27782–27787 Colorado Museum, Boulder, CO, 27845 Museum of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 27845–27846 Transportation Department Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget See Federal Aviation Administration Sound, Tacoma, WA, 27846 See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Texas Archeological Research Laboratory, University of PROPOSED RULES Texas, Austin, TX, 27846–27847 Economic regulations: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission and Aircraft gate returns; reporting requirements; meeting, Thomas Burke Memorial State Museum of Natural 27771 History, WA, 27847–27848 Airline data; Internet submissions; meeting, 27770–27771

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:48 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\17MYCN.SGM 17MYCN sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES VI Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Contents

Treasury Department See Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Reader Aids Agency information collection activities; proposals, Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for submissions, and approvals, 27898–27899 phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

Separate Parts In This Issue To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Part II listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Labor Department, Employment and Training archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Administration, 27904–27947 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:48 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\17MYCN.SGM 17MYCN sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Contents VII

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.

10 CFR Proposed Rules: 26...... 27766 60...... 27766 63...... 27766 73...... 27766 74...... 27766 14 CFR 39 (4 documents) ...... 27721, 27723, 27725, 27730 401...... 27732 415...... 27732 431...... 27732 435...... 27732 440...... 27732 460...... 27732 Proposed Rules: 39 (2 documents) ...... 27766, 27768 217...... 27770 234...... 27771 241...... 27770 248...... 27770 250...... 27770 291...... 27770 298...... 27770 374a...... 27770 20 CFR 656...... 27904 21 CFR 520...... 27733 522 (2 documents) ...... 27733, 27734 29 CFR Proposed Rules: 1910...... 27771 1915...... 27771 1917...... 27771 1918...... 27771 30 CFR Proposed Rules: 948...... 27782 33 CFR 100...... 27735 151...... 27738 165...... 27740 40 CFR Proposed Rules: 52...... 27787 131...... 27789 44 CFR 65...... 27741 67...... 27752 50 CFR 660...... 27759 Proposed Rules: 679...... 27798

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:56 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\17MYLS.LOC 17MYLS sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES 27721

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 95

Thursday, May 17, 2007

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Conclusion contains regulatory documents having general Washington, DC. applicability and legal effect, most of which We reviewed the available data and are keyed to and codified in the Code of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: determined that air safety and the Federal Regulations, which is published under Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, public interest require adopting the AD 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 as proposed. Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by Differences Between This AD and the Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– MCAI or Service Information the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of 4145; fax: (816) 329–4090. new books are listed in the first FEDERAL We have reviewed the MCAI and REGISTER issue of each week. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: related service information and, in Streamlined Issuance of AD general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The FAA is implementing a new different words from those in the MCAI process for streamlining the issuance of Federal Aviation Administration to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. ADs related to MCAI. The streamlined operators and is enforceable. In making process will allow us to adopt MCAI 14 CFR Part 39 these changes, we do not intend to differ safety requirements in a more efficient substantively from the information [Docket No. FAA–2007–27531 Directorate manner and will reduce safety risks to provided in the MCAI and related Identifier 2007–CE–020–AD; Amendment the public. This process continues to service information. 39–15054; AD 2007–10–13] follow all FAA AD issuance processes to We might also have required different meet legal, economic, Administrative actions in this AD from those in the RIN 2120–AA64 Procedure Act, and Federal Register MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. requirements. We also continue to meet Any such differences are highlighted in Airworthiness Directives; APEX our technical decision-making a NOTE within the AD. Aircraft (Type Certificate No. A36EU responsibilities to identify and correct Formerly Held by AVIONS MUDRY et unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated Costs of Compliance CIE) Model CAP 10 B Airplanes products. We estimate that this AD will affect 31 products of U.S. registry. We also AGENCY: Federal Aviation This AD references the MCAI and Administration (FAA), Department of related service information that we estimate that it will take about 1 work- Transportation (DOT). considered in forming the engineering hour per product to comply with basic basis to correct the unsafe condition. requirements of this AD. The average ACTION: Final rule. The AD contains text copied from the labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based SUMMARY: We are adopting a new MCAI and for this reason might not on these figures, we estimate the cost of airworthiness directive (AD) for the follow our plain language principles. this AD to the U.S. operators to be $2,480 or $80 per product. products listed above. This AD results Discussion from mandatory continuing In addition, we estimate that any airworthiness information (MCAI) We issued a notice of proposed necessary follow-on actions would take issued by an aviation authority of rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR about 6 work-hours and require parts another country to identify and correct part 39 to include an AD that would costing $2,500, for a cost of $2,980 per an unsafe condition on an aviation apply to the specified products. That product. We have no way of product. The MCAI describes the unsafe NPRM was published in the Federal determining the number of products condition as: Register on March 23, 2007 (72 FR that may need these actions. * * * the discovery of cracks on aileron 13712). That NPRM proposed to correct Authority for This Rulemaking spades of an in-service CAP 10B aircraft. an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states that: Title 49 of the United States Code The consequence on the aircraft of these specifies the FAA’s authority to issue cracks might be the loss of the airplane * * * the discovery of cracks on aileron rolling control. rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, spades of an in-service CAP 10B aircraft. section 106, describes the authority of We are issuing this AD to require The consequence on the aircraft of these the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: cracks might be the loss of the airplane actions to correct the unsafe condition Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more on these products. rolling control. APEX AIRCRAFT has designed a new detail the scope of the Agency’s DATES: This AD becomes effective June models of inboard and mid-aileron spades authority. 21, 2007. supports which shall be installed in place of We are issuing this rulemaking under On June 21, 2007, the Director of the the previous supports models if cracks are the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, Federal Register approved the found. Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: incorporation by reference of certain Comments General requirements.’’ Under that publications listed in this AD. section, Congress charges the FAA with ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD We gave the public the opportunity to promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in docket on the Internet at http:// participate in developing this AD. We air commerce by prescribing regulations dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket received no comments on the NPRM or for practices, methods, and procedures Management Facility, U.S. Department on the determination of the cost to the the Administrator finds necessary for of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, public. safety in air commerce. This regulation

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27722 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

is within the scope of that authority 2007–10–13 APEX Aircraft (Type Other FAA AD Provisions because it addresses an unsafe condition Certificate No. A36EU formerly held by (g) The following provisions also apply to that is likely to exist or develop on AVIONS MUDRY et CIE): Amendment this AD: products identified in this rulemaking 39–15054; Docket No. FAA–2007–27531; (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance action. Directorate Identifier 2007–CE–020–AD. (AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, Effective Date FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs Regulatory Findings for this AD, if requested using the procedures (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to We determined that this AD will not becomes effective June 21, 2007. ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace have federalism implications under Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, Affected ADs Executive Order 13132. This AD will 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri not have a substantial direct effect on (b) None. 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816) 329–4090. Before using any approved AMOC the States, on the relationship between Applicability the national government and the States, on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, or on the distribution of power and (c) This AD applies to Model CAP 10 B notify your appropriate principal inspector airplanes; serial numbers 001 through 299, responsibilities among the various (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District fitted with major change 000302 (fiber carbon Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local levels of government. spar), and serial numbers 300 and up; that FSDO. For the reasons discussed above, I are certificated in any category. (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement certify this AD: in this AD to obtain corrective actions from (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Subject a manufacturer or other source, use these action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (d) Air Transport Association of America actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under (ATA) Code 57: Wings. actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures Reason (or their delegated agent). You are required (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (e) The mandatory continuing to assure the product is airworthy before it (3) Will not have a significant airworthiness information (MCAI) states: is returned to service. economic impact, positive or negative, * * * the discovery of cracks on aileron (3) Reporting Requirements: For any on a substantial number of small entities spades of an in-service CAP 10B aircraft. reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act under the criteria of the Regulatory The consequence on the aircraft of these (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Flexibility Act. cracks might be the loss of the airplane Management and Budget (OMB) has We prepared a regulatory evaluation rolling control. approved the information collection of the estimated costs to comply with Actions and Compliance requirements and has assigned OMB Control this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. Number 2120–0056. (f) Unless already done, do the following Examining the AD Docket actions: Related Information You may examine the AD docket on (1) Within the next 50 hours time-in- (h) Refer to MCAI Direction ge´ne´rale de service (TIS) after the effective date of this l’aviation civile AD No. F–2005–049, dated the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov; or in AD and repetitively thereafter at intervals not person at the Docket Management March 30, 2005; and APEX Aircraft to exceed 50 hours TIS, inspect the spades Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 040401, Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., supports for cracks following the dated October 29, 2004. Monday through Friday, except Federal ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS of holidays. The AD docket contains the APEX Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin Material Incorporated by Reference NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any No. 040401, dated October 29, 2004. (i) You must use APEX Aircraft Mandatory comments received, and other Replacement of the spades supports with Service Bulletin No. 040401, dated October information. The street address for the ones with a letter ‘‘A’’ marking per APEX 29, 2004, to do the actions required by this Docket Office (telephone (800) 647– Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No. AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 040401, dated October 29, 2004, terminates (1) The Director of the Federal Register 5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. approved the incorporation by reference of Comments will be available in the AD the inspection requirements of this AD. (2) Before further flight, if cracks are found this service information under 5 U.S.C. docket shortly after receipt. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. during any inspection required by paragraph (2) For service information identified in List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (f)(1) of this AD, replace the spades supports this AD, contact Apex Aircraft, Bureau de following the ACCOMPLISHMENT Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Navigabilite´, 1, route de Troyes, 21121 INSTRUCTIONS of APEX Aircraft Mandatory DAROIS—France; telephone: +33 380 35 65 safety, Incorporation by reference, Service Bulletin No. 040401, dated October Safety. 10; fax +33 380 35 65 15; e-mail: 29, 2004. [email protected]; Internet: Adoption of the Amendment FAA AD Differences http://www.apex-aircraft.com. (3) You may review copies at the FAA, I Accordingly, under the authority Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ Central Region, Office of the Regional delegated to me by the Administrator, or service information as follows: The MCAI Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as and service bulletin require the initial Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives follows: inspection action within 10 hours TIS. We and Records Administration (NARA). For consider 10 hours TIS an urgent safety of information on the availability of this PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS flight compliance time, and we do not material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go DIRECTIVES consider this unsafe condition to be an to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/ urgent safety of flight condition. Because we cfr/ibr-locations.html. I 1. The authority citation for part 39 do not consider this unsafe condition to be Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 9, continues to read as follows: an urgent safety of flight condition, we issued 2007. this action through the normal notice of Charles L. Smalley, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) AD process. Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, § 39.13 [Amended] The initial inspection time of 50 hours TIS is an adequate compliance for this AD action Aircraft Certification Service. I 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding and met the FAA requirements for an NPRM [FR Doc. E7–9393 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] the following new AD: followed by a final rule. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27723

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, the NPRM respectively, are no longer DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday required, we have deleted those actions Federal Aviation Administration through Friday, except Federal holidays. from this AD. Further, we have also Contact Boeing Commercial deleted the preventative modification, 14 CFR Part 39 Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, which was specified in paragraph (f)(3) [Docket No. FAA–2005–22288; Directorate Washington 98124–2207, for service of the NPRM. This AD instead requires Identifier 2005–NM–132–AD; Amendment information identified in this AD. accomplishing new repetitive 39–15050; AD 2007–10–09] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan inspections, which are specified in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this RIN 2120–AA64 Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle AD. We have determined that the new Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind repetitive inspections are sufficient to Model 747–400 Series Airplanes Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington maintain an acceptable level of safety. 98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6437; We have described the new repetitive AGENCY: Federal Aviation fax (425) 917–6590. inspections under ‘‘Relevant Service Administration (FAA), Department of Information.’’ Transportation (DOT). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Final rule; request for Discussion Relevant Service Information comments. The FAA issued a notice of proposed We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2660, dated SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR November 16, 2006. Part 1 of the airworthiness directive (AD) for certain part 39 to include an AD that would Accomplishment Instructions of the Boeing Model 747–400 series airplanes. apply to certain Boeing Model 747–400 service bulletin describes procedures for This AD requires repetitive inspections series airplanes. That NPRM was doing (1) repetitive detailed inspections for any crack in the upper deck floor published in the Federal Register on for any crack in the upper deck floor beam at station 400, which include September 6, 2005 (70 FR 52943). That beam at the intersection of the floor inspecting the floor beam web and NPRM proposed to require doing a beam and frame on both sides of the chords, certain fastener holes at the conductivity test of the upper deck floor airplane, (2) repetitive open hole high intersection of the floor beam and frame beam at station 400 to identify the floor frequency eddy current (HFEC) on both sides of the airplane, and beam material. If the floor beam is inspections for any crack in certain certain floor panel attachment fastener manufactured from 7050 aluminum fastener holes at the intersection of the holes at the floor beam upper chords. alloy, that NPRM also proposed to floor beam upper chord and the frame This AD also requires corrective action require inspecting the upper deck floor inner chord on both sides of the if necessary. This AD results from beam and certain fastener holes at the airplane, and (3) corrective actions if several reports indicating that fatigue floor beam upper chord for cracking; necessary. The corrective actions cracking was found in upper deck floor repairing any cracking if necessary; and include (1) contacting Boeing for repair beams made from 7000 series aluminum doing a preventative modification. instructions if any crack is found in the alloy. We are issuing this AD to detect Actions Since NPRM Was Issued floor beam during any detailed and correct cracking in the upper deck inspection, (2) oversizing the cracked floor beam at station 400, which could Since we issued the NPRM, Boeing fastener holes at the intersection of the extend and sever the floor beam. A has published Alert Service Bulletin floor beam upper chord and frame inner severed floor beam could result in loss 747–53A2660, dated November 16, chord, and doing open hole HFEC of controllability and rapid 2006, to replace Boeing Alert Service inspections of the oversized faster holes, decompression of the airplane. Bulletin 747–53A2509, dated June 9, 2005. In the NPRM, we referred to if any crack is found in the fastener DATES: This AD becomes effective June Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– holes during any HFEC inspection, (3) 1, 2007. installing an oversized fastener, if no The Director of the Federal Register 53A2509 as the appropriate source of crack is found in an oversized fastener approved the incorporation by reference service information for accomplishing hole and a minimum edge margin of of a certain publication listed in the AD the proposed conductivity test, one-time 1.7D is maintained, and (4) contacting as of June 1, 2007. inspections of the upper deck floor We must receive comments on this beam and certain fastener holes for Boeing for repair instructions if any AD by July 16, 2007. cracking and repair if necessary, crack in a fastener hole cannot not be removed by oversizing the fastener hole ADDRESSES: Use one of the following reporting requirement, and preventative modification. We proposed the and maintaining a minimum edge addresses to submit comments on this margin of 1.7D. AD. conductivity test and reporting • DOT Docket web site: Go to requirement to find the two upper deck Part 2 of the Accomplishment http://dms.dot.gov and follow the floor beams that were made from 7050– Instructions of the service bulletin instructions for sending your comments T7451 aluminum alloy, which are more describes procedures for doing electronically. susceptible to fatigue cracking. After repetitive open hole HFEC inspections • Government-wide rulemaking web several operators accomplished the for any crack in the upper deck floor site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov conductivity test specified in Boeing beam at all floor panel attachment and follow the instructions for sending Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2509, the fastener holes through the forward and your comments electronically. discrepant upper deck floor beams were aft horizontal flanges of the floor beam • Mail: Docket Management Facility; found on two airplanes at station 400. upper chord, from the left body frame to U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Therefore, we have revised the the right body frame; and doing Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, applicability in paragraph (c) of this AD corrective actions if necessary. The Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. to include only those affected airplanes. corrective action includes contacting • Fax: (202) 493–2251. Since the proposed conductivity test Boeing for repair instructions if any • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on and reporting requirement, which were crack is found at the floor panel the plaza level of the Nassif Building, specified in paragraphs (f) and (f)(2) of attachment fastener holes.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27724 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

The service bulletin specifies specified in the service information the AD that might suggest a need to accomplishing the initial inspections in described previously. modify it. Parts 1 and 2 of the Accomplishment We will post all comments we Explanation of Changes to Costs of Instructions before the airplane has receive, without change, to http:// Compliance accumulated 18,000 total flight cycles. dms.dot.gov, including any personal The service bulletin also specifies a In the NPRM, we estimated that there information you provide. We will also repetitive interval of 10,000 flight cycles are about 123 airplanes of the affected post a report summarizing each for the inspections in Part 1 of the design in the worldwide fleet and about substantive verbal contact with FAA Accomplishment Instructions and a 17 airplanes of U.S. registry. However, personnel concerning this AD. Using the repetitive interval of 6,000 flight cycles since issuance of the NPRM, we have search function of that web site, anyone for the inspection in Part 2 of the determined that only 2 airplanes are can find and read the comments in any Accomplishment Instructions. affected by this AD. Those affected of our dockets, including the name of Accomplishing the actions specified airplanes are currently operated by non- the individual who sent the comment in the service information is intended to U.S. operators under foreign registry. (or signed the comment on behalf of an adequately address the unsafe Therefore, we have revised the ‘‘Costs of association, business, labor union, etc.). condition. Compliance’’ accordingly. You may review the DOT’s complete After the NPRM was issued, we Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Comments reviewed the figures we have used over Register published on April 11, 2000 We provided the public the the past several years to calculate AD (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit opportunity to participate in the costs to operators. To account for http://dms.dot.gov. development of this AD. We have various inflationary costs in the airline considered the comments received. industry, we find it necessary to Examining the Docket increase the labor rate used in these You may examine the AD docket on Request To Clarify the Source of calculations from $65 per work hour to the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in Reported Cracking $80 per work hour. The cost impact person at the Docket Management Boeing requests that we clarify that information, below, reflects this Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 this AD results from several reports of increase in the specified hourly labor p.m., Monday through Friday, except fatigue cracking found in upper deck rate. Federal holidays. The Docket floor beams made from 7000 series Management Facility office (telephone aluminum alloy, not 7050 aluminum Costs of Compliance (800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza alloy. Boeing states that 7050 aluminum If an affected airplane is imported and level of the Nassif Building at the DOT alloy was not yet an option when placed on the U.S. Register in the future, street address stated in the ADDRESSES cracking was found in the upper deck the required inspections would take section. Comments will be available in floor beams on Model 747 airplanes; about 5 work hours, at an average labor the AD docket shortly after the Docket cracking was found on airplanes with rate of $80 per work hour. Based on Management System receives them. 7075–T6 upper deck floor beams, which these figures, we estimate the cost of prompted issuance of other related this AD to be $400 per airplane, per Authority for This Rulemaking rulemaking (as identified in the NPRM) inspection cycle. Title 49 of the United States Code to address that unsafe condition. The specifies the FAA’s authority to issue FAA’s Determination of the Effective commenter also states that the fatigue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Date and crack growth in the 7050 beams is Section 106, describes the authority of expected to be marginally better than in No airplane affected by this AD is the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, the 7075 beams. currently on the U.S. Register. Aviation Programs, describes in more We agree with Boeing’s request and Therefore, providing notice and detail the scope of the Agency’s have revised the ‘‘Summary’’ and opportunity for public comment is authority. paragraph (d) of this AD. unnecessary before this AD is issued, We are issuing this rulemaking under and this AD may be made effective in the authority described in Subtitle VII, Clarification of Alternative Method of less than 30 days after it is published in Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, Compliance (AMOC) Paragraph the Federal Register. ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that We have revised this action to clarify section, Congress charges the FAA with Comments Invited the appropriate procedure for notifying promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in the principal inspector before using any This AD is a final rule that involves air commerce by prescribing regulations approved AMOC on any airplane to requirements that affect flight safety. for practices, methods, and procedures which the AMOC applies. The new requirements, which are to be the Administrator finds necessary for done in accordance with Boeing Alert safety in air commerce. This regulation FAA’s Determination and Requirements Service Bulletin 747–53A2660, dated is within the scope of that authority of This AD November 16, 2006, were not preceded because it addresses an unsafe condition The unsafe condition described by notice and an opportunity for public that is likely to exist or develop on previously is likely to exist or develop comment; however, we invite you to products identified in this rulemaking on other airplanes of the same type submit any relevant written data, views, action. design that may be registered in the U.S. or arguments regarding this AD. Send at some time in the future. Therefore, your comments to an address listed Regulatory Findings we are issuing this AD to detect and under the ADDRESSES section. Include We have determined that this AD will correct cracking in the upper deck floor ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2005–22288; not have federalism implications under beam, which could extend and sever the Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–132– Executive Order 13132. This AD will floor beam. A severed floor beam could AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. not have a substantial direct effect on result in loss of controllability and rapid We specifically invite comments on the the States, on the relationship between decompression of the airplane. This AD overall regulatory, economic, the national government and the States, requires accomplishing the actions environmental, and energy aspects of or on the distribution of power and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27725

responsibilities among the various Compliance reference of this document in accordance levels of government. (e) You are responsible for having the with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. For the reasons discussed above, I actions required by this AD performed within Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, certify that the regulation: the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. for a copy of this service information. You 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory may review copies at the FAA, Transport action’’ under Executive Order 12866; Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the Actions S.W., Renton, Washington; or at the National DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (f) At the applicable times specified in Archives and Records Administration (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and Table 1 of paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert (NARA). For information on the availability 3. Will not have a significant Service Bulletin 747–53A2660, dated of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, November 16, 2006, do the actions specified or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal- economic impact, positive or negative, register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. on a substantial number of small entities in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this under the criteria of the Regulatory AD and do all applicable corrective actions, Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 7, by accomplishing all the applicable actions 2007. Flexibility Act. specified in the Accomplishment Stephen P. Boyd, We prepared a regulatory evaluation Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin Acting Manager, Transport Airplane of the estimated costs to comply with 747–53A2660, dated November 16, 2006; Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. this AD and placed it in the AD docket. except where the service bulletin specifies to [FR Doc. E7–9396 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] See the ADDRESSES section for a location contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before to examine the regulatory evaluation. further flight, repair the crack using a method BILLING CODE 4910–13–P approved in accordance with paragraph (g) of List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (1) Repetitive detailed inspections for any safety, Incorporation by reference, crack in the upper deck floor beam at the Federal Aviation Administration Safety. intersection of the floor beam and frame on Adoption of the Amendment both sides of the airplane. 14 CFR Part 39 (2) Repetitive open hole high frequency I Accordingly, under the authority eddy current (HFEC) inspections for any [Docket No. FAA–2006–26498; Directorate crack in certain fastener holes at the Identifier 2006–CE–83–AD; Amendment 39– delegated to me by the Administrator, 15056; AD 2007–10–15] the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as intersection of the floor beam upper chord and the frame inner chord on both sides of RIN 2120–AA64 follows: the airplane. (3) Repetitive open hole HFEC inspections Airworthiness Directives; Cessna PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS for any crack in the upper deck floor beam DIRECTIVES at all floor panel attachment fastener holes Aircraft Company Models 208 and 208B Airplanes I 1. The authority citation for part 39 through the forward and aft horizontal flanges of the floor beam upper chord, from continues to read as follows: AGENCY: Federal Aviation the left body frame to the right body frame. Administration (FAA), DOT. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Alternative Methods of Compliance ACTION: Final rule. § 39.13 [Amended] (AMOCs) SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new I (g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 2. The Federal Aviation Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the airworthiness directive (AD) to Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if supersede AD 2006–06–06, which by adding the following new requested in accordance with the procedures applies to certain Cessna Aircraft airworthiness directive (AD): found in 14 CFR 39.19. Company (Cessna) Models 208 and 2007–10–09 Boeing: Amendment 39–15050. (2) To request a different method of 208B airplanes. AD 2006–06–06 Docket No. FAA–2005–22288; compliance or a different compliance time currently requires you to incorporate Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–132–AD. for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR information into the applicable section 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on Effective Date any airplane to which the AMOC applies, of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) and Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) (a) This AD becomes effective June 1, 2007. notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District and requires you to install placards. Affected ADs Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local Since we issued AD 2006–06–06, (b) None. FSDO. Cessna issued new S1 Known Icing (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable Equipment AFM supplements and Applicability level of safety may be used for any repair developed a low airspeed awareness (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747– required by this AD, if it is approved by an system. Consequently, this AD requires 400 series airplanes, certificated in any Authorized Representative for the Boeing you to incorporate the applicable AFM category; as identified in Boeing Alert Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Service Bulletin 747–53A2660, dated Authorization Organization who has been supplement revision and temporarily November 16, 2006. authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to retain the requirements of AD 2006–06– make those findings. For a repair method to 06 until the above revisions are Unsafe Condition be approved, the repair must meet the incorporated. One of the AFM (d) This AD results from several reports certification basis of the airplane, and the requirements is the installation of a indicating that fatigue cracking was found in approval must specifically refer to this AD. functional low airspeed awareness upper deck floor beams made from 7000 Material Incorporated by Reference system to operate the airplane in known series aluminum alloy. We are issuing this icing conditions. We are issuing this AD AD to detect and correct cracking in the (h) You must use Boeing Alert Service upper deck floor beam at station 400, which Bulletin 747–53A2660, dated November 16, to assure that the pilot has enough could extend and sever the floor beam. A 2006, to perform the actions that are required information and the necessary severed floor beam could result in loss of by this AD, unless the AD specifies equipment to prevent loss of control of controllability and rapid decompression of otherwise. The Director of the Federal the airplane while in-flight during icing the airplane. Register approved the incorporation by conditions.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27726 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

DATES: This AD becomes effective on problem since the icing season does not Comment Issue No. 4: Concern About June 21, 2007. start until the end of September or early the Reliability and Accuracy of the Low ADDRESSES: To get the service October. Airspeed Awareness Alert System information identified in this AD, The FAA concurs that the compliance Corporate Air expresses concern contact the Cessna Aircraft Company, time for the low airspeed awareness about the reliability and accuracy of the Product Support, P.O. Box 7706, system can be extended and will low airspeed awareness alert system. Wichita, Kansas 67277. increase it from 30 days to 90 days after The commenter did not request a To view the AD docket, go to the the effective date of the AD. Cessna has specific change other than the change in Docket Management Facility; U.S. issued new S1 Known Icing Equipment compliance time referenced previously. Department of Transportation, 400 AFM supplements, dated February 20, We infer that the commenter either Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 2007. These supplements incorporate all wants the requirement taken out of the Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– the actions from the NPRM, including AD or the AD delayed until further 001 or on the Internet at http:// the requirement for the installation of a research can be done. dms.dot.gov. The docket number FAA– functional low airspeed awareness The FAA and Cessna conducted flight 2006–26498; Directorate Identifier system when flying into known icing tests of the low airspeed awareness 2006–CE–83–AD. conditions. system during certification where the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: system passed all certification tests and Robert P. Busto, Aerospace Engineer, We are changing the final rule to was found acceptable. The system was Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, require the incorporation of the designed to meet reliability certification FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Wichita, applicable S1 Known Icing Equipment requirements. We have determined that Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 946– AFM supplement, dated February 20, a functional low airspeed awareness 4157; fax: (316) 946–4107. 2007, and to extend the compliance system is necessary for the Cessna time from 30 days to 90 days after the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Models 208 and 208B to safely operate effective date of the AD. in known icing conditions. Discussion Comment Issue No. 2: Do Not Retain the We have not made changes to the On January 25, 2007, we issued a Actions From AD 2006–06–06 final rule based on this comment. proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Comment Issue No. 5: Require RACCA believes that there is no need Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to Equipment Other Than the Low for the FAA to restate the actions of AD include an AD that would apply to Airspeed Awareness System Cessna Models 208 and 208B airplanes. 2006–06–06 in the AD. The commenter This proposal was published in the states that as soon as the new AD Stephen McClure believes that there Federal Register as a notice of proposed becomes effective, the actions of AD will not be any benefit in safety from the rulemaking (NPRM) on February 1, 2007 2006–06–06 are superseded and are no installation of the low airspeed (FR 72 4663). The NPRM proposed to longer necessary. awareness system, because the airplane airspeed indicators already fill the need. supersede AD 2006–06–06, which We concur that, as of the effective He feels that pilots need to be trained to currently requires you to incorporate date of the new AD, the actions of AD avoid and/or exit icing conditions once information into the applicable section 2006–06–06 are superseded. However, encountered. As an alternative, the of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) we are allowing 90 days after the commenter believes a better wing ice and Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) effective date of this AD before the new detection light system, automatic boot and requires you to install placards. The actions must be incorporated. It is cycling system, and Goodrich ice NPRM would require you to incorporate essential to address the unsafe condition detection system would provide a better new S1 Known Icing Equipment AFM and assure that the actions of AD 2006– safety benefit than the low airspeed supplements and to install a low 06–06 remain in effect until the actions airspeed awareness system. awareness system. required by the new AD are We do not agree that the low airspeed Comments incorporated. awareness system is not necessary and We provided the public the We have not made changes to the have determined that it is necessary for opportunity to participate in developing final rule based on this comment. flight in known icing conditions. The accident/incident history of the Model this AD. The following presents the Comment Issue No. 3: Clarify Whether 208 indicates that pilots have not been comments received on the proposal and Alternative Methods of Compliance diligent in the management of the FAA’s response to each comment. As (AMOC) Approved per AD 2006–06–06 aircraft when operating in icing policy, we do not address anonymous Are Retained for This AD comments. conditions, as aircraft performance can decay very quickly. Additionally, the Comment Issue No. 1: Provide More Since the FAA is retaining the actions of AD 2006–06–06 until the new actions accident that occurred in Moscow in Time for Installation of the Low 2006 and recent flight tests have shown Airspeed Awareness System are done, RACCA questions whether it is the FAA’s intent to allow the AMOCs that the aural stall warning system does Corporate Air, the Regional Air Cargo approved for AD 2006–06–06. not provide sufficient time before a stall Carriers Association (RACCA), and in all icing conditions. The low airspeed Federal Express request an extension to It is the FAA’s intent to retain the awareness system addresses each of the compliance time for installing the AMOCs approved for AD 2006–06–06 these concerns by providing an alert low airspeed awareness system. The during the 90-day compliance period with sufficient time to allow pilots to NPRM proposes a compliance time of 30 until the new actions are required. take the proper corrective action. The days, and the commenters want an We are changing the final rule to state commenter is correct in stating that extension until September 2007 in order that AMOCs approved for AD 2006–06– training pilots to avoid and/or exit icing to prevent unnecessary grounding of 06 are approved for this AD until the conditions is a prudent course of action. their airplanes. The commenters state actions required by paragraph (e) of this Cessna has issued new S1 Known Icing that this should not present a safety AD are done. Equipment AFM supplements, dated

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27727

February 20, 2007. These supplements associated with the Models 208 and adopting the AD as proposed except for incorporate all the actions from the 208B airplanes, the deice boot clearing the changes previously discussed and NPRM, including the requirement for effectiveness was not significantly minor editorial corrections. We have the installation of a functional low improved over manually cycling at a determined that these changes and airspeed awareness system when flying certain accretion thickness. Therefore, minor corrections: into known icing conditions. the benefit of an automatic deice boot • Are consistent with the intent that We agree with the commenter that the cycling system would be to relieve pilot was proposed in the NPRM for workload. Service history on the Models additional systems referenced would correcting the unsafe condition; and 208 and 208B airplanes and many other enhance safety. However, the accident/ • Do not add any additional burden aircraft with manual boot cycling incident history on the Models 208 and upon the public than is already systems does not justify the need to 208B does not justify requiring the required. mandate an automatic system. installation of such equipment through We are changing the final rule to Costs of Compliance AD action. The pilot’s failure to detect require the incorporation of the icing conditions has not been the applicable S1 Known Icing Equipment We estimate that this AD affects 765 problem on the affected airplanes; the AFM supplement, dated February 20, airplanes in the U.S. registry. problem has been having the 2007, and the extension of the The AD requires inserting the information, training, and/or equipment compliance time from 30 days to 90 applicable new S1 Known Icing necessary to operate safely once icing days after the effective date of the AD. Equipment AFM supplement, dated conditions are encountered. February 20, 2007, into the AFM/POH, Additionally, the FAA examined the Conclusion which includes the installation of a low effectiveness of auto deice boot cycling We have carefully reviewed the airspeed awareness alert system. We during icing tunnel tests in 2005 and available data and determined that air estimate the following costs to do the discovered that, at typical speeds safety and the public interest require actions of this AD:

Total cost per Total cost on Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators

22 work-hours × $80 per hour = $1,760 ...... $6,440 $8,200 $6,273,000

Authority for This Rulemaking 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the § 39.13 [Amended] Title 49 of the United States Code DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures I 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by specifies the FAA’s authority to issue (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 3. Will not have a significant 2006–06–06, Amendment 39–14514, (71 Section 106 describes the authority of economic impact, positive or negative, FR 13533, March 16, 2006), and adding the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, on a substantial number of small entities the following new AD: Aviation Programs, describes in more under the criteria of the Regulatory 2007–10–15 Cessna Aircraft Company: detail the scope of the agency’s Flexibility Act. Amendment 39–15056; Docket No. FAA–2006–26498; Directorate Identifier authority. We prepared a summary of the costs We are issuing this rulemaking under 2006–CE–83–AD. to comply with this AD (and other the authority described in Subtitle VII, information as included in the Effective Date Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, Regulatory Evaluation) and placed it in (a) This AD becomes effective on June 21, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 2007. section, Congress charges the FAA with the AD Docket. You may get a copy of promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in this summary by sending a request to us Affected ADs air commerce by prescribing regulations at the address listed under ADDRESSES. (b) This AD supersedes AD 2006–06–06, for practices, methods, and procedures Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2006–26498; Amendment 39–14514. Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–83–AD’’ the Administrator finds necessary for Applicability in your request. safety in air commerce. This regulation (c) This AD applies to Models 208 and is within the scope of that authority List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 208B, all serial numbers, that are certificated because it addresses an unsafe condition in any category. that is likely to exist or develop on Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Unsafe Condition products identified in this AD. safety, Safety. (d) This AD results from our determination Regulatory Findings Adoption of the Amendment that the revisions dated February 20, 2007, to We have determined that this AD will the S1 Known Icing Equipment AFM I Accordingly, under the authority supplement are necessary and should be not have federalism implications under incorporated into the Airplane Flight Manual Executive Order 13132. This AD will delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration (AFM)/Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH); not have a substantial direct effect on and that a low airspeed awareness system the States, on the relationship between amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation should be required when operating in known the national government and the States, Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: icing conditions. We are issuing this AD to or on the distribution of power and assure that the pilot has enough information PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS responsibilities among the various and the necessary equipment to prevent loss DIRECTIVES of control of the airplane while in-flight levels of government. during icing conditions. For the reasons discussed above, I I 1. The authority citation for part 39 certify that this AD: New Actions Required by this AD continues to read as follows: 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory (e) Unless already done, within the next 90 action’’ under Executive Order 12866; Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. days after the effective date of this AD,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27728 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

incorporate the applicable new S1 Known Icing Equipment AFM supplement, dated February 20, 2007, into the AFM/POH:

Document Affects

(1) Model 208 (675 SHP) FAA-approved Flight Manual Supplement S1 Cessna Model 208 airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Ltd., ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1352-S1–10, dated PT6A–114A turboprop engine installed (675 SHP) or FAA-approved February 20, 2007, or later FAA-approved revision that incorporates engine of equivalent or higher horsepower installed, equipped with the same information. airframe deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight in known or forecast icing (2) Model 208 (600 SHP) FAA-approved Flight Manual Supplement S1 Cessna Model 208 airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Ltd., ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1307-S1–09, dated PT6A–114 turboprop engine installed (600 SHP) or FAA-approved February 20, 2007, or later FAA-approved revision that incorporates engine of equivalent horsepower installed, equipped with airframe the same information. deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight in known or forecast icing. (3) Model 208B (675 SHP) FAA-approved Flight Manual Supplement Cessna Model 208B airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Ltd., S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1329-S1–10, PT6A–114A turboprop engine installed (675 SHP) or FAA-approved dated February 20, 2007, or later FAA-approved revision that incor- engine of equivalent or higher horsepower installed, equipped with porates the same information. airframe deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight in known or forecast icing. (4) Model 208B (600 SHP) FAA-approved Flight Manual Supplement Cessna Model 208B airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Ltd., S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1309-S1–10, PT6A–114 turboprop engine installed (600 SHP) or FAA-approved dated February 20, 2007, or later FAA-approved revision that incor- engine of equivalent horsepower installed, equipped with airframe porates the same information. deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight in known or forecast icing.

Note: The above supplements require the information into the POH specified in all AD 2006–06–06. The new actions required by installation of a functional low airspeed paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(4) of this AD. this AD in paragraph (e) above terminate the awareness system. Cessna Service Bulletin Make an entry into the aircraft records requirement for the actions in paragraphs (h) CAB06–11 and Service Kit SK 208–171, both showing compliance with this portion of the and (i) of this AD. dated October 9, 2006, provide instructions AD in accordance with section 43.9 of the (h) No later than March 27, 2006 (3 days for such an installation. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9). after March 24, 2006, which is the effective (f) The owner/operator holding at least a date of AD 2006–06–06), incorporate the private pilot certificate as authorized by Actions Retained From AD 2006–06–06 following revisions into the Airplane Flight section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation (g) The actions in paragraphs (h) and (i) of Regulations (14 CFR 43.7) may insert the this AD below are retained in this AD from Manual (AFM), unless already done:

Affected airplanes Incorporate the following AFM revision document

(1) Cessna Model 208 airplanes and Model 208B airplanes, all serial Section 2: Limitations and Section 4: Normal Procedures: Temporary numbers. Revision 208PHTR05, dated June 27, 2005, to the POH and FAA- approved AFM. (2) Cessna Model 208 airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Ltd., Section 9: Optional Systems Description and Operating Procedures: PT6A–114A turboprop engine installed (675 SHP) or FAA-approved Revision 6 of the 208 (675 SHP) POH/FAA-approved AFM Supple- engine of equivalent horsepower installed, equipped with airframe ment S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1352–S1– deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight 06, dated June 27, 2005. in known or forecast icing. (3) Cessna Model 208 airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Ltd., Section 9: Optional Systems Description and Operating Procedures: PT6A–114 turboprop engine installed (600 SHP) or FAA-approved Revision 6 of the Cessna Model 208 (600 SHP) POH/FAA-approved engine of equivalent horsepower installed, equipped with airframe AFM Supplement S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight D1307–S1–06, dated June 27, 2005. in known or forecast icing. (4) Cessna Model 208B airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Section 9: Optional Systems Description and Operating Procedures: Ltd., PT6A–114A turboprop engine installed (675 SHP) or FAA-ap- Revision 7 of the 208B (675 SHP) POH/FAA-approved AFM Supple- proved engine of equivalent horsepower installed, equipped with air- ment S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1329–S1– frame deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from 07, dated June 27, 2005. flight in known or forecast icing. (5) Cessna Model 208B airplanes with a Pratt & Whitney of Canada Section 9: Optional Systems Description and Operating Procedures: Ltd., PT6A–114 turboprop engine installed (600 SHP) or FAA-ap- Revision 6 of the 208B (600 SHP) POH/FAA-approved AFM Supple- proved engine of equivalent horsepower installed, equipped with air- ment S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment,’’ Cessna document D1309-S1– frame deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from 06, dated June 27, 2005. flight in known or forecast icing.

(i) No later than March 27, 2006 (3 days owner/operator holding at least a private in accordance with section 43.9 of the after March 24, 2006, which is the effective pilot certificate as authorized by section 43.7 Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9): date of AD 2006–06–06), you must do the of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR (1) For Cessna Model 208 airplanes and following actions, unless already done. These 43.7) may do the placard POH/AFM Model 208B airplanes, all serial numbers, changes are to the POH and FAA-approved requirements as specified in the paragraphs equipped with airframe deicing pneumatic AFM and to the POH/FAA-approved AFM boots, that are not currently prohibited from below. Make an entry into the aircraft records Supplement S1 ‘‘Known Icing Equipment’’ flight in known or forecast icing: You are mandated in paragraph (h) of this AD. The showing compliance with portion of the AD prohibited from continued flight after

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27729

encountering moderate or greater icing 208 or 208B POH and FAA-approved AFM Airspeed of 120 KIAS cannot be conditions. The airplane can dispatch into KNOWN ICING EQUIPMENT SUPPLEMENT maintained in level flight. forecast areas of icing but must exit moderate S1 under ‘‘ENVIRONMENTAL An accretion of 1⁄4-inch of ice is observed or greater icing conditions if encountered. CONDITIONS’’ with: ‘‘FLIGHT IN THESE on the wing strut. (2) For Cessna Model 208 airplanes and CONDITIONS ARE PROHIBITED.’’ Disregard any mention of approval for Model 208B airplanes, all serial numbers, (iii) Replace the last two sentences in the flight in icing conditions within the POH/ equipped with airframe deicing pneumatic LIMITATIONS section of the Cessna Models boots, that are not currently prohibited from 208 or 208B POH and FAA-approved AFM AFM.’’ flight in known or forecast icing: KNOWN ICING EQUIPMENT SUPPLEMENT Appendix 2 Retained From AD 2006– (i) Insert the text in Appendix 1 of this AD S1 under ‘‘ENVIRONMENTAL preceding the KINDS OF OPERATION CONDITIONS’’ with the following text: ‘‘Exit 06–06 LIMITS paragraph in the LIMITATIONS strategies should be determined during pre- Changes to the Cessna Models 208 or 208B section of the Cessna Models 208 or 208B flight planning.’’ Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) and FAA- POH and FAA-approved AFM. Approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) (ii) Insert the text in Appendix 2 of this AD Alternative Methods of Compliance in the LIMITATIONS section of the Cessna (AMOCs) Affected Cessna Models 208 or 208B POH Models 208 or 208B POH and FAA-approved (j) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft and FAA-Approved AFM AFM KNOWN ICING EQUIPMENT Certication (ACO), has the authority to SUPPLEMENT S1 at the beginning of the approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested Insert the following text in the paragraph ‘‘REQUIRED EQUIPMENT.’’ using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. LIMITATIONS section of the POH and FAA- (3) For Cessna Models and Models 208B Send information to ATTN: Robert P. Busto, approved AFM KNOWN ICING EQUIPMENT airplanes, all serial numbers, equipped with Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO, FAA, SUPPLEMENT S1, at the beginning of the airframe deicing pneumatic boots that are 1801 Airport Road, Wichita, Kansas 67209; paragraph ‘‘REQUIRED EQUIPMENT.’’ This not currently prohibited from flight in known telephone: (316) 946–4157; fax: (316) 946– may be done by inserting a copy of this AD or forecast icing: Install three placards with 4107. Before using any approved AMOC on into the POH/AFM: black letters on a white background. The any airplane to which the AMOC applies, ‘‘Continued flight after encountering placards must be located on the instrument notify your appropriate principal inspector panel under the radio stack, immediately moderate or greater icing conditions is (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District prohibited. One or more of the following above the pilot’s flight instruments, or below Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local defines moderate icing conditions for this the vertical speed indicator. Lettering on the FSDO. placard must be a minimum height of 1/8- (k) AMOCs approved for AD 2006–06–06 airplane: inch. are approved for this AD until the actions in Indicated airspeed in level flight at (i) Placard 1 must include the text of paragraph (e) of this AD are done. After this, constant power decreases by 20 knots. Appendix 3 of this AD. they are no longer valid. The paragraph Engine torque required to maintain (ii) Placard 2 must include the following designations of the AMOC refer to paragraphs airspeed increases by 400 ft. lbs. text: ‘‘120 KIAS Minimum in Icing Flaps Up (e) and (f) of AD 2006–06–06, which are Airspeed of 120 KIAS cannot be except 110 KIA if Climbing to Exit Icing.’’ paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD respectively. (iii) Placard 3 must include the following maintained in level flight. 1 text: ‘‘Disconnect autopilot at first indication Related Information An accretion of ⁄4-inch of ice is observed on the wing strut. of ice accretion.’’ (l) To get copies of the AFM supplements Disregard any mention of approval for (4) For Cessna Models 208 and 208B and service information referenced in this airplanes, all serial numbers, equipped with AD, contact: Cessna Aircraft Company, flight in icing conditions within the POH/ airframe deicing pneumatic boots that are Product Support, P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, AFM.’’ not currently prohibited from flight into Kansas 67277. To view the AD docket, go to Appendix 3 Retained From AD 2006– known or forecast icing: the Docket Management Facility; U.S. (i) Insert the text in Appendix 4 of this AD Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh 06–06 under the ‘‘AIRSPEED LIMITATIONS’’ Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, paragraph in the LIMITATIONS section of Cessna Model 208 Airplanes and Model Washington, DC, or on the Internet at the Cessna Models 208 and 208B POH and 208B Airplanes, Equipped With Airframe http://dms.dot.gov. The docket number is FAA-approved AFM. Deicing Pneumatic Boots, That Are Not Docket No. FAA–2006–26498; Directorate (ii) Replace the text in the KNOWN ICING Currently Prohibited From Flight in Known Identifier 2006–CE–83–AD. EQUIPMENT SUPPLEMENT S1 under the or Forecast Icing ‘‘MINIMUM SPEED IN ICING CONDITIONS’’ Appendix 1 Retained From AD 2006– Install a placard with black letters on a paragraph with the text in Appendix 4 of this 06–06 white background. The placard shall be AD. (iii) Insert the following text in the Changes to the Cessna Models 208 or 208B located on the instrument panel in one of the LIMITATIONS section of the POH/AFM Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) and FAA- following areas: Under the radio stack, under the ‘‘OTHER LIMITATIONS’’ Approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) immediately above the pilot’s flight paragraph and in the LIMITATIONS section instruments, or below the pilot’s vertical Affected Cessna Models 208 or 208B POH of the KNOWN ICING EQUIPMENT speed indicator. Lettering on the placard and FAA-Approved AFM SUPPLEMENT S1 under the ‘‘AUTOPILOT shall be a minimum 1⁄8-inch tall and state the OPERATION IN ICING CONDITIONS’’ Insert the following text at the beginning of following: paragraph: ‘‘Disconnect autopilot at first the KINDS OF OPERATION LIMITS ‘‘Continued flight after encountering paragraph in the LIMITATIONS section of indication of ice accretion.’’ moderate or greater icing conditions is (5) For Cessna Model 208 airplanes and the Cessna Models 208 or 208B POH and prohibited. One or more of the following Model 208B airplanes, all serial numbers, FAA-approved AFM. This may be done by equipped with airframe deicing pneumatic inserting a copy of this AD into the POH/ defines moderate icing conditions for this boots, that are not currently prohibited from AFM: airplane: flight in known or forecast icing: ‘‘Continued flight after encountering Airspeed in level flight at constant power (i) Replace the text in the PERFORMANCE moderate or greater icing conditions is decreases by 20 KIAS. section of the Cessna Models 208 or 208B prohibited. One or more of the following Engine torque required to maintain POH and FAA-approved AFM KNOWN defines moderate icing conditions for this airspeed increases by 400 ft. lbs. ICING EQUIPMENT SUPPLEMENT S1 under airplane: 120 KIAS cannot be maintained in level the ‘‘STALL SPEEDS’’ paragraph with the Indicated airspeed in level cruise flight at flight. text in Appendix 5 of this AD. constant power decreases by 20 knots. Ice accretion of 1/4 inch observed on the (ii) Replace the ‘‘WARNING’’ text in the Engine torque required to maintain wing strut.’’ LIMITATIONS section of the Cessna Models airspeed increases by 400 ft. lbs.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27730 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Appendix 4 Retained From AD 2006– DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION person at the Docket Management 06–06 Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 Federal Aviation Administration Changes to the Cessna Models 208 or 208B p.m., Monday through Friday, except Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) and FAA- Federal holidays. The Docket Approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) 14 CFR Part 39 Management Facility office (telephone Supplement S1 [Docket No. FAA–2006–24696; Directorate (800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the street Affected Cessna Models 208 or 208B POH Identifier 2006–NM–038–AD; Amendment address stated in the ADDRESSES section. and FAA-Approved AFM and FAA-Approved 39–15052; AD 2007–10–11] Supplement S1 RIN 2120–AA64 Discussion Insert the following text into the The FAA issued a supplemental LIMITATIONS section under the ‘‘AIRSPEED Airworthiness Directives; Empresa notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) LIMITATIONS’’ paragraph of the Cessna Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an Models 208 or 208B POH and FAA-approved (EMBRAER) Model EMB–145LR, AFM, and replace the text in the KNOWN AD that would apply to certain –145XR, and –145MP Airplanes; and EMBRAER Model EMB–145, –145ER, ICING EQUIPMENT SUPPLEMENT S1 under Model EMB–135BJ and –135LR the ‘‘MINIMUM SPEED IN ICING –145MR, –145LR, –145XR, –145MP, and CONDITIONS’’ paragraph with the following Airplanes –145EP airplanes; and Model EMB– text. This may be done by inserting a copy AGENCY: Federal Aviation 135BJ, –135ER, –135KE, –135KL, and of this AD into the POH/AFM: –135LR airplanes. That supplemental ‘‘Minimum airspeed in icing conditions, Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). NPRM was published in the Federal for all flight phases including approach, Register on December 6, 2006 (71 FR except takeoff and landing: ACTION: Final rule. 70648). That supplemental NPRM Flaps up: 120 KIAS Flaps 10°: 105 KIAS SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new proposed to require replacing the Flaps 20°: 95 KIAS airworthiness directive (AD) for certain electrical bonding clamps inside the Exception for flaps up: when climbing to EMBRAER Model EMB–145LR, –145XR, fuel tanks and adjacent areas. That exit icing conditions airspeed can be reduced and –145MP airplanes; and Model supplemental NPRM also proposed to to 110 KIAS minimum. EMB–135BJ and –135LR airplanes. This add airplanes to the applicability. Flaps must be extended during all phases AD requires replacing the electrical Comments (takeoff and landing included) at airspeeds bonding clamps inside the fuel tanks below 110 KIAS, except adhere to published and adjacent areas. This AD results from We provided the public the AFM procedures when operating with a report of the failure of a fitting clamp opportunity to participate in the ground deicing/anti-icing fluid applied. of an electrical bonding cable for the development of this AD. We have Warning fuel tubing. We are issuing this AD to considered the single comment The aural stall warning system does not prevent loss of bonding protection in received. function properly in all icing conditions and the interior of the fuel tanks or adjacent Request To Remove Airplanes From the should not be relied upon to provide areas, and a consequent potential source Applicability of the Supplemental adequate stall warning when in icing of ignition in a fuel tank and possible NPRM conditions.’’ fire or explosion. Note: These are minimum speeds for ExpressJet points out that the DATES: This AD becomes effective June operations in icing conditions. Disregard any supplemental NPRM specified that the reference to the original speeds within the 21, 2007. newly added EMBRAER Model EMB– POH/AFM. The Director of the Federal Register 135BJ, –135ER, –135KE, –135KL, and approved the incorporation by reference –135LR airplanes accomplish the Appendix 5 Retained From AD 2006– of certain publications listed in the AD required actions in accordance with 06–06 as of June 21, 2007. EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG– Changes to the Cessna Models 208 or 208B ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 28–0030, dated April 19, 2006. Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) and FAA- docket on the Internet at http:// ExpressJet asserts that this service Approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket bulletin is not applicable to any of these Supplement S1 Management Facility, U.S. Department airplanes, except the Model EMB–135BJ Replace the text in the PERFORMANCE of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, airplanes. Therefore, ExpressJet states section of the POH/AFM KNOWN ICING SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, that EMBRAER Model EMB–135ER, EQUIPMENT SUPPLEMENT S1 under the Washington, DC. –135KE, –135KL, and –135LR airplanes ‘‘STALL SPEEDS’’ paragraph with the Contact Empresa Brasileira de should not be included in the following text: Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box applicability of the supplemental ‘‘Ice accumulation on the airframe may 343—CEP 12.225, Sao Jose dos result in a 20 KIAS increase in stall speed. NPRM. Either buffet or aural stall warning should be Campos—SP, Brazil, for service From this comment, we infer that treated as an imminent stall.’’ information identified in this AD. ExpressJet is requesting that EMBRAER ‘‘WARNING—The aural stall warning FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Model EMB–135ER, –135KE, –135KL, system does not function properly in all icing Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, and –135LR airplanes be removed from conditions and should not be relied upon to International Branch, ANM–116, the applicability of the AD. We partially provide adequate stall warning when in icing Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, agree. As we stated in the supplemental conditions.’’ 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, NPRM, the Agincia Nacional de Aviarno Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May Washington 98057–3356; telephone Civil (ANAC), which is the 10, 2007. (425) 227–2125; fax (425) 227–1149. airworthiness authority for Brazil, David R. Showers, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: notified us that the unsafe condition Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, identified in the original NPRM might Aircraft Certification Service. Examining the Docket exist on EMBRAER ‘‘Model EMB–135 [FR Doc. E7–9398 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] You may examine the AD docket on airplanes,’’ in addition to the airplanes BILLING CODE 4910–13–P the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov or in identified in the original NPRM. ANAC

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27731

subsequently issued Brazilian requirements of this AD and we have 145–28–0028 and are not subject to the airworthiness directive 2006–02–03R2, removed those airplanes from the requirements of this AD. effective October 8, 2006, to address the applicability of this AD. We do not subject unsafe condition on ‘‘Model agree to remove Model EMB–135LR Conclusion EMB–135 airplanes.’’ airplanes from the applicability of this We have carefully reviewed the However, we have verified the AD, but we do agree that these airplanes available data, including the comment effectivity of EMBRAER Service are not subject to EMBRAER Service received, and determined that air safety Bulletins 145–28–0028, dated November Bulletin 145LEG–28–0030. Therefore, and the public interest require adopting 7, 2005; and 145LEG–28–0030, dated we have revised Tables 1 and 2 of this the AD with the changes described April 19, 2006; with EMBRAER. AD to specify that these airplanes are previously. We have determined that EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG– identified in and must use EMBRAER these changes will neither increase the 28–0030 applies only to Model EMB– Service Bulletin 145–28–0028 to economic burden on any operator nor 135BJ airplanes. EMBRAER Service accomplish the actions required by this Bulletin 145–28–0028 applies only to AD. increase the scope of the AD. Model EMB–135LR airplanes, and to In addition, we have removed Model Costs of Compliance Model EMB–145LR, –145XR, and EMB–145, –145ER, –145MR, and –145MP airplanes. Therefore, we agree –145EP airplanes from the applicability The following table provides the that Model EMB–135ER, –135KE, and of this AD. These airplanes are not estimated costs for U.S. operators to –135KL airplanes are not subject to the identified in EMBRAER Service Bulletin comply with this AD.

ESTIMATED COSTS

Number of Average U.S.- Action Work hours labor rate Parts Cost per airplane registered Fleet cost per hour airplanes

Replacement of bond- 2 $80 Between $33 and $87, Between $193 and 20 Between $3,860 and ing clamp (all air- per kit (depending $247 (depending on $4,940 (depending plane groups). on kit/airplane group). kit/airplane group). on kit/airplane group).

Authority for This Rulemaking the States, on the relationship between the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as Title 49 of the United States Code the national government and the States, follows: specifies the FAA’s authority to issue or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, DIRECTIVES Section 106, describes the authority of levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, I certify that this AD: 1. The authority citation for part 39 Aviation Programs, describes in more (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory continues to read as follows: detail the scope of the Agency’s action’’ under Executive Order 12866; Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. authority. (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under We are issuing this rulemaking under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures § 39.13 [Amended] the authority described in Subtitle VII, (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and I 2. The Federal Aviation Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, (3) Will not have a significant Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that economic impact, positive or negative, by adding the following new section, Congress charges the FAA with on a substantial number of small entities airworthiness directive (AD): promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in under the criteria of the Regulatory air commerce by prescribing regulations 2007–10–11 Empresa Brasileira de Flexibility Act. Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): for practices, methods, and procedures We prepared a regulatory evaluation the Administrator finds necessary for Amendment 39–15052. Docket No. of the estimated costs to comply with FAA–2006–24696; Directorate Identifier safety in air commerce. This regulation this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 2006–NM–038–AD. is within the scope of that authority See the ADDRESSES section for a location because it addresses an unsafe condition to examine the regulatory evaluation. Effective Date that is likely to exist or develop on (a) This AD becomes effective June 21, products identified in this rulemaking List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 2007. action. Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Affected ADs safety, Incorporation by reference, Regulatory Findings (b) None. Safety. We have determined that this AD will Applicability Adoption of the Amendment not have federalism implications under (c) This AD applies to the airplanes Executive Order 13132. This AD will Accordingly, under the authority identified in Table 1 of this AD, certificated not have a substantial direct effect on delegated to me by the Administrator, in any category.

TABLE 1.—APPLICABILITY

EMBRAER model— As identified in—

EMB–145LR, –145XR, –145MP, and –135LR airplanes ...... EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–28–0028, dated November 7, 2005.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27732 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1.—APPLICABILITY—Continued

EMBRAER model— As identified in—

EMB–135BJ airplanes ...... EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG–28–0030, dated April 19, 2006.

Unsafe Condition Compliance electrical bonding clamps having part (d) This AD results from a report of the (e) You are responsible for having the numbers AN735D6 and AN735D4 inside the failure of a fitting clamp of an electrical actions required by this AD performed within forward fuel tank or the ventral, wing stub, bonding cable for the fuel tubing. We are the compliance times specified, unless the and wing fuel tanks, and adjacent areas, as issuing this AD to prevent loss of bonding actions have already been done. applicable; by accomplishing all actions protection in the interior of the fuel tanks or Electrical Bonding Clamp Replacement specified in the Accomplishment adjacent areas, and a consequent potential Instructions of the applicable service bulletin source of ignition in a fuel tank and possible (f) At the time specified in paragraph (f)(1) identified in Table 2 of this AD. fire or explosion. or (f)(2) of this AD, as applicable: Replace the

TABLE 2.—APPLICABLE SERVICE INFORMATION

For EMBRAER model— Use—

EMB–145LR, –145XR, –145MP, and –135LR airplanes ...... EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–28–0028, dated November 7, 2005 EMB–135BJ airplanes ...... EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG–28–0030, dated April 19, 2006.

(1) For Model EMB–145LR, –145XR, and to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/ 460.19, 460.45, and 460.49 is May 17, –145MP airplanes; and Model EMB–135LR cfr/ibr-locations.html. 2007. airplanes: Within 5,000 flight hours after the Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 7, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For effective date of this AD. 2007. (2) For Model EMB–135BJ airplanes: technical information, contact Kenneth Within 4,000 flight hours or 48 calendar Stephen P. Boyd, Wong, Deputy Manager, Licensing and months after the effective date of this AD, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Safety Division, Commercial Space whichever occurs first. Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Transportation, AST–200, Federal [FR Doc. E7–9401 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Aviation Administration, 800 Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) (g)(1) The Manager, International Branch 267–8465; facsimile (202) 267–3686; ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs e-mail [email protected]. For legal information, contact Laura Montgomery, for this AD, if requested in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Senior Attorney, Office of the Chief (2) Before using any AMOC approved in Counsel, Federal Aviation accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to 14 CFR Parts 401, 415, 431, 435, 440 Administration, 800 Independence which the AMOC applies, notify the and 460 Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; appropriate principal inspector in the FAA telephone (202) 267–3150; facsimile [Docket No. FAA–2005–23449] Flight Standards Certificate Holding District (202) 267–7971, e-mail Office. Human Space Flight Requirements for [email protected]. Related Information Crew and Space Flight Participants SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (h) Brazilian airworthiness directive 2006– 02–03R2, effective October 8, 2006, also AGENCY: Federal Aviation Background addresses the subject of this AD. Administration, DOT. On December 15, 2006, the FAA ACTION: Notice of Office of Management Material Incorporated by Reference published the final rule, Human Space and Budget Approval for Information Flight Requirements for Crew and Space (i) You must use EMBRAER Service Collection. Flight Participants, in the Federal Bulletin 145–28–0028, dated November 7, Register. The rule established 2005; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin SUMMARY: This notice announces the 145LEG–28–0030, dated April 19, 2006; as requirements for human space flight as Office of Management and Budget’s required by the Commercial Space applicable; to perform the actions that are (OMB) approval of the information required by this AD, unless the AD specifies Launch Amendments Act of 2004. In the otherwise. The Director of the Federal collection requirement in the final rule DATES section of the final rule, we noted Register approved the incorporation by published on December 15, 2006. The that affected parties did not need to reference of these documents in accordance sections of the final rule pending comply with the information collection with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. approval of this information collection requirements in specified sections of the Contact Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica request are effective upon publication of rule until the Office of Management and S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225, this notice. Budget (OMB) approved the FAA’s Sao Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil, for a copy DATES: On April 16, 2007, the FAA request to collect the information. of this service information. You may review received OMB approval for the According to the Paperwork copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, information collection requirement in Reduction Act, OMB approved the Washington; or at the National Archives and the final rule published at 71 FR 75616 FAA’s request for new information Records Administration (NARA). For (December 15, 2006). The compliance collection on April 16, 2007, and information on the availability of this date for information collection assigned the information collection material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go requirements in §§ 460.5, 460.7, 460.9, OMB Control Number 2120–0720. The

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27733

control number was not available when atrioventricular valvular insufficiency tablets. The total daily dose should be the final rule was published, thus or dilated cardiomyopathy; for use with divided into two portions administered necessitating publication of this notice. concurrent therapy for congestive heart approximately 12 hours apart. The FAA request was approved by OMB failure as appropriate on a case-by-case (2) Indications for use. For the without change and expires on April 30, basis. The NADA is approved as of management of the signs of mild, 2010. April 30, 2007, and the regulations in 21 moderate, or severe (modified New York Title 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, CFR part 520 are amended by adding Heart Association Class II, III, or IV) 41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, § 520.1780 to reflect the approval. congestive heart failure due to 44709–44711, 44713, 44716–44717, In accordance with the freedom of atrioventricular valvular insufficiency 44722, 46105, grants authority to the information provisions of 21 CFR part or dilated cardiomyopathy; for use with Administrator to publish this notice. 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a concurrent therapy for congestive heart The final rule (71 FR 75616) became summary of safety and effectiveness failure as appropriate on a case-by-case effective on February 13, 2007 and the data and information submitted to basis. compliance date for information support approval of this application (3) Limitations. Federal law restricts collection requirements in §§ 460.5, may be seen in the Division of Dockets this drug to use by or on the order of 460.7, 460.9, 460.19, 460.45, and 460.49 Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug a licensed veterinarian. is May 17, 2007. Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. Dated: May 7, 2007. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 Issued in Washington, DC on May 8, 2007. Bernadette Dunham, Pamela Hamilton-Powell, a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. Director, Office of Rulemaking Aviation Under section 512(c)(2)(F)(i) of the Safety. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [FR Doc. E7–9516 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. E7–9480 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] (21 U.S.C. 360b(c)(2)(F)(i)), this BILLING CODE 4160–01–S BILLING CODE 4910–13–P approval qualifies for 5 years of marketing exclusivity beginning on the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND date of the approval. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND The agency has determined under 21 HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES CFR 25.33(d)(1) that this action is of a Food and Drug Administration type that does not individually or Food and Drug Administration cumulatively have a significant effect on 21 CFR Part 522 the human environment. Therefore, 21 CFR Part 520 neither an environmental assessment Implantation or Injectable Dosage Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; nor an environmental impact statement Form New Animal Drugs; Ivermectin Pimobendan is required. and Clorsulon This rule does not meet the definition AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’ HHS. ACTION: Final rule. Therefore, it is not subject to the ACTION: Final rule. congressional review requirements in 5 SUMMARY: The Food and Drug U.S.C. 801–808. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 520 animal drug regulations to reflect approval of a new animal drug Animal drugs. approval of an abbreviated new animal application (NADA) filed by Boehringer I Therefore, under the Federal Food, drug application (ANADA) filed by Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. The NADA Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under Norbrook Laboratories, Ltd. The provides for the veterinary prescription authority delegated to the Commissioner ANADA provides for the use of an use of pimobendan chewable tablets in of Food and Drugs and redelegated to ivermectin and clorsulon solution by dogs for the management of the signs of the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 subcutaneous injection in cattle for congestive heart failure. CFR part 520 is amended as follows: control of various internal and external DATES: This rule is effective May 17, parasites. 2007. PART 520—ORAL DOSAGE FORM DATES: This rule is effective May 17, NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2007. Melanie R. Berson, Center for Veterinary I 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Medicine (HFV–110), Food and Drug part 520 continues to read as follows: K. Harshman, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV–104), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301–827–7540, e- I mail: [email protected]. 2. Add § 520.1780 to read as follows: Rockville, MD 20855, 301–827–0169, e- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: § 520.1780 Pimobendan. mail: [email protected]. Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc., (a) Specifications. Each chewable SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Norbrook 2621 N. Belt Hwy., St. Joseph, MO tablet contains 1.25, 2.5, or 5 milligrams Laboratories, Ltd., Station Works, 64506–2002, filed NADA 141–273 that (mg) pimobendan. Newry BT35 6JP, Northern Ireland, filed provides for the veterinary prescription (b) Sponsor. See No. 000010 in ANADA 200–436 that provides for use use of VETMEDIN (pimobendan) § 510.600(c) of this chapter. of NOROMECTIN Plus (ivermectin and Chewable Tablets in dogs for the (c) Conditions of use in dogs—(1) clorsulon) Injection for Cattle by management of the signs of mild, Amount. Administer orally at a total subcutaneous injection in cattle for moderate, or severe (modified New York daily dose of 0.23 mg per pound (0.5 mg control of various internal and external Heart Association Class II, III, or IV) per kilogram) body weight, using a parasites. Norbrook Laboratories, Ltd.’s congestive heart failure due to suitable combination of whole or half NOROMECTIN Plus Injection for Cattle

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27734 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

is approved as a generic copy of Merial, for use as in paragraph (e) of this ACTION: Final rule. Ltd.’s IVOMEC Plus Injection for Cattle, section. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug approved under NADA 140–833. The * * * * * ANADA is approved as of April 23, (d) Special considerations. See Administration (FDA) is amending the 2007, and the regulations are amended § 500.25 of this chapter. animal drug regulations to reflect in 21 CFR 522.1193 to reflect the (e) Conditions of use in cattle—(1) approval of an abbreviated new animal approval. Amount. Administer 1 mL (10 mg drug application (ANADA) filed by In accordance with the freedom of ivermectin and 100 mg clorsulon) per 50 Norbrook Laboratories, Ltd. The information provisions of 21 CFR part kilograms (110 pounds) by ANADA provides for use of a one 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a subcutaneous injection. percent ivermectin solution by summary of safety and effectiveness (2) Indications for use. For the subcutaneous injection in cattle, swine, data and information submitted to treatment and control of gastrointestinal reindeer, and American bison for the support approval of this application nematodes (adults and fourth-stage treatment and control of various internal may be seen in the Division of Dockets larvae) (Haemonchus placei, Ostertagia and external parasites. Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug ostertagi (including inhibited larvae), O. DATES: This rule is effective May 17, Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. lyrata, Trichostrongylus axei, T. 2007. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 colubriformis, Cooperia oncophora, C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through punctata, C. pectinata, K. Harshman, Center for Veterinary Friday. Oesophagostomum radiatum, Medicine (HFV–104), Food and Drug FDA has determined under 21 CFR Nematodirus helvetianus (adults only), Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., 25.33(a)(1) that this action is of a type N. spathiger (adults only), Bunostomum Rockville, MD 20855, 301–827–0169, e- that does not individually or phlebotomum; lungworms (adults and mail: [email protected]. fourth-stage larvae) (Dictyocaulus cumulatively have a significant effect on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Norbrook the human environment. Therefore, viviparus); liver flukes (adults only) Laboratories, Ltd., Station Works, neither an environmental assessment (Fasciola hepatica); grubs (parasitic Newry BT35 6JP, Northern Ireland, filed nor an environmental impact statement stages) (Hypoderma bovis, H. lineatum); supplemental ANADA 200–437 that is required. lice (Linognathus vituli, Haematopinus provides for use of NOROMECTIN This rule does not meet the definition eurysternus, Solenopotes capillatus); (ivermectin) Injection for Cattle and of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because mites (Psoroptes ovis (syn. P. communis Swine by subcutaneous injection in it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’ var. bovis), Sarcoptes scabiei var. bovis); cattle, swine, reindeer, and American Therefore, it is not subject to the and for control of infections of D. bison for the treatment and control of congressional review requirements in 5 viviparus and O. radiatum for 28 days various internal and external parasites. U.S.C. 801–808. afer treatment; O. ostertagi, T. axei, and Norbrook Laboratories, Ltd.’s C. punctata for 21 days after treatment; List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522 NOROMECTIN Injection for Cattle and and H. placei and C. oncophora for 14 Swine is approved as a generic copy of Animal drugs. days after treatment. Merial, Ltd.’s IVOMEC Injection for (3) Limitations. For subcutaneous use I Therefore, under the Federal Food, Cattle and Swine approved under only. Not for intravenous or Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under NADA 128–409. The ANADA is intramuscular use. Do not treat cattle authority delegated to the Commissioner approved as of April 20, 2007, and the within 49 days of slaughter. Because a of Food and Drugs and redelegated to regulations are amended in 21 CFR withdrawal time in milk has not been the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 522.1192 to reflect the approval and a established, do not use in female dairy CFR part 522 is amended as follows: current format. cattle of breeding age. Do not use in In accordance with the freedom of other animal species because severe PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR information provisions of 21 CFR part adverse reactions, including fatalities in INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a dogs, may result. A withdrawal period ANIMAL DRUGS summary of safety and effectiveness has not been established for this product data and information submitted to I 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR in preruminating calves. Do not use in support approval of this application part 522 continues to read as follows: calves to be processed for veal. may be seen in the Division of Dockets Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. Dated: May 7, 2007. Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug I 2. Amend § 522.1193 as follows: Bernadette Dunham, Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. a. Revise the section heading and Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 paragraphs (a) and (b); Medicine. a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through b. Redesignate paragraph (d) as [FR Doc. E7–9517 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Friday. paragraph (e); BILLING CODE 4160–01–S FDA has determined under 21 CFR c. Add new paragraph (d); and 25.33(a)(1) that this action is of a type d. Revise newly redesignated that does not individually or paragraph (e). DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND cumulatively have a significant effect on The revisions, redesignation, and HUMAN SERVICES the human environment. Therefore, addition read as follows: neither an environmental assessment Food and Drug Administration nor an environmental impact statement § 522.1193 Ivermectin and clorsulon. is required. (a) Specifications. Each milliliter (mL) 21 CFR Part 522 This rule does not meet the definition of solution contains 10 milligrams (mg) Implantation or Injectable Dosage of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because (1 percent) ivermectin and 100 mg (10 Form New Animal Drugs; Ivermectin it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’ percent) clorsulon. Therefore, it is not subject to the (b) Sponsors. See Nos. 050604 and AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, congressional review requirements in 5 055529 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter HHS. U.S.C. 801–808.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27735

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522 larvae) (Oxyuris equi), large spp. (adults only)); lice (H. suis); and Animal drugs. roundworms (adult) (Parascaris mites (S. scabiei var. suis). equorum), hairworms (adult) (iii) Limitations. Do not treat swine I Therefore, under the Federal Food, (Trichostrongylus axei), large mouth within 18 days of slaughter. Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under stomach worms (adult) (Habronema (4) American bison—(i) Amount. 200 authority delegated to the Commissioner muscae), neck threadworms µg/kg of body weight by subcutaneous of Food and Drugs and redelegated to (microfilariae) (Onchocerca spp.), and injection. the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 stomach bots (Gastrophilus spp.). (ii) Indications for use. For the CFR part 522 is amended as follows: (iii) Limitations. Not for use in horses treatment and control of grubs (H. intended for human consumption. bovis). PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR Federal law restricts this drug to use by (iii) Limitations. Do not slaughter INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW or on the order of a licensed within 56 days of last treatment. ANIMAL DRUGS veterinarian. (5) Reindeer—(i) Amount. 200 µg/kg µ I 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR (2) Cattle—(i) Amount. 200 g/kg of of body weight by subcutaneous part 522 continues to read as follows: body weight by subcutaneous injection. injection. (ii) Indications for use—(A) For the (ii) Indications for use. For the Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. treatment and control of gastrointestinal treatment and control of warbles I 2. Revise § 522.1192 to read as nematodes (adults and fourth-stage (Oedemagena tarandi). follows: larvae) (Haemonchus placei, Ostertagia (iii) Limitations. Do not treat reindeer ostertagi (including inhibited larvae), O. within 56 days of slaughter. § 522.1192 Ivermectin. lyrata, T. axei, T. colubriformis, (6) Ranch-raised foxes—(i) Amount. (a) Specifications—(1) Each milliliter Cooperia oncophora, C. punctata, C. 200 µg/kg of body weight by (mL) of solution contains 20 milligrams pectinata, Oesophagostomum radiatum, subcutaneous injection. Repeat in 3 (mg) ivermectin. Nematodirus helvetianus (adults only), weeks. (2) Each mL of solution contains 10 N. spathiger (adults only), Bunostomum (ii) Indications for use. For treatment mg ivermectin. phlebotomum); lungworms (adults and and control of ear mites (Otodectes (3) Each mL of solution contains 2.7 fourth-stage larvae) (Dictyocaulus cynotis). mg ivermectin. viviparus); grubs (parasitic stages) (b) Sponsors. See sponsors in Dated: May 7, 2007. (Hypoderma bovis, H. lineatum); Bernadette Dunham, § 510.600(c) of this chapter for use as in sucking lice (Linognathus vituli, paragraph (e) of this section. Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary Haematopinus eurysternus, Solenopotes Medicine. (1) No. 050604 for use of the product capillatus); mites (scabies) (Psoroptes [FR Doc. E7–9515 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] described in paragraph (a)(1) of this ovis (syn. P. communis var. bovis), section as in paragraph (e)(1) of this Sarcoptes scabiei var. bovis). BILLING CODE 4160–01–S section; the product described in (B) For control of infections of D. paragraph (a)(2) of this section as in viviparus for 28 days after treatment, paragraphs (e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(ii)(A), and O. ostertagi for 21 days after DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND (e)(2)(ii)(C), (e)(2)(iii), (e)(3), (e)(4) and treatment, and H. placei, T. axei, C. SECURITY (e)(5) of this section; and the product punctata, C. oncophora, and O. Coast Guard described in paragraph (a)(3) of this radiatum for 14 days after treatment. section as in paragraphs (e)(3) and (e)(6) (C) For control of infections and to of this section. protect from reinfection with D. 33 CFR Part 100 (2) Nos. 059130 and 055529 for use of viviparus and O. radiatum for 28 days [CGD13–07–013] the product described in paragraph after treatment; O. ostertagi, T. axei, and RIN 1625–AA00 (a)(2) of this section as in paragraphs C. punctata for 21 days after treatment; (e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(ii)(A), (e)(2)(ii)(B), H. placei and C. oncophora for 14 days Special local regulation: ULHRA (e)(2)(iii), (e)(3), (e)(4), and (e)(5) of this after treatment. Hydroplane Races, Howard Amon section. (iii) Limitations. Do not treat cattle Park, Richland, WA (c) Related tolerances. See § 556.344 within 35 days of slaughter. Because a of this chapter. withdrawal time in milk has not been AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. (d) Special considerations—(1) See established, do not use in female dairy ACTION: Special local regulation § 500.25 of this chapter. cattle of breeding age. A withdrawal temporary final rule. (2) Labeling shall bear the following period has not been established for this precaution: ‘‘This product should not be product in pre-ruminating calves. Do SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is used in other animal species as severe not use in calves to be processed for undertaking two actions with regard to adverse reactions, including fatalities in veal. the above captioned regulation. The first dogs, may result.’’ (3) Swine—(i) Amount. 300 µg/kg of is to withdraw the temporary final rule (e) Conditions of use—(1) Horses—(i) body weight by subcutaneous injection. previously published on April 23, 2007 Amount. 200 micrograms per kilogram (ii) Indications for use. For the because it erroneously described the (µg/kg) of body weight by intramuscular treatment and control of gastrointestinal race area. The second is to correct the injection. roundworms (adults and fourth-stage previous error by establishing a (ii) Indications for use. For the larvae) (large roundworm, Ascaris temporary special local regulation for treatment and control of large strongyles suum; red stomach worm, the ULHRA National Series Hydroplane (adult) (Strongylus vulgaris, S. Hyostrongylus rubidus; nodular worm, Race to be held on the waters of the edentatus, Triodontophorus spp.), small Oesophagostomum spp.; threadworm, Columbia River in the vicinity of strongyles (adult and fourth stage Strongyloides ransomi (adults only)); Howard Amon Park, Richland, WA. larvae) (Cyathostomum spp., somatic roundworm larvae These special local regulations limit the Cylicocyclus spp., Cylicostephanus (threadworm, S. ransomi (somatic movement of non-participating vessels spp.), pinworms (adult and fourth-stage larvae)); lungworms (Metastrongylus in the regulated race area. This

VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:07 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27736 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

temporary rule is needed to provide for the hydroplane races. The hydroplane of allowing the hydroplanes to race. the safety of life on navigable waters race poses several dangers to the public This rule would be enforced from 7 a.m. during the event. including excessive noise, objects to 7 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time each day DATES: This regulation is effective from falling from any accidents, and on May 19 and 20, 2007. For the above 7 a.m. (PDT) to 7 p.m. (PDT) on May 19 hydroplanes racing at high speeds in reasons, the Coast Guard does not and 20, 2007. proximity to other vessels. Accordingly, anticipate any significant economic ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this the Special local regulation is needed to impact. protect watercraft and their occupants preamble as being available in the Small Entities docket are part of docket (CGD13–07– from safety hazards associated with the Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 013) and are available for inspection or event. This Special local regulation will be enforced by representatives of the (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered copying at U. S. Coast Guard Sector whether this rule would have a Portland, 6767 N. Basin Avenue, Captain of the Port, Portland, Oregon. The Captain of the Port may be assisted significant economic impact on a Portland, Oregon 97217 between 7 a.m. substantial number of small entities. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by other federal, state, and local agencies. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises except Federal holidays. small businesses, not-for-profit FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Discussion of Rule organizations that are independently Petty Officer Michelle Duty, c/o Captain This temporary rule will create a owned and operated and are not of the Port, Portland 6767 N. Basin regulated area to assist in minimizing dominant in their fields, and Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97217, (503) the inherent dangers associated with governmental jurisdictions with 240–2590. hydroplane races. These dangers populations of less than 50,000. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: include, but are not limited to, excessive The Coast Guard certifies under 5 noise, race craft traveling at high speed U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have Regulatory Information in close proximity to one another and to a significant economic impact on a We did not publish a notice of spectator craft, and the risk of airborne substantial number of small entities. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this objects from any accidents associated This rule will affect the following regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and with hydroplanes. In the event that entities, some of which may be small 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds hydroplanes require emergency entities: The owners or operators of that good cause exists for not publishing assistance, rescuers must have vessels intending to transit or anchor in an NPRM and for making this rule immediate and unencumbered access to a portion of the Columbia River during effective less than 30 days after the craft. The Coast Guard, through this the time mentioned under Background publication in the Federal Register. action, intends to promote the safety of and Purpose. This Special local Publishing an NPRM would be contrary personnel, vessels, and facilities in the regulation will not have a significant to public interest since immediate area. Due to these concerns, public economic impact on a substantial action is necessary to ensure the safety safety requires these regulations to number of small entities due to its short of vessels and spectators. If normal provide for the safety of life on the duration and small area. The only notice and comment procedures were navigable waters. vessels likely to be impacted will be followed, or if the effective date of this recreational boaters, small passenger Regulatory Evaluation rule were delayed by 30 days, this rule vessel operators, and a ferry that runs would not become effective until after This temporary rule is not a through the regulated area twice a day. the date of the event. For this reason, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under The event is held for the benefit and following normal rulemaking section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, entertainment of the recreational and procedures in this case would be Regulatory Planning and Review, and small passenger vessel operators, and contrary to the public interest. does not require an assessment of the event will pause in order to allow potential costs and benefits under Background and Purpose the ferry to pass through the area at its section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office allotted times. Because the impacts of The Coast Guard is undertaking two of Management and Budget has not this proposal are expected to be so actions in this document. The first is to reviewed it under that Order. It is not minimal, the Coast Guard certifies withdraw the temporary final rule ‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory under 605(b) of the Regulatory previously published on April 23, 2007 policies and procedures of the Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that at 72 FR 20047 because it erroneously Department of Homeland Security this temporary rule will not have a described the race area. The second is (DHS). significant economic impact on a to correct the previous error by We expect the economic impact of substantial number of small entities. establishing a temporary special local this temporary rule to be so minimal If you think that your business, regulation for the ULHRA National that a full Regulatory Evaluation under organization, or governmental Series Hydroplane Race to be held on the regulatory policies and procedures jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity the waters of the Columbia River in the of DHS is unnecessary. This expectation and that this temporary rule would have vicinity of Howard Amon Park, is based on the fact that the regulated a significant economic impact on it, Richland, WA. area established by this rule please submit a comment (see The Coast Guard is establishing a encompasses an area on the Columbia ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it temporary special local regulation to River near Howard Amon Park in qualifies and how and to what degree allow for a safe racing event. This event Richland, WA not frequented by this rule would economically affect it. occurs on the Columbia River in the commercial navigation. The regulation vicinity of Howard Amon Park in is established for the benefit and safety Assistance for Small Entities Richland, WA and is scheduled to start of the recreational boating public and Under section 213(a) of the Small at 7 a.m. (PDT) and last until 7 p.m. the event will pause in order to allow Business Regulatory Enforcement (PDT) on May 19 and 20, 2007. This the ferry to pass through the area at its Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), event may result in a number of allotted times, any negative recreational we offered to assist small entities in recreational vessels congregating near boating impact is offset by the benefits understanding the rule so that they can

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27737

better evaluate its effects on them and Protection of Children and Department of Homeland Security participate in the rulemaking process. We have analyzed this rule under Management Directive 5100.1, which Small businesses may send comments Executive Order 13045, Protection of guide the Coast Guard in complying on the actions of Federal employees Children from Environmental Health with the National Environmental Policy who enforce, or otherwise determine Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321– compliance with, Federal regulations to an economically significant rule and 4370f), and have concluded that there the Small Business and Agriculture does not concern an environmental risk are no factors in this case that would Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman to health or risk to safety that may limit the use of a categorical exclusion and the Regional Small Business disproportionately affect children. under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Indian Tribal Governments Ombudsman evaluates these actions excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph annually and rates each agency’s This rule does not have tribal (34)(h) of Commandant Instruction responsiveness to small business. If you implications under Executive Order M16475.1D, from further environmental wish to comment on actions by 13175, Consultation and Coordination documentation. Special local regulations issued in conjunction with a employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– with Indian tribal governments, because it does not have a substantial direct regatta or marine event permit are 888–888–REG–888–FAIR (1–888–734– effect on one or more Indian tribes, on specifically excluded from further 3247). the relationship between the federal analysis and documentation under that Collection of Information government and Indian tribes, or on the section. distribution of power and Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h) of This rule calls for no new collection responsibilities between the federal the instruction, an ‘‘Environmental of information under the Paperwork government and Indian tribes. Analysis Check List’’ and a categorical Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– exclusion determination are not Energy Effects 3520). required for this rule. We have analyzed this rule under Federalism Executive Order 13211, Actions List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 A rule has implications for federalism Concerning Regulations That Marine Safety, Navigation (water), under Executive Order 13132, Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Reporting and Recordkeeping Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Distribution, or Use. We have requirements, Waterways. effect on State or local governments and determined that it is not a ‘‘significant I For the reasons discussed in the energy action’’ under that order because would either preempt State law or preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ impose a substantial direct cost of CFR Part 100 as follows: under Executive Order 12866 and is not compliance on them. We have analyzed likely to have a significant adverse effect this rule under that order and have PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON on the supply, distribution, or use of determined that this rule does not have NAVIGABLE WATERS energy. The Administrator of the Office implications for federalism under that I of Information and Regulatory Affairs 1. The authority citation for part 100 Order. has not designated it as a significant continues to read as follows: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act energy action. Therefore, it does not Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; Department of require a Statement of Energy Effects Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act under Executive Order 13211. of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires § 100.T13–009 [Withdrawn]. Federal agencies to assess the effects of Technical Standards I 2. Withdraw temporary § 100.T13– their discretionary regulatory actions. In The National Technology Transfer 009. particular, the Act addresses actions and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 I 3. Add temporary § 100.T13–010 to that may result in the expenditure by a U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use read as follows: state, local, or tribal government, in the voluntary consensus standards in their aggregate, or by the private sector of regulatory activities unless the agency § 100.T13–010 ULHRA Hydroplane Races Howard Amon Park, Richland, Washington. $100,000,000 or more in any one year. provides Congress, through the Office of Though this rule will not result in such Management and Budget, with an (a) Regulated Area. The regulated area an expenditure, we do discuss the explanation of why using these is defined as the waters of the Columbia effects of this rule elsewhere in this standards would be inconsistent with River from bank to bank in the vicinity preamble. applicable law or otherwise impractical. of Howard Amon Park on the Columbia Voluntary consensus standards are River in Richland, Washington Taking of Private Property technical standards (e.g., specifications commencing at the Interstate 182 Bridge of materials, performance, design, or and continuing up river Northward 3.0 This rule will not effect taking of miles and terminating at the Columbia private property or otherwise have operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management River Mile 339. taking implications under Executive (b) Special Local Regulations. This Order 12630, Governmental Actions and systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus event will take place from 7 a.m. PDT Interference with Constitutionally to approximately 7 p.m. PDT May 19 to Protected Property Rights. standards bodies. This rule does not use technical 20, 2007, in the described waters of the Civil Justice Reform standards. Therefore, we did not Columbia River in Richland, consider the use of voluntary consensus Washington. This rule meets applicable standards standards. (1) No persons may enter or remain in in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive the regulated area except for Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Environment participants in the event, supporting minimize litigation, eliminate We have analyzed this rule under personnel, vessels registered with the ambiguity, and reduce burden. Commandant Instruction M16475.1D event organizer, and personnel or

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27738 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

vessels authorized by the Coast Guard as being available in the docket, are part statutory language in the National Patrol Commander. of docket USCG–2007–28201 and are Invasive Species Act of 1996 (NISA). We (2) The Coast Guard Patrol available for inspection or copying at discussed this exemption and its Commander is a commissioned, the Docket Management Facility, U.S. reasoning in the preamble of the 2004 warrant, petty officer, or auxiliarist of Department of Transportation, room PL– final rule, stating, ‘‘NISA authorizes the Coast Guard who has been 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., specific exemptions for crude oil designated by Commander, Coast Guard Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 tankers engaged in coastwise trade, and Sector Portland. A Coast Guard p.m., Monday through Friday, except Department of Defense and Coast Guard Auxiliarist, when so appointed by the Federal holidays. You may also find this vessels. Therefore, we do not currently COTP per 14 U.S.C 831, may act as the docket on the Internet at http:// have the authority to include these Patrol Commander. The Patrol dms.dot.gov. vessels in the applicability for the final Commander is empowered to control rule.’’ This statement made clear our FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If movement of vessels in the regulated intention to carry that exemption you have questions on this rule, call Mr. area and adjoining waters during the forward into the mandatory program. Ray Davis, Coast Guard, telephone 202– hours these regulations are in effect. With respect to the exemptions for 372–1461. If you have questions on (3) A succession of sharp, short vessels operating exclusively within one viewing the docket, call Ms. Renee V. signals by whistle, siren, or horn from Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, the Wright, Program Manager, Docket vessels patrolling the area shall serve as language changed to include only Operations, telephone 202–493–0402. a signal to stop. Vessels or persons exemptions for §§ 151.2040 and signaled shall stop and shall comply SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 151.2045, but not § 151.2035. This with the orders of the patrol vessels. Regulatory History exemption is not taken from NISA. The Failure to due so may result in the Coast Guard established it as a expulsion from the area, citation, for We did not publish a notice of discretionary exercise of its regulatory failure to comply or both. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this authority after notice and comment (4) Any spectator vessel may anchor regulation. Under both 5 U.S.C. rulemaking. It would be inappropriate outside the regulated area specified in 553(b)(A) and (b)(B), the Coast Guard to expand the ballast water management paragraph (a) of this section, but may finds this rule is exempt from notice requirements exemption beyond those not block a navigable channel. and comment rulemaking requirements previously granted by means of a because this change involves agency Dated: May 4, 2007. technical amendment not subject to a organization and practices, and good notice and comment rulemaking. These K.S. Cook, cause exists for not publishing an NPRM vessels will continue following the Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting for the revision in the rule because it is requirements in § 151.2035. While this Commander, 13th Coast Guard District. a non-substantive change. This rule includes the requirements in [FR Doc. 07–2460 Filed 5–15–07; 9:58 am] consists only of a technical and § 151.2035(b), which calls for ballast BILLING CODE 4910–15–P conforming amendment. The change water management for vessels operating will have no substantive effect on the outside the U.S. EEZ, vessels operating public; therefore, it is unnecessary to exclusively in a COTP Zone will not DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND publish an NPRM. Under 5 U.S.C. operate outside the U.S. EEZ and, SECURITY 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that, for therefore, compliance with those the same reasons, good cause exists for Coast Guard particular requirements is not making this rule effective less than 30 mandatory. These vessels are reminded, days after publication in the Federal 33 CFR Part 151 however, that they must comply with Register. § 151.2035(a), which calls for ballast [USCG–2007–28201] Background and Purpose water management inside of U.S. RIN 1625–ZA13 waters. This rule, which becomes effective Regulatory Evaluation Vessels Carrying Oil, Noxious Liquid May 17, 2007, makes a technical Substances, Garbage, Municipal or correction to 33 CFR part 151. This rule This rule is not a ‘‘significant Commercial Waste, and Ballast Water; does not create any substantive regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Technical, Organizational and requirements. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Conforming Amendment Discussion of Rule Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. This rule corrects the authority and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that ACTION: Final rule. citation in part 151 and amends 33 CFR Order. The Office of Management and § 151.2010. When the Coast Guard Budget has not reviewed it under that SUMMARY: This rule makes a non- converted the voluntary ballast water Order. We expect the economic impact substantive change to Title 33 of the management guidelines in 33 CFR part of this rule to be so minimal that a full Code of Federal Regulations. The 151, Subpart D, into a mandatory ballast Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. purpose of this rule is to make a water management program (69 FR As this rule involves internal agency conforming amendment and technical 44952, July 28, 2004), we inadvertently practices and procedures and a non- correction to a Coast Guard navigation did not make changes to § 151.2010 to substantive change, it will not impose and navigable water regulation. This reflect several exemptions. Specifically, any costs on the public. rule will have no substantive effect on that crude oil tankers engaged in the regulated public. coastwise trade and Department of Small Entities DATES: This final rule is effective May Defense and Coast Guard vessels were Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 17, 2007. exempted from the mandatory ballast (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered ADDRESSES: Comments and material water management requirements in whether this rule would have a received from the public, as well as § 151.2035, which had previously been significant economic impact on a documents mentioned in this preamble a voluntary program as stated by substantial number of small entities.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27739

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises an economically significant rule and a categorical exclusion under section small businesses, not-for-profit does not create an environmental risk to 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this organizations that are independently health or risk to safety that may rule is categorically excluded, under owned and operated and are not disproportionately affect children. figure 2–1, paragraphs (34)(a) and (b), of dominant in their fields, and the Instruction from further Indian Tribal Governments governmental jurisdictions with environmental documentation because populations of less than 50,000. This This rule does not have tribal this rule involves editorial, procedural, rule does not require a general NPRM implications under Executive Order and internal agency functions. A final and, therefore, is exempt from the 13175, Consultation and Coordination ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ requirements of the Regulatory with Indian Tribal Governments, and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Flexibility Act. Although this rule is because it does not have a substantial Determination’’ are available in the exempt, we have reviewed it for direct effect on one or more Indian docket where indicated under potential economic impact on small tribes, on the relationship between the ADDRESSES. entities and determined that it will not Federal Government and Indian tribes, List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 151 have an impact on small entities. or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Administrative practice and Collection of Information Government and Indian tribes. procedure, Oil pollution penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping This rule calls for no new collection Energy Effects of information under the Paperwork requirements, Water pollution control. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– We have analyzed this rule under I For the reasons discussed in the 3520). Executive Order 13211, Actions preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Concerning Regulations That CFR part 151 as follows: Federalism Significantly Affect Energy Supply, A rule has implications for federalism Distribution, or Use. We have PART 151—VESSELS CARRYING OIL, under Executive Order 13132, determined that it is not a ‘‘significant NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct energy action’’ under that order because GARBAGE, MUNICIPAL OR effect on State or local governments and it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ COMMERCIAL WASTE, AND BALLAST would either preempt State law or under Executive Order 12866 and is not WATER impose a substantial direct cost of likely to have a significant adverse effect I 1. Revise the authority citation for part compliance on them. We have analyzed on the supply, distribution, or use of 151 to read as follows: this rule under that Order and have energy. The Administrator of the Office determined that it does not have of Information and Regulatory Affairs Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321, 1903, 1908; 46 implications for federalism. has not designated it as a significant U.S.C. 6101; Pub. L. 104–227, 110 Stat. 304; energy action. Therefore, it does not E.O. 12777, 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 351; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Department of Homeland Security Delegation require a Statement of Energy Effects No. 0170.1. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act under Executive Order 13211. of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires I 2. Revise § 151.2010 to read as Technical Standards Federal agencies to assess the effects of follows: their discretionary regulatory actions. In The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 § 151.2010 Which vessels are exempt from particular, the Act addresses actions the mandatory requirements? that may result in the expenditure by a U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use State, local, or tribal government, in the voluntary consensus standards in their (a) Two types of vessels are exempt aggregate, or by the private sector of regulatory activities unless the agency from the requirements in §§ 151.2035, $100,000,000 or more in any one year. provides Congress, through the Office of 151.2040, and 151.2045: (1) A crude oil tanker engaged in the Though this rule will not result in such Management and Budget, with an coastwise trade. an expenditure, we do discuss the explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with (2) A Department of Defense or Coast effects of this rule elsewhere in this Guard vessel subject to the requirements preamble. applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are of section 1103 of the Act, or any vessel Taking of Private Property technical standards (e.g., specifications of the Armed Forces, as defined in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 This rule will not effect a taking of of materials, performance, design, or U.S.C. 1322(a)) that is subject to the private property or otherwise have operation; test methods; sampling ‘‘Uniform National Discharge Standards taking implications under Executive procedures; and related management for Vessels of the Armed Forces’’ (33 Order 12630, Governmental Actions and systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus U.S.C. 1322(n)). Interference with Constitutionally (b) One type of vessel is exempt from standards bodies. This rule does not use Protected Property Rights. the requirements in §§ 151.2040 and technical standards. Therefore, we did Civil Justice Reform 151.2045: not consider the use of voluntary (1) A vessel that operates exclusively This rule meets applicable standards consensus standards. within one Captain of the Port (COTP) in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Environment Zone. Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to (2) [Reserved] minimize litigation, eliminate We have analyzed this rule under ambiguity, and reduce burden. Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, Dated: May 11, 2007. which guides the Coast Guard in Stefan G. Venckus, Protection of Children complying with the National Chief, Office of Regulations and We have analyzed this rule under Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Administrative Law, United States Coast Executive Order 13045, Protection of (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and Guard. Children from Environmental Health have concluded that there are no factors [FR Doc. 07–2459 Filed 5–15–07; 9:58 am] Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not in this case that would limit the use of BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27740 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Bridge set forth in 33 CFR 165.811. In substantial number of small entities. SECURITY September 2005, the visual displays The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises atop the SPRR Bridge were destroyed by small businesses, not-for-profit Coast Guard Hurricane Rita and have not been organizations that are independently restored. Prior to their destruction, the owned and operated and are not 33 CFR Part 165 visual displays consisted of two dominant in their fields, and [CGD08–06–023] vertically arranged red balls by day and governmental jurisdictions with two vertically arranged flashing white populations of less than 50,000. RIN 1625–AA11 lights by night. The displays were This amended rule is neutral to all maintained by the bridge owner and Regulated Navigation Area; business entities as it merely changes were activated upon direction by Coast the means of notification by which Atchafalaya River, Berwick Bay, Guard Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) Berwick Bay, LA towing vessel operators within the Berwick Bay during high water periods regulated navigation area are provided AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of as specified in 33 CFR 165.811. Prior to notice that the provisions of 33 CFR Homeland Security (DHS). the current implementation of VTS 165.811 are or are anticipated to be in Berwick Bay, the use of visual displays ACTION: Final rule. effect. Henceforth, all operators will be on the SPRR Bridge served as the notified by VTS Berwick Bay rather than SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending primary means of advising towing by visual displays. Therefore, the Coast its regulations pertaining to the vessels that the provisions of 33 CFR Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) Atchafalaya River, Berwick Bay, 165.811 were in effect, or were that this final rule will not have a Berwick Bay, LA, navigation area. Coast anticipated to be placed into effect, in significant economic impact on a Guard Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) order to reduce the risk of mishaps substantial number of small entities. Berwick Bay determined that the involving towing vessels and the local Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) Bridge bridges crossing the waterway. The Collection of Information visual displays were no longer destruction of the displays by Hurricane This rule calls for no new collection necessary due to updated VTS Rita and the subsequent request by of information under the Paperwork technologies and procedures that BNSF Railway Company for their Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– actively inform towing vessels that the discontinuance prompted discussion 3520). rules of 33 CFR 165.811 are in effect at within the Coast Guard as to the the time of entry into the VTS. This necessity of the visual displays. Coast Federalism action relieves both the owner of the Guard VTS Berwick Bay concluded that A rule has implications for federalism SPRR Bridge and the Coast Guard from the visual displays are antiquated and under Executive Order 13132, maintaining antiquated visual displays no longer serve as a primary means to Federalism, if it has a substantial direct and related equipment. advise towing vessels that the effect on State or local governments and DATES: This final rule is effective June requirements of 33 CFR 165.811 are in would either preempt State law or 18, 2007. effect. VTS Berwick Bay now directly impose a substantial direct cost of advises towing vessels as to which ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this compliance on them. We have analyzed navigation rules are in effect at the time preamble as being available in the this rule under that Order and have of the vessel entry into the VTS docket, are part of docket [CGD08–06– determined that it does not have regulated navigation area. 023] and are available for inspection or implications for federalism. copying at U.S. Coast Guard District Regulatory Evaluation Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Eight, 500 Poydras Street, New Orleans, This final rule is not a ‘‘significant Louisiana, 70130–3396 between 8 a.m. regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires except Federal holidays. Planning and Review, and does not Federal agencies to assess the effects of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: require an assessment of potential costs their discretionary regulatory actions. In Chief Warrant Officer Edgardo Estrada, and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that particular, the Act addresses actions Eighth Coast Guard District’s Waterways Order. The Office of Management and that may result in the expenditure by a Branch, at telephone 504–671–2326. Budget has not reviewed it under that State, local, or tribal government, in the Please cite [CGD08–06–023]. Order. aggregate, or by the private sector of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We expect the economic impact of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. this proposed rule to be so minimal that Though this rule will not result in such Regulatory History a full Regulatory Evaluation is an expenditure, we do discuss the On December 27, 2006, we published unnecessary. effects of this rule elsewhere in this a notice of proposed rulemaking This amended rule eliminates existing preamble. (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Regulated Navigation visual display requirements from a list Taking of Private Property Area; Atchafalaya River, Berwick Bay, of notice requirements under 33 CFR Berwick Bay, LA’’ in the Federal 165.811(f) which have been superseded This rule will not effect a taking of Register (71 FR 77657). We received no by improved procedures for notification. private property or otherwise have letters commenting on the proposed This amended rule neither imposes any taking implications under Executive rule. No public meeting was requested additional costs to the public nor Order 12630, Governmental Actions and and none was held. eliminates significant benefits. Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Background and Purpose Small Entities Civil Justice Reform BNSF Railway Company, the owner of Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered This rule meets applicable standards Bridge, requested a change to the visual whether this rule would have a in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive display requirements for the SPRR significant economic impact on a Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27741

minimize litigation, eliminate Environment SUMMARY: Modified Base (1% annual- ambiguity, and reduce burden. We have analyzed this amended rule chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) are finalized for the communities listed Protection of Children under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, and Department of below. These modified BFEs will be We have analyzed this rule under Homeland Security Management used to calculate flood insurance Executive Order 13045, Protection of Directive 5100.1, which guides the premium rates for new buildings and Children from Environmental Health Coast Guard in complying with the their contents. Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not National Environmental Policy Act of DATES: The effective dates for these an economically significant rule and 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), modified BFEs are indicated on the does not create an environmental risk to and have concluded that there are no following table and revise the Flood health or risk to safety that may factors in this case that would limit the Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in effect disproportionately affect children. use of a categorical exclusion under for the listed communities prior to this Indian Tribal Governments section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. date. Therefore, we believe that this rule ADDRESSES: The modified BFEs for each This rule does not have tribal should be categorically excluded, under community are available for inspection implications under Executive Order figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the at the office of the Chief Executive 13175, Consultation and Coordination Instruction, from further environmental Officer of each community. The with Indian Tribal Governments, documentation. Under figure 2–1, respective addresses are listed in the because it does not have a substantial paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an table below. direct effect on one or more Indian ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: tribes, on the relationship between the not required for this rule. William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Federal Government and Indian tribes, Management Section, Mitigation List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 or on the distribution of power and Division, Federal Emergency responsibilities between the Federal Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Government and Indian tribes. (water), Reporting and recordkeeping Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3151. Energy Effects requirements, Security measures, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Waterways. Federal Emergency Management Agency We have analyzed this rule under I For the reasons discussed in the (FEMA) makes the final determinations Executive Order 13211, Actions preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 listed below of the modified BFEs for Concerning Regulations That CFR part 165 as follows: each community listed. These modified Significantly Affect Energy Supply, BFEs have been published in Distribution, or Use. We have PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION newspapers of local circulation and determined that it is not a ‘‘significant AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS ninety (90) days have elapsed since that energy action’’ under that order because publication. The Mitigation Division it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ I 1. The authority citation for part 165 Director of FEMA resolved any appeals under Executive Order 12866 and is not continues to read as follows: resulting from this notification. likely to have a significant adverse effect Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. The modified BFEs are not listed for on the supply, distribution, or use of Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. each community in this notice. energy. The Administrator of the Office However, this final rule includes the of Information and Regulatory Affairs 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. address of the Chief Executive Officer of has not designated it as a significant the community where the modified energy action. Therefore, it does not § 165.811 [Amended] BFEs determinations are available for require a Statement of Energy Effects I inspection. under Executive Order 13211. 2. In § 165.811, remove paragraph (f)(4) and the note located at the end of The modified BFEs are made pursuant Technical Standards the section. to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, The National Technology Transfer Dated: May 2, 2007. and are in accordance with the National and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 J.R. Whitehead, Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. voluntary consensus standards in their Eighth Coast Guard District. For rating purposes, the currently regulatory activities unless the agency [FR Doc. E7–9497 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] effective community number is shown provides Congress, through the Office of BILLING CODE 4910–15–P and must be used for all new policies Management and Budget, with an and renewals. explanation of why using these The modified BFEs are the basis for standards would be inconsistent with DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the floodplain management measures applicable law or otherwise impractical. SECURITY that the community is required to either Voluntary consensus standards are adopt or to show evidence of being technical standards (e.g., specifications Federal Emergency Management already in effect in order to qualify or of materials, performance, design, or Agency to remain qualified for participation in operation; test methods; sampling the National Flood Insurance Program procedures; and related management 44 CFR Part 65 (NFIP). systems practices) that are developed or These modified BFEs, together with adopted by voluntary consensus Changes in Flood Elevation the floodplain management criteria standards bodies. Determinations required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the This rule does not use technical AGENCY: Federal Emergency minimum that are required. They standards. Therefore, we did not Management Agency, DHS. should not be construed to mean that consider the use of voluntary consensus the community must change any ACTION: Final rule. standards. existing ordinances that are more

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27742 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

stringent in their floodplain environmental impact assessment has List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 management requirements. The not been prepared. Flood insurance, Floodplains, community may at any time enact Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood Reporting and recordkeeping stricter requirements of its own, or elevation determinations are not within requirements. pursuant to policies established by other the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Federal, State, or regional entities. Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory I Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is flexibility analysis is not required. amended to read as follows: These modified BFEs are used to meet Regulatory Classification. This final the floodplain management rule is not a significant regulatory action PART 65—[AMENDED] requirements of the NFIP and are also under the criteria of section 3(f) of used to calculate the appropriate flood Executive Order 12866 of September 30, I 1. The authority citation for part 65 insurance premium rates for new 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, continues to read as follows: buildings built after these elevations are 58 FR 51735. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; made final, and for the contents in these Executive Order 13132, Federalism. Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, buildings. The changes in BFEs are in This final rule involves no policies that 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. have federalism implications under 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. Executive Order 13132, Federalism. National Environmental Policy Act. Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice § 65.4 [Amended] This final rule is categorically excluded Reform. This final rule meets the I 2. The tables published under the from the requirements of 44 CFR part applicable standards of Executive Order authority of § 65.4 are amended as 10, Environmental Consideration. An 12988. follows:

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Alabama: Mobile Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- Mr. John Pafenbach, County Adminis- December 28, 2006 ...... 015008 (FEMA Docket areas of Mobile tember 28, 2006; Press-Reg- trator, Mobile County, 205 Government No.: B–7474). County (05–04– ister. Street, Mobile, AL 36644. 2236P). Arizona: Maricopa Unincorporated September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Don Stapley, Chairman, December 21, 2006 ...... 040037 (FEMA Dock- areas of Maricopa tember 21, 2006; Arizona Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, et No.: B– County (06–09– Business Gazette. Administration Building, 301 West Jef- 7474). B067P). ferson Street, Tenth Floor, Phoenix, AZ 85003. Pima (FEMA Town of Marana November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Ed Honea, Mayor, Town October 26, 2006 ...... 040118 Docket No.: (06–09–BD84P). 16, 2006; The Daily Terri- of Marana, Marana Municipal Complex, B–7712). torial. 11555 West Civic Center Drive, Marana, AZ 85653. Benton (FEMA City of Rogers (06– December 20, 2006; December The Honorable Steve Womack, Mayor, March 28, 2007 ...... 050013 Docket No.: 06–BA42P). 27, 2006; Arkansas Home- City of Rogers, 301 West Chestnut, B–7712). town Gazette. Rogers, AR 72756. Crawford (FEMA City of Van Buren November 29, 2006; December The Honorable John Riggs, Mayor, City of March 7, 2007 ...... 050053 Docket No.: (06–06–B796P). 6, 2006; Press Argus-Courier. Van Buren, 1003 Broadway, Van B–7712). Buren, AR 72956. Crawford (FEMA Unincorporated November 29, 2006; December The Honorable Jerry H. Williams, March 7, 2007 ...... 050428 Docket No.: areas of Crawford 6, 2006; Press Argus-Courier. Crawford County Judge, Crawford B–7712). County (06–06– County Courthouse, 300 Main Street, B796P). Van Buren, AR 72956. Pulaski (FEMA City of Sherwood November 16, 2006; November The Honorable Bill Harmon, Mayor, City February 22, 2007 ...... 050235 Docket No.: (06–06–B539P). 23, 2006; The Sherwood of Sherwood, 2199 East Kiehl Avenue, B–7712). Voice. Sherwood, AR 72120. Saline (FEMA City of Benton (06– November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Rick Holland, Mayor, City November 27, 2006 ...... 050192 Docket No.: 06–BC89P). 7, 2006; The Benton Courier. of Benton, Benton Municipal Complex, B–7712). 114 South East Street, Benton, AR 72015. Saline (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Lanny Fite, County Judge, November 27, 2006 ...... 050191 Docket No.: areas of Saline 7, 2006; The Benton Courier. Saline County, 200 North Main Street, B–7712). County (06–06– Room 117, Benton, AR 72015. BC89P). Washington City of Fayetteville November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Dan Coody, Mayor, City of November 20, 2006 ...... 050216 (FEMA Dock- 06–06–BA12P. 16, 2006; Arkansas Demo- Fayetteville, 113 West Mountain, Fay- et No.: B– crat Gazette. etteville, AR 72701. 7703). California: Contra Costa City of Oakley (06– November 16, 2006; November The Honorable Brad Nix, Mayor, City of February 22, 2007 ...... 060766 (FEMA Dock- 09–BA94P). 23, 2006; Contra Costa Oakley, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA et No.: B– Times. 94561. 7703). Merced (FEMA City of Merced (06– October 18, 2006; October 25, The Honorable Ellie Wooton, Mayor, City January 25, 2007 ...... 060191 Docket No.: 09–B107P). 2006; Chowchilla News. of Merced, 678 West 18th Street, B–7474). Merced, CA 95340. Merced (FEMA Unincorporated October 18, 2006; October 25, The Honorable Mike Nelson, Chairman, January 25, 2007 ...... 060188 Docket No.: areas of Merced 2006; Chowchilla News. Merced County, Board of Commis- B–7474). County (06–09– sioners, 2222 M Street, Second Floor, B107P). Merced, CA 95340. Nevada (FEMA Town of Truckee October 26, 2006; November 2, The Honorable Beth Ingalls, Mayor, Town September 29, 2006 ...... 060762 Docket No.: (06–09–B008P). 2006; Sierra Sun. of Truckee, 10183 Truckee Airport B–7474). Road, Truckee, CA 96161.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27743

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Sacramento City of Citrus October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Bret Daniels, Mayor, City September 22, 2006 ...... 060765 (FEMA Dock- Heights (06–09– 2006; The Daily Recorder. of Citrus Heights, 6237 Fountain et No.: B– B062P). Square Drive, Citrus Heights, CA 7474). 95621. Sacramento City of Elk Grove September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Richard Soares, Mayor, August 25, 2006 ...... 060767 (FEMA Dock- (06–04–B040P). tember 21, 2006; The Daily City of Elk Grove, 9400 Laguna Palms et No.: B– Recorder. Way, Elk Grove, CA 95758. 7474). Sacramento Unincorporated November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Roberta Macglashan, December 1, 2006 ...... 060262 (FEMA Dock- areas of Sac- 16, 2006; The Daily Terri- Chair, Sacramento County, Board of et No.: B– ramento County torial. Supervisors, 700 H Street, Suite 2450, 7703). (06–09–BD69P). Sacramento, CA 95814. San Diego City of La Mesa (05– September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Art Madrid, Mayor, City of September 5, 2006 ...... 060292 (FEMA Dock- 09–A362P). tember 28, 2006; San Diego La Mesa, 8130 Allison Avenue, La et No.: B– Transcript. Mesa, CA 92041. 7474). San Diego City of San Diego September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Jerry Sanders, Mayor, September 5, 2006 ...... 060295 (FEMA Dock- (05–09–A362P). tember 28, 2006; San Diego City of San Diego, 202 C Street, 11th et No.: B– Transcript. Floor, San Diego, CA 92101. 7474). San Diego Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Bill Horn, Chairman, San November 29, 2006 ...... 060284 (FEMA Dock- areas of San 28, 2006; San Diego Tran- Diego County, Board of Supervisors, et No.: B– Diego County (06– script. 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335, San 7712). 09–BF75P). Diego, CA 92101. San Diego Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Bill Horn, Chairman, San February 16, 2007 ...... 060284 (FEMA Dock- areas of San 2006; The San Diego Tran- Diego County, Board of Supervisors, et No.: B– Diego County (07– script. 1600 Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA 7474). 09–0162X). 92123. San Luis Obispo City of San Luis October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable David F. Romero, Mayor, January 25, 2007 ...... 060310 (FEMA Dock- Obispo (06–09– 2006; The Tribune. City of San Luis Obispo, City Hall, 990 et No.: B– BA38P). Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 7474). 93401. Santa Barbara Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Salud Carbajal, Chairman, December 28, 2006 ...... 060331 (FEMA Dock- areas of Santa tember 28, 2006; Santa Bar- Santa Barbara County Board of Super- et No.: B– Barbara County bara News Press. visors, 105 East Anapamu Street, 7474). (05–09–1158P). Santa Barbara, CA 93101. Shasta (FEMA City of Redding (06– September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Ken Murray, Mayor, City August 31, 2006 ...... 060360 Docket No.: 09–B348P). tember 28, 2006; Redding of Redding, 777 Cypress Avenue, P.O. B–7474). Record Searchlight. Box 496071, Redding, CA 96001. Colorado: Arapahoe City of Cherry Hills October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Mike Wozniak, Mayor, September 19, 2006 ...... 080013 (FEMA Dock- Village (06–08– 2006; The Littleton Inde- City of Cherry Hills Village, 2450 East et No.: B– B375P). pendent. Quincy Avenue, Cherry Hills Village, 7474). CO 80113. Boulder (FEMA Town of Lyons (06– November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Tim Kyer, Mayor, Town of February 28, 2007 ...... 080029 Docket No.: 08–B252P). 29, 2006; The Daily Camera. Lyons, P.O. Box 49, Lyons, CO 80540. B–7703). Boulder (FEMA Unincorporated November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Ben Pearlman, Chairman, February 28, 2007 ...... 080023 Docket No.: areas of Boulder 29, 2006; The Daily Camera. Boulder County Board of Commis- B–7703). County (06–08– sioners, P.O. Box 471, Boulder, CO B252P). 80306. Boulder (FEMA City of Boulder (06– December 20, 2006; December The Honorable Mark Ruzzin, Mayor, City March 28, 2007 ...... 080024 Docket No.: 08–B289P). 27, 2006; The Daily Camera. of Boulder, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO B–7712). 80306. Boulder (FEMA Unincorporated December 20, 2006; December The Honorable Ben Pearlman, Chairman, March 28, 2007 ...... 080023 Docket No.: areas of Boulder 27, 2006; The Daily Camera. Boulder County Board of Commis- B–7712). County (06–08– sioners, Boulder County Courthouse, B289P). P.O. Box 471, Boulder, CO 80306. Broomfield City and County of September 27, 2006; October The Honorable Karen Stuart, Mayor, City September 11, 2006 ...... 085073 (FEMA Dock- Broomfield (06– 4, 2006; The Broomfield En- and County of Broomfield, One et No.: B– 08–B417P). terprise. DesCombes Drive, Broomfield, CO 7474). 80020. Douglas (FEMA City of Lone Tree October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Jack O’Boyle, Mayor, City January 18, 2007 ...... 080319 Docket No.: (06–08–B443P). 2006; The Douglas County of Lone Tree, 9777 South Yosemite B–7474). News-Press. Street, Suite 100, Lone Tree, CO 80124. Douglas (FEMA Unincorporated October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Walter M. Maxwell, Chair- January 18, 2007 ...... 080049 Docket No.: areas of Douglas 2006; The Douglas County man, Douglas County Board of Com- B–7474). County (06–08– News-Press. missioners, 100 Third Street, Castle B443P). Rock, CO 80104. El Paso (FEMA Unincorporated November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Jim Bensberg, Chairman, October 30, 2006 ...... 080059 Docket No.: areas of El Paso 29, 2006; El Paso County El Paso County Board of Commis- B–7712). County (05–08– Advertiser and News. sioners, 27 East Vermijo Avenue, Colo- A578P). rado Springs, CO 80903–2208. El Paso (FEMA Unincorporated November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Sallie Clark, Chair, El December 13, 2006 ...... 080059 Docket No.: areas of El Paso 29, 2006; El Paso County Paso County Board of Commissioners, B–7712). County (06–08– Advertiser and News. 27 East Vermijo Avenue, Colorado B137P). Springs, CO 80903. Jefferson City of Arvada (06– October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Ken Fellman, Mayor, City January 18, 2007 ...... 085072 (FEMA Dock- 08–B403P). 2006; The Golden Transcript. of Arvada, 8101 Ralston Road, Arvada, et No.: B– CO 80002. 7474).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27744 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Jefferson Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable J. Kevin McCasky, Chair- December 28, 2006 ...... 080087 (FEMA Dock- areas of Jefferson tember 28, 2006; The Gold- man, Jefferson County Board of Com- et No.: B– County (06–08– en Transcript. missioners, 100 Jefferson County Park- 7474). B422P). way, Golden, CO 80419–5550. Connecticut: Hartford (FEMA City of Hartford (07– December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Eddie A. Perez, Mayor, December 6, 2006 ...... 095080 Docket No.: 01–0111P). 28, 2006; The Hartford Cou- City of Hartford, 550 Main Street, Hart- B–7712). rant. ford, CT 06103. Delaware: New Castle Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Chris Coons, New Castle March 29, 2007 ...... 105085 (FEMA Dock- areas of New Cas- 28, 2006; The News Journal. County Executive, 87 Reads Way, New et No.: B– tle County (06– Castle, DE 19720. 7712). 03–B23P). New Castle Unincorporated December 1, 2006; December The Honorable Paul G. Clark, President, March 9, 2007 ...... 105085 (FEMA Dock- areas of New Cas- 8, 2006; Newark Post. New Castle County Council, City/Coun- et No.: B– tle County (06– ty Building, 800 North French Street, 7712). 03–B714P). Eighth Floor, Wilmington, DE 19801. Sussex (FEMA Unincorporated November 29, 2006; December Mr. Robert L. Stickels, County Adminis- March 7, 2007 ...... 100029 Docket No.: areas of Sussex 6, 2006; Delaware Wave. trator, Sussex County, No. 2 The Cir- B–7703). County (05–03– cle, Georgetown, DE 19947. A587P). Florida: Clay (FEMA Unincorporated November 9, 2006; November The Honorable William Wilkes, Circuit October 16, 2006 ...... 120064 Docket No.: areas of Clay 16, 2006; Clay Today. Court Judge, Clay County Courthouse, B–7712). County (06–04– 825 North Orange Avenue, Green Cove BQ02P). Springs, FL 32043. Duval (FEMA City of Jacksonville December 11, 2006; December The Honorable Mr. John Peyton, Mayor, March 19, 2007 ...... 120077 Docket No.: (05–04–A005P). 18, 2006; Jacksonville Daily City of Jacksonville, City Hall at St. B–7712). Record. James, Fourth Floor, 117 West Duval Street, Jacksonville, FL 32202. Flagler (FEMA Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable James Darby, Chairman, November 30, 2006 ...... 120085 Docket No.: areas of Flagler 28, 2006; The News-Journal. Board of Commissioners, Flagler Coun- B–7712). County (06–04– ty, P.O. Box 1132, Flagler Beach, FL BW09P). 32136. Leon (FEMA City of Tallahassee September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable John Marks, Mayor, City December 28, 2006 ...... 120144 Docket No.: (05–04–1773P). tember 28, 2006; Tallahas- of Tallahassee, 300 South Adams B–7474). see Democrat. Street, Tallahassee, FL 32301. Leon (FEMA Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Parwez Alam, Adminis- March 29, 2007 ...... 120143 Docket No.: areas of Leon 28, 2006; Tallahassee Dem- trator, Leon County, 301 South Monroe B–7712). County (06–04– ocrat. Street, Fifth floor, Tallahassee, FL B039P). 32301. Marion (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Jim Payton, Chairman, October 30, 2006 ...... 120160 Docket No.: areas of Marion 7, 2007; Star-Banner. Marion County, Board of Commis- B–7712). County (06–04– sioners, 601 Southeast 25th Avenue, BH17P). Ocala, FL 34471. Miami-Dade City of Miami (06– November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor, October 30, 2006 ...... 120650 (FEMA Dock- 04–C312P). 7, 2006; Miami New Times. City of Miami, 3500 Pan American et No.: B– Drive, Miami, FL 33133. 7712). Monroe (FEMA Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Dixie Spehar, Mayor, August 29, 2006 ...... 125129 Docket No.: areas of Monroe tember 28, 2006; Key West Monroe County, 2798 Overseas High- B–7474). County (06–04– Citizen. way, Suite 300, Marathon, FL 33050. BI38P. Pinellas (FEMA City of Clearwater September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Frank Hibbard, Mayor, December 21, 2006 ...... 125096 Docket No.: (06–04–B129X). tember 21, 2006; St. Peters- City of Clearwater, P.O. Box 4748, B–7474). burg Times. Clearwater, FL 33758. Pinellas (FEMA City of St. Peters- December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Rick Baker, 175 Fifth March 29, 2007 ...... 125148 Docket No.: burg (06–04– 28, 2006; St. Petersburg Street North, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. B–7712). BS96P). Times. Polk (FEMA Unincorporated November 2, 2006; November Mr. Michael Herr, County Manager, Polk August 31, 2006 ...... 120261 Docket No.: areas of Polk 9, 2006; The Polk County County, P.O. Box 9005, Drawer BC01, B–7474). County (06–04– Democrat. Bartow, FL 33831–9005. B694P). Polk (FEMA Unincorporated November 16, 2006; November Mr. Michael Herr, County Manager, Polk February 22, 2007 ...... 120261 Docket No.: areas of Polk 23, 2006; The Polk County County, P.O. Box 9005, Drawer BC01, B–7712). County (06–04– Democrat. Bartow, FL 33831. BO60P). Polk (FEMA City of Winter Haven November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Mike Easterling, Mayor, October 19, 2006 ...... 120271 Docket No.: (07–04–0025X). 16 2006; The Polk County City of Winter Haven, 451 Third Street B–7703). Democrat. Northwest, Winter Haven, FL 33881. Sarasota (FEMA City of Sarasota September 26, 2006; October The Honorable Fred Atkins, Mayor, City August 28, 2006 ...... 125150 Docket No.: (06–04–BH18P). 3, 2006; The Sarasota Her- of Sarasota, 1565 First Street, Sara- (B–7474). ald-Tribune. sota, FL 344236. Seminole Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Carlton D. Henley, Chair- October 30, 2006 ...... 120289 (FEMA Dock- areas of Seminole 2006; Orlando Sentinel. man, Seminole County, Board of Com- et No.: B– County (06–04– missioners, Seminole County Services, 7474). BJ43P). Building, 1101 East First Street, San- ford, FL 32771. St. Johns Unincorporated November 9, 2006; November The Honorable James E. Bryant, Chair- February 15, 2007 ...... 125147 (FEMA Dock- areas of St. Johns 16, 2006; The St. Augustine man, St. Johns County, Board of Coun- et No.: B– County (06–04– Record. ty Commissioners, 4020 Lewis Speed- 7712). BT86P). way, St. Augustine, FL 32084.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27745

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Columbia Unincorporated December 6, 2006; December The Honorable Ron C. Cross, Chairman, February 28, 2007 ...... 130059 (FEMA Dock- areas of Columbia 13, 2006; Columbia County Columbia County Commissioners, 908 et No.: B– County (06–04– News-Times. Nerium Trail, Evans, GA 30809. 7712). C011P). Gwinnett (FEMA Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Charles E. Bannister, March 29, 2007 ...... 130322 Docket No.: areas of Gwinnett 28, 2006; Gwinnett Daily Chairman, Gwinnett County Board of B–7712). County (05–04– Post. Commissioners, 75 Langley Drive, 2732P). Lawrenceville, GA 30045. Gwinnett (FEMA Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Charles Bannister, Chair- November 30, 2006 ...... 130322 Docket No.: areas of Gwinnett 28, 2006; Gwinnett Daily man, Board of Commissioners, B–7712). County (06–04– Post. Gwinnett County, 75 Langley Drive, C663P). Lawrenceville, GA 30045. Peach (FEMA Unincorporated October 25, 2006; November 1, The Honorable James Khoury, Chairman, January 25, 2007 ...... 130373 Docket No.: areas of Peach 2006; The Leader Tribune. Peach County, Board of Commis- B–7703). County (06–04– sioners, 205 West Church Street, Suite BM78P). 204, Fort Valley, GA 31030. Hawaii: Hawaii (FEMA Unincorporated September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Harry Kim, Mayor, County December 21, 2006 ...... 155166 Docket No.: areas of Hawaii tember 21, 2006; Hawaii of Hawaii, 25 Aupuni Street, Room 215, B–7474). County (06–09– Tribune-Herald. Hilo, HI 96720. B247P). Hawaii (FEMA Unincorporated October 5, 2006; October 12, The Honorable Harry Kim, Mayor, County January 11, 2007 ...... 155166 Docket No.: areas of Hawaii 2006; Hawaii Tribune-Herald. of Hawaii, 25 Aupuni Street, Room 215, B–7474). County (06–09– Hilo, HI 96720. B685P). Illinois: De Kalb (FEMA Village of Kirkland October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Michael A Becker, Village January 25, 2006 ...... 170186 Docket No.: (06–05–BF46P). 2006; Daily Chronicle. President, Village of Kirkland, 511 West B–7474). Main Street, Kirkland, IL 60146. De Kalb (FEMA Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, Mr. Raymond R. Bockman, County Ad- January 25, 2007 ...... 170808 Docket No.: areas of De Kalb 2006; Daily Chronicle. ministrator, De Kalb County, 200 North B–7474). County (06–05– Main Street, Sycamore, IL 60178. BF46P). DuPage (FEMA City of Warrenville December 21, 2006; December The Honorable David L. Brummel, Mayor, November 22, 2006 ...... 170218 Docket No.: (06–05–B753P). 28, 2006; Daily Herald. City of Warrenville, City Hall 28W701, B–7712). Stafford Place, Warrenville, IL 60555. Kane (FEMA Village of Hampshire September 21, 2006; Sep- Mr. Jeffrey Magnussen, Village President, December 28, 2006 ...... 170327 Docket No.: (06–05–BC30P). tember 28, 2006; Elburn Her- Village of Hampshire, Village Hall 234 B–7474). ald. South State St, P.O. Box 457, Hamp- shire, IL 60140. Kane (FEMA Village of Hampshire October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Jeffrey Magnussen, Vil- January 18, 2007 ...... 170327 Docket No.: (06–05–BT15P). 2006; Elburn Herald. lage President, Village of Hampshire, B–7474). P.O. Box 457, Hampshire, IL 60140. Kane (FEMA Unincorporated October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Karen McConnaughay, January 18, 2007 ...... 170896 Docket No.: areas of Kane 2006; Elburn Herald. Chairman, Kane County Board, 719 B–7474). County (06–05– South Batavia Avenue, Building A, Ge- BT15P). neva, IL 60134. Ogle (FEMA City of Rochelle (06– November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Chaad Olson, Mayor, City February 15, 2007 ...... 170352 Docket No.: 05–B086P). 16, 2006; The Rochelle New- of Rochelle, 420 North Sixth Street, Ro- B–7712). Leader. chelle, IL 61068. St. Clair (FEMA City of Belleville (06– November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Mark Eckert, Mayor, City March 8, 2007 ...... 170618 Docket No.: 05–B005P). 7, 2006; News-Democrat. Of Belleville, 101 South Illinois Street, B–7712). Belleville, IL 62220. St. Clair (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December Mr. Mark Kern, Chairman, St. Clair Coun- March 8, 2007 ...... 170616 Docket No.: areas of St. Clair 7, 2006; News-Democrat. ty Board, St. Clair County Building, 10 B–7712). County (06–05– Public Square, Belleville, IL 62220. B005P). Will (FEMA Village of Frankfort September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Raymond Rossi, Mayor, August 29, 2006 ...... 170701 Docket No.: (05–05–A220P). tember 21, 2006; Daily Village of Frankfort, 432 West Ne- B–7474). Southtown. braska Street, Frankfort, IL 60423. Will (FEMA Village of Frankfort November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Jim Holland, Mayor, Vil- October 31, 2006 ...... 170701 Docket No.: (06–05–BT88P). 7, 2006; Daily Southtown. lage of Frankfort, 432 West Nebraska B–7712). Street, Frankfort, IL 60423. Will (FEMA City of Naperville October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable A. George Pradel, Mayor, January 18, 2007 ...... 170213 Docket No.: (06–05–B639P). 2006; The Naperville Sun. City of Naperville, 400 South Eagle B–7474). Street, Naperville, IL 60566. Will (FEMA Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Lawrence M. Walsh, Will January 18, 2007 ...... 170695 Docket No.: areas of Will 2006; The Naperville Sun. County Executive, 302 North Chicago B–7474). County (06–05– Street, Joliet, IL 60432. B639P). Indiana: Hancock (FEMA City of Greenfield December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Rodney Fleming, Mayor, January 2, 2007 ...... 180084 Docket No.: (06–05–B085P). 28, 2006; Greenfield Daily City of Greenfield, Keith J. McClanon, B–7712). Reporter. Government Center, 10 South State Street, Greenfield, IN 46140. Hancock (FEMA Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December Mr. Brian Kleiman, President, Board of March 29, 2007 ...... 180419 Docket No.: areas of Hancock 28, 2006; Greenfield Daily Commissioners, Hancock County, 111 B–7712). County (06–05– Reporter. South American Legion Place, Green- B085P). field, IN 46130.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:07 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27746 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Marion (FEMA City of Indianapolis October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Bart Peterson, Mayor, City October 25, 2006 ...... 180159 Docket No.: (06–05–B545P). 2006; Indianapolis Star. of Indianapolis, 2501 City-County, B–7474). Building, 200 East Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204. Marion (FEMA Town of Speedway October 19, 2006; October 26, Mr. Bruce Sherman, Town Manager, October 25, 2006 ...... 180162 Docket No.: (06–05–B545P). 2006; Indianapolis Star. Town of Speedway, 1450 North B–7474). Lynhurst Drive, Speedway, IN 46224. Kansas: Douglas (FEMA City of Lawrence September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Mike Amyx, Mayor, City of August 30, 2006 ...... 200090 Docket No.: (06–07–B014P). tember 28, 2006; Lawrence Lawrence, P.O. Box 708, Lawrence, KS B–7474). Daily Journal-World. 66044. Johnson (FEMA City of Olathe (06– December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Michael Copeland, Mayor, November 22, 2006 ...... 200173 Docket No.: 07–B170P). 28, 2006; The Johnson City of Olathe, P.O. Box 768, Olathe, B–7712). County Sun. KS 66051–0768. Johnson (FEMA City of Overland December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Carl Gerlach, Mayor, City November 22, 2006 ...... 200174 Docket No.: Park (06–07– 28, 2006; The Johnson of Overland Park, 8500 Santa Fe Drive, B–7712). B170P). County Sun. Olathe, KS 66061. Sedgwick City of Wichita (06– December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Carlos Mayans, Mayor, February 5, 2007 ...... 200238 (FEMA Dock- 07–BB40P). 28, 2006; The Wichita Eagle. City of Wichita, City Hall, First Floor, et No.: B– 455 North Main Street, Wichita, KS 7712). 67202. Maine: Cumberland Town of Windham November 9, 2006; November The Honorable John MacKinnon, Chair- October 30, 2006 ...... 230189 (FEMA Dock- (06–01–B562P). 16, 2006; Portland Press man, Windham Town Council, 8 School et No.: B– Herald. Road, Windham, ME 04062. 7712). Cumberland Town of Windham October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable John MacKinnon, Chair- January 25, 2007 ...... 230189 (FEMA Dock- (06–01–B717P). 2006; Portland Press Herald. man, Windham Town Council, 8 School et No.: B– Road, Windham, ME 04062. 7474). Oxford (FEMA Town of Bethel (06– November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Stanley R. Howe, Chair- October 30, 2006 ...... 230088 Docket No.: 01–B021P). 7, 2006; The Bethel Citizen. man, Town of Bethel, P.O. Box 1660, B–7712). Bethel, ME 04217. Maryland: Allegany (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable James J. Stakem, Presi- March 8, 2007 ...... 240001 Docket No.: areas of Allegany 7, 2006; The Cumberland dent, Allegany County, Board of Com- B–7712). County (06–03– Times-News. missioners, Allegany County Office B234P). Complex, 701 Kelly Road, Fourth Floor, Cumberland, MD 21502–2803. Carroll (FEMA Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Julia W. Gouge, Presi- January 25, 2007 ...... 240015 Docket No.: areas of Carroll 2006; Carroll County Times. dent, Carroll County, Board of Commis- B–7712). County (05–03– sioners, Carroll County Office Building, A533P). 225 North Center Street, Westminster, MD 21157. Frederick Unincorporated November 9, 2006; November The Honorable John L. Thompson, Jr., February 15, 2007 ...... 240027 (FEMA Dock- areas of Frederick 16, 2006; The Frederick President, Frederick County Board of et No.: B– County (06–03– News-Post. County Commissioners, Winchester 7703). B384P). Hall, 12 East Church Street, Frederick, MD 21701. Howard (FEMA Unincorporated December 14, 2006; December The Honorable James N. Robey, Howard November 16, 2006 ...... 240044 Docket No.: areas of Howard 21, 2006; Howard County County Executive, 3430 Courthouse B–7712). County (05–03– Times. Drive, Ellicott City, MD 21043. A496P). Washington Town of Boonsboro October 5, 2006; October 12, The Honorable Charles F. Kauffman, Jr., January 11, 2007 ...... 240071 (FEMA Dock- (06–03–B016P). 2006; Hagerstown Herald- Mayor, Town of Boonsboro, 21 North et No.: B– Mail. Main Street, Boonsboro, MD 21713. 7474). Washington Unincorporated October 5, 2006; October 12, Mr. Rodney Shoop, County Administrator, January 11, 2007 ...... 240070 (FEMA Dock- areas of Wash- 2006; Hagerstown Herald- Washington County, 100 West Wash- et No.: B– ington County Mail. ington Street, Hagerstown, MD 21740. 7474). (06–03–B016P). Massachusetts: Barnstable Town of Bourne (06– December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Linda Zuern, Chair, Board November 30, 2006 ...... 255210 (FEMA Dock- 01–B530P). 28, 2006; Cape Cod Times. of Selectmen, Town of Bourne, 24 et No.: B– Perry Avenue, Buzzards Bay, MA 7712). 02532. Barnstable Town of Falmouth August 24, 2006; August 31, Mr. Robert L. Whritenour, Jr., Town Ad- August 8, 2006 ...... 255211 (FEMA Dock- (06–01–B133P). 2006; Cape Cod Times. ministrator, Town of Falmouth, 59 Town et No.: B– Hall Square, Falmouth, MA 02540. 7474). Essex (FEMA Town of Wenham November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Peter Hersee, Chairman, February 15, 2007 ...... 250107 Docket No.: (06–01–B791P). 16, 2006; The Salem News. Wenham Board of Selectmen, 123 B–7712). Main Street, Wenham, MA 01984. Michigan: Macomb and Township of December 22, 2006; December The Honorable John D. Brennan, Super- March 30, 2007 ...... 260445 Marquette Macomb (06–05– 29, 2006; Macomb County visor, Township of Macomb, 54111 (FEMA Dock- BT19P). Legal News. Broughton Road, Macomb, MI 48042. et No.: B– 7712). Minnesota:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27747

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Hennepin City of Plymouth August 24, 2006; August 31, The Honorable Judy Johnson, Mayor, July 28, 2006 ...... 270179 (FEMA Dock- (05–05–3454P). 2006; Minneapolis Star Trib- City of Plymouth, 3400 Plymouth Bou- et No.: B– une. levard, Plymouth, MN 55447. 7474). Olmsted (FEMA City of Rochester November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Ardell Brede, Mayor, City October 30, 2006 ...... 275246 Docket No.: (06–05–BR73P). 7, 2006; Post-Bulletin. of Rochester, 201 Fourth Street South- B–7712). east, Room 281, Rochester, MN 55904. Mississippi: Rankin (FEMA City of Flowood (06– December 20, 2006; December The Honorable Gary Rhoads, Mayor, City March 29, 2007 ...... 280289 Docket No.: 04–C397P). 27, 2006; Rankin County of Flowood, P.O. Box 320069, B–7712). News. Flowood, MS 39232–0069. Rankin (FEMA Unincorporated December 20, 2006; December The Honorable Norman McLeod, Rankin March 29, 2007 ...... 280142 Docket No.: areas of Rankin 27, 2006; Rankin County County Administrator, 221 East Gov- B–7712). County (06–04– News. ernment Street, Suite A, Brandon, MS C397P). 39042. Missouri: Clay (FEMA Village of Claycomo October 19, 2006; October 26, Ms. Lois Anderson, Village Administrator, September 29, 2006 ...... 290089 Docket No.: (06–07–BD06P). 2006; The Sun-Tribune. Village of Claycomo, 115 East 69 High- B–7474). way, Claycomo, MO 64119. Clay (FEMA City of Liberty (06– October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Robert T. Steinkamp, September 29, 2006 ...... 290096 Docket No.: 07–BD06P). 2006; The Sun-Tribune. Mayor, City of Liberty, 101 East Kansas B–7474). Street, Liberty, MO 64068. Pemiscot City of Caruthersville December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Diane Sayre, Mayor, City March 29, 2007 ...... 290275 (FEMA Dock- (06–07–B730P). 28, 2006; Caruthersville- of Caruthersville, 200 West Third et No.: B– Hayti Democrat-Argus. Street, Caruthersville, MO 63830. 7712). Pemiscot Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Charles Moss, Presiding March 29, 2007 ...... 290779 (FEMA Dock- areas of Pemiscot 28, 2006; Caruthersville Commissioner, Pemiscot County Com- et No.: B– County (06–07– Hayti Democrat-Argus. mission, 610 Ward Avenue, 7712). B730P). Caruthersville, MO 63830. St. Charles City of O’Fallon (06– September 20, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Donna Morrow, Mayor, December 27, 2006 ...... 290316 (FEMA Dock- 07–B699P). tember 27, 2006; St. Charles City of O’Fallon, City Hall, 100 North et No.: B– Journal. Main Street, O’Fallon, MO 63366. 7712). St. Charles Unincorporated September 20, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Joe Ortwerth, County Ex- December 27, 2006 ...... 290315 (FEMA Dock- areas of St. tember 27, 2006; St. Charles ecutive, St. Charles County Administra- et No.: B– Charles County Journal. tion Building, 201 North Second Street, 7712). (06–07–B699P). St. Charles, MO 63301. Warren (FEMA City of Wright City November 16, 2006; November The Honorable Eileen Klocke, Mayor, City February 22, 2007 ...... 290654 Docket No.: (06–07–B605P). 23, 2006; Warren County of Wright City, P.O. Box 436, Wright B–7703). Record. City, MO 63390. Warren (FEMA Unincorporated November 16, 2006; November The Honorable Fred Vahle, Presiding February 22, 2007 ...... 290443 Docket No.: areas of Warren 23, 2006; Warren County Commissioner, Warren County, Board B–7703). County (06–07– Record. of Commissioners, 104 West Main B605P). Street, Suite B, Warrenton, MO 63383. Nevada: Clark (FEMA Unincorporated November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Rory Reid, Chair, Clark October 31, 2006 ...... 320003 Docket No.: areas of Clark 16, 2006; Las Vegas Re- County Board of Commissioners, 500 B–7712). County (06–09– view-Journal. South Grand Central Parkway, Las B036P). Vegas, NV 89106. Clark (FEMA Unincorporated November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Rory Reid, Chair, Clark February 15, 2007 ...... 320003 Docket No.: areas of Clark 16, 2006; Las Vegas Re- County Board, Of Commissioners, 500 B–7712). County (06–09– view-Journal. South Grand Central Parkway, Las B275P). Vegas, NV 89106. New Mexico: Bernalillo City of Albuquerque October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Martin J. Chavez, Mayor, September 20, 2006 ...... 350002 (FEMA Dock- (06–06–B638P). 2006; The Albuquerque Jour- City of Albuquerque, P.O. Box 1293, Al- et No.: B– nal. buquerque, NM 87103. 7474). Sandoval City of Rio Rancho November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Ken Jackson, Mayor, City December 1, 2006 ...... 350146 (FEMA Dock- (06–06–BI29P). 7, 2006; The Santa Fe New of Rio Rancho, 3900 Southern Boule- et No.: B– Mexican. vard, Rio Rancho, NM 87124. 7712). Santa Fe Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- Mr. Gerald T.E. Gonzalez, County Man- August 29, 2006 ...... 350069 (FEMA Dock- areas of Santa Fe tember 28, 2006; The Santa ager, Santa Fe County, P.O. Box 276, et No.: B– County (06–06– Fe New Mexican. Santa Fe, NM 87504. 7474). B296P). North Carolina: Beaufort (FEMA Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, Mr. Paul Spruill, County Manager, Beau- September 25, 2006 ...... 370013 Docket No.: areas of Beaufort 2006; Washington Daily fort County, P.O. Box 1027, Wash- B–7474). County (06–04– News. ington, NC 27889. BP18P). Beaufort (FEMA City of Washington October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Judy Jennette, Mayor, September 25, 2006 ...... 370017 Docket No.: (06–04–BP18P). 2006; Washington Daily City of Washington, P.O. Box 1988, B–7474). News. Washington, NC 27889. Durham (FEMA City of Durham (06– November 9, 2006; November The Honorable William V. ‘‘Bill’’ Bell, October 27, 2006 ...... 370086 Docket No.: 04–B004P). 16, 2006; The Herald-Sun. Mayor, City of Durham, 101 City Hall B–7712). Plaza, Durham, NC 27701. Guilford (FEMA City of Greensboro July 20, 2006; July 27, 2006; The Honorable Keith Holliday, Mayor, City October 26, 2006 ...... 375351 Docket No.: (05–04–A010P). News & Record. of Greensboro, P.O. Box 3136, Greens- B–7474). boro, NC 27402.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27748 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

North Dakota: Mor- City of Mandan (06– September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Ken LaMont, Mayor, City August 29, 2006 ...... 380072 ton (FEMA Docket 08–B460P). tember 28, 2006; The Bis- of Mandan, 205 Second Avenue, North- No.: B–7474). marck Tribune. west, Mandan, ND 58554. Ohio: Allen (FEMA City of Lima (05–05– November 30, 2006; December The Honorable David J. Berger, Mayor, March 8, 2007 ...... 390006 Docket No.: 0634P). 7, 2006; The Lima News. City of Lima, 50 Town Square, Lima, B–7712). OH 45801. Allen (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Greg Sneary, President, March 8, 2007 ...... 390758 Docket No.: areas of Allen 7, 2006; The Lima News. Allen County, Board of Commissioners, B–7712). County (05–05– 301 West North Street, Lima, OH 0634P). 45801. Delaware City of Powell (06– October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Don Grubbs, Mayor, City January 25, 2007 ...... 390626 (FEMA Dock- 05–BJ86P). 2006; Delaware Gazette. of Powell, 47 Hall Street, Powell, OH et No.: B– 43065. 7474). Fairfield (FEMA Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Jon Myers, County Com- January 25, 2007 ...... 390158 Docket No.: areas of Fairfield 2006; Lancaster Eagle Ga- missioner, Board of Commissioners, B–7474). County (06–05– zette. Fairfield County, 210 East Main Street, BA30P). Room 301, Lancaster, OH 43130. Franklin (FEMA City of Columbus September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Michael B. Coleman, December 28, 2006 ...... 390170 Docket No.: (05–05–0944P). tember 28, 2006; The Co- Mayor, City of Columbus, 90 West B–7474). lumbus Dispatch. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43215. Franklin (FEMA Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Paula Brooks, President, December 28, 2006 ...... 390167 Docket No.: areas of Franklin tember 28, 2006; The Co- Franklin County Board of Commis- B–7474). County (05–05– lumbus Dispatch. sioners, 373 South High Street, Colum- 0944P). bus, OH 43215. Lucas (FEMA City of Toledo (06– December 1, 2006; December The Honorable Carleton S. Finkbeiner, October 30, 2006 ...... 395373 Docket No.: 05–B078P). 7, 2006; Toledo Legal News. Mayor, City of Toledo, One Govern- B–7712). ment Center, 640 Jackson, Suite 2200, Toledo, OH 43604. Lucas (FEMA City of Toledo (07– December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Carleton S. Finkbeiner, November 29, 2006 ...... 395373 Docket No.: 05–0330X). 28, 2006; Toledo Legal News. Mayor, City of Toledo, One Govern- B–7712). ment Center, 640 Jackson, Suite 2200, Toledo, OH 43604. Lucas (FEMA Unincorporated December 1, 2006; December Ms.Tina Skeldon Wozniak, President, October 30, 2006 ...... 390359 Docket No.: areas of Lucas 7, 2006; Toledo Legal News. Lucas County Board of Commissioners, B–7712). County (06–05– One Government Center, Suite 800, BW42P). Toledo, OH 43604. Oklahoma: Cleveland City of Moore (05– October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Glenn Lewis, Mayor, City September 29, 2006 ...... 400044 (FEMA Dock- 06–0578P). 2006; The Norman Transcript. of Moore, 301 North Broadway, Moore, et No.: B– OK 73160. 7474). Tulsa (FEMA City of Broken Arrow October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Richard Carter, Mayor, January 25, 2007 ...... 400236 Docket No.: (06–06–-BE22P). 2006; Tulsa World. City of Broken Arrow, P.O. Box 610, B–7474). Broken Arrow, OK 74012. Oregon: Jackson City of Jacksonville October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable James W. Lewis, Mayor, January 18, 2007 ...... 410095 (FEMA Docket (06–10–B002P). 2006; Medford Mail Tribune. City of Jacksonville, P.O. Box 7, Jack- No.: B–7474). sonville, OR 97530. Pennsylvania: Chester (FEMA Township of West September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Edward G. Meakim, Jr., December 28, 2006 ...... 420293 Docket No.: Goshen (05–03– tember 28, 2006; Daily Local Chairman, West Goshen Township B–7474). 0848P). News. Board of Supervisors, 1025 Paoli Pike, West Chester, PA 19380–4699. Cumberland Township of Lower November 30, 2006; December The Honorable John T. Titzel, President, March 8, 2007 ...... 421016 (FEMA Dock- Allen (06–03– 7, 2006; The Sentinel. Board of Commissioners, Township of et No.: B– B823P). Lower Allen, 1993 Hummel Avenue, 7712). Camp Hill, PA 17011. Cumberland Township of Silver December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Christopher R. Latta, November 30, 2006 ...... 420370 (FEMA Dock- Spring (06–03– 28, 2006; The Sentinel. Chairman, Silver Spring Township Su- et No.: B– B462P). pervisors, 6475 Carlisle Pike, Mechan- 7712). icsburg, PA 17055. Delaware Borough of Novmeber 2, 2006; November The Honorable Frank C. Kelly, Mayor, October 10, 2006 ...... 420408 (FEMA Dock- Collingsdale (05– 9, 2006; Delaware County Borough of Collingdale, 800 MacDade et No.: B– 03–A446P). Daily Times. Boulevard, Collingdale, PA 19023. 7474). Lehigh (FEMA City of Allentown December 1, 2006; December The Honorable Ed Pawlowski, Mayor, March 9, 2007 ...... 420585 Docket No.: (06–03–B617P). 8, 2006; The Express-Times. City of Allentown, Office of the Mayor, B–7712). 435 Hamilton Street, Allentown, PA 18101. York (FEMA Township of Penn October 12, 2006; October 19, The Honorable Joseph A. Klunk, Presi- January 18, 2007 ...... 421025 Docket No.: (05–03–0718P). 2006; The York Dispatch. dent, Penn Township Board of Com- B–7474). missioners, Penn Township Municipal Building, 20 Wayne Avenue, Hanover, PA 17331. Rhode Island: Provi- Town of North November 30, 2006; December The Honorable David Lovett, Chairman, October 10, 2006 ...... 440021 dence (FEMA Smithfield (06–01– 7, 2006; The Call. North Smithfield Town Council, 1 Main Docket No.: B– B167P). Street, North Smithfield, RI 02876. 7712). South Carolina:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27749

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Berkeley (FEMA Unincorporated October 25, 2006; November 1, The Honorable James H. Rozier, Jr., Su- September 28, 2006 ...... 450029 Docket No.: areas of Berkeley 2006; Berkeley Independent. pervisor and County Council Chairman, B–7474). County (06–04– Berkeley County, 1003 Highway 52, BO05P. Moncks Corner, SC 29461. Charleston City of Charleston November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Joseph P. Riley, Jr., October 27, 2006 ...... 455412 (FEMA Dock- (06–04–BQ23P). 7, 2006; The Post and Cou- Mayor, City of Charleston, P.O. Box et No.: B– rier. 652, Charleston, SC 29402. 7712). Charleston City of Isle of Palms December 21, 2006; December Ms. Linda Lovvorn Tucker, City Adminis- November 30, 2006 ...... 455416 (FEMA Dock- (07–04–0193P). 28, 2006; The Post and Cou- trator, City of Isle of Palms, Post Office et No.: B– rier. Box 508, Isle of Palms, SC 29451. 7712). Greenville Unincorporated September 22, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Butch Kirven, Chairman, December 28, 2006 ...... 450089 (FEMA Dock- areas of Greenville tember 28, 2006; The Green- Greenville County Council, Seven et No.: B– County (06–04– ville News. Ralph Hendricks Drive, Simpsonville, 7474). B141P). SC 29681. Horry (FEMA City of Myrtle Beach December 21, 2006; December Mr. Thomas Leath, Manager, City of Myr- November 17, 2006 ...... 450109 Docket No.: (05–04–2815P). 28, 2006; Horry Independent. tle Beach, P.O. Drawer 2468, Myrtle B–7712). Beach, SC 29577. Horry (FEMA Unincorporated November 22, 2006; November Mr. Danny Knight, County Administrator, March 1, 2007 ...... 450104 Docket No.: areas of Horry 30, 2006; Horry Independent. Horry County, P.O. Box 1236, Conway, B–7712). County (06–04– SC 29528. C114P). Lexington Unincorporated October 5, 2006; October 12, Ms. Katherine Doucett, County Adminis- January 11, 2007 ...... 450129 (FEMA Dock- areas of Lexington 2006; The Lexington County trator, Lexington County, 212 South et No.: B– County (06–04– Chronicle. Lake Drive, Lexington, SC 29072. 7474). BM33P). Lexington Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, Ms. Katherine Doucett, County Adminis- January 25, 2007 ...... 450129 (FEMA Dock- areas of Lexington 2006; The Lexington County trator, Lexington County, 212 South et No.: B– County (06–04– Chronicle. Lake Drive, Lexington, SC 29072. 7474). BQ42P). Richland (FEMA Unincorporated December 22, 2006; December The Honorable Anthony G. Mizzell, Chair, March 30, 2007 ...... 450170 Docket No.: areas of Richland 29, 2006; The Columbia Star. Richland County Council, 106 Wembley B–7712). County (06–04– Street, Columbia, SC 29209. BP19P). Richland (FEMA Unincorporated October 20, 2006; October 27, The Honorable Anthony G. Mizzell, Chair, September 25, 2006 ...... 450170 Docket No.: areas of Richland 2006; The Columbia Star. Richland County Council, 106 Wembley B–7474). County (06–04– Street, Columbia, SC 29209. BT87P). Richland (FEMA Unincorporated December 22, 2006; December The Honorable Anthony Mizzell, Chair- March 30, 2007 ...... 450170 Docket No.: areas of Richland 29, 2006; The Columbia Star. man, Richland County Council, P.O. B–7712). County (07–04– Box 192, Columbia, SC 29202. 0179P). South Dakota: Brown (FEMA City of Aberdeen November 2, 2006; November The Honorable Mike Levsen, Mayor, City February 8, 2007 ...... 460007 Docket No.: (06–08–B272P). 9, 2006; Aberdeen American of Aberdeen, 123 South Lincoln, Aber- B–7703). News. deen, SD 57401. Brown (FEMA Unincorporated November 2, 2006; November The Honorable Deb Knecht, Chairman, February 8, 2007 ...... 460006 Docket No.: areas of Brown 9, 2006; Aberdeen American Brown County Board of Commis- B–7703). County (06–08– News. sioners, 25 Market Street, Aberdeen, B272P). SD 57401. Pennington City of Rapid City December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Jim Shaw, Mayor, City of March 29, 2007 ...... 465420 (FEMA Dock- (06–08–B495P). 28, 2006; Rapid City Journal. Rapid City, 300 Sixth Street, Rapid et No.: B– City, SD 57701. 7712). Pennington Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Kenneth Davis, Chair- March 29, 2007 ...... 460064 (FEMA Dock- areas of Pen- 28, 2006; Rapid City Journal. person, Pennington County Board of et No.: B– nington County Commissioners, 315 Saint Joseph 7712). (06–08–B495P). Street, Rapid City, SD 57701. Tennessee: Hamilton (FEMA City of Chattanooga November 16, 2006; November The Honorable Ron Littlefield, Mayor, City February 22, 2007 ...... 370072 Docket No.: (05–04–3186P). 23, 2006; Chattanooga of Chattanooga, 1001 Lindsay Street, B–7703). Times Free Press. Chattanooga, TN 37402. Hamilton (FEMA City of Chattanooga October 26, 2006; November 2, The Honorable Ron Littlefield, Mayor, City February 1, 2007 ...... 470072 Docket No.: (06–04–BV55P). 2006; Chattanooga Times of Chattanooga, City Hall, Suite 100 B–7474). Free Press. 101 East 11th Street, Chattanooga, TN 37402. Nashville and Metropolitan Govern- December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Bill Purcell, Mayor, Metro- November 30, 2006 ...... 470040 Davidson ment of Nashville 28, 2006; Nashville Record. politan Government of Nashville and (FEMA Dock- and Davidson Davidson County, 107 Metropolitan et No.: B– County (07–04– Courthouse, Nashville, TN 37201. 7712). 0583P). Williamson City of Brentwood October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Brian Joe Sweeney, January 25, 2007 ...... 470205 (FEMA Dock- (06–04–C457P). 2006; The Tennessean. Mayor, City of Brentwood, P.O. Box et No.: B– 788, Brentwood, TN 37024–0788. 7474). Williamson Town of Nolensville December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Tommy Dugger, Mayor, November 22, 2006 ...... 470425 (FEMA Dock- (06–04–BX96P). 28, 2006; Tennessean A.M. Town of Nolensville, 2260 Rolling Hills, et No.: B– Section. Nolensville, TN 37135. 7712). Texas:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27750 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Bexar (FEMA City of Live Oak November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Henry O. Edward, Jr., March 8, 2007 ...... 480043 Docket No.: (04–06–A273P). 7, 200; Daily Commercial Mayor, City of Live Oak, 8001 Shin Oak B–7712). Recorder. Drive, Live Oak, TX 78233. Bexar (FEMA City of San Antonio November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Phil Hardberger, Mayor, March 8, 2007 ...... 480045 Docket No.: (06–06–B191P). 7, 2006; Daily Commercial City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966 B–7712). Recorder. San Antonio, TX 78283. Bexar (FEMA City of San Antonio November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Phil Hardberger, Mayor, March 8, 2007 ...... 480045 Docket No.: (06–06–BC37P). 7, 2006; Daily Commercial City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966 B–7712). Recorder. San Antonio, TX 78283. Bexar (FEMA City of San Antonio November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Phil Hardberger, Mayor, March 1, 2007 ...... 480045 Docket No.: (06–06–BD54P). 30, 2006; Daily Commercial City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966 B–7712). Recorder. San Antonio, TX 78283. Bexar (FEMA City of Shavano November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Tommy Peyton, Mayor, March 1, 2007 ...... 480047 Docket No.: Park (06–06– 30, 2006; Daily Commercial City of Shavano Park, 900 Saddletree B–7712). BD54P). Recorder. Court, San Antonio, TX 78231. Bexar (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Nelson W. Wolff, County March 8, 2007 ...... 480035 Docket No.: areas of Bexar 7, 2006; Daily Commercial Judge, Bexar County Courthouse, 100 B–7712). County (04–06– Recorder. Dolorosa, Suite 1.20, San Antonio, TX A273P). 78205. Brazos (FEMA City of Bryan (05– October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Ernie Wentrcek, Mayor, January 25, 2007 ...... 480082 Docket No.: 06–0891P). 2006; The Eagle. City of Bryan, 300 South Texas Ave- B–7474). nue, Bryan, TX 77803. Brazos (FEMA City of College Sta- December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Ron Silvia, Mayor, City of March 29, 2007 ...... 480083 Docket No.: tion (06–06– 28, 2006; The Eagle. College Station, 1101 Texas Avenue, B–7712). B753P). College Station, TX 77840. Collin (FEMA City of Allen (06–06– December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Stephen Terrell, Mayor, March 29, 2007 ...... 480131 Docket No.: B685P). 28, 2006; The Allen Amer- City of Allen, 305 Century Parkway, B–7712). ican. Allen, TX 75013. Collin (FEMA City of Princeton September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Kathy Davis, Mayor, City August 30, 2006 ...... 480757 Docket No.: (06–06–B820P). tember 28, 2006; The Prince- of Princeton, P.O. Box 970, Princeton, B–7474). ton Herald. TX 75407. Dallas (FEMA City of Grand Prairie December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Charles England, Mayor, March 29, 2007 ...... 485472 Docket No.: (06–06–B413P). 28, 2006; The Daily Com- City of Grand Prairie, 317 College B–7712). mercial Record. Street, Grand Prairie, TX 75050. Dallas (FEMA City of Grand Prairie September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Charles England, Mayor, December 28, 2006 ...... 485472 Docket No.: (06–06–B658P). tember 28, 2006; The Daily City of Grand Prairie, 317 College B–7474). Commercial Record. Street, Grand Prairie, TX 75050. Dallas (FEMA City of Hutchins (06– November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Artis Johnson, Mayor, City February 28, 2007 ...... 480179 Docket No.: 06–B194P). 29, 2006; The Daily Com- of Hutchins, P.O. Box 500, Hutchins, B–7703). mercial Record. TX 75141. Dallas (FEMA City of Rowlett (06– September 8, 2006; September The Honorable C. Shane Johnson, December 15, 2006 ...... 480185 Docket No.: 06–B822P). 15, 2006; Rowlett Lakeshore Mayor, City of Rowlett, P.O. Box 99, B–7474). Times. Rowlett, TX 75030–0099. Dallas (FEMA City of Wilmer (06– November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Linda Root, Mayor, City of February 28, 2007 ...... 480190 Docket No.: 06–B194P). 29, 2006; The Daily Com- Wilmer, 128 North Dallas Avenue, Wil- B–7703). mercial Record. mer, TX 75172. Denton (FEMA Town of Bartonville October 20, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Ron Robertson, Mayor, September 28, 2006 ...... 481501 Docket No.: (06–06–B742P). 2006; Denton Record-Chron- Town of Bartonville, 1941 East Jeter B–7474). icle. Road, Bartonville, TX 76226. Denton (FEMA City of Denton (06– October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Perry McNeill, Mayor, City September 28, 2006 ...... 480194 Docket No.: 06–BD25P). 2006; Denton Record-Chron- of Denton, 215 East McKinney Street, B–7474). icle. Denton, TX 76201. Denton (FEMA City of The Colony October 20, 2006; October 26, The Honorable John Dillard, Mayor, City January 25, 2007 ...... 481581 Docket No.: (05–06–A219P). 2006; Denton Record-Chron- of The Colony, 6800 Main Street, The B–7474). icle. Colony, TX 75056. Denton (FEMA City of Fort Worth September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, August 31, 2006 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–B018P). tember 28, 2006; Northeast Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7474). Tarrant Star-Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Denton (FEMA Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Mary Horn, Denton Coun- September 28, 2006 ...... 480774 Docket No.: areas of Denton 2006; Denton Record-Chron- ty Judge, 110 West Hickory Street, B–7474). County (06–06– icle. Second Floor, Denton, TX 76201. BD25P). El Paso (FEMA City of El Paso (06– November 9, 2006; November The Honorable John Cook, Mayor, City of February 15, 2007 ...... 480214 Docket No.: 06–B414P). 16, 2006; El Paso Times. El Paso, Two Civic Center Plaza, 10th B–7703). Floor, El Paso, TX 79901. Ellis (FEMA City of Waxahachie November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Jay Barksdale, Mayor, February 15, 2007 ...... 480211 Docket No.: (06–06–BF64P). 16, 2006; Waxahachie Daily City of Waxahachie, P.O. Box 757, B–7712). Light. Waxahachie, TX 75165. Fort Bend Fort Bend County October 19, 2006; October 26, Mr. Epifanio Salazar, P.E., Board Presi- January 25, 2007 ...... 481594 (FEMA Dock- LID No. 7 (06–06– 2006; Fort Bend Herald. dent, Fort Bend County L.I.D. No. 7, c/o et No.: B– B073P). Schwartz, Page & Harding, L.L.P., 7474). 1300 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 1400, Houston, TX 77027. Fort Bend City of Sugar Land October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable David G. Wallace, Mayor, January 25, 2007 ...... 480234 (FEMA Dock- (06–06–B073P). 2006; Fort Bend Herald. City of Sugar Land, P.O. Box 110, et No.: B– Sugar Land, TX 77487. 7474). Fort Bend Unincorporated October 19, 2006; October 26, The Honorable Robert E. Hebert, PhD, January 25, 2007 ...... 480228 (FEMA Dock- areas of Fort Bend 2006; Fort Bend Herald. Fort Bend County Judge, 301 Jackson et No.: B– County (06–06– Street, Suite 719, Richmond, TX 77469. 7474). B073P).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27751

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Harris (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Robert Eckels, Harris March 7, 2007 ...... 480287 Docket No.: areas of Harris 7, 2006; Houston Chronicle. County Judge, 1001 Preston, Suite B–7712). County (06–06– 911, Houston, TX 77002. B392P). McClellan City of Waco (06– September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Virginia DuPuy, Mayor, December 21, 2006 ...... 480461 (FEMA Dock- 06–B021P). tember 21, 2006; Waco Trib- City of Waco, P.O. Box 2570, Waco, et No.: B– une-Herald. TX 76702–2570. 7474). Montgomery Unincorporated December 20, 2006; December The Honorable Alan B. Sadler, Mont- March 28, 2007 ...... 480483 (FEMA Dock- areas of Mont- 27, 2006; Conroe Courier. gomery County Judge, 301 North et No.: B– gomery County Thompson, Suite 210, Conroe, TX 7712). (06–06–BE46P). 77301. Rockwall (FEMA Unincorporated September 20, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Bill Bell, Rockwall County December 28, 2006 ...... 480543 Docket No.: areas of Rockwall tember 27, 2006; Royse City Judge, 101 East Rusk Street, Suite B–7474). County (06–06– Herald-Banner. 202, Rockwall, TX 75087. B819P). Tarrant (FEMA City of Colleyville December 21, 2006; December The Honorable David Kelly, Mayor, City of March 29, 2007 ...... 480590 Docket No.: (06–06–BG05P). 28, 2006; Fort Worth Star- Colleyville, 100 Main Street, Colleyville, B–7712). Telegram. TX 76034. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, January 2, 2007 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–B537P). 28, 2006; Fort Worth Star- Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7712). Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, February 15, 2007 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–B717P). 16, 2006; Fort Worth Star- Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7712). Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth September 14, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, December 21, 2006 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–BC39P). tember 21, 2006; Northeast Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7474). Tarrant Star-Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, December 28, 2006 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–BE06P). tember 28, 2006; Northeast Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7474). Tarrant Star-Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, November 27, 2006 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–BH46P). 28, 2006; Fort Worth Star- Mayor, City of Forth Worth, 1000 B–7712). Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth November 9, 2006; November The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, February 15, 2007 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–BK70P). 16, 2006; Fort Worth Star- Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7712). Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of Fort Worth December 21, 2006; December The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, March 29, 2007 ...... 480596 Docket No.: (06–06–BK71P). 28, 2006; Fort Worth Star- Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 B–7712). Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Tarrant (FEMA City of North Rich- September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Oscar Trevino, Mayor, August 30, 2006 ...... 480607 Docket No.: land Hills (06–06– tember 28, 2006; Dallas City of North Richland Hills, P.O. Box B–7474). B788P). Morning News. 820609, North Richland Hills, TX 76182–0609. Utah: Grand (FEMA City of Moab (06– November 30, 2006; December The Honorable David Sakrison, Mayor, March 8, 2007 ...... 490072 Docket No.: 08–B290P). 7, 2006; The Times-Inde- City of Moab, 217 East Center Street, B–7712). pendent. Moab, UT 84532. Grand (FEMA Unincorporated November 30, 2006; December The Honorable Joette Langianese, Chair, March 8, 2007 ...... 490232 Docket No.: areas of Grand 7, 2006; The Times-Inde- Grand County Council, 125 East Center B–7712). County (06–08– pendent. Street, Moab, UT 84532. B290P). Salt Lake City of South Jordan December 21, 2006; December The Honorable William Kent Money, November 27, 2006 ...... 490107 (FEMA Dock- (06–08–B511P). 28, 2006; The Salt Lake Trib- Mayor, City of South Jordan, 1600 et No.: B– une. West Towne Center Drive, South Jor- 7712). dan, UT 84095. Washington City of St. George November 22, 2006; November The Honorable Daniel D. McArthur, February 28, 2007 ...... 490177 (FEMA Dock- (05–08–0365P). 29, 2006; St. George Spec- Mayor, City of St. George, 175 East et No.: B– trum. 200 North, St. George, UT 84770. 7712). Washington Unincorporated November 22, 2006; November The Honorable James J. Eardley, Chair- February 28, 2007 ...... 490224 (FEMA Dock- areas of Wash- 29, 2006; St. George Spec- man, Washington County Board of et No.: B– ington County trum. Commissioners, 197 East Tabernacle 7712). (05–08–0365P). Street, St. George, UT 84770. Virgina: Fauquier (FEMA Unincorporated September 13, 2006; Sep- Mr. Paul McCulla, County Administrator, December 20, 2006 ...... 510055 Docket No.: areas of Fauquier tember 20, 2006; Fauquier Fauquier County, 10 Hotel Street, Suite B–7474). County (05–03– Times. 204, Warrenton, VA 20186. 0241P). Prince William Town of Haymarket September 28, 2006; October The Honorable Pamela E. Stutz, Mayor, January 4, 2007 ...... 510121 (FEMA Dock- (05–03–A398P). 5, 2006; Potomac News & Town of Haymarket, P.O. Box 367, et No.: B– Manassas Journal Mes- Haymarket, VA 20168. 7474). senger.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27752 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No.

Rockingham Unincorporated December 21, 2006; December Mr. Joseph S. Paxton, County Adminis- March 29, 2007 ...... 510133 (FEMA Dock- areas of Rocking- 28, 2006; Daily News-Record. trator, Rockingham County Administra- et No.: B– ham County (07– tion Center, 20 East Gay Street, Harri- 7712). 03–0034P). sonburg, VA 22802. Washington: Pierce Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Shawn Bunney, Pierce August 30, 2006 ...... 530138 (FEMA Docket areas of Pierce tember 28, 2006; The News County Council Chairman, 930 Tacoma No.: B–7474). County (06–10– Tribune. Avenue South, County-City Building, B193P). Room 1046, Tacoma, WA 98402–2176. Wyoming: Laramie (FEMA City of Cheyenne September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Jack R. Spiker, Mayor, August 29, 2006 ...... 560030 Docket No.: (06–08–B409P). tember 28, 2006; Wyoming City of Cheyenne, 2101 O’Neil Avenue, B–7474). Tribune-Eagle. Room 310, Cheyenne, WY 82001. Laramie (FEMA Unincorporated September 21, 2006; Sep- The Honorable Diane Humphrey, Chair- August 29, 2006 ...... 560029 Docket No.: areas of Laramie tember 28, 2006; Wyoming man, Laramie County, Board of Com- B–7474). County (06–08– Tribune-Eagle. missioners, 309 West 20th Street, B409P). Cheyenne, WY 82001.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each environmental impact assessment has 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) community are available for inspection not been prepared. Dated: May 3, 2007. at the office of the Chief Executive Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood David I. Maurstad, Officer of each community. The elevation determinations are not within Federal Insurance Administrator of the respective addresses are listed in the the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility National Flood Insurance Program, Federal table below. Emergency Management Agency, Department Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory of Homeland Security. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: flexibility analysis is not required. [FR Doc. 07–2384 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Regulatory Classification. This final Management Section, Mitigation BILLING CODE 9110–12–P rule is not a significant regulatory action Division, Federal Emergency under the criteria of section 3(f) of Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Executive Order 12866 of September 30, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3151. 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, SECURITY SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 58 FR 51735. Federal Emergency Management Agency Executive Order 13132, Federalism. Federal Emergency Management (FEMA) makes the final determinations This final rule involves no policies that Agency listed below for the modified BFEs for have federalism implications under each community listed. These modified Executive Order 13132. 44 CFR Part 67 elevations have been published in Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice newspapers of local circulation and Final Flood Elevation Determinations Reform. This final rule meets the ninety (90) days have elapsed since that applicable standards of Executive Order publication. The Mitigation Division AGENCY: Federal Emergency 12988. Management Agency, DHS. Director of FEMA has resolved any ACTION: Final rule. appeals resulting from this notification. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 This final rule is issued in accordance SUMMARY: Base (1% annual chance) with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Administrative practice and Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting BFEs are made final for the and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has and recordkeeping requirements. communities listed below. The BFEs developed criteria for floodplain I Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is and modified BFEs are the basis for the management in floodprone areas in amended as follows: floodplain management measures that accordance with 44 CFR part 60. each community is required either to Interested lessees and owners of real PART 67—[AMENDED] adopt or to show evidence of being property are encouraged to review the already in effect in order to qualify or proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM I 1. The authority citation for part 67 remain qualified for participation in the available at the address cited below for continues to read as follows: National Flood Insurance Program each community. The BFEs and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; (NFIP). modified BFEs are made final in the Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, DATES: The date of issuance of the Flood communities listed below. Elevations at 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing selected locations in each community 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. BFEs and modified BFEs for each are shown. § 67.11 [Amended] community. This date may be obtained National Environmental Policy Act. by contacting the office where the maps This final rule is categorically excluded I 2. The tables published under the are available for inspection as indicated from the requirements of 44 CFR part authority of § 67.11 are amended as on the table below. 10, Environmental Consideration. An follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27753

Depth in feet above ground. * Elevation in feet State City/town/county Source of flooding Location (NGVD) +Elevation in feet (NAVD) Modified

City of Hamilton, Illinois Docket No.: FEMA–P–7917

Illinois ...... City of Hamilton ...... Chaney Creek Tributary 1 Approximately 190 feet upstream of the +532 confluence with Chaney Creek. Approximately 1,155 feet upstream of +605 Park Drive. Cheny Creek Tributary ..... At the confluence with Chaney Creek +580 Tributary 1. Approximately 20 feet upstream of Hill- +616 crest Drive. Railroad Creek Tributary 1 Approximately 215 feet upstream of the +558 confluence with Railroad Creek. Approximately 30 feet upstream of Wal- +612 nut Street. Tributary 2 ...... Approximately 345 feet upstream of the +588 confluence with Railroad Creek. Approximately 435 feet upstream of +645 Broadway Street. Tributary 3 ...... Approximately 200 feet upstream of the +575 confluence with Railroad Creek. Approximately 60 feet upstream of South +635 19th Street. Spring Creek ...... Approximately 460 feet upstream of the +561 confluence with Chaney Creek. Approximately 1,975 feet upstream of the +611 confluence with Chaney Creek.

# Depth in feet above ground. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Hamilton Maps are available for inspection at the Community Map Repository, City of Hamilton, City Hall, 1010 Broadway, Hamilton, Illinois.

Hancock County, Illinois (Unincorporated Areas) Docket No.: FEMA–P–7917

Illinois ...... Hancock County (Unin- Chaney Creek Tributary 1 Approximately 70 feet upstream of the *529 corporated Areas). confluence with Chaney Creek. Approximately 370 feet upstream of the *536 confluence with Chaney Creek. Railroad Creek Tributary 3 Approximately 2,970 feet upstream of the *636 confluence with Railroad Creek. Approximately 3,170 feet upstream of the *636 confluence with Railroad Creek. Spring Creek ...... Approximately 70 feet upstream of the *536 confluence with Chaney Creek. Approximately 460 feet upstream of the *561 confluence with Chaney Creek.

# Depth in feet above ground. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES Hancock County, UIllinois (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at the Community Map Repository, Hancock County Courthouse, 500 Main Street, Carthage, Illinois.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27754 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

*Elevation in feet (NGVD) +Elevation in feet Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation (NAVD) Communities affected # Depth in feet above ground Modified

Richmond County, North Carolina and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: FEMA–D–7686

Baggetts Creek ...... At the confluence with Speeds Creek ...... +135 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). At U.S. Highway 1 ...... +159 Beaver Dam Creek (into At the confluence with Rocky Fork Creek ...... +238 Richmond County (Unincor- Rocky Fork Creek). porated Areas). Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Millstone Road (State +315 Road 1487). Beaverdam Branch ...... Approximately 50 feet upstream of the Railroad ...... +247 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 860 feet upstream of Chalk Road ...... +269 City of Hamlet, City of Rock- ingham. Beaverdam Creek (into Big At the confluence with Big Mountain Creek ...... +341 Richmond County (Unincor- Mountain Creek). porated Areas). Approximately 100 feet downstream of Capel Mill Road +367 (State Road 1321). Bells Creek ...... At the confluence with Rocky Fork Creek ...... +270 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,200 feet upstream of Haywood Parker +320 Road (State Road 1441). Big Branch ...... At the confluence with Drowning Creek ...... +302 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with +318 Drowning Creek. Big Mountain Creek ...... At the confluence with Mountain Creek and Little Mountain +246 Richmond County (Unincor- Creek. porated Areas). Approximately 600 feet upstream of the confluence of Sil- +374 ver Creek. Big Muddy Creek ...... At the Richmond/Scotland County boundary ...... +311 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), Town of Hoffman. Approximately 1,500 feet upstream of Blues Bridge Road ... +397 Black Branch ...... At the confluence with Solomans Creek ...... +214 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of U.S. Highway 74 ...... +256 Bones Fork Creek ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +256 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,000 feet upstream of Millstone Road +276 (State Road 1487). Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Bones Fork Creek ...... +267 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 600 feet upstream of Millstone Road (State +280 Road 1487). Buffalo Creek ...... At the confluence with Little River ...... +201 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of Cartledge Creek Road +262 (State Road 1005). Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Buffalo Creek ...... +224 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of the confluence with +238 Buffalo Creek. Camp Branch ...... At the confluence with Gum Swamp Creek ...... +256 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Cognac Road (State +302 Road 1605). Cartledge Creek ...... At the confluence with Pee Dee River ...... +152 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,400 feet upstream of John Webb Road +294 (State Road 1308). Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Cartledge Creek ...... +152 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 2.0 miles upstream of the confluence with +219 Cartledge Creek. Tributary 2 ...... At the confluence with Cartledge Creek ...... +168 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27755

*Elevation in feet (NGVD) +Elevation in feet Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation (NAVD) Communities affected # Depth in feet above ground Modified

Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Dockery Road (State +218 Road 1143). Cheek Creek ...... At the confluence with Little River ...... +207 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,800 feet upstream of the confluence with +207 Little River. Chock Creek ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +239 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Gray Woods Road ...... +279 Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Chock Creek ...... +247 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.0 mile upstream of the confluence with +260 Chock Creek. Tributary 2 ...... At the confluence with Chock Creek ...... +263 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.3 miles upstream of Fox Road (State +301 Road 1606). Colemans Creek ...... At the confluence with Mountain Creek ...... +193 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.8 miles upstream of Grassy Island Road +271 (State Road 1148). Cox Pond ...... At the upstream side of the Railroad ...... +274 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 150 feet downstream of McDonald Avenue .. +296 Crawford Branch ...... Approximately 1.2 miles downstream of Old Peggy Mill +260 Richmond County (Unincor- Road (State Road 1610). porated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of Old Peggy Mill Road +302 (State Road 1610). Crooked Creek ...... At County Line Road (State Road 1803) ...... +244 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 700 feet downstream of Scholl Shankle +268 Road (State Road 1805). Drowning Creek ...... At the Richmond/Scotland/Hoke/Moore County boundaries +268 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). At the Richmond/Montgomery/Moore County boundary ...... +368 Gum Swamp Creek ...... At Gum Swamp Road (State Road 1609) ...... +255 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Marston Road (State +329 Road 1001). Hitchcock Creek ...... At the confluence with Pee Dee River ...... +138 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of the confluence of In- +302 dian Camp Lake. Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +186 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 250 feet downstream of Richmond Road ..... +235 Tributary 2 ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +195 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 30 feet downstream of Richmond Road ...... +251 Tributary 2A ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek Tributary 2 ...... +195 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence of +267 Hitchcock Creek Tributary 2. Tributary 2B ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek Tributary 2 ...... +241 City of Rockingham. Approximately 50 feet downstream of Richmond Road ...... +249 Tributary 3 ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +195 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 1,100 feet upstream of Nicholson Road ...... +220 Tributary 4 ...... At the confluence with McKinney Lake/Hitchcock Creek ...... +283 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of the confluence with +290 McKinney Lake/Hitchcock Creek.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27756 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

*Elevation in feet (NGVD) +Elevation in feet Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation (NAVD) Communities affected # Depth in feet above ground Modified

Indian Camp Lake ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +287 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.0 mile upstream of the confluence with +306 Hitchcock Creek. Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Indian Camp Lake ...... +296 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.4 miles upstream of the confluence with +349 Indian Camp Lake. Jennies Branch ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +159 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 1,300 feet upstream of Patterson Street ...... +276 Jobs Creek ...... At the confluence with Little Mountain Creek ...... +375 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of U.S. Highway 220 ...... +418 Joes Creek ...... Approximately 1,700 feet upstream of the confluence with +224 Richmond County (Unincor- Joes Creek Tributary. porated Areas). Approximately 500 feet upstream of Old Laurinburg Road +276 (State Road 1614). Tributary ...... At the County Line Road (State Road 1802 ...... +261 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.0 mile upstream of County Line Road +282 (State Road 1802. Kinsman Lake ...... Approximately 1,000 feet upstream of the confluence with +260 Richmond County (Unincor- South Prong Falling Creek. porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of the confluence with +276 South Prong Falling Creek. Lightwood Knot Creek ...... Approximately 1,800 feet downstream of Ghio Road (State +246 Richmond County (Unincor- Road 1803). porated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of Ghio Road (State Road +259 1803). Little Hamer Creek ...... At the confluence with Wolf Branch Creek and Unnamed +238 Richmond County (Unincor- Tributary of Wolf Branch Creek. porated Areas). At the Richmond/Montgomery County boundary ...... +241 Little Mountain Creek ...... The confluence with Mountain Creek and Big Mountain +246 Richmond County (Unincor- Creek. porated Areas). Approximately 3.6 miles upstream of the confluence of +486 Jobs Creek. Little River ...... At the confluence with Pee Dee River ...... +200 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,900 feet upstream of the confluence of +207 Cheek Creek. Marks Creek ...... At the North Carolina/South Carolina State boundary ...... +120 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 2.3 miles upstream of Boyd Lake Road ...... +340 Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +193 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of the confluence with +210 Marks Creek. Tributary 2 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +212 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with +246 Marks Creek. Tributary 3 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +217 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.1 miles upstream of the confluence with +257 Marks Creek. Tributary 4 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +221 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 500 feet upstream of Homeplace Road +247 (State Road 1995). Tributary 5 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +225 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of the confluence with +262 Marks Creek.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27757

*Elevation in feet (NGVD) +Elevation in feet Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation (NAVD) Communities affected # Depth in feet above ground Modified

Tributary 6 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +228 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of NC Highway 177 ...... +244 Tributary 7 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +233 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of U.S. Highway 74 ...... +282 Tributary 8 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +242 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the confluence with +263 Marks Creek. Tributary 9 ...... At the confluence with Marks Creek ...... +294 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Raintree Road ...... +323 Middle Prong Hamer Creek .. At the confluence with Little River ...... +201 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). At the Richmond/Montgomery County boundary ...... +246 Millstone Creek ...... At the confluence with Rocky Fork Creek/Millstone Lake .... +311 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with +334 Rocky Fork Creek/Millstone Lake. Mountain Creek ...... At the confluence with Pee Dee River ...... +192 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). At the confluences of Big Mountain Creek and Little Moun- +246 tain Creek. Naked Creek (into Drowning At the confluence with Drowning Creek ...... +313 Richmond County (Unincor- Creek). porated Areas). At Research Farm Road (State Road 1527) ...... +458 Naked Creek (into Pee Dee At the confluence with Pee Dee River ...... +190 Richmond County (Unincor- River). porated Areas). Approximately 1,100 feet upstream of Parson Lake Road +267 (State Road 1145). North Prong Falling Creek .... Approximately 1,200 feet upstream of Long Drive ...... +222 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 1.7 miles upstream of the confluence of +295 North Prong Falling Creek Tributary 1. Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with North Prong Falling Creek ...... +256 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of the confluence with +265 North Prong Falling Creek. Paradise Creek ...... At the confluence with Rocky Fork Creek ...... +351 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Fire Tower Road (State +369 Road 1455). Pee Dee River ...... At the North Carolina/South Carolina State boundary ...... +110 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). At the Montgomery/Richmond County boundary ...... +220 Rocky Fork Creek ...... At the confluence with Ledbetter Lake ...... +238 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1.3 miles upstream of O.G. Reynolds Road +499 (State Road 1457). Rocky Branch ...... At the confluence with Hitchcock Creek ...... +159 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Rockingham. Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Sandhill Road (State +263 Road 1971). Rocky Fork Creek Tributary 1 At the confluence with Rocky Fork Creek ...... +262 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with +288 Rocky Fork Creek. Silver Creek ...... At the confluence with Big Mountain Creek ...... +373 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of County Line Road +398 (State Road 1153). Solomans Creek ...... At the confluence with Pee Dee River ...... +132 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27758 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

*Elevation in feet (NGVD) +Elevation in feet Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation (NAVD) Communities affected # Depth in feet above ground Modified

Approximately 900 feet upstream of Stokes Road (State +259 Road 1992). South Prong Cartledge Creek At the confluence with Cartledge Creek ...... +228 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,600 feet upstream of Sandy Ridge Church +302 Road (State Road 1305). South Prong Falling Creek .... At the upstream side of the Richmond College Lake Dam .. +276 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 1,200 feet upstream of Wire Grass Road ..... +297 Tributary 1 ...... At the confluence with South Prong Falling Creek/Rich- +276 Richmond County (Unincor- mond College Lake. porated Areas), City of Hamlet. Approximately 1,800 feet upstream of the confluence with +295 South Prong Falling Creek/Richmond College Lake. Speeds Creek ...... At the confluence with Solomans Creek ...... +135 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of Sandhill Road (State +176 Road 1971). Treeces Branch ...... At the confluence with Cartledge Creek ...... +184 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 780 feet upstream of Cartledge Creek Road +242 (State Road 1005). Unnamed Tributary to Wolf At the confluence with Wolf Branch Creek and Little Hamer +238 Richmond County (Unincor- Branch Creek. Creek. porated Areas). At the Richmond/Montgomery County boundary ...... +245 Watery Branch ...... At the confluence with Speeds Creek ...... +145 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). Approximately 1,900 feet upstream of the confluence with +165 Speeds Creek. White Creek Tributary ...... Approximately 1,000 feet downstream of Osborne Road +198 Richmond County (Unincor- (State Road 1803). porated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Osborne Road (State +207 Road 1803). Wolf Branch Creek ...... At the confluence with Middle Prong Hamer Creek ...... +220 Richmond County (Unincor- porated Areas). At the confluence of Little Hamer Creek and Unnamed +238 Tributary of Wolf Branch Creek.

# Depth in feet above ground. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Hamlet Maps are available for inspection at the Hamlet City Hall, 201 Main Street, Hamlet, North Carolina. City of Rockingham Maps are available for inspection at the Rockingham City Hall, Planning Department, 514 Rockingham Road, Rockingham, North Carolina. Town of Hoffman Maps are available for inspection at the Hoffman Town Hall, 2176 Caddell Road, Hoffman, North Carolina. Richmond County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at the Richmond County Planning Department, 221 South Hancock Street, Rockingham, North Carolina.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27759

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. Comments may be submitted via mothership sectors begins May 15. The 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) e-mail at shoreside primary season in most of the Dated: May 3, 2007. [email protected] Eureka statistical area (between 42° David I. Maurstad, or at the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: north latitude (N. lat.) and 40°30′ N. lat.) Federal Insurance Administrator of the http://www.Regulations.gov. begins on April 1, and the fishery south National Flood Insurance Program, Federal Copies of the FONSI and its of 40°30′ N. lat. begins April 15. The Emergency Management Agency, Department supporting EA and other documents Pacific whiting shoreside fishery north of Homeland Security. cited in this document are available of 42° N. lat. begins on June 15. No more [FR Doc. 07–2385 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] from Frank Lockhart at the address than five percent of the shore-based BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Assistant Regional Administrator for sector allocation may be taken in the Sustainable Fisheries, Northwest early season fishery off California before Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way the primary season north of 42° N. lat. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NE., Seattle, WA 98115–0070. opens on June 15. This is intended to Information presented by the Council ensure an opportunity for all sectors of National Oceanic and Atmospheric for this temporary rule is available for the shoreside industry to have fair Administration public review during business hours at opportunity to engage in the fishery the office of the Council at 7700 NE when fish are available to them without 50 CFR Part 660 Ambassador Place, Portland, OR 97220, excessive risk that any one area will phone: 503–820–2280. Copies of receive disproportionately large [Docket No. 070510101–7101–01] additional reports or testimony opportunities. It also supports efforts to referenced in this document may also be minimize bycatch of rockfish and RIN 0648–AV57 obtained from the Council. salmon. The current management regime with Fisheries Off West Coast States; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Frank specific sector allocations and Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; a Lockhart (Northwest Region, NMFS), differences in area and sector season Temporary Rule phone: 206–526–6142; fax: 206–526– 6736) and e-mail: start dates was first implemented for the 1997 fishery (Federal Register: May 20, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries [email protected]. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 1997 (Volume 62, Number 97)). At that Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: time, the benefits of the sector Commerce. Electronic Access allocations were to: Reduce the uncertainty of the amounts available for ACTION: Temporary rule; emergency The temporary rule also is accessible each sector, make the fishery easier to action; request for comments. via the Internet at the Office of the monitor, and eliminate the ‘‘first-come- Federal Register’s Web site at http:// SUMMARY: NMFS publishes a temporary first-serve’’ derby style incentives in the www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. rule to prohibit any vessel from fishery associated with the ‘‘no-action’’ Background information and participating in either the mothership, alternative as separate allocations documents, including the EA, are catcher-processor or shoreside delivery encourage each sector to operate at a available at the Council’s Web site at sector of the directed Pacific whiting more leisurely and safe pace. By http://pcouncil.org. (whiting) fishery off the West Coast in reducing the race for fish, separate 2007 if it does not have a history of Background sector allocations would provide greater incentives for vessels to move to other sector-specific participation in the The whiting fishery off the West Coast whiting fishery between January 1, fishing grounds if necessary to lower is managed under the Groundfish FMP bycatch levels, particularly of yellowtail 1997, and January 1, 2007. This rule is prepared by the Council and approved intended to prevent serious rockfish and salmon. In addition, with by the Secretary of Commerce under the separate allocations, each sector would conservation and management problems Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Council has that could be caused by new entrants in have greater accountability and adopted a formal process through opportunity to minimize bycatch while 2007 and to maintain the status quo which, every two years, it establishes while the Pacific Fishery Management providing each sector the flexibility of allowable catches and associated fishery starting at different times without losing Council (Council) addresses the issue of conservation and management measures increased effort in the whiting fishery any competitive advantage. It also for most of the groundfish fishery supported efforts to minimize bycatch of through an amendment to the Pacific sectors for a biennial management cycle. Groundfish Fishery Management Plan rockfish and salmon. The whiting fishery is managed Since 1997, when sector specific (FMP) for the long term. somewhat differently because there is allocations were made, the fishery has DATES: The amendments in this rule are an annual stock assessment on which been fairly stable except for a few recent effective May 14, 2007 through the Council bases an annual instances where additional rules had to November 13, 2007, except for determination of the U.S. optimum be put in place to protect overfished amendments to §§ 660.333 and 660.335, yield (OY) and the sub-quotas of the species (2004) and endangered salmon which are effective May 14, 2007. U.S. OY. Beginning in 1997, the Council (2005). As in many fisheries, when the Comments must be received by June makes annual allocations of the U.S. OY fishery is stable, most of the participants 18, 2007. available to each of three directed know each other and have a shared ADDRESSES: Comments on the fishing sectors: Mothership, catcher- interest in maintaining a stable management measures and the related processor, and shoreside delivery. situation. In this instance, cooperation environmental assessment (EA) may be Further, the directed whiting fishery has includes a common interest in ensuring sent to Frank Lockhart, Assistant a distinct seasonal structure, with the that bycatch is limited because Regional Administrator for Sustainable primary season start dates for each of excessive bycatch could close the Fisheries, Northwest Region, NMFS, the three commercial sectors being the fishery before the whiting quota is 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA same since 1997. The primary seasons reached. Therefore, there is frequent 98115–0070, fax: 206–526–6376. for the non-tribal catcher/processor and sharing of information to ensure that

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27760 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

areas of high bycatch rates are known there was the prospect of additional was intended to address actual or and avoided. This communication entry of AFA vessels in 2007, as well as potential harm to West Coast fishers happens throughout the season but is perhaps additional other vessels in the from the AFA, but that the evidence especially crucial early in the season groundfish fishery. they presented to indicate harm (i.e., an when the target species (whiting) and The Council originally considered the earlier closure of the whiting fishery in the sensitive bycatch species (overfished issue of limiting new vessel entry to the 2006 than in 2005) was due to new rockfish and salmon) are highly mobile. whiting fishery in September 2006. At participation by both AFA vessels and This communication allows fishing to that time, the Council recommended non-AFA vessels. While acknowledging be prosecuted in areas with high that NMFS implement an emergency that new market conditions were likely probability of large whiting catches with rule to prevent new entry of certain, but to attract additional vessels, he pointed low bycatch. In turn, this has provided not all, vessels into the whiting fishery out that the proposed action would have the directed whiting fishery with a long for the 2007 season, as well as prohibit denied new entry to a selected category period to pursue the fishery and kept certain vessels that participated in the of vessels (i.e., AFA vessels) but not all whiting vessels from engaging in other 2006 season. The Council stated its vessels. The RA noted that the groundfish fishing sectors that were belief that the conservation problems guidelines for the use of emergency under severe economic stress. These are that would arise from an accelerated rules call for use of notice-and-comment all benefits related to the enhanced ‘‘race for fish’’ if certain AFA vessels procedures when there are controversial communication among fishermen were allowed to remain in the fishery, actions with serious economic effects, within a stable fishery. or if additional AFA vessels were especially when the decision is largely In addition, keeping shoreside allowed to enter the fishery. The related to allocation and not processing facilities open for longer prospect of more participation was conservation. Further, the Council’s periods also has helped maintain alarming to the Council, which was remedy would not have fully addressed employment opportunities for many concerned that additional vessels would the valid conservation concerns raised who otherwise would have been result in an accelerated ‘‘race for fish,’’ by the Council. Therefore, the proposal, displaced by the severe cutbacks the with increased harvest rates for whiting. as with other allocation decisions, Council had made in other groundfish Increased harvest rates, especially if the would more appropriately be handled fishery sectors to prevent overfishing new vessels are of larger capacity or through the Council’s full rulemaking and achieve rebuilding of overfished piloted by masters unfamiliar with the process even if there were valid rockfish stocks. There is a further fishery, could lead to greater (and conservation concerns. benefit to whiting fishers and potentially disastrous) bycatch of The RA subsequently advised the processors, as the quality of the whiting overfished species of rockfish. In Council on February 13, 2007, that if it is much better later in the season addition, the Council was advised by were to submit a proposal that dealt because the fish had regained weight current whiting fishery participants that more fully with the issue of lost during the spawning season. this accelerated race for fish would conservation risks and management Finally, by shifting whiting fishing to likely lead to higher levels of fishing problems due to potential new entry of later in the season, and through other earlier in the season by the at-sea any new vessels into the directed industry voluntary actions and portion (i.e., motherships and catcher/ whiting fishery, NMFS would review communications, the industry was able processors) of the fishery; such an that proposal on its own merits. NMFS to reduce its likelihood of high bycatch occurrence could result in higher would continue to be concerned if the of overfished rockfish and salmon. bycatch of endangered or threatened request based the proposed action on In 2006, however, there was several salmon as bycatch rates are documented the AFA rather than on the Magnuson- shifts in fishery conditions that led to to be higher in the spring. The Council Stevens Act. Council concern about the potential for concluded that serious conservation and The Council discussed the issue at its major disruptions in the whiting fishery management problems would result meeting March 9, 2007, including the and related non-whiting groundfish from this accelerated ‘‘race for fish’’ history of the issue, its earlier action, fisheries. There was a significant caused by new entry of AFA vessels to NMFS’ rejection and indication of a increase in the ex-vessel price for the fishery. The Council also noted a possible remedy, and alternatives whiting. This attracted several new concern was that new entry of AFA available to the Council. There were vessels to the whiting shoreside fishery vessels could result in early four new pieces of information in 2006. Second, as rationalization of achievement of the U.S. directed harvest presented at the Council meeting that the Alaska pollock fishery was quotas, leaving West Coast-based vessels exacerbated their concern about an achieved, some vessels, including some facing no fishing or very limited fishing increased race for fish. First, the price American Fisheries Act-qualified while the AFA vessels could return to for whiting continues to increase to vessels (AFA vessels), found they could the rationalized pollock fisheries in unprecedented levels. Ex-vessel prices engage in fishing for whiting off the which they had an interest. However, increased from $77 per ton in 2004 to West Coast in the spring and early the Council proposal would have $137 per ton in 2006—nearly doubling summer and then shift to Alaska to take prohibited only certain AFA vessels since 2004 and increasing by more than their shares of pollock later in the from entry to the fishery for the fist time 22 percent in 2006 from the 2005 price. summer when Alaskan fishing in 2007, and would have removed from Industry projections for 2007 are that conditions were more favorable. Among the fishery only AFA vessels that had prices will continue to increase to more the new entries to the whiting fishery participated for the first time in 2006. than $176 per ton. Second, the U.S. were several AFA vessels. The entry of The Council’s recommendation would Optimum Yield (OY) for whiting in new vessels to the whiting fishery not have prevented additional non-AFA 2007 is 10 percent lower than the OY in resulted in achievement of the whiting vessels from entering the fishery. 2006. Third, because of higher than harvest limits earlier in the year in 2006 In a letter dated January 11, 2007, the projected rockfish bycatch rates, the than in 2005 and an earlier closure than Northwest Regional Administrator (RA), Council took action in March 2007 that anticipated of the shoreside sector, NMFS, notified the Council that he placed new and more severe constraints adversely affecting processors as well as denied its request for an emergency on non-whiting groundfish fishing. This fishers. The Council understood that rule. He noted that the Council’s action reduces the fishing opportunities for

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27761

these non-whiting sectors. Fourth, the only be transferred once a year. This emergency rule, expressing concern OY for Alaska pollock is reduced for person was not aware of the prospect of about the increased risk of excessive 2007. an emergency rule when he transferred bycatch and noting restrictive actions All of these recent and unanticipated the permit. Fairness justifies this the Council has taken toward other changes in conditions increase the exception to the regulation. groundfish fishery sectors to prevent likelihood of an accelerated race for For purposes of implementing the bycatch problems. NMFS believes it is fish: The first by making entry more Council request, which is for control of likely that increased capacity in the potentially lucrative for additional entry on a sector-by-sector basis, NMFS whiting fishery could exacerbate such vessels; the second by constraining is using 1997 as the base year. That is problems. It was noted that the whiting supply of whiting for harvest and the first year in which the three sectors limit for 2007 is lower than in 2006, and leading to more pressure among vessels began being considered for separate sub- thus there is a greater risk that new to quickly capture the limited whiting quotas and management controls. State participation would lead to more quota; and the third and fourth by landings data, observer records, and intensive competition and problems. increasing the relative attractiveness of NORPAC industry reports will be the California also pointed out the risk of whiting compared to other fishing sole evidence to demonstrate eligibility management problems if the whiting opportunities. Faced with this new based on historic sector-specific fishery were to close earlier than normal information, the Council adopted and participation. and whiting fishers were to place more submitted its new request that NMFS Public Comments and Issues pressure on other groundfish fishery promulgate an emergency rule that sectors, thereby exacerbating problems would prohibit any vessel from At the Council meeting, the Council in those sectors as well as coastal operating in the mothership, catcher- took comment on the issue prior to communities. Oregon’s representative processor, or shoreside delivery sector taking action. There were numerous on the Council was strongly in favor of of the whiting fishery in 2007 if it did expressions of support for the action as the emergency rule as the state was not have a history of sector-specific well as some comments opposed to the concerned that additional entry would participation prior to January 1, 2007. action. In addition, the Northwest result in intensive early fishing, with The Council also committed to Region and the Council have received high risk of excessive rockfish and completing an amendment to its written comments since the Council salmon bycatch. Further, an early Groundfish FMP to resolve issues action was taken. At the meeting, fishers closure of the fishery would have severe associated with AFA vessels for the long who commented were divided; some adverse impacts on coastal processors in term, consistent with the Magnuson- opposed the action while most testifying Oregon and elsewhere. It is notable that Stevens Act, the AFA, and other before the Council supported it. While Washington’s representative had applicable law. This could lead to an most of those testifying stated their opposed the proposed emergency in additional program under consideration belief that allowing new entrants would September 2006 but was now convinced of an individual fishermen’s quota cause a conservation problem, there was that 2007 presented different and system as early as 2010. some testimony that a problem would unforeseen conditions. Washington NMFS agrees that if this rule is not not occur. Some argued that leaving the noted that the Council’s proposal would implemented, an accelerated ‘‘race for fishery open to new entry could result not force out any person who had fish’’ is likely to cause serious in a high probability of intensive fishing participated in 2006. Washington conservation and management early in the season leading to supported action as reducing the risk of problems, including excessive bycatch conservation problems (especially with adverse impacts on rockfish (especially of overfished rockfish, excessive catch respect to bycatch), while others argued noting concern about canary rockfish) of endangered and threatened salmon, that the catch limit on whiting provided and salmon. The Washington and severe disruption of other assurance that there would not be any representative also noted that this groundfish fishery sectors. This rule threat to whiting, and that the limits on would be a one-year action; it will be will help maintain stability in the bycatch provided protection to incumbent on the Council to address the whiting fishery and other groundfish overfished rockfish. There was capacity issue for the long-term in a fishing sectors in 2007 while the agreement that there is an allocation timely manner. Council completes its FMP amendment issue that the Council needs to resolve. The Pacific Whiting Conservation to resolve groundfish and whiting Some urged the Council to address this Cooperative (Cooperative) fishing fleet capacity issues for the long for the longer term through Amendment recommended that the Council request term. This rule also provides that parties 15 without an emergency rule, while the emergency rule. The Cooperative who invested in 2006 and early 2007 by others supported an emergency rule to subsequently submitted written purchasing groundfish trawl limited allow the fishery to proceed as it has in comments (see below). entry permits for aggregation and use on recent years (i.e., in a stable manner) A processor who has recently a single vessel in the whiting fishery in without new entry while the Council invested in shoreside facilities has 2007 are exempted from the prohibition develops Amendment 15. A written NMFS in favor of keeping the against subsequently disaggregating spokesperson for the recreational sector fishery open, which in this context such permits. This will mitigate supported the emergency rule as it means to not freeze new entry to the financial harm to such parties who could reduce the risk of excessive shoreside processing sector. invested in good faith without knowing bycatch of salmon and rockfish, which A company that invested in 2006 by that this emergency rule could be in turn would reduce the risk of further purchasing limited entry permits and implemented. The rule also contains constraints on recreational fishing for combining them on a single vessel with provisions to allow a person who groundfish. A West Coast processing the intent of entering the fishery in 2007 transferred a permit to a ‘‘prohibited’’ industry member also spoke in favor of objected to the emergency rule proposal. vessel (a vessel not eligible to the emergency rule. In this company’s view, there is no participate in the fishery) can reverse The West Coast state officials voting ‘‘emergency’’ pursuant to NMFS’ that action and return the permit to the at the meeting all supported the guidelines for the use of emergency previous vessel or transfer it to a vessel emergency rule. The California state authority, especially for the entry of that is eligible. Normally, a permit can official made the motion for the additional processing capacity or a

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27762 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

catcher/processor vessel. They noted could enter the fishery in 2007. This cooperation of industry is vital to that NMFS disapproved the Council’s party suggested that it would be ensuring a stable fishery with minimal September 2006 proposal, and the beneficial to other whiting fishers to bycatch. NMFS determined that reasons for that disapproval would increase the number of potential buyers applying the prohibition on new entry apply in this instance as well. They of fish. only to the catcher sectors would not noted that the Council could have used Two sets of comments were received address the problem; the entry of its normal decision processes to from representatives of the mothership additional at-sea processors could also establish additional measures to manage sector. They favored the proposed lead to an accelerated race for fish as the whiting fishery and had chosen not action, with special emphasis on more parties compete for the available to do so; in their view, nothing has ensuring that eligibility for participation sector allocation, with a higher changed so significantly as to warrant is on a sector-specific basis, and that likelihood of a breakdown in emergency regulations. They also noted eligibility in 2007 be based on sector- communication and cooperation leading that the permits acquired to allow their specific participation beginning in 1997. to excessive risk of heavy early season vessel to qualify under the limited entry Responses to Comments fishing with high bycatch and fishery program were from active vessels, so disruptions. NMFS agrees that the their prospective new entry would only Because the conservation concerns Council intended that eligibility be replace existing capacity rather than add raised by the Council in 2006 still exist determined on a sector-specific basis, to the capacity of the fleet. Their letter and because, unlike their 2006 request, and has determined that 1997 should be identifies the specific analyses that they the Council’s proposed remedy fully used as the initial year for qualification maintain would be needed to satisfy addresses those concerns by of participation in the fishery on a Magnuson-Stevens Act requirement for encompassing all vessels that could sector-specific basis. This was the first management regulations and asserts that potentially enter the whiting fishery year in which management of the such analyses would show that the absent this rule, NMFS believes that the domestic whiting fishery was managed ‘‘best scientific information available’’ available information demonstrates that on a sector-specific basis. does not support an emergency rule. emergency action is warranted. This conclusion is further supported by the Evaluation of Emergency Rule Request Subsequent Public Comments on the new information received in late 2006 Against Agency Guidelines Emergency Rule Proposal and early 2007. These conditions may NMFS has considered the Council’s At the Council meeting, following the pose an unacceptably high risk that request and the information on which vote on the proposed emergency action, there would be serious conservation and the request is based. NMFS considered the NMFS representative invited written management problems if no action is also the information in the Council’s public comment on the prospective taken. The Council has been responsive final environmental impact statement action while the Council prepared the to NMFS’ objections to the prior request (FEIS) for its biennial harvest limits and actual submission for NMFS for emergency action and has taken the conservation and management consideration, requesting that they be broader action required to address the measures. This includes extensive submitted within two weeks. NMFS problem in the short term, and has information on the status of stocks and wanted to be sure it had as complete an committed to action to resolve the the economic status of the fisheries and understanding as possible on the range whiting fishery capacity issue in the the dependency of communities which of issues and concerns that various long-term through an amendment to the are dependent on those fisheries. NMFS parties would have on this matter. Groundfish FMP. NMFS notes that the has evaluated the proposal against its During this period, the following emergency rule would be in effect for at guidelines for the use of emergency comments were received: most one year, and that the rule rules, published at 62 FR 44421 (August The Pacific Whiting Conservation contains provisions intended to 21, 1997), which sets forth criteria that Cooperative wrote reiterating its support minimize financial harm to those who must be met to warrant emergency rules. for emergency action. It noted that the may have invested to participate in the Each of the criteria is discussed below. voluntary industry arrangement that fishery in 2007 not knowing they would 1. The Situation Results From Recent, results in the slow pace of fishing early be precluded from utilizing the Unforeseen Events or Recently in the season and that includes investment in the fishery. NMFS notes Discovered Circumstances collaboration and communication to further the critical need to ensure that avoid bycatch would likely end if there bycatch limits on overfished rockfish Two years ago, it could not have been were new entry to the fishery. It not be exceeded so that the stocks can foreseen that Pacific whiting would be indicated that there would be a ‘‘race for rebuild in accordance with the a much more important component of fish’’ leading to all the problems approved rebuilding plans. the West Coast groundfish fisheries as discussed by the Council when it agreed NMFS agrees with the Council that well as a potential target of Alaska to request emergency action. the risks of serious economic fishers. As noted earlier, in 2005 and The State of Oregon submitted disruptions in the event of excessive 2006, ex-vessel prices for whiting supplemental comments, reiterating its catch of rockfish are very high if there increased dramatically, and the industry concerns about the risk of excessive were no control to stop entry into the projection is that prices will continue to bycatch of rockfish as well as the whiting fishery at least for 2007. NMFS rise in 2007. The U.S. OY for whiting in economic disruption to the West Coast also agrees that the risk of loss of 2007 is down 10 percent from the 2006 whiting fishing fleet and to West Coast industry cooperation in the fishing year level, so the supply of whiting for the processors and their employees if there would pose serious risks of loss of U.S. industry will lead to increased were early closure of the whiting fishery control over bycatch. With respect to the competition even without new entry. for any reason. potential to allow new mothership The Council acted in March 2007 to One party suggested that the operations, NMFS concludes that this further restrict non-whiting fishing due emergency rule request be approved would not fully address the risks of an to higher than anticipated rockfish only with respect to the entry of new accelerated ‘‘race for fish,’’ with bycatch rates; this puts new pressure on harvesting vessels. This would mean consequent risk of early fishing and in those other sectors and makes whiting that additional mothership operations turn excessive bycatch. Again, the relatively more attractive, and could

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27763

promote shifting of effort to whiting if the consequent unacceptably high risk vessels that participated prior between no action were taken to prevent it. of excessive bycatch and fishery January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2006, Finally, while the OY for Alaska pollock disruptions. If fishing is conducted inclusive, would be eligible to is reduced and rationalization of the more intensely, there is likely to be less participate in 2007. It can be argued that Alaska pollock fishery allows many care to avoid bycatch and more the fishery is already overcapitalized, vessels that normally fish in Alaska to likelihood of ‘‘disaster’’ tows with but at least there would not be further set their own schedules for catching a extremely high bycatch levels. This overcapacity due to additional new share of the harvest. The pollock fishery would be especially true if the new entry to the fishery for short-term gain would be available later in the year, if entrants were high capacity vessels with at the expense of those with a long- desired; these vessels (many of which a need to fill up fast to cover costs, or standing interest in the fishery. have or could obtain West Coast trawl if the vessel were captained by a person It is known that at least one party limited entry permits) could choose to not familiar with the fishery and unable invested in 2006 by buying limited fish for Pacific whiting early in the year to adjust to high bycatch rates. This entry permits and aggregating them for and, when the whiting quota is reached, could lead to early closure of the application of a single permit on a shift operations to Alaska to fish for whiting fishery if bycatch limits are single vessel intended to participate in pollock. These vessels have the reached; it is important to note that if a the whiting fishery in 2007. There may capability (i.e., equipment and gear) to bycatch limit is reached, even if only by be other such situations. The regulations fish for whiting with little or no added one sector, fishing by all sectors of the for the limited entry permit program cost. Taken together, these new and whiting fishery must cease. For currently do not allow a permit unforeseen conditions support a high perspective, in early June 2004 a vessel established through aggregation of likelihood of new entry to the whiting in the mothership sector had a single multiple permits to be subsequently fishery in 2007 if no action were taken. tow of fish estimated to contain 3.9 mt disaggregated. However, to alleviate This would result in unacceptably high of canary, which is equal to 83 percent financial harm to any who in good faith risk of conservation and management of the 2007 whiting fishery bycatch made investments as described, the problems. limit for non-tribal whiting fisheries. An emergency rule provides for an accelerated race for fish could well exception from the prohibition against 2. The Situation Presents Serious result in closure of the whiting fishery disaggregation of permits. The Conservation or Management Problems before the annual quota of whiting is investor(s) may then be able to recapture in the Fishery reached, resulting in serious loss of at least a portion of the investment that As noted, the whiting stock is income and employment both to fishers might otherwise be lost. In addition, one thoroughly monitored and assessed and to processing facilities. Accelerated party is known to have tried to register annually, and the results are generally fishing for Pacific whiting in the spring a permit for use on a ‘‘prohibited’’ accepted as presenting an accurate is also likely to result in incidental vessel; the rule includes a provision assessment of the stock. The U.S. and catches of salmon in excess of the allowing such parties to register their Canada have agreed to a Treaty for joint incidental take allowances under permits for alternate, eligible vessels in management of the stock and for sharing biological opinions issued under the such cases. the harvestable surplus. Given the ESA. Also, as pointed out above, the As noted above, NMFS has Council’s relatively conservative harvest yield per fish is greater later in the established that 1997 is the initial year strategy for whiting, there is little reason season than earlier, so pressure to fish for which sector participation will be for serious conservation concern about early is likely to result in less usable considered in determining eligibility for the current and future condition of the and less valuable product. a particular sector of the whiting fishery Pacific whiting stock. In summary, allowing new entry to in 2007. State landings data, Pacific However, it is also generally true that the whiting fishery in 2007 is likely to Fishery Information Network (PacFIN) the more participants in a fishery result in serious conservation and data, observer data, and NORPAC managed under quotas, the greater the management problems. industry reports as appropriate to the likelihood that conservation will The situation can be addressed sector, will be the sole evidence to become a concern, and especially in the through emergency regulations for demonstrate the sector-specific case where the fishery is still subject to which the immediate benefits outweigh eligibility of vessels. new entry. Quite simply, new entry the value of advance notice, public encourages more intensive fishing as comment and deliberative consideration Classification soon as a fishery is open as participants of the impacts on participants to the The Assistant Administrator finds fear they will not catch a fair share of same extent as would be expected under good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to the available fish if they do not fish the normal rulemaking process. waive the requirement for prior notice early. In turn there is greater pressure to The benefit of immediate action is and opportunity for public comment, as fish hard with possibly less regard for that it provides for greater stability in such procedures are impracticable and minimizing waste or bycatch. This is the 2007 Pacific whiting fishery while contrary to the public interest. especially true in the whiting fishery, in the Council completes action on the The season for the primary West Coast which industry cooperation has been a amendment to manage the fishery over Pacific whiting fishery opened April 15 vital element in controlling the pace of the long term, possibly including south of 42° N. latitude (lat.) and opens the fishery and in sharing information conservation and management measures May 15 south of 42° N. lat. The normal so that participants would avoid areas of to deal with AFA impacts as well as the seasonal pattern of the fishery (and the high bycatch and thus help each other impacts of otherwise unlimited entry pattern that the Council believes is extend the season as long as possible. into the whiting fishery. The Council necessary to prevent adverse impacts on As noted above, this cooperation would can use its established planning process fish stocks as well as on established be less likely to continue if new entrants and the Secretary can use notice and fisheries) is to have relatively little were allowed into the fishery without comment rulemaking procedures for fishing early in the season with limit. A breakdown in cooperation and implementing the long-term strategy expanded fishing later in the year, and communication would be likely to and measures. There is little cost as only with the fishery extending through the result in an accelerated race for fish and new entry would be prohibited; any summer. This has been achieved in

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27764 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

recent years, at least in part, because of stability for the future. Providing An environmental assessment was voluntary action by an industry group opportunity for prior notice and public prepared for this action under the that has worked hard to ensure that the comments on the Council’s requested National Environmental Policy Act and season will last well into the summer or action for 2007 would delay the rule to a Finding of No Significant Impact was fall as long as the whiting quota allows the extent that the benefits of the rule signed on May 4, 2007. it. This allows less fishing when there would be nullified and the protection of This temporary rule has been are high bycatch rates for rockfish and the resources intended by the rule determined to be not significant for salmon, and more fishing when bycatch would not be provided. purposes of Executive Order 12866. rates are lower. The proposed action will have List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 As noted above, there were several beneficial effects on current participants new pieces of information supporting in the Pacific whiting fishery and on Fisheries, Fishing. the expectation of additional entry to participants in other groundfish Dated: May 11, 2007. the fleet in 2007. First, the price for fisheries. Without this action, it is fairly William T. Hogarth, whiting continues to increase to certain that there would be additional unprecedented levels, ex-vessel prices Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, entry into the fishery, meaning greater National Marine Fisheries Service. have increased from $77 per ton in 2004 competition for the available harvest I to $137 per ton in 2006—nearly (the U.S. whiting OY is reduced by 10% For the reasons set out in the doubling since 2004, and increasing by from the 2006 harvest level) and a preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is amended over 22% compared to 2005. Industry greater likelihood of an ‘‘accelerated as follows: projections for 2007 are that prices will race for fish.’’ This would be expected continue to increase to over $176 per PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST to result in early closure of the directed COAST STATES ton. Second, the U.S. Optimum Yield of whiting fishery, which in turn could whiting was reduced by 10% for the lead to idle capacity (for those who do I 1. The authority citation for part 660 2007 season compared to 2006. Third, not have the ability to shift to other continues to read as follows: because of higher than projected fisheries or other groundfish sectors) or Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. rockfish bycatch rates, the Council took excess capacity shifting to other action in March that placed more severe groundfish fisheries. Such a shift would I 2. In § 660.306, paragraph(f)(6) is constraints on non-whiting groundfish exacerbate the economic difficulty being added to read as follows: fishing. Fourth, the quota for Alaskan experienced in those non-whiting § 660.306 Prohibitions. pollock was reduced this year. All of sectors due to severe constraints on these recent changes increase the fishing levels and areas available for * * * * * chance of an accelerated race for fish: fishing. In one possible scenario, the no (f) * * * The first by making entry more lucrative action alternative would result in (6) Fish for or land whiting, or process for additional vessels, the second by rockfish bycatch limits for the whiting at sea, while participating in a constraining supply of whiting and groundfish fisheries being exceeded in specific sector (as defined at leading to more pressure among vessels the whiting fishery at levels that would § 660.373(a)), from May 14, 2007 and to quickly capture the more limited require additional reductions in other through November 13, 2007 with a supply of whiting, and the third and groundfish fishing sectors targeting vessel that has no history of fourth by increasing the relative healthy groundfish stocks. participation within that specific sector attractiveness of entering the whiting of the whiting fishery in the period after Therefore, NMFS has concluded it is fishery this year. December 31, 1996, and prior to January impracticable and contrary to the public Without this emergency rule, new 1, 2007, as specified in § 660.373(j). entry is likely early in the season; if this interest to provide an opportunity for prior notice and public comment under I 3. In § 660.333, paragraph (f) is added happens, the voluntary limitation of to read as follows: early season fishing will likely cease to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). For the same reasons be effective, resulting in more intensive as discussed above, the Assistant § 660.333 Limited entry fishery—eligibility early season fishing and higher bycatch Administrator also finds that good cause and registration. levels. It also would likely result in exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive * * * * * early achievement either of a bycatch the 30-day delay in effectiveness of this (f) Limited entry permits indivisible. limit (causing early closure of the rule. As previously discussed, this rule Nothwithstanding paragraph (d), a whiting fishery) or of the whiting catch is necessary to prevent the conservation trawl-endorsed limited entry permit that quota (also causing early closure of the and management problems that would was created between December 31, whiting fishery). Fishers from Alaska arise from additional entry to the Pacific 2006, and May 14, 2007 by aggregating could return to Alaska; West Coast- whiting fishery in 2007. Without this multiple limited entry permits under based vessels would not have that rule, there will be new entry, and § 660.335(b) may be disaggregated back alternative and would either be idled or current stability in the fishery, with low into the initially combined component would add to pressure in the severely bycatch of rockfish and salmon, will permits. likely dissolve. This would pose an constrained other sectors of the I 4. In § 660.335, paragraph (f)(3) is unacceptable risk of excessive bycatch groundfish fishery. In the worst case, added to read as follows: the whiting fishery would catch so of overfished rockfish and of salmon as much in excess of its rockfish bycatch well as an unacceptable risk of severe § 660.335 Limited entry permits—renewal, limits that the Council would be forced management problems in the combination, stacking, change of permit to impose even more limits on the other economically stressed groundfish ownership, and transfer. groundfish fishery sectors to keep total fishery. * * * * * bycatch within the total limits. The This temporary rule is exempt from (f) * * * emergency rule maintains the status quo the procedures of the Regulatory (3) Any transfer of a trawl-endorsed in the fishery at least through 2007, Flexibility Act because the rule is issued limited entry permit that occurred while the Council develops a long-term without opportunity for prior notice and between December 31, 2006, and May management program to achieve opportunity for public comment. 14, 2007 may be rescinded by the permit

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27765

owner without counting against that primary season (as defined at harvested, whiting in the period after permit owner’s once per calendar year § 660.373(b)) in the period after December 31, 1996, and prior to January restriction on frequency of permit December 31, 1996, and prior to January 1, 2007. Observer data collected by the transfers for the 2007 calendar year. 1, 2007. State fish ticket data collected Northwest Fisheries Science Center and * * * * * by the states and maintained by Pacific by North Pacific Groundfish Observer I 5. In § 660.373, paragraph (j) is added States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Program as organized under the Alaska to read as follows: Pacific Fishery Information System is Fisheries Science Center’s NORPAC the sole evidence to demonstrate database is the sole evidence to § 660.373 Pacific whiting (whiting) fishery participation in this sector. demonstrate participation in this sector. management. (ii) To harvest whiting in the * * * * * mothership sector between May 17, (iv) to harvest and process whiting in (j) 2007 Pacific whiting fishery. (1) In 2007 and November 13, 2007, a vessel the catcher-processor sector between general, a person may fish for or land must have harvested whiting for May 17, 2007 and November 13, 2007, whiting or process whiting at sea in a delivery to motherships in the period a vessel must have harvested and sector of the whiting fishery (as defined after December 31, 1996, and prior to processed whiting in the period after at § 660.373(a)) between May 17, 2007 January 1, 2007. Observer data collected December 31, 1996, and prior to January and November 13, 2007 only with a by the Northwest Fisheries Science 1, 2007. Observer data collected by vessel that has history of participation Center and by North Pacific Groundfish Northwest Fisheries Science Center and in that sector of the whiting fishery in Observer Program as organized under by North Pacific Groundfish Observer the period after December 31, 1996, and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center’s Program as organized under the Alaska prior to January 1, 2007. Specifically: NORPAC database is the sole evidence Fisheries Science Center’s NORPAC (i) To harvest whiting in the shore- to demonstrate participation in this database is the sole evidence to based sector between May 17, 2007 and sector. demonstrate participation in this sector. November 13, 2007, a vessel must have (iii) To process whiting in the (2) [Reserved] harvested for delivery to a shore-based mothership sector between May 17, processor at least 4000 lbs (1.81 mt) of 2007 and November 13, 2007, a vessel [FR Doc. 07–2417 Filed 5–14–07; 8:58 am] whiting in a single trip during the must have processed at sea, but not BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:37 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR1.SGM 17MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES 27766

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 95

Thursday, May 17, 2007

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER public comments on the information at For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. contains notices to the public of the proposed this time. Patrice M. Bubar, issuance of rules and regulations. The Deputy Director, Division of DATES: There will be an opportunity for purpose of these notices is to give interested Intergovernmental Liaison and Rulemaking, persons an opportunity to participate in the public comment when the notice of Office of Federal and State Materials and rule making prior to the adoption of the final proposed rulemaking is published in the Environmental Management Programs. rules. Federal Register. [FR Doc. E7–9520 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: The preliminary draft rule BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY language can be viewed and COMMISSION downloaded electronically via the NRC’s rulemaking Web site at http:// DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 10 CFR Parts 26, 60, 63, 73, and 74 ruleforum.llnl.gov. Along with any publicly available documents related to Federal Aviation Administration RIN 3150–AI06 this rulemaking, the draft information may be viewed electronically on public 14 CFR Part 39 Geologic Repository Operations Area computers in the NRC’s Public Security and Material Control and [Docket No. FAA–2007–27976; Directorate Accounting Requirements Document Room (PDR), located at One Identifier 2007–CE–042–AD] White Flint North, 11555 Rockville RIN 2120–AA64 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Room Commission. O–1 F21, and open to the public on Airworthiness Directives; Cirrus Federal workdays from 7:45 a.m. until ACTION: Availability of preliminary draft Design Corporation Models SR20 and rule language. 4:15 p.m. The PDR reproduction SR22 Airplanes contractor will make copies of SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory documents for a fee. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Commission (NRC) is making available Administration (FAA), Department of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Transportation (DOT). preliminary draft rule language to Merri Horn, Office of Federal and State ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking amend its regulations to revise the Materials and Environmental security requirements and material (NPRM). Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear control and accounting (MC&A) Regulatory Commission, Washington, requirements for a geologic repository SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new operations area (GROA). The goal of this DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415– airworthiness directive (AD) for certain rulemaking is to ensure effective 8126, e-mail, [email protected]. Cirrus Design Corporation (CDC) Models SR20 and SR22 airplanes. This security measures are in place for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC protection of high-level radioactive proposed AD would require you to is making a preliminary version of the replace the pick-up collar support and waste given the post-September 11, draft proposed rule language available 2001, threat environment. New nylon screws, of the Cirrus Airplane to inform stakeholders of the current Parachute System (CAPS), with a new requirements for specific training status of this proposed rulemaking. This enhancements, improved access design pick-up collar support and preliminary draft rule language may be custom tension screws. This proposed authorization, and enhancements to subject to significant revisions during defensive strategies will be AD results from a CDC report of an in- the rulemaking process. The NRC is not flight CAPS activation where the incorporated. The proposed rule will soliciting early public comments on this reinstate the alcohol and drug parachute failed to successfully deploy. preliminary draft rule language. No provisions of the fitness-for-duty We are proposing this AD to correct stakeholder requests for a comment provisions to a GROA. The proposed pick-up collar support fasteners of the rule will also impose the fatigue portion period will be granted at this stage in CAPS, which could result in the of the fitness-for-duty requirements for the rulemaking process. Stakeholders premature separation of the collar. This the security personnel at a GROA. The will have an opportunity to comment on condition, if not corrected, could result proposed rule will establish general the rule language when it is published in the parachute failing to successfully performance objectives and as a proposed rule. deploy (CAPS failure). corresponding system capabilities for The NRC’s preliminary draft rule DATES: We must receive comments on the GROA MC&A program, with a focus language will be posted on the NRC’s this proposed AD by June 18, 2007. on strengthening, streamlining, and rulemaking Web site at http:// ADDRESSES: Use one of the following consolidating all MC&A regulations ruleforum.llnl.gov. The NRC may post addresses to comment on this proposed specific to a GROA. In addition, the updates to the draft proposed rule AD: • proposed rule will require the language on the rulemaking Web site. DOT Docket Web site: Go to emergency plan to address radiological http://dms.dot.gov and follow the emergencies. The availability of the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day instructions for sending your comments preliminary draft rule language is of May, 2007. electronically. intended to inform stakeholders of the • Mail: Docket Management Facility; current status of the NRC’s activities, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 but the NRC is not soliciting formal Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27767

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– environmental, and energy aspects of This condition, if not corrected, could 0001. the proposed AD. We will consider all result in the parachute failing to • Fax: (202) 493–2251. comments received by the closing date successfully deploy (CAPS failure). • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on and may amend the proposed AD in Relevant Service Information the plaza level of the Nassif Building, light of those comments. 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, We will post all comments we We have reviewed CDC’s Alert DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday receive, without change, to http:// Service Bulletin No. SB A2X–95–10 R2, through Friday, except Federal holidays. dms.dot.gov, including any personal Issued April 2, 2007, Revised: April 24, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 2007. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each The service information describes instruction for submitting comments. procedures for replacing the pick-up For service information identified in substantive verbal contact we receive concerning this proposed AD. collar support of the CAPS with a new this proposed AD, contact Cirrus Design design pick-up collar support and Corporation, 4515 Taylor Circle, Duluth, Discussion replacing the nylon screws with custom Minnesota 55811; telephone (218) 727– aluminum tension screws. 2737; internet address: http:// We have received a CDC report of an www.cirrusdesign.com. in-flight CAPS activation where the FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: parachute failed to successfully deploy. Wess Rouse, Aerospace Engineer, 2300 A CDC airplane in Australia had an We are proposing this AD because we East Devon Avenue, Room 107, Des engine failure and was making an off evaluated all information and Plaines, Illinois 60018; telephone: (847) airport landing. The pilot activated the determined the unsafe condition 294–8113; fax: (847) 297–7834. CAPS, and evidence indicates that the described previously is likely to exist or parachute was not properly extracted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: develop on other products of the same from the airplane. type design. This proposed AD would Comments Invited Testing indicates that the force of the require you to do a replacement of the We invite you to send any written CAPS rocket ignition and rocket blase pick-up collar support and associated relevant data, views, or arguments may prematurely break the nylon pick fastening screws of the CAPS. regarding this proposed AD. Send your up collar/support screws. When comments to an address listed under the functioning properly the screws should Costs of Compliance ADDRESSES section. Include the docket not break until impacted by a flange at We estimate that this proposed AD number, ‘‘FAA–2007–27976; Directorate the rocket base. A prematurely would affect 2,677 airplanes in the U.S. Identifier 2007–CE–042–AD’’ at the separated collar/support may bind on registry. beginning of your comments. We the rocket as it slides down toward the We estimate the following costs to do specifically invite comments on the flange at the base of the rocket. This the proposed replacement of the pick-up overall regulatory, economic, may alter the direction of the rocket. collar support of the CAPS:

Total cost per Total cost on Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators

2 work-hours × $80 per hour = $160 ...... $17 $177 $473,829

Note: CDC will provide warranty credit to products identified in this rulemaking We prepared a regulatory evaluation the extent noted in Cirrus Alert Service action. of the estimated costs to comply with Bulletin No. SB A2X–95–10 R2, Issued April this porposed AD and placed it in the Regulatory Findings 2, 2007, Revised: April 24, 2007. AD docket. Authority for This Rulemaking We have determined that this Examining the AD Docket proposed AD would not have federalism Title 49 of the United States Code implications under Executive Order You may examine the AD docket that specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 13132. This proposed AD would not contains the proposed AD, the rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, have a substantial direct effect on the regulatory evaluation, any comments Section 106, describes the authority of States, on the relationship between the received, and other information on the the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, national Government and the States, or Internet at http://dms.dot.gov; or in Aviation Programs, describes in more on the distribution of power and person at the Docket Management detail the scope of the Agency’s responsibilities among the various Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., authority. levels of government. Monday through Friday, except Federal We are issuing this rulemaking under For the reasons discussed above, I holidays. The Docket Office (telephone the authority described in Subtitle VII, certify that the proposed regulation: (800) 647–5227) is located at the street Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, address stated in the ADDRESSES section. 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that Comments will be available in the AD action’’ under Executive Order 12866; section, Congress charges the FAA with docket shortly after receipt. promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the air commerce by prescribing regulations DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 for practices, methods, and procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation the Administrator finds necessary for 3. Will not have a significant safety, Safety. safety in air commerce. This regulation economic impact, positive or negative, is within the scope of that authority on a substantial number of small entities The Proposed Amendment because it addresses an unsafe condition under the criteria of the Regulatory Accordingly, under the authority that is likely to exist or develop on Flexibility Act. delegated to me by the Administrator,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27768 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

the FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR Comments Due Date Unsafe Condition part 39 as follows: (a) We must receive comments on this (d) This AD results from a Cirrus Design airworthiness directive (AD) action by June Corporation (CDC) report of an in-flight PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 18, 2007. Cirrus Airplane Parachute System (CAPS) DIRECTIVES activation where the parachute failed to Affected ADs 1. The authority citation for part 39 successfully deploy. We are issuing this AD continues to read as follows: (b) None. to correct pick-up collar support fasteners of the CAPS, which could result in the Applicability Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. premature separation of the collar. This (c) This AD applies to Model SR20 § 39.13 [Amended] condition, if not corrected, could result in the airplanes, serial numbers (SN) 1005 through parachute failing to successfully deploy 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 1798, and Model SR22 airplanes, SN 0002 (CAPS failure). the following new AD: through 2437, that are certificated in any Compliance Cirrus Design Corporation: Docket No. FAA– category. 2007–27976; Directorate Identifier 2007– (e) To address this problem, you must do CE–042–AD. the following, unless already done:

Actions Compliance Procedures

Replace the pick-up collar support of the CAPS Within the next 25 hours time-in-service (TIS), Follow Cirrus Alert Service Bulletin No. SB with the new design pick-up collar support or within 60 days, whichever occurs first A2X–95–10 R2, Issued April 2, 2007, Re- and the two nylon collar support screws with after the effective date of this AD. vised: April 24, 2007. new custom aluminum tension screws. One of the following must do the replacement: (1) A CDC trained and authorized para- chute system technician who also holds an Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) me- chanic license; or (2) a CDC trained and authorized para- chute system technician who is super- vised by an A&P mechanic.

Alternative Methods of Compliance DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The proposed AD would require actions (AMOCs) that are intended to address the unsafe (f) The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Federal Aviation Administration condition described in the MCAI. Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the DATES: We must receive comments on authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 14 CFR Part 39 this proposed AD by June 18, 2007. requested using the procedures found in 14 ADDRESSES: You may send comments by CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Wess [Docket No. FAA–2007–27974; Directorate any of the following methods: Rouse, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 2300 East Identifier 2007–CE–040–AD] • DOT Docket Web Site: Go to http:// Devon Avenue, Room 107, Des Plaines, RIN 2120–AA64 Illinois 60018; telephone: (847) 294–8113; dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments fax: (847) 297–7834. Before using any Airworthiness Directives; Diamond approved AMOC on any airplane to which electronically. Aircraft Industries GmbH Model DA 40 • Fax: (202) 493–2251. the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate and DA 40F Airplanes • principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Mail: Docket Management Facility, Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking AGENCY: Federal Aviation U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 a PI, your local FSDO. Administration (FAA), Department of Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Transportation (DOT). Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– Related Information 0001. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (g) To get copies of the service information • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on (NPRM). referenced in this AD, contact Cirrus Design the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Corporation, 4515 Taylor Circle, Duluth, SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, Minnesota 55811; telephone: (218) 727–2737; DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday internet address: www.cirrusdesign.com. To airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This proposed through Friday, except Federal holidays. view the AD docket, go to the Docket • AD results from mandatory continuing Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Management Facility; U.S. Department of http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., airworthiness information (MCAI) Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, originated by an aviation authority of instructions for submitting comments. DC, or on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. another country to identify and correct Examining the AD Docket The docket number is Docket No. FAA– an unsafe condition on an aviation 2007–27976; Directorate Identifier 2007–CE– product. The MCAI describes the unsafe You may examine the AD docket on 042–AD. condition as: the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May A nose landing gear leg failed in area of the Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 11, 2007. nose gear leg pivot axle. This airplane was Monday through Friday, except Federal David R. Showers, mostly operated on grass runways and training operations. This failure was based on holidays. The AD docket contains this Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, a fatigue crack developed in the pivot axle. proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, Aircraft Certification Service. Material inspections figured out that this any comments received, and other [FR Doc. 07–2438 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] cracks may also develop on other serial No. information. The street address for the BILLING CODE 4910–13–M pending the type of operation. Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27769

5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. mostly operated on grass runways and Based on these figures, we estimate Comments will be available in the AD training operations. This failure was based on the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. docket shortly after receipt. a fatigue crack developed in the pivot axle. operators to be $38,080, or $80 per Material inspections figured out that this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: product. cracks may also develop on other serial No. Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, pending the type of operation. In addition, we estimate that any FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 necessary follow-on actions would take Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, The MCAI requires repetitively about 8 work-hours and require parts Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– inspecting the nose landing gear leg for costing $1,715, for a cost of $2,355 per 4145; fax: (816) 329–4090. cracks and replacing the nose landing product. We have no way of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: gear leg if cracks are found. determining the number of products You may obtain further information that may need these actions. Streamlined Issuance of AD by examining the MCAI in the AD The FAA is implementing a new docket. Authority for This Rulemaking process for streamlining the issuance of Relevant Service Information Title 49 of the United States Code ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined specifies the FAA’s authority to issue process will allow us to adopt MCAI Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, safety requirements in a more efficient has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin section 106, describes the authority of manner and will reduce safety risks to No. MSB40–046/1, No. MSBD4–046/1, the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: the public. This process continues to dated April 25, 2007. The actions Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more follow all FAA AD issuance processes to described in this service information are detail the scope of the Agency’s meet legal, economic, Administrative intended to correct the unsafe condition authority. Procedure Act, and Federal Register identified in the MCAI. We are issuing this rulemaking under requirements. We also continue to meet FAA’s Determination and Requirements the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, our technical decision-making of the Proposed AD Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: responsibilities to identify and correct This product has been approved by General requirements.’’ Under that unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated section, Congress charges the FAA with products. the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in This proposed AD references the air commerce by prescribing regulations MCAI and related service information in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with this State of for practices, methods, and procedures that we considered in forming the the Administrator finds necessary for engineering basis to correct the unsafe Design Authority, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the safety in air commerce. This regulation condition. The proposed AD contains is within the scope of that authority text copied from the MCAI and for this MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this because it addresses an unsafe condition reason might not follow our plain that is likely to exist or develop on language principles. AD because we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe products identified in this rulemaking Comments Invited condition exists and is likely to exist or action. We invite you to send any written develop on other products of the same Regulatory Findings relevant data, views, or arguments about type design. We determined that this proposed AD this proposed AD. Send your comments Differences Between This Proposed AD would not have federalism implications to an address listed under the and the MCAI or Service Information under Executive Order 13132. This ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2007–27974; Directorate Identifier We have reviewed the MCAI and proposed AD would not have a 2007–CE–040–AD’’ at the beginning of related service information and, in substantial direct effect on the States, on your comments. We specifically invite general, agree with their substance. But the relationship between the national comments on the overall regulatory, we might have found it necessary to use Government and the States, or on the economic, environmental, and energy different words from those in the MCAI distribution of power and aspects of this proposed AD. We will to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. responsibilities among the various consider all comments received by the operators and is enforceable. In making levels of government. closing date and may amend this these changes, we do not intend to differ For the reasons discussed above, I proposed AD because of those substantively from the information certify this proposed regulation: comments. provided in the MCAI and related 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory We will post all comments we service information. action’’ under Executive Order 12866; receive, without change, to http:// We might also have proposed 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the dms.dot.gov, including any personal different actions in this AD from those DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures information you provide. We will also in the MCAI in order to follow FAA (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and post a report summarizing each policies. Any such differences are 3. Will not have a significant substantive verbal contact we receive highlighted in a NOTE within the economic impact, positive or negative, about this proposed AD. proposed AD. on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Discussion Costs of Compliance Flexibility Act. Austro Control, which is the aviation Based on the service information, we We prepared a regulatory evaluation authority for Austria, has issued AD No. estimate that this proposed AD would of the estimated costs to comply with A–2005–005, dated November 15, 2005 affect about 476 products of U.S. this proposed AD and placed it in the (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to registry. We also estimate that it would AD docket. correct an unsafe condition for the take about 1 work-hour per product to List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 specified products. The MCAI states: comply with the basic requirements of A nose landing gear leg failed in area of the this proposed AD. The average labor Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation nose gear leg pivot axle. This airplane was rate is $80 per work-hour. safety, Safety.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27770 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

The Proposed Amendment (3) Do the actions required in paragraphs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD following Diamond Accordingly, under the authority Aircraft Industries GmbH Mandatory Service Office of the Secretary delegated to me by the Administrator, Bulletin No. MSB40–046/1, No. MSBD4–046/ the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 1, dated April 25, 2007, and the applicable 14 CFR Parts 217, 241, 248, 250, 291, 39 as follows: maintenance manual. 298 and 374a PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS FAA AD Differences [Docket No. OST 2006–26053] DIRECTIVES Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ RIN 2139–AA11 1. The authority citation for part 39 or service information as follows: No continues to read as follows: differences. Submitting Airline Data via the Internet Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Other FAA AD Provisions AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT. § 39.13 [Amended] (g) The following provisions also apply to ACTION: Notice of public meeting. this AD: 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the following new AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, Transportation (DOT) is hosting a public Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH: Docket FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs meeting to discuss the submission of air No. FAA–2007–27974; Directorate for this AD, if requested using the procedures carrier traffic, financial, and consumer Identifier 2007–CE–040–AD. found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to reports via a secure internet connection. Comments Due Date ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace The public meeting was requested by the Air Transport Association. DOT staff (a) We must receive comments by June 18, Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 2007. 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri will demonstrate e-filing procedures 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816) and be available to answer questions. Affected ADs 329–4090. Before using any approved AMOC During the meeting, the DOT will (b) None. on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, propose a pilot program for a limited Applicability notify your appropriate principal inspector number of air carriers to test the internet (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District filing system prior to the system (c) This AD applies to the following becoming operational. A cross section of airplanes certificated in any category: Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. major, national, regional, commuter and Model Serial Nos. (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement foreign air carriers will be invited to in this AD to obtain corrective actions from volunteer to participate in the pilot DA 40 ..... All serial numbers beginning with a manufacturer or other source, use these program. 40.006. actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective DATES: The meeting will be held June DA 40F .. All serial numbers beginning with actions are considered FAA-approved if they 21, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. 40.F001. are approved by the State of Design Authority All serial numbers beginning with (or their delegated agent). You are required ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 40.FC001. to assure the product is airworthy before it the new DOT headquarters building at is returned to service. 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Subject (3) Reporting Requirements: For any Washington, DC 20590. The room (d) Air Transport Association of America reporting requirement in this AD, under the number will be announced at a later (ATA) Code 32: Landing Gear. provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act date. Persons attending the public meeting must pass through the building Reason (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has security; therefore, we are requesting (e) The mandatory continuing that you register for attendance by airworthiness information (MCAI) states: approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control e-mailing or calling Ms. Sharon Herman ‘‘A nose landing gear leg failed in area of Number 2120–0056. at [email protected] or (202) the nose gear leg pivot axle. This airplane 366–9059. was mostly operated on grass runways and Related Information training operations. This failure was based on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: a fatigue crack developed in the pivot axle. (h) Refer to MCAI Austro Control AD No. Bernie Stankus, Office of Airline Material inspections figured out that this A–2005–005, dated November 15, 2005; and Information, RTS–42, Research and crack may also develop on other serial No. Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Innovative Technology Administration, pending the type of operation.’’ Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB40–046/ Bureau of Transportation Statistics The MCAI requires repetitively inspecting 1, No. MSBD4–046/1, dated April 25, 2007, (BTS), telephone number (202) 366– the nose landing gear leg for cracks and for related information. 4387, fax number (202) 366–3383 or replacing the nose landing gear leg if cracks Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May e-mail [email protected]. are found. 10, 2007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Actions and Compliance Charles L. Smalley, of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) was (f) Unless already done, do the following Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, published on December 20, 2006 (71 FR actions: Aircraft Certification Service. 76226). You may review comments to (1) Within the next 100 hours time-in- [FR Doc. E7–9495 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] the NPRM at http://www.dms.dot.gov, service (TIS) after the effective date of this Docket 26053. AD, inspect the nose landing gear leg for BILLING CODE 4910–13–P cracks. Repetitively inspect thereafter at Background intervals not to exceed 200 hours TIS. (2) Before further flight after any inspection Receiving and processing aviation in which cracks are found, replace the nose data is an essential business process for landing gear leg. After replacement, continue the DOT. To increase efficiency and with the repetitive inspection requirement reduce costs of the filing process to both specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. the air carriers and the government,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27771

DOT has proposed that all aviation data [email protected] or (202) 366– Issued in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2007. collected by the BTS be transmitted via 9059. Donald W. Bright, the internet (e-filing). To the maximum Assistant Director, Airline Information, extent practicable, the proposed e-filing FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Transportation Statistics. system will be user friendly. Bernie Stankus, Office of Airline [FR Doc. E7–9209 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Automated, built-in data edits would Information, RTS–42, Research and BILLING CODE 4910–HY–P alert filers of incomplete information, Innovative Technology Administration, thus reducing filing errors and the need Bureau of Transportation Statistics, for corrective re-processing. E-filing is telephone number (202) 366–4387, fax DEPARTMENT OF LABOR more secure than attaching files to number (202) 366–3383 or e-mail e-mails. E-filing does not have the size [email protected]. Occupational Safety and Health limit constraints encountered by Administration attachments to e-mail submissions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: E-filing provides the submitters with Background 29 CFR Parts 1910, 1915, 1917, and immediate confirmation that the filing 1918 has been received by BTS. E-filing The long tarmac delays that occurred should eliminate the need for BTS to in late 2006 and early 2007 focused [Docket No. OSHA–2007–0044] key punch hard copy records into its public attention on the DOT’s Part 234 various data bases. Airline Service Quality Performance RIN 1218–AC08 During this public meeting, DOT Reports. In reviewing taxi-out times, it Updating OSHA Standards Based on representatives will answer questions was brought to our attention that the air about the proposed system, the pilot National Consensus Standards; carriers were inconsistent in reporting Personal Protective Equipment program and gather additional public gate-departure times when an aircraft comments. A summary of the public returned to the gate. Some carriers were AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health meeting will be placed in the reporting the initial gate departure time Administration (OSHA), Department of rulemaking docket. while others were reporting the Labor. Issued in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2007. ‘‘second’’ gate departure time. There are ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Donald W. Bright, advantages and disadvantages with both Assistant Director, Airline Information, methods. SUMMARY: OSHA is proposing to revise the personal protective equipment (PPE) Bureau of Transportation Statistics. By reporting the first gate-departure [FR Doc. E7–9210 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] sections of its general industry, shipyard time, the DOT knows the time interval employment, longshoring, and marine BILLING CODE 4910–HY–P from when the aircraft was ready to terminals standards regarding the use of depart and when the aircraft actually eye and face protective devices, head DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION departed the airport (wheels-off time). protection, and foot protection. OSHA is However, many times the air carrier is proposing to replace the existing Office of the Secretary credited with an on-time departure, references to specific consensus when in reality the aircraft returned to standards with performance language 14 CFR Part 234 the gate only to depart well after the requiring PPE to be constructed in scheduled departure time. Also, the accordance with good design standards. Reporting Requirements for Aircraft taxi-out time is miscalculated, as the The proposed revision includes Gate Returns time that the aircraft was parked at the guidance for determining what is a good design standard. In addition, OSHA is AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT. gate awaiting re-boarding is counted in the taxi out time. proposing to add non-mandatory ACTION: Notice of public meeting. appendices that list standards that Reporting the second gate-departure constitute good design standards as SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of time disguises inconveniences that the used in the requirement. Transportation (DOT) is hosting a public passengers endured by making it appear OSHA is also proposing to delete a meeting to discuss the reporting of on- that they were on the aircraft for a much paragraph in its ventilation standard time aviation data, specifically the shorter duration before wheels-off time. that requires safety shoes to comply reporting of gate-departure time when Some have indicated that the taxi-out with a specific American National an aircraft returns to the gate after an time for carriers reporting the second Standards Institute (ANSI) standard, initial gate departure, but before the gate departure time is a more accurate and another paragraph in in its welding, wheels-off time, and the need to report assessment of taxi-out times. cutting and brazing standard that gate-departure time when the flight is requires filter lenses and plates in eye ultimately cancelled. During recent snowstorms in the northeast, many flights departed the protective equipment to meet a test for DATES: The meeting will be held June boarding gates only to spend many transmission of radiant energy 20, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. hours on the tarmac being de-iced and prescribed in another specific ANSI ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at waiting for improved weather standard. In proposing to delete these the new DOT headquarters building at conditions. When the weather paragraphs, OSHA intends for this 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SW., deteriorated, flights were cancelled. safety equipment to comply with the Washington, DC 20590. The room applicable PPE design provisions in Historically, carriers have not reported number will be announced at a later Subpart I of the general industry gate-departure times when the flight is date. Persons attending the public standards. later cancelled. During this public meeting must pass through the building These proposed revisions are a security; therefore, we are requesting meeting, the Department will attempt to continuation of OSHA’s effort to update that you register for attendance by e- clarify the reporting requirements for or remove references to specific mailing or calling Ms. Sharon Herman at aircraft that return to departure gates. consensus and industry standards

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27772 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

located throughout the Agency’s contact Kevin Ropp, Director, OSHA also provides guidance on what is a standards. Office of Communications, Room N– good design standard. In addition, 3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 DATES: Comments and requests for an OSHA is proposing to add non- informal public hearing must be Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, mandatory appendices that list submitted by the following dates: DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–1999. standards that constitute good design • Hard copy: Your comments or For technical inquiries, contact Ted standards for purposes of the hearing requests must be submitted Twardowski, Directorate of Standards requirement. Second, OSHA is (postmarked or sent) by July 16, 2007. and Guidance, Room N–3609, OSHA, proposing to delete two paragraphs in • Electronic transmission and U.S. Department of Labor, 200 § 1910.94 (Ventilation) and § 1910.252 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, facsimile: Your comments or hearing (Welding, cutting and brazing) DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–2070 or requests must be sent by July 16, 2007. referencing specific versions of fax: (202) 693–1663. Copies of this American National Standards Institute ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Federal Register notice are available (ANSI) standards on foot protection and requests for hearings and additional from the OSHA Office of Publications, eye and face protective devices, materials by any of the following Room N–3101, U.S. Department of respectively. OSHA discusses each methods: Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., action below. Electronically: You may submit Washington, DC 20210, telephone: (202) comments, requests for hearings, and 693–1888. Electronic copies of this B. Revisions to PPE Sections in General attachments electronically at http:// Federal Register notice, as well as news Industry, Shipyard Employment, www.regulations.gov, which is the releases and other relevant documents, Longshoring, and Marine Terminals Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the are available at OSHA’s Web page at Standards instructions on-line for making http://www.osha.gov. (1) Background electronic submissions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fax: If your submissions, including Subpart I of OSHA’s general industry attachments, are not longer than 10 Table of Contents standards contains design requirements pages, you may fax them to the OSHA I. Discussion of Changes for eye and face protective devices, head Docket Office at (202) 693–1648. II. Legal Considerations protection, and foot protection. See Mail, hand delivery, express mail, III. Preliminary Economic Analysis and §§ 1910.133, 1910.135, 1910.136. OSHA messenger or courier service: You must Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification IV. Paperwork Reduction Act has similar requirements in subpart I of submit three copies of your comments, V. Federalism part 1915 (Shipyard Employment), requests for hearings and attachments to VI. State-Plan States subpart E of part 1917 (Marine the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. VII. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Terminals), and subpart J of part 1918 OSHA—2007—0044, U.S. Department VIII. Authority and Signature (Longshoring). These rules require, of Labor, Room N–2625, 200 I. Discussion of Changes among other things, that this PPE Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, comply with certain ANSI standards DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express A. Introduction incorporated by reference, unless the mail, messenger and courier service) are As discussed in a previous Federal employer demonstrates that a piece of accepted during the Department of Register notice (69 FR 68283), OSHA is equipment is as effective as equipment Labor’s and Docket Office’s normal undertaking a series of projects to that complies with the incorporated business hours, 8:15 a.m.–4:45 p.m., e.t. update its standards to reflect the latest ANSI standard. See, e.g., Instructions: All submissions must versions of consensus and industry § 1910.133(b)(1).1 These design include the Agency name and the OSHA standards. These projects will include provisions are part of comprehensive docket number for this rulemaking updating or revoking consensus and requirements to ensure that employees (OSHA Docket No. OSHA–2007–0044). industry standards incorporated by use PPE that will protect them from Submissions, including any personal reference, updating regulatory text of hazards in the workplace. information you provide, are placed in current OSHA rules that were adopted All of the incorporated ANSI the public docket without change and directly from the language of outdated standards have been superseded by may be made available online at http:// consensus standards, and, where more current versions. Table I lists the www.regulations.gov. appropriate, replacing specific ANSI standards that are incorporated by Docket: To read or download references to outdated consensus reference and the current versions of submissions or other material in the standards with performance-oriented those standards for the PPE that are docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov requirements. This action is another covered by this proposed rule. or the OSHA Docket Office at the step in OSHA’s long-term effort to address above. All documents in the update or revoke references to specific 1 The general industry and shipyard employment docket are listed in the consensus and industry standards. standards expressly allow employers to use PPE www.regulations.gov index, however, OSHA is performing two main actions that is as protective as PPE constructed in some information (e.g., copyrighted in this proposal. First, OSHA is accordance with the incorporated standards. OSHA material) is not publicly available to uses its de minimis policy to allow employers proposing to revise the personal covered by the longshoring and marine terminals read or download through the Web site. protective equipment (PPE) sections of standards to use PPE that is as protective as PPE All submissions, including copyrighted its general industry, shipyard constructed in accordance with the incorporated material, are available for inspection employment, longshoring, and marine standards. See OSHA Instruction CPL 2.103, Field and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Inspection Reference Manual Ch. III, C.2.g; terminals rules to require that PPE be Memorandum from Richard Fairfax, Director, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For constructed in accordance with good Directorate of Enforcement Programs to Regional general information and press inquiries design standards. The proposed revision Administrators (June 19, 2006).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27773

TABLE 1.—CURRENT OSHA PPE REQUIREMENTS

Incorporated Current version of ANSI Subpart/section PPE ANSI standard standard

Subpart I/§ 1910.133 (Eye and Face Devices- § 1910.133(b)(1) Protective eye and face de- Z87.1–1989 ANSI Z87.1–2003. General Industry). vices purchased after July 5, 1994. § 1910.133(b)(2) Protective eye and face de- Z87.1–1968 ANSI Z87.1–2003. vices purchased before July 5, 1994. Subpart I/§ 1910.135 (Headwear-General In- § 1910.135(b)(1) Protective helmets purchased Z89.1–1986 ANSI Z89.1–2003. dustry). after July 5, 1994. § 1910.135(b)(2) Protective helmets purchased Z89.1–1969 ANSI Z89.1–2003. before July 5, 1994. Subpart I/§ 1910.136 (Footwear-General Indus- § 1910.136(b)(1) Protective footwear purchased Z41–1991 ASTM F–2412–05 &–2413– try). after July 5, 1994. 05 2 § 1910.136(b)(2) Protective footwear purchased Z41.1–1967 ASTM F–2412–05 &–2413– before July 5, 1994. 05 Subpart I/§ 1915.153 (Eye and Face Devices- § 1915.153(b)(1) Protective eye and face de- Z87.1–1989 ANSI Z87.1–2003. Shipyard Employment). vices purchased after May 20, 1982. § 1915.153(b)(2) Protective eye and face de- Z87.1–1979 ANSI Z87.1–2003. vices purchased before May 20, 1982. Subpart I/§ 1915.155 (Headwear-Shipyard Em- § 1915.155(b)(1) Protective helmets purchased Z89.1–1986 ANSI Z89.1–2003. ployment). after August 22, 1996. § 1915.155(b)(2) Protective helmets purchased Z89.1–1969 ANSI Z89.1–2003. before August 22, 1996. Subpart I/§ 1915.156 (Footwear-Shipyard Em- § 1915.156(b)(1) Protective footwear purchased Z41–1991 ASTM F–2412–05 &–2413– ployment). after August 22, 1996. 05 § 1915.156(b)(2) Protective footwear purchased Z41–1983 ASTM F–2412–05 &–2413– before August 22, 1996. 05 Subpart E/§ 1917.91 (Eye and Face Devices- 1917.91(a)(1) Protective eye and face devices Z87.1–1989 ANSI Z87.1–2003. Marine Terminals). Subpart E/1917.93 (Headwear-Marine Termi- § 1917.93(b) Protective headwear ...... Z89.1–1986 ANSI Z89.1–2003. nals). Subpart E/§ 1917.94 (Footwear-Marine Termi- § 1917.94(b) Protective footwear ...... Z41–1991 ASTM F–2412–05 &–2413– nals). 05 Subpart J/§ 1918.101 (Eye and Face Devices- § 1918.101(a) Protective eye and face devices Z87.1–1989 ANSI Z87.1–2003. Longshoring). Subpart J/§ 1918.103 (Headwear-Longshoring) § 1918.103(b) Protective headwear ...... Z89.1–1986 ANSI Z89.1–2003. Subpart J/§ 1918.104 (Footwear-Longshoring) .. § 1918.104(b) Protective footwear ...... Z41–1991 ASTM F–2412–05 &–2413– 05

As Table I indicates, the incorporated In the past, OSHA has updated its It also establishes additional guidance ANSI standards are all over a decade old PPE standards by revising them to for employers as to what constitutes a and in some instances are two decades incorporate more recent versions of the good design standard. ANSI standards. 59 FR 16360 (Apr. 6, old. All of the ANSI standards have 2. The Provisions of the Proposal been updated, and in one instance, the 1994). This temporarily alleviates the ANSI Z41 standard for protective problem of trying to obtain PPE The crux of the proposed revision is footwear, has been completely replaced. manufactured in accordance with an the requirement that the PPE be As the standards have been updated, outdated version of an ANSI standard, constructed in accordance with good manufacturers have switched to but it ensures that the problem will arise design standards. Eye and face, head, manufacturing PPE that is in accord again as the incorporated standards are and foot PPE are commonly worn in with the updated standards. As a result, superseded by future versions. Despite general industry, shipyard employment, employers and employees have its best efforts, OSHA cannot propose longshoring, and marine terminals. The PPE must be strong enough to protect difficulty obtaining PPE manufactured and finalize its standards as frequently employees from the hazards they face in in accordance with the incorporated as the consensus standards development the workplace. It also must be standards. OSHA estimates the average organizations (SDOs). Some consensus constructed and tested in accordance life of these types of PPE to be about two standards are updated every 3–5 years; with sound and accepted principles that to four years. OSHA Docket S–060, OSHA simply does not have the will ensure the safety of employees.3 Preliminary Regulatory Impact & resources to engage in full rulemaking at this frequency for all of its PPE Generally, good design standards for Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of the these types of PPE are reflected in the Personal Protective Equipment standards. OSHA has preliminarily concluded relevant national consensus standards. Standard Table IV–2 (U.S. Dep’t of that incorporating specific versions of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory ANSI standards is not an effective 3 An inherent part of any good design standard is Analysis, June 30, 1989). Accordingly, approach for its PPE design a testing protocol for ensuring that the the difficulty is widespread and occurs manufactured equipment will provide a specified requirements. Therefore, OSHA is on a regular basis. level of protection. Accordingly, the requirement proposing a performance-oriented that the PPE be constructed in accordance with approach: to replace references to good design standards includes the requirement 2 ANSI’s Z41 standard has been withdrawn and that the PPE be tested in accordance with a testing replaced by the cited ASTM International specific ANSI standards with a protocol that is designed to ensure that the PPE standards. ASTM International was formerly the requirement that PPE be constructed in provides the level of protection the good design American Society for Testing and Materials. accordance with good design standards. standard is intended to achieve.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27774 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

OSHA has examined the standards for constructed in accordance with a design and 1991 (footwear) versions of the eye and face, head, and foot PPE issued standard that meets specified criteria national consensus standards by ANSI and ASTM International consistent with the criteria for the incorporated in the existing standards (ASTM) over the last 40 years. OSHA development of national consensus for PPE, as well as the more recent has found that these standards reflect standards. versions of those national consensus the state of the art in terms of design The specific criteria of the proposal standards. Specifically, OSHA proposes safety that existed at the time they were are drawn from the criteria nationally to list in the non-mandatory appendices issued.4 Furthermore, each successive recognized testing laboratories must the following standards: for protective edition of these standards has improved apply for determining if a standard is eye and face devices, ANSI Z87.1–1989, the design features of the PPE. For appropriate for evaluating the safety of ANSI Z87.1–1998, and ANSI Z87.1– example, a comparison between the equipment or materials. See § 1910.7(c). 2003; for protective headwear, ANSI 1989 and 2003 versions of the ANSI They also reflect the criteria of a Z89.1–1986, ANSI Z89.1–1997, and standard for protective eye and face national consensus standard as defined ANSI Z89.1–2003; and for protective equipment shows that ANSI has in the OSH Act and the way many SDOs footwear, ANSI Z41–1991, ANSI Z41– strengthened the impact resistance operate. See 29 U.S.C. 652(9). The 1999, and ASTM F–2412–05 and ASTM requirements of the standard. Similarly, proposal is intended to codify the F–2413–05. As stated above, OSHA has the current ASTM International criteria that have been used successfully carefully reviewed all of these standards standard for footwear improves on prior for developing design standards that and has found that they establish design ANSI standards for footwear by ensure an adequate level of safety. criteria that provide adequate protection increasing protection against electrical The first of these criteria ensures that for employees. hazards. the design standard incorporates safety OSHA has not, however, proposed to To develop their standards, these concerns as part of the standard and that list ANSI standards from before 1986. SDOs receive input from industry these safety concerns are related to the OSHA’s incorporation of earlier groups, employee representatives, particular piece of PPE covered by the versions in its existing PPE design government agencies, safety experts, OSHA standard. The second ensures standards was limited to allowing the and other affected parties. See, e.g., that the design standard provides use of PPE that was purchased by a ANSI Z89.1–2003, American National guidelines for constructing the certain date that has long passed. For Standard for Industrial Head Protection equipment and has achieved a ten years or more, the existing standards Foreword. As a result, they develop minimum level of recognition by safety have not permitted the use of PPE standards that are generally recognized experts as providing an adequate level manufactured in accordance with those as providing an adequate level of safety, of safety. The third of these criteria is earlier versions if the PPE was as shown by the widespread use of these process-oriented; it ensures that purchased after those specified dates. In standards by manufacturers even where knowledgeable and affected interests addition, for some time manufacturers OSHA standards specify an earlier have an opportunity to provide input have not been manufacturing PPE in version. into the development of the standard, accordance with those earlier versions. Congress recognized the importance which advances the goal of ensuring Given the limited useful life of PPE and of national consensus standards in the that the design standard provides an the length of time that has passed since effort to protect employee safety and adequate level of safety. employers and employees have been health. For the first two years following PPE constructed in accordance with able to use PPE manufactured in promulgation of the Occupational Safety the proposal’s criteria for a good design accordance with those earlier versions, and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act), standard is only presumptively OSHA believes that no PPE currently in Congress authorized the adoption of compliant with the standard’s general use was constructed in accordance with national consensus standards as OSHA requirement that the PPE be constructed those earlier standards. Accordingly, standards without notice and comment. in accordance with good design there is no need to list those earlier 29 U.S.C. 655(a). For standards adopted standards. The presumption is primarily standards. using the notice-and-comment intended to reserve OSHA’s authority to Employers are not required to ensure procedures of the OSH Act, relevant determine that a future national that the PPE is constructed in national consensus standards are the consensus standard for PPE design accordance with a listed national baseline for evaluating OSHA standards. specifications will not provide an consensus standard. The fundamental See 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(8) (when a new adequate level of protection and requirement is that the PPE be standard differs from a national therefore will not meet the general good constructed in accordance with good design requirement. OSHA believes that consensus standard, the Secretary must design standards. However, OSHA is it will rarely, if ever, determine that a explain why the new standard will proposing that once a national future national consensus standard better effectuate purposes of the Act consensus standard is listed in the non- related to PPE design specifications than the national consensus standard). mandatory appendices, the presumption In light of this, OSHA believes that does not provide sufficient protection; in the standard would be conclusive for design standards that are formulated nevertheless, OSHA’s proposed enforcement purposes. Of course, pursuant to the processes described approach provides for that possibility. OSHA’s decision to list a national To further increase the notice above will generally constitute good consensus standard in the non- employers have of their obligations design standards. OSHA’s analysis of mandatory appendices would not under the proposed requirements, the PPE design standards over the last preclude OSHA from initiating OSHA is also proposing to list in non- 40 years provides evidence of this. appropriate procedures to revoke that mandatory appendices the national OSHA is thus including in the proposal listing. But until and unless OSHA consensus standards that OSHA has a presumption that PPE complies with revokes a listing through that procedure, determined are good design standards as the good design requirement if it is employers will be assured that their use that concept is used in the proposal. of PPE that was constructed in 4 OSHA has placed copies of these national OSHA is proposing to reference in the accordance with a listed national consensus standards in the docket for this non-mandatory appendices the 1986 consensus standard meets the good rulemaking (OSHA—2007—0044). (headwear), 1989 (eye and face devices), design requirement. An employer’s

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27775

reasonable reliance on a manufacturer’s adding language in the regulatory text of the good design requirement and which certification that the PPE was the proposed rule that makes this clear.5 therefore will be listed in the non- mandatory appendices. Similarly, the constructed in accordance with any of 3. Effects of the Proposal the listed national consensus standards proposal presumes that a future national satisfies the employer’s obligation to OSHA believes that requiring use of consensus standard, as described in this ensure that the PPE was constructed in PPE that meets good design standards is proposal, will meet the good design accordance with a good design standard. appropriate and will increase employee requirement. The possibility that a safety and health by facilitating the use future national consensus standard will OSHA also intends to update in the of state of-the-art PPE. It is appropriate not be a good design standard is remote, future the non-mandatory appendices to to provide this type of flexibility and employers will be able to rely on include any future national consensus because, as stated above, OSHA’s the presumption established by the standard it determines meets the experience has shown that overall safety proposal with a high degree of requirements of the proposed rule. increases with each update of national confidence. OSHA is committing itself to reviewing consensus standards. In sum, by replacing the existing PPE future national consensus standards for OSHA standards should be written to provisions with performance PPE design criteria as they are facilitate the ability of employers to take requirements, the transition to the use of promulgated. Assuming the review advantage of safety advances developed PPE built in accordance with updated confirms that a newly promulgated by ANSI and similar organizations. Even standards will occur more certainly and national consensus standard is a good when an updated national consensus rapidly than it occurs under the present design standard, OSHA will use the standard merely maintains the status OSHA standards. This will facilitate procedures it has developed for direct quo in terms of safety, ensuring that employer efforts to improve the safety final rules to add the newly OSHA standards are written to facilitate and health of employees by providing promulgated national consensus the use of PPE constructed in state of the art PPE. In addition, the standard to the non-mandatory accordance with those standards serves proposal does not add any compliance appendices. Those procedures involve the interest of protecting employee burdens on employers. safety. Once updated standards are OSHA publishing the direct final rule in 4. Alternatives the Federal Register along with an promulgated, over time PPE constructed identical proposed rule. The direct final in accordance with those standards In developing the proposal, OSHA become increasingly more available and considered several alternatives. While rule will go into effect unless OSHA PPE constructed under the predecessor some of these approaches had receives a significant adverse comment standards become increasingly advantages, for the reasons stated below, within a specified period. If OSHA unavailable. Those seeking to obtain OSHA has decided preliminarily not to receives significant adverse comments, PPE will therefore usually have an adopt them. it will withdraw the direct final rule and easier time finding PPE manufactured in First, OSHA considered proposing to treat the comments as responses to the accordance with a current version than update the PPE standards by proposed rule. When using the direct PPE manufactured in accordance with incorporating the most current versions final rule procedures for updating the an older version. of the referenced national consensus non-mandatory appendices for the PPE OSHA’s current PPE design standards, standards. As discussed above, OSHA design standards, OSHA will consider however, impose obstacles to allowing has done this in the past. However, this as significant adverse comments only employers and employees to obtain the would provide only a short-term fix to those comments that explain why the benefit of better PPE manufactured the problem of references to outdated reviewed version does not provide under improved standards or newer consensus standards. In OSHA’s view, equivalent or greater protection to equipment manufactured under updated this approach would simply perpetuate employees. As stated, the addition of a standards that maintain the status quo. the obstacles to using state-of-the art new national consensus standard would Under the current general industry and PPE that are contained in the current not require employers to use PPE shipyard employment standards, to OSHA standards. constructed in accordance with that obtain these benefits employers must be Second, OSHA considered replacing standard; it would merely provide able to demonstrate that the PPE the references to specific design employers with an additional option for manufactured in accordance with the standards with performance-oriented meeting the good design requirement. updated versions are as protective as language that would require the PPE to OSHA anticipates that additions to the PPE manufactured in accordance with provide the level of protection that a non-mandatory appendices will occur the referenced versions. Employers need conscientious safety expert would rapidly and without controversy. to research the referenced national provide. In OSHA’s view, the proposal Finally, in switching from a consensus standards, identify and is superior to this alternative because it provides greater notice to employers of specification provision to a performance analyze the updated versions, and make the determination as to whether PPE their compliance obligations. oriented provision, OSHA is not Finally, OSHA considered proposing intending to decrease employee designed to meet the updated versions provide employees with protection specific performance-based criteria, protection. The references to the equivalent to or greater than the such as a particular level of impact- specific ANSI standards in OSHA’s protection they receive with PPE resistance, that the various types of PPE existing rules are the minimum design designed in accordance with the would have to meet. The specific specifications for PPE used in the referenced versions. performance-based criteria of design workplace and, as stated above, OSHA The proposal reduces if not eliminates standards, however, are generally tied to is listing them in the non-mandatory this burden. It will authorize the use of particular test methods, and employers appendices. PPE meeting good design PPE that meets the current versions of are not in the best position to determine standards must at a minimum be the referenced standards, which as if the performance-based criteria have constructed to provide protection noted above OSHA has determined meet been met. Thus, in OSHA’s view, the equivalent to, or greater than, this proposal is easier for employers to minimum level of protection. OSHA is 5 See, e.g., Proposed § 1910.133(b)(2). implement than a standard of this type.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27776 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Moreover, OSHA believes that this C. Deletions of Outdated References 654(b), 655(b). A safety or health alternative would tend to favor a From Ventilation and Welding standard is a standard which requires particular design standard at the Standards employers to maintain conditions or potential expense of discouraging Section 1910.94(a)(5)(v)(a) of OSHA’s adopt practices that are reasonably adherence to future improved design ventilation standard requires that safety necessary or appropriate to provide safe standards. shoes comply with ANSI Z41.1–1967; or healthful working conditions. 29 U.S.C. 652(8). A standard is reasonably 5. Request for Comments § 1910.252(b)(2)(ii)(I) of OSHA’s welding standard requires filter lenses necessary or appropriate within the OSHA solicits comments on the and plates in protective eyewear to meaning of section 652(8) if, among proposal’s combination of a general comply with the transmission test for other things, a significant risk of good design requirement and the radiant energy prescribed in ANSI material harm exists in the workplace presumption that PPE constructed in Z87.1–1968. OSHA is proposing to and the proposed standard would accordance with certain specific criteria delete these paragraphs. By doing so, substantially reduce or eliminate that complies with the good design OSHA intends for the safety shoes workplace risk. requirement. More specifically, OSHA required by § 1910.94(a)(5)(v) to comply OSHA has already determined that solicits comments on the following with revised section 1910.136(b) requirements for PPE, including design issues: requiring footwear to meet good design requirements, are reasonably necessary or appropriate within the meaning of 1. Does this approach provide standards. OSHA intends for filter section 652(8). This proposed rule employers with sufficient notice of their lenses and plates in protective eyewear neither reduces employee protection nor legal obligations while also providing required by section 1910.252(b)(2) to alters an employer’s obligations under sufficient flexibility to account for comply with revised section 1910.133(b) the existing OSHA standard. Under the future developments in design requiring eye and face protective proposal, employers will be able to standards for PPE? devices to meet good design standards. OSHA is not deleting the requirements continue to use the same equipment 2. Has OSHA accurately prescribed in §§ 1910.94 and 1910.252 that specify they have been using to meet their the criteria that will ensure that a when, and under what conditions, compliance obligation under the standard meeting those criteria will at employees must use certain PPE; these existing standards’ design criteria least presumptively be a good design requirements will remain in the affected requirement. The proposal provides standard? Are the criteria sufficiently standards. guidance on additional PPE employers clear for employers to determine OSHA believes that these deletions can use to comply with the design whether certain PPE meets the good will not increase compliance burdens, criteria requirement by providing design requirement? In particular, can including compliance costs. It is equivalent or greater protection. By employers easily understand and apply unlikely that employees are using safety facilitating but not mandating the the second criterion—that a particular shoes that are manufactured in transition to PPE constructed in design standard be recognized in the accordance with ANSI Z41.1–1967. accordance with updated versions of United States as providing Instead, employees are presumably national consensus standards, employee specifications that result in an adequate using shoes that were manufactured in protection will increase and compliance level of safety? If not, what criterion accordance with the 1991 or 1999 burdens on employers will stay the should be used to determine whether a version or its current replacement, same or decrease. For these reasons, particular design standard is or is not ASTM F–2412–05 and 2413–05. OSHA is not required in this action to recognized in the United States as Furthermore, OSHA believes that determine significant risk or the extent providing specifications that result in an virtually all employees affected by the to which the proposal would reduce adequate level of safety? welding standard use eyewear that that risk, as would typically be required 3. Should the listing of a design complies with ANSI Z87.1–1989, ANSI by Industrial Union Department, AFL- standard in a Non-Mandatory Appendix 87.1–1998, or ANSI Z87.1–2003, rather CIO v. American Petroleum Institute, be conclusive on whether PPE than eyewear manufactured in 448 U.S. 607 (1980). constructed in accordance with that accordance with the 1968 transmission III. Preliminary Economic Analysis and standard meets the good design test for radiant energy required in the Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification requirement? existing OSHA standard. This action is not economically 4. Are there other publicly available OSHA solicits comments on whether significant within the context of design standards that are not included OSHA is correct that compliance Executive Order 12866, or a major rule in the proposed non-mandatory burdens would not increase under the under the Unfunded Mandates Reform appendices that would provide an proposal. OSHA also solicits comments Act or Section 801 of the Small Business adequate level of protection and on whether OSHA should, rather than Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. therefore should be included in the delete the paragraphs, replace them The rulemaking would impose no appendices? with cross references to §§ 1910.136(b) and 1910.133(b). additional costs on any private or public 5. Are there other alternatives the sector entity, and does not meet any of Agency should consider that will II. Legal Considerations the criteria for an economically provide sufficient notice to employers, The purpose of the Occupational significant or major rule specified by the appropriate protection for employees, Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. Executive Order or relevant statutes. and flexibility to account for future 651 et seq., is to achieve to the extent This action allows for increased developments in design standards for possible safe and healthful working flexibility in choosing the PPE used by PPE? conditions for all employees. 29 U.S.C. employees. However, the rule does not 6. Are there PPE currently in use that 651(b). To achieve this goal Congress require an employer to update or were constructed in accordance with authorized the Secretary of Labor to replace its PPE solely as a result of this national consensus standards not promulgate and enforce occupational rule, if the PPE currently in use meets included in the proposed appendices? safety and health standards. 29 U.S.C. the existing OSHA standard.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27777

Furthermore, because the rule standards to reflect the new standard or 901 et seq.); 5 U.S.C. 553, Secretary of imposes no costs, OSHA certifies that it amendment, or show OSHA why there Labor’s Order 5–2002, and 29 CFR part would not have a significant impact on is no need for action, e.g., because an 1911. a substantial number of small entities. existing State standard covering this Signed at Washington, DC this 10th day of area is already at least as effective as the IV. Paperwork Reduction Act May, 2007. new Federal standard or amendment. 29 Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., This action does not impose new CFR 1953.5(a). These 26 States and information collection requirements for Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational territories are: Alaska, Arizona, Safety and Health. purposes of the Paperwork Reduction California, Connecticut (plan covers Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–30. only State and local government Proposed Amendments to Standards V. Federalism employees), Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, The Occupational Safety and Health OSHA has reviewed this proposed Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New Administration is proposing to amend rule in accordance with the Executive Jersey (plan covers only State and local parts 1910, 1915, 1917, and 1918 of Order on Federalism (Executive Order government employees), New York Title 29 of the Code of Federal 13132, 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), (plan covers only State and local Regulations as set forth below. which requires that agencies, to the government employees), North Carolina, extent possible, refrain from limiting PART 1910—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, AND HEALTH STANDARDS State policy options, consult with States Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, prior to taking any actions that would Virgin Islands (plan covers only Subpart A—General restrict State policy options, and take territorial and local government such actions only when there is clear employees), Washington, and Wyoming. 1. The authority citation for subpart A constitutional authority and the OSHA does not consider the proposal of part 1910 is revised to read as presence of a problem of national scope. as proposing a change that will trigger follows: Executive Order 13132 provides for the requirements of § 1953.5(a). Authority: Secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational preemption of State law only if there is Accordingly, State-Plan States will not a clear congressional intent for the Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, be required to adopt the proposal, if it 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12– Agency to do so. Any such preemption is promulgated as proposed, or show 71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 is to be limited to the extent possible. why there is no need for action on their (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 Section 18 of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. part. At the conclusion of the FR 111), or 5–2002 (67 FR 65008), as 667, expresses Congress’ intent to rulemaking proceedings, OSHA will applicable. preempt State laws where OSHA has advise State-Plan States if OSHA Section 1910.6 also issued under 5 U.S.C. promulgated occupational safety and intends to require them to inform OSHA § 553. Sections 1910.6, 1910.7, and 1910.8 health standards. Under the OSH Act, a of what action, if any, they will take also issued under 29 CFR part 1911. Section State can avoid preemption on issues 1910.7(f) also issued under 31 U.S.C. 9701, with regard to the matter covered by the 29 U.S.C. 9a, 5 U.S.C. 553; Pub. L. 106–113 covered by Federal standards only if it proposal. See 29 CFR 1953.4(b)(7). submits, and obtains Federal approval (113 Stat. 1501A–222); and OMB Circular VII. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act A–25 (dated July 8, 1993) (58 FR 38142, July of, a plan for the development of such 15, 1993). standards and their enforcement (State- This proposed rule has been reviewed Plan State). 29 U.S.C. 667. Occupational in accordance with the Unfunded § 1910.6 [Amended] safety and health standards developed Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA). 2. In § 1910.6, paragraphs (e)(60), by such State-Plan States must, among 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. For the purposes (e)(61), (e)(67), (e)(68), (e)(70), (e)(71) are other things, be at least as effective in of the UMRA, the Agency certifies that removed. Paragraphs (e)(62) through providing safe and healthful this proposed rule does not impose any (e)(66) are redesignated as paragraphs employment and places of employment Federal mandate that may result in (e)(60) through (e)(64), respectively; as the Federal standards. Subject to increased expenditures by State, local, paragraph (e)(69) is redesignated as these requirements, State-Plan States are or tribal governments, in the aggregate, paragraph (e)(65); and paragraph (e)(72) free to develop and enforce under State or increased expenditures by the private is redesignated as paragraph (e)(66). law their own requirements for safety sector, of more than $100 million in any and health standards. year. Subpart G—Occupational Health and This proposed rule complies with Environmental Control Executive Order 13132. In States List of Subjects in 29 CFR Parts 1910, 1915, 1917, and 1918 without OSHA-approved State Plans, 3. The authority citation for subpart G this action limits State policy options in Incorporation by reference, of part 1910 is revised to read as the same manner as all OSHA Occupational safety and health, follows: standards. In State-Plan States, this Personal protective equipment. Authority: Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the action does not significantly limit State VIII. Authority and Signature Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 policy options. As explained below, (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s State-Plan States will not have to adopt This document was prepared under Order No. 12–71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR the proposal, if it is promulgated as the direction of Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., 25059), 9–83 (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR proposed. Assistant Secretary of Labor for 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111), or 5–2002 (67 FR Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. 65008), as applicable; and 29 CFR part 1911. VI. State Plan States Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Section 1910.94 also issued under 5 U.S.C. When Federal OSHA promulgates a Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. It 553. new standard or more stringent is issued pursuant to sections 4, 6, and § 1910.94 [Amended] amendment to an existing standard, the 8 of the Occupational Safety and Health 26 States or U.S. Territories with their Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657), 4. Section 1910.94 is amended by own OSHA-approved occupational section 941 of the Longshore and Harbor removing and reserving paragraph safety and health plans must revise their Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. (a)(5)(v)(a).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27778 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Subpart I—Personal Protective accordance with one of the listed (i) The standard specifies the safety Equipment national consensus standards. requirements for the particular 7. Paragraph (b) of § 1910.135 is equipment; 5. The authority citation for subpart I revised to read as follows: (ii) The standard is recognized in the of part 1910 is revised to read as United States as providing § 1910.135 Head protection. follows: specifications that result in an adequate Authority: Sections 4, 6, and 8, * * * * * level of safety; and Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (b) Criteria for protective helmets. (1) (iii) The standard was developed by a (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s The employer shall ensure that the standards development organization Order No. 12–71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR protective helmets are constructed in 25059), 9–83 (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR under a method providing for input and accordance with good design standards. consideration of views of industry 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111), or 5–2002 (67 FR A protective helmet that is constructed 65008), as applicable. groups, experts, users, governmental Sections 1910.132, 1910.134, and 1910.138 in accordance with an equipment design authorities, and others having broad also issued under 29 CFR part 1911. standard that meets the following experience and expertise in issues Sections 1910.133, 1910.135, and 1910.136 criteria will be presumed to be related to the design and construction of also issued under 29 CFR part 1911 and 5 constructed in accordance with good the particular equipment. U.S.C. 553. design standards: (2) Non-mandatory appendix C to this 6. Paragraph (b) of § 1910.133 is (i) The standard specifies the safety subpart contains examples of national revised to read as follows: requirements for the particular consensus standards that OSHA has equipment; § 1910.133 Eye and face protection. determined meet the criteria of (ii) The standard is recognized in the paragraph (b)(1) of this section. * * * * * United States as providing Protective footwear that is constructed (b) Criteria for protective eye and face specifications that result in an adequate in accordance with any of the listed devices. (1) The employer shall ensure level of safety; and national consensus standards will be that the protective eye and face devices (iii) The standard was developed by a deemed to meet the good design are constructed in accordance with good standards development organization requirement of paragraph (b)(1). design standards. Equipment that is under a method providing for input and Protective footwear is not required to be constructed in accordance with an consideration of views of industry constructed in accordance with one of equipment design standard that meets groups, experts, users, governmental the listed standards, but the protective the following criteria will be presumed authorities, and others having broad footwear must be constructed in to be constructed in accordance with experience and expertise in issues accordance with good design standards. good design standards: related to the design and construction of (i) The standard specifies the safety To meet this requirement, the protective the particular equipment. footwear must provide protection requirements for the particular (2) Non-mandatory appendix C to this equivalent to or greater than protective equipment; subpart contains examples of national footwear of the same type that is (ii) The standard is recognized in the consensus standards that OSHA has constructed in accordance with one of United States as providing determined meet the criteria of the listed national consensus standards. specifications that result in an adequate paragraph (b)(1) of this section. 9. Appendix C to Subpart I is added level of safety; and Protective helmets that are constructed as follows: (iii) The standard was developed by a in accordance with any of the listed standards development organization national consensus standards will be Appendix C to Subpart I of Part 1910— under a method providing for input and deemed to meet the good design Criteria for Personal Protective consideration of views of industry requirement of paragraph (b)(1). Equipment (Non-Mandatory) groups, experts, users, governmental Protective helmets are not required to be authorities, and others having broad This appendix lists equipment design constructed in accordance with one of standards that OSHA has determined are experience and expertise in issues the listed standards, but the protective ‘‘good design standards’’ as that phrase is related to the design and construction of helmets must be constructed in used in §§ 1910.133(b), 1910.135(b), and the particular equipment. accordance with good design standards. 1910.136(b). (2) Non-mandatory appendix C to this To meet this requirement, the protective 1. Good design standards for protective eye subpart contains examples of national helmet must provide protection and face devices (1910.133(b)) consensus standards that OSHA has equivalent to or greater than a protective ANSI Z87.1–2003, ‘‘American National determined meet the criteria of helmet of the same type that is Standard Practice for Occupational and paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ constructed in accordance with one of ANSI Z87.1–1998, ‘‘American National Protective eye and face devices that are the listed national consensus standards. constructed in accordance with any of Standard Practice for Occupational and 8. Paragraph (b) of § 1910.136 is Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ the listed national consensus standards revised to read as follows: ANSI Z87.1–1989, ‘‘American National will be deemed to meet the good design Standard Practice for Occupational and requirement of paragraph (b)(1). § 1910.136 Foot protection. Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ Protective eye and face devices are not * * * * * 2. Good design standards for protective required to be constructed in (b) Criteria for protective footwear. (1) helmets (1910.135(b)) accordance with one of the listed The employer shall ensure that the ANSI Z89.1–2003, ‘‘American National standards, but the protective eye and protective footwear is constructed in Standard for Personnel Protection— face devices must be constructed in accordance with good design standards. Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- accordance with good design standards. Protective footwear that is constructed Requirements’’ ANSI Z89.1–1997, ‘‘American National To meet this requirement, the protective in accordance with an equipment design Standard for Personnel Protection— eye and face device must provide standard that meets the following Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- protection equivalent to or greater than criteria will be presumed to be Requirements’’ a protective eye and face device of the constructed in accordance with good ANSI Z89.1–1986, ‘‘American National same type that is constructed in design standards: Standard for Personnel Protection—

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27779

Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- to be constructed in accordance with experience and expertise in issues Requirements’’ good design standards: related to the design and construction of 3. Good design standards for protective (i) The standard specifies the safety the particular equipment. footwear (1910.136(b)) requirements for the particular (2) Non-mandatory appendix C to this ASTM F–2412–2005, ‘‘Standard Test subpart contains examples of national Methods for Foot Protection,’’ and ASTM F– equipment; 2413–2005, ‘‘Specification for Performance (ii) The standard is recognized in the consensus standards that OSHA has Requirements for Protective Footwear.’’ United States as providing determined meet the criteria of These two standards together constitute a specifications that result in an adequate paragraph (b)(1) of this section. good design standard. level of safety; and Protective helmets that are constructed ANSI Z41–1999, ‘‘American National (iii) The standard was developed by a in accordance with any of the listed Standard for Personal Protection—Protective standards development organization national consensus standards will be Footwear’’ under a method providing for input and deemed to meet the good design ANSI Z41–1991, ‘‘American National consideration of views of industry requirement of paragraph (b)(1). Standard for Personal Protection—Protective groups, experts, users, governmental Footwear’’ Protective helmets are not required to be authorities, and others having broad constructed in accordance with one of Subpart Q—Welding, Cutting and experience and expertise in issues the listed standards, but the protective Brazing related to the design and construction of helmets must be constructed in the particular equipment. accordance with good design standards. 10. The authority citation for subpart (2) Non-mandatory appendix C to this To meet this requirement, the protective Q of part 1910 is revised to read as subpart contains examples of national helmet must provide protection follows: consensus standards that OSHA has equivalent to or greater than a protective Authority: Secs. 4, 6, and 8 of the determined meet the criteria of helmet of the same type that is Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 paragraph (b)(1) of this section. constructed in accordance with one of (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s Protective eye and face devices that are the listed national consensus standards. Order No. 12–71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR constructed in accordance with any of 16. Paragraph (b) of § 1915.156 is 25059), 9–83 (48 FR 35736), 1–90 (55 FR the listed national consensus standards revised to read as follows: 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111), or 5–2002 (67 FR will be deemed to meet the good design 65008), as applicable; and 29 CFR part 1911. requirement of paragraph (b)(1). § 1915.156 Foot protection. Section 1910.252 also issued under 5 Protective eye and face devices are not * * * * * U.S.C. 553. required to be constructed in (b) Criteria for protective footwear. (1) § 1910.252 [Amended] accordance with one of the listed The employer shall ensure that the protective footwear is constructed in 11. Section 1910.252 is amended by standards, but the protective eye and face devices must be constructed in accordance with good design standards. removing and reserving paragraph Protective footwear that is constructed (b)(2)(ii)(I). accordance with good design standards. To meet this requirement, the protective in accordance with an equipment design PART 1915—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY eye and face device must provide standard that meets the following AND HEALTH STANDARDS FOR protection equivalent to or greater than criteria will be presumed to be SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT a protective eye and face device of the constructed in accordance with good same type that is constructed in design standards: 12. The authority citation for part accordance with one of the listed (i) The standard specifies the safety 1915 is revised to read as follows: national consensus standards. requirements for the particular Authority: Sec. 41, Longshore and Harbor 15. Paragraph (b) of § 1915.155 is equipment; Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. 941); revised to read as follows: (ii) The standard is recognized in the secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety and Health United States as providing Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); § 1915.155 Head protection. specifications that result in an adequate Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR * * * * * level of safety; and 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR (b) Criteria for protective helmets. (1) (iii) The standard was developed by a 35736), 1–90 (55 FR 9033), 6–96 (62 FR 111), The employer shall ensure that the standards development organization 3–2000 (65 FR 50017), or 5–2002 (67 FR protective helmets are constructed in under a method providing for input and 65008), as applicable; and 29 CFR part 1911. accordance with good design standards. consideration of views of industry Sections 1915.5, 1915.153, 1915.155, and A protective helmet that is constructed groups, experts, users, governmental 1915.156 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. in accordance with an equipment design authorities, and others having broad § 1915.5 Incorporation by reference. standard that meets the following experience and expertise in issues 13. Section 1915.5 is amended by criteria will be presumed to be related to the design and construction of removing paragraphs (d)(1)(iv) through constructed in accordance with good the particular equipment. (d)(1)(ix). design standards: (2) Non-mandatory appendix C to this 14. Paragraph (b) of § 1915.153 is (i) The standard specifies the safety subpart contains examples of national revised to read as follows: requirements for the particular consensus standards that OSHA has equipment; determined meet the criteria of § 1915.153 Eye and face protection. (ii) The standard is recognized in the paragraph (b)(1) of this section. * * * * * United States as providing Protective footwear that is constructed (b) Criteria for protective eye and face specifications that result in an adequate in accordance with any of the listed devices. (1) The employer shall ensure level of safety; and national consensus standards will be that the protective eye and face devices (iii) The standard was developed by a deemed to meet the good design are constructed in accordance with good standards development organization requirement of paragraph (b)(1). design standards. Equipment that is under a method providing for input and Protective footwear is not required to be constructed in accordance with an consideration of views of industry constructed in accordance with one of equipment design standard that meets groups, experts, users, governmental the listed standards, but the protective the following criteria will be presumed authorities, and others having broad footwear must be constructed in

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27780 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

accordance with good design standards. Safety Act of 1990 (49 U.S.C. 1801–1819 and (b)(1) The employer shall ensure that To meet this requirement, the protective 5 U.S.C. 553). the protective helmets are constructed footwear must provide protection § 1917.3 [Amended] in accordance with good design equivalent to or greater than protective standards. Protective helmets that are 19. Section 1917.3 is amended by footwear of the same type that is constructed in accordance with an removing paragraphs (b)(4) through constructed in accordance with one of equipment design standard that meets (b)(6) and redesignating paragraph (b)(7) the listed national consensus standards. the following criteria will be presumed as (b)(4). 17. Appendix C to subpart I is added 20. Paragraph (a)(1) of § 1917.91 is to be constructed in accordance with to read as follows: revised to read as follows: good design standards: Appendix C to Subpart I of Part 1915— (i) The standard specifies the safety § 1917.91 Eye and face protection. Criteria for Personal Protective requirements for the particular Equipment (Non-Mandatory) (a)(1)(i) The employer shall ensure equipment; that each affected employee uses (ii) The standard is recognized in the This appendix lists equipment design appropriate eye and/or face protection United States as providing standards that OSHA has determined are where there are exposures to eye and/ specifications that result in an adequate ‘‘good design standards’’ as that phrase is or face hazards. Protective eye and face used in sections 1915.153(b), 1915.155(b), level of safety; and and 1915.156(b). devices shall be constructed in (iii) The standard was developed by a 1. Good design standards for protective eye accordance with good design standards. standards development organization and face devices (1915.153(b)) Equipment that is constructed in under a method providing for input and ANSI Z87.1–2003, ‘‘American National accordance with an equipment design consideration of views of industry Standard Practice for Occupational and standard that meets the following groups, experts, users, governmental Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ criteria will be presumed to be authorities, and others having broad ANSI Z87.1–1998, ‘‘American National constructed in accordance with good experience and expertise in issues Standard Practice for Occupational and design standards: related to the design and construction of Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ (A) The standard specifies the safety ANSI Z87.1–1989, ‘‘American National the particular equipment. requirements for the particular (2) Non-mandatory appendix A to this Standard Practice for Occupational and equipment; Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ subpart contains examples of national 2. Good design standards for protective (B) The standard is recognized in the consensus standards that OSHA has helmets (1915.155(b)) United States as providing determined meet the criteria of ANSI Z89.1–2003, ‘‘American National specifications that result in an adequate paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Standard for Personnel Protection— level of safety; and Protective helmets that are constructed (C) The standard was developed by a Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers— in accordance with any of the listed standards development organization Requirements’’ national consensus standards will be ANSI Z89.1–1997, ‘‘American National under a method providing for input and deemed to meet the good design Standard for Personnel Protection— consideration of views of industry requirement of paragraph (b)(1). Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers— groups, experts, users, governmental Protective helmets are not required to be Requirements’’ authorities, and others having broad constructed in accordance with one of ANSI Z89.1–1986, ‘‘American National experience and expertise in issues Standard for Personnel Protection— the listed standards, but the protective related to the design and construction of Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers— helmets must be constructed in the particular equipment. Requirements’’ accordance with good design standards. 3. Good design standards for protective (ii) Non-mandatory appendix A to this subpart contains examples of national To meet this requirement, the protective footwear (1915.156(b)) helmet must provide protection ASTM F–2412–2005, ‘‘Standard Test consensus standards that OSHA has Methods for Foot Protection,’’ and ASTM F– determined meet the criteria of equivalent to or greater than a protective 2413–2005, ‘‘Specification for Performance paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. helmet of the same type that is Requirements for Protective Footwear.’’ Protective eye and face devices that are constructed in accordance with one of These two standards together constitute a constructed in accordance with any of the listed national consensus standards. good design standard. the listed national consensus standards * * * * * ANSI Z41–1999, ‘‘American National will be deemed to meet the good design 22. Paragraph (b) of § 1917.94 is Standard for Personal Protection—Protective revised to read as follows: Footwear’’ requirement of paragraph (a)(1)(i). Protective eye and face devices are not ANSI Z41–1991, ‘‘American National § 1917.94 Foot protection. Standard for Personal Protection—Protective required to be constructed in Footwear’’ accordance with one of the listed * * * * * standards, but the protective eye and (b)(1) The employer shall ensure that PART 1917—MARINE TERMINALS face devices must be constructed in the protective footwear is constructed in accordance with good design standards. accordance with good design standards. 18. The authority citation for part To meet this requirement, the protective Protective footwear that is constructed 1917 is revised to read as follows: eye and face device must provide in accordance with an equipment design Authority: Sec. 41, Longshore and Harbor protection equivalent to or greater than standard that meets the following Worker’s Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. 941); a protective eye and face device of the criteria will be presumed to be Secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety and Health same type that is constructed in constructed in accordance with good Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); design standards: Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR accordance with one of the listed 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR national consensus standards. (i) The standard specifies the safety 35736), 6–96 (62 FR 111), or 5–2002 (67 FR * * * * * requirements for the particular 65008), as applicable; and 29 CFR part 1911. 21. Paragraph (b) of § 1917.93 is equipment; Sections 1917.3, 1917.28, 1917.91, 1917.93, revised to read as follows: (ii) The standard is recognized in the 1917.94 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. United States as providing Section 1917.29, also issued under Sec. 29, § 1917.93 Head protection. specifications that result in an adequate Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform * * * * * level of safety; and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27781

(iii) The standard was developed by a These two standards together constitute a paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. standards development organization good design standard. Protective eye and face devices that are under a method providing for input and ANSI Z41–1999, ‘‘American National constructed in accordance with any of consideration of views of industry Standard for Personal Protection—Protective the listed national consensus standards Footwear’’ will be deemed to meet the good design groups, experts, users, governmental ANSI Z41–1991, ‘‘American National authorities, and others having broad Standard for Personal Protection—Protective requirement of paragraph (a)(1)(i). experience and expertise in issues Footwear’’ Protective eye and face devices are not related to the design and construction of required to be constructed in the particular equipment. PART 1918—SAFETY AND HEALTH accordance with one of the listed (2) Non-mandatory appendix A to this REGULATIONS FOR LONGSHORING standards, but the protective eye and subpart contains examples of national face devices must be constructed in consensus standards that OSHA has 24. The authority citation for part accordance with good design standards. determined meet the criteria of 1918 is revised to read as follows: To meet this requirement, the protective paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Authority: Sec. 41, Longshore and Harbor eye and face device must provide Protective footwear that is constructed Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. 941); protection equivalent to or greater than in accordance with any of the listed Secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety and Health a protective eye and face device of the national consensus standards will be Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); same type that is constructed in deemed to meet the good design Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR accordance with one of the listed 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR national consensus standards. requirement of paragraph (b)(1). 35736), 6–96 (62 FR 111), or 5–2002 (67 FR Protective footwear is not required to be 65008), as applicable; and 29 CFR part 1911. * * * * * constructed in accordance with one of Sections 1918.3, 1918.90, 1918.101, 27. Paragraph (b) of § 1918.103 is the listed standards, but the protective 1918.103, 1918.104 also issued under 5 revised to read as follows: footwear must be constructed in U.S.C. 553. § 1918.103 Head protection. accordance with good design standards. Section 1918.100 also issued under Sec. To meet this requirement, the protective 29, Hazardous Materials Transportation * * * * * footwear must provide protection Uniform Safety Act of 1990 (49 U.S.C. 1801– (b)(1) The employer shall ensure that equivalent to or greater than protective 1819 and 5 U.S.C. 553). the protective helmets are constructed in accordance with good design footwear of the same type that is § 1918.3 [Amended] constructed in accordance with one of standards. A protective helmet that is the listed national consensus standards. 25. Section 1918.3 is amended by constructed in accordance with an 23. Appendix A to subpart E is added removing paragraphs (b)(4) through equipment design standard that meets to read as follows: (b)(6). the following criteria will be presumed 26. Paragraph (a)(1) of § 1918.101 is to be constructed in accordance with Appendix A to Subpart E of Part 1917— revised to read as follows: good design standards: Criteria for Personal Protective (i) The standard specifies the safety Equipment (Non-Mandatory) § 1918.101 Eye and face protection. requirements for the particular (a) * * * This appendix lists equipment design equipment; standards that OSHA has determined are (1)(i) Each affected employee uses (ii) The standard is recognized in the ‘‘good design standards’’ as that phrase is appropriate eye and/or face protection United States as providing used in §§ 1917.91(a)(1), 1917.93(b), and where there are exposures to eye and/ specifications that result in an adequate 1917.94(b). or face hazards. Protective eye and face level of safety; and 1. Good design standards for protective eye devices shall be constructed in (iii) The standard was developed by a and face devices (1917.91(a)(1)) accordance with good design standards. standards development organization ANSI Z87.1–2003, ‘‘American National Equipment that is constructed in under a method providing for input and Standard Practice for Occupational and accordance with an equipment design consideration of views of industry Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ standard that meets the following ANSI Z87.1–1998, ‘‘American National groups, experts, users, governmental Standard Practice for Occupational and criteria will be presumed to be authorities, and others having broad Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ constructed in accordance with good experience and expertise in issues ANSI Z87.1–1989, ‘‘American National design standards: related to the design and construction of Standard Practice for Occupational and (A) The standard specifies the safety the particular equipment. Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ requirements for the particular (2) Non-mandatory appendix A to this 2. Good design standards for protective equipment; subpart contains examples of national helmets (1917.93(b)) (B) The standard is recognized in the consensus standards that OSHA has ANSI Z89.1–2003, ‘‘American National United States as providing determined meet the criteria of Standard for Personnel Protection— specifications that result in an adequate paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- Requirements’’ level of safety; and Protective helmets that are constructed ANSI Z89.1–1997, ‘‘American National (C) The standard was developed by a in accordance with any of the listed Standard for Personnel Protection— standards development organization national consensus standards will be Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- under a method providing for input and deemed to meet the good design Requirements’’ consideration of views of industry requirement of paragraph (b)(1). ANSI Z89.1–1986, ‘‘American National groups, experts, users, governmental Protective helmets are not required to be Standard for Personnel Protection— authorities, and others having broad constructed in accordance with one of Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- experience and expertise in issues the listed standards, but the protective Requirements’’ related to the design and construction of helmets must be constructed in 3. Good design standards for protective footwear (1917.94(b)) the particular equipment. accordance with good design standards. ASTM F–2412–2005, ‘‘Standard Test (ii) Non-mandatory appendix A to this To meet this requirement, the protective Methods for Foot Protection,’’ and ASTM F– subpart contains examples of national helmet must provide protection 2413–2005, ‘‘Specification for Performance consensus standards that OSHA has equivalent to or greater than a protective Requirements for Protective Footwear.’’ determined meet the criteria of eye and face device of the same type

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27782 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

that is constructed in accordance with ANSI Z87.1–2003, ‘‘American National hydrologic balance outside the permit one of the listed national consensus Standard Practice for Occupational and area. OSM had approved an earlier standards. Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ submittal of these same amendments on ANSI Z87.1–1998, ‘‘American National December 1, 2003 (68 FR 67035), but * * * * * Standard Practice for Occupational and 28. Paragraph (b) of § 1918.104 is Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ that approval was vacated and revised to read as follows: ANSI Z87.1–1989, ‘‘American National remanded by the United States District Standard Practice for Occupational and Court for the Southern District of West § 1918.104 Foot protection. Educational Eye and Face Protection’’ Virginia on September 30, 2005. The * * * * * 2. Good design standards for protective United States Court of Appeals for the (b)(1) The employer shall ensure that helmets (1918.103(b)) Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower ANSI Z89.1–2003, ‘‘American National court’s ruling on December 12, 2006. We the protective footwear is constructed in Standard for Personnel Protection— accordance with good design standards. are expressly seeking comment on Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- whether the proposed amendments and Protective footwear that is constructed Requirements’’ in accordance with an equipment design ANSI Z89.1–1997, ‘‘American National the supporting arguments and standard that meets the following Standard for Personnel Protection— explanations presented by the State are criteria will be presumed to be Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- consistent with the Federal hydrologic constructed in accordance with good Requirements’’ protection requirements under SMCRA. design standards: ANSI Z89.1–1986, ‘‘American National DATES: We will accept written Standard for Personnel Protection— (i) The standard specifies the safety comments on this amendment until 4 Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers- p.m. (local time), on June 18, 2007. If requirements for the particular Requirements’’ equipment; 3. Good design standards for protective requested, we will hold a public hearing (ii) The standard is recognized in the footwear (1918.104(b)) on the amendment on June 11, 2007. We United States as providing ASTM F–2412–2005, ‘‘Standard Test will accept requests to speak at a specifications that result in an adequate Methods for Foot Protection,’’ and ASTM F– hearing until 4:00 p.m. (local time), on level of safety; and 2413–2005, ‘‘Specification for Performance June 1, 2007. Requirements for Protective Footwear.’’ ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, (iii) The standard was developed by a These two standards together constitute a standards development organization identified by WV–112–FOR, by any of good design standard. the following methods: under a method providing for input and ANSI Z41–1999, ‘‘American National • consideration of views of industry Standard for Personal Protection—Protective E-mail: [email protected]. Include groups, experts, users, governmental Footwear’’ WV–112–FOR in the subject line of the ANSI Z41–1991, ‘‘American National message; authorities, and others having broad • experience and expertise in issues Standard for Personal Protection—Protective Mail/Hand Delivery: Mr. Roger W. related to the design and construction of Footwear’’ Calhoun, Director, Charleston Field the particular equipment. [FR Doc. E7–9315 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1027 (2) Non-mandatory appendix A to this BILLING CODE 4510–26–P Virginia Street, East, Charleston, West subpart contains examples of national Virginia 25301; or consensus standards that OSHA has • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// determined meet the criteria of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR www.regulations.gov. Follow the paragraph (b)(1) of this section. instructions for submitting comments. Protective footwear that is constructed Office of Surface Mining Reclamation Instructions: All submissions received in accordance with any of the listed and Enforcement must include the agency docket number national consensus standards will be for this rulemaking. For detailed deemed to meet the good design 30 CFR Part 948 instructions on submitting comments requirement of paragraph (b)(1). [WV–112–FOR] and additional information on the Protective footwear is not required to be rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public constructed in accordance with one of West Virginia Regulatory Program Comment Procedures’’ heading in the the listed standards, but the protective SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of footwear must be constructed in AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining this document. You may also request to accordance with good design standards. Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), speak at a public hearing by any of the To meet this requirement, the protective Interior. methods listed above or by contacting footwear must provide protection ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment the individual listed under FOR FURTHER equivalent to or greater than protective period and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment. INFORMATION CONTACT. footwear of the same type that is Docket: You may review copies of the constructed in accordance with one of SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of West Virginia program, this amendment, the listed national consensus standards. a proposed amendment to the West a listing of any scheduled public 29. Appendix A to subpart J is added Virginia regulatory program (the West hearings, and all written comments to read as follows: Virginia program) under the Surface received in response to this document at Appendix A to Subpart J of Part 1918— Mining Control and Reclamation Act of the addresses listed below during Criteria for Personal Protective 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). West Virginia normal business hours, Monday through Equipment (Non-Mandatory) is re-submitting a proposed amendment Friday, excluding holidays. You may to revise the West Virginia Code of State also receive one free copy of this This appendix lists equipment design Regulations (CSR) concerning the amendment by contacting OSM’s standards that OSHA has determined are ‘‘good design standards’’ as that phrase is hydrologic impacts of surface mining Charleston Field Office listed below. used in sections 1918.101(a)(1), 1918.103(b), operations. The amendments are Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director, and 1918.104(b). intended to repeal a definition of Charleston Field Office, Office of 1. Good design standards for protective eye ‘‘cumulative impact,’’ and add a Surface Mining Reclamation and and face devices (1918.101(a)(1)) definition of ‘‘material damage’’ to the Enforcement, 1027 Virginia Street, East,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27783

Charleston, West Virginia 25301, Bill 2663 deleted the definition of September 30, 2005, to vacate and Telephone: (304) 347–7158. E-mail: cumulative impact at CSR 38–2–2.39 remand OSM’s approval of West [email protected]. and added a definition of material Virginia’s amendments (Administrative West Virginia Department of damage at CSR 38–2–3.22.e, a provision Record Number WV–1479). The Fourth Environmental Protection, 601 57th that concerns cumulative hydrologic Circuit Court ruled that OSM failed to Street, SE., Charleston, WV 25304, impact assessments (CHIA) of surface comply with the rulemaking procedures Telephone: (304) 926–0490. coal mining and reclamation operations. set forth in section 553 of the In addition, you may review a copy of By letter dated May 2, 2001, West Administrative Procedure Act. The the amendment during regular business Virginia submitted the proposed Court also stated that OSM’s failure to hours at the following locations: changes as an amendment to its properly analyze and explain its Office of Surface Mining Reclamation permanent regulatory program decision to approve the State’s program and Enforcement, Morgantown Area (Administrative Record Number WV– amendment rendered that action Office, 604 Cheat Road, Suite 150, 1209). OSM approved the deletion of arbitrary and capricious. Morgantown, West Virginia 26508, the definition of cumulative impact and III. Description of the Proposed Telephone: (304) 291–4004. (By the addition of the definition of material Amendment Appointment Only) damage on December 1, 2003 (68 FR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 67035) (Administrative Record Number By letter dated March 22, 2007 and Enforcement, Beckley Area Office, WV–1379). (Administrative Record Number WV– 313 Harper Park Drive, Suite 3, Beckley, On January 30, 2004, the Ohio River 1485), the West Virginia Department of West Virginia 25801, Telephone: (304) Valley Environmental Coalition, Inc., Environmental Protection (WVDEP) re- 255–5265. Hominy Creek Preservation Association, submitted an amendment to its program FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Inc., and Citizens Coal Council filed a under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). Roger W. Calhoun, Director, Charleston complaint and petition for judicial See Section II above, for the background Field Office, Telephone: (304) 347– review in the United States District on the previous submittal of this 7158. E-mail: [email protected]. Court for the Southern District of West amendment. The amendment revises the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Virginia (Administrative Record West Virginia Code of State Regulations Number WV–1382). On September 30, (CSR) concerning the potential I. Background on the West Virginia Program hydrologic impacts of surface and II. Background on the Previous Submittal of 2005, the United States District Court This Amendment for the Southern District of West underground mining operations. The III. Description of the Proposed Amendment Virginia vacated OSM’s decision of amendment is intended to repeal a IV. Public Comment Procedures December 1, 2003, and remanded the definition of ‘‘cumulative impact,’’ and V. Procedural Determinations matter to the Secretary for further add a definition of ‘‘material damage’’ to proceedings consistent with the Court’s the hydrologic balance outside the I. Background on the West Virginia decision (Administrative Record permit area. Program Number WV–1439). In its March 22, 2007, re-submittal Section 503(a) of the Act permits a In response to the Court’s decision of letter, the State provided the following State to assume primacy for the September 30, 2005, OSM notified the information in support of its proposed regulation of surface coal mining and State on November 1, 2005, that its amendment: A description of the reclamation operations on non-Federal definition of material damage was not proposed amendment; a 13-page and non-Indian lands within its borders approved and could not be explanation of why it believes the by demonstrating that its program implemented. OSM also stated that the amendment is no less stringent than includes, among other things, ‘‘*** a deletion of the definition of cumulative SMCRA and no less effective than the State law which provides for the impact was not approved and the State Federal regulations; a copy of the State’s regulation of surface coal mining and had to take action to add it back into the Requirements Governing Water Quality reclamation operations in accordance program. On November 22, 2005, the Standards at 47 CSR 2; and a copy of the with the requirements of the Act * * *; United States District Court for the United States District Court for the and rules and regulations consistent Southern District of West Virginia Southern District of West Virginia with regulations issued by the Secretary amended its earlier decision decision Ohio River Valley pursuant to the Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C. (Administrative Record Number WV– Environmental Coalition, Inc. (OVEC), 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these 1454). In its amended order, the Court et al., v. Callaghan, et al., Civil Action criteria, the Secretary of the Interior directed the Secretary to instruct the No. 3:00–0058, dated March 8, 2001. conditionally approved the West State that it may not implement either You may receive a copy of this Virginia program on January 21, 1981. the new language nor the deletion of information by contacting the person You can find background information language from the State’s program, and listed above under FOR FURTHER on the West Virginia program, including that the State must enforce only the INFORMATION CONTACT. the Secretary’s findings, the disposition State program approved by OSM prior It must be noted that WVDEP stated of comments, and conditions of to the amendments. By letter dated in its March 22, 2007, letter that it is approval of the West Virginia program January 5, 2006, OSM notified the State resubmitting the program amendment in the January 21, 1981, Federal that the Court’s amended judgment pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(9). The Register (46 FR 5915). You can also find order makes it clear that the definition Federal regulations at 30 CFR later actions concerning West Virginia’s of ‘‘cumulative impact’’ at CSR 38–2– 732.17(h)(8) provide that if the Director program and program amendments at 30 2.39 remains part of the approved West disapproves an amendment, the State CFR 948.10, 948.12, 948.13, 948.15, and Virginia program and, as such, must be regulatory authority will have 30 days 948.16. implemented by the State, and that the after publication of the Director’s definition of ‘‘material damage’’ is not decision to resubmit a revised II. Background on the Previous approved and can not be implemented. amendment request for consideration by Submittal of this Amendment On December 12, 2006, the U.S. Court the Director. The Federal regulations at In 2001, West Virginia House Bill of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 30 CFR 732.17(h)(9) specify the 2663 was enacted as State law. House affirmed the District Court’s ruling of minimum public comment period to be

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27784 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

provided and the time period within WVDEP provided a 13-page explanation balance which has a significant adverse which the Director should approve or that we have summarized below. impact on the capability of a receiving disapprove an amendment stream to support its uses, a proposed Application of the Material Damage resubmission. This program amendment mining operation must be designed so Definition does not qualify as a resubmission as to consistently comply with the water pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(8) and (9) In its submittal, the WVDEP stated quality standards for these uses. If upon because this amendment has been the that the new definition of material review of a permit application and subject of litigation and the time period damage at CSR 38–2–3.22.e focuses on assessment of the probable cumulative provided at 30 CFR 732.17(h)(8) for the impact of mining operation(s) on the impact of all anticipated mining in the resubmission has expired. Therefore, ability of a water resource to ‘‘support cumulative impact area on the OSM will treat the amendment as a new existing conditions and uses’’. The hydrologic balance, the WVDEP is able request and initiate review procedures principle use of the term ‘‘material to determine that the proposed in accordance with 30 CFR 732.17(h). damage’’ in the hydrologic context in operation has been designed so as to SMCRA, is as a test for evaluating the consistently comply with the water West Virginia Proposes the Following potential hydrologic impacts of a permit Amendments quality standards that protect the uses of application before the mining operation the water into which discharges from 1. CSR 38–2–2.39 Definition of (and any potential enforcement) takes the operation will flow, the WVDEP will ‘‘cumulative impact’’ place. This new definition effectively make a finding that the proposed requires the State to consider the water This definition is proposed for operation has been designed so as to quality standards it has promulgated deletion from the West Virginia prevent material damage to the pursuant to section 303(a) of the Federal program, and provides as follows: hydrologic balance outside the permit Clean Water Act as part of the material area. Cumulative impact means the hydrologic damage inquiry under the surface Consistent with the concept that impact that results from the cumulation of mining law. These water quality mining operations must be designed to flows from all coal mining sites to common standards are codified in the State channels or aquifers in a cumulative impact prevent material damage, isolated or regulations at CSR 47–2–1 to –9.4. By area. Individual mines within a given random exceedences of water quality definition at CSR 47–2–2.21, ‘‘water cumulative impact area may be in full standards by a slight margin which do quality standards’’ means the compliance with effluent standards and all not affect the capability of the affected other regulatory requirements, but as a result ‘‘combination of water uses to be of the co-mingling of their off-site flows, protected and the water quality criteria water resource to support its uses will there is a cumulative impact. The Act does to be maintained by these rules.’’ The not be regarded as ‘‘material’’ damage. not prohibit cumulative impacts but does phrase used in this definition, ‘‘water In making the material damage emphasize that they be minimized. When the quality criteria’’, is also a defined term finding upon a proposed operation’s magnitude of cumulative impact exceeds at CSR 47–2–2.20, and its definition capability, as designed, to consistently threshold limits or ranges as predetermined comply with water quality standards, by the Division, they constitute material reiterates this direct link between damage. protection of stream uses and the WVDEP does not intend to create application of water quality standards: the impression that it will consider 2. CSR 38–2–3.22.e Cumulative every pollutant for which a water Hydrologic Impact Assessment (CHIA) ‘‘Water quality criteria’’ shall mean levels quality standard has been promulgated. of parameters or stream conditions that are This provision is proposed to be required to be maintained by these Water quality standards have been amended by adding a definition of regulations [state water quality standards]. promulgated for a wide variety of material damage to the existing Criteria may be expressed as a constituent parameters, many of which have no language. The proposed definition of concentration, levels, or narrative statement, potential to be in the effluent from a material damage provides as follows: representing a quality of water that supports mining operation. Instead, the agency’s a designated use or uses. consideration will be limited to Material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area[s] means any long The WVDEP stated that CSR 47–2–6 standards for those parameters which, term or permanent change in the hydrologic establishes various categories of uses for based on its experience with other balance caused by surface mining the water resources of the State. For mining operations in the area and the operation(s) which has a significant adverse protection of each of these categories of geochemical data which the provisions impact on the capability of the affected water use, Appendix E, Table 1 of the water at CSR 38–2–3.23 require to be included resource(s) to support existing conditions quality standards rules establishes a in the application, have the potential to and uses. specific set of water quality criteria (see have an impact on water quality if the As amended, CSR 38–2–3.22.e would CSR 47–2–8.1). These sets of criteria application is granted. provide as follows: include numeric limits for various Comparison of the Material Damage and The Director [Secretary] shall perform a pollutant parameters that are intended Cumulative Impact Definitions separate CHIA for the cumulative impact area to protect the category of use to which of each permit application. This evaluation they apply. Most, if not all, of these The WVDEP stated that for the most shall be sufficient to determine whether the State numeric limits are based on part, there is very little difference proposed operation has been designed to scientific studies conducted by or for between the definition of ‘‘cumulative prevent material damage to the hydrologic the U.S. Environmental Protection impact’’ that is proposed to be deleted, balance outside the permit area. Material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the Agency for the purpose of providing which included a definition of material permit area[s] means any long term or technical guidance to state regulators as damage, and the material damage permanent change in the hydrologic balance to the limits that must be placed on the definition that is proposed to be added. caused by surface mining operation(s) which concentrations of various pollutants in The cumulative impact definition at has a significant adverse impact on the order to provide protection for each CSR 38–2–2.39 provides that material capability of the affected water resource(s) to category of stream use. damage occurs when ‘‘the magnitude of support existing conditions and uses. The WVDEP stated that to assure that cumulative impact exceeds threshold In support of the proposed mining will not result in a long term or limits or ranges as predetermined by the amendments described above, the permanent change in the hydrologic [WVDEP]’’.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27785

The agency’s guidance to its permit example, if the iron level in a trout State program more consistent with reviewers stated that water quality stream is measured at 0.52 mg/l at any SMCRA rather than less so. standards should be used as material single point in time, which exceeds the IV. Public Comment Procedures damage limits under this definition. As water quality standard of 0.50 mg/l for with the material damage definition at the iron concentration in trout streams, Under the provisions of 30 CFR CSR 38–2–3.22.e that is being proposed, some would argue that the stream has 732.17(h), we are seeking your isolated or random exceedences of water been materially damaged, even in the comments on whether these quality standards by a slight margin absence of any evidence that this single amendments and the supporting which did not affect the capability of exceedence has contributed to arguments and explanations presented the affected water resource to support impairment of any aspect of the trout’s by the State satisfy the applicable its uses were not regarded as ‘‘material’’ life cycle or the supporting ecology. The program approval criteria of 30 CFR damage under the cumulative impact new definition makes it clear that single 732.15. If we approve these revisions, definition. Accordingly, regardless of or random, minor exceedences which they will become part of the West whether a permit reviewer made a do not affect the capability of a water Virginia program. material damage finding based on resource to support its uses do not Written Comments application of threshold limits or ranges constitute ‘‘material’’ damage. By under the old cumulative impact equating ‘‘material’’ damage with a Send your written or electronic definition or makes such a finding based ‘‘significant’’ adverse impact on the comments to OSM at the address given on whether there will be a significant capability of the affected water resource above. Your written comments should adverse impact on the capability of the to support its uses, the new definition be specific, pertain only to the issues affected water resource to support its is truer to the plain meaning of proposed in this rulemaking, and uses under the new material damage ‘‘material damage’’ as used in the include explanations in support of your definition, the real focus under both statute. recommendations. We may not consider definitions is on the question of whether Third, the WVDEP stated that the old or respond to your comments when water quality standards will be met definition, which is proposed to be developing the final rule if they are consistently so stream uses are deleted, focuses only on whether received after the close of the comment protected. ‘‘cumulative impacts’’ exceed the period (see DATES). We will make every The WVDEP stated that there are three threshold limits or ranges, to the attempt to log all comments into the distinctions between the old cumulative exclusion of consideration of other administrative record, but comments impact definition and the new material individual hydrologic impacts of the delivered to an address other than the damage definition. First, by requiring proposed operation. This exclusive Charleston Field Office may not be the material damage finding to be made focus may not be consistent with 30 logged in. upon the capability of the stream to CFR sections 780.21(g) and 784.14(f) support its uses, the new definition which require the material damage Electronic Comments clearly requires the material damage finding to be based on a determination Please submit Internet comments as inquiry to be made by reference to the of ‘‘whether the proposed operation has an E-mail or Word file avoiding the use State’s water quality standards that have been designed to prevent material of special characters and any form of been promulgated to protect these uses. damage to the hydrologic balance encryption. Please also include Attn: On its face, the old cumulative impact outside the permit area’’. Under the new SATS NO. WV–112–FOR and your definition only required this finding to definition, this potential shortcoming is name and return address in your be based on threshold limits or ranges. eliminated. The new material damage Internet message. If you do not receive Outside the agency’s guidance, which definition provides for consideration of a confirmation that we have received lacked the binding effect of a regulation, the design of the proposed operation as your Internet message, contact the there was no requirement that any well as cumulative impacts through its Charleston Field office at (304) 347– particular set of ‘‘limits or ranges’’ be focus on whether there has been a 7158. used. Accordingly, individual permit ‘‘change in the hydrologic balance Availability of Comments reviewers may have believed that they caused by surface mining operation(s)’’. had discretion to arbitrarily make up The WVDEP concluded that the Before including your address, phone their own criteria on a case by case State’s proposed material damage number, e-mail address, or other basis. Where such criteria varied from definition is consistent with the plain personal identifying information in your water quality standards, there was meaning of the term as it is used in comment, you should be aware that potential for conflict with the Clean SMCRA, its use in the context of your entire comment—including your Water Act in violation of 30 U.S.C. hydrologic protection in SMCRA, the personal identifying information—may 1292(a)(3) of SMCRA. By requiring the meaning it is given in other contexts in be made publicly available at any time. finding to be made upon the capability SMCRA, as well as the overall focus of While you can ask us in your comment of a stream to support its uses, which SMCRA. By focusing on the protection to withhold your personal identifying requires this judgment to be based on of stream uses, based on whether a information from public review, we the ability of the operation to comply proposed mining operation has been cannot guarantee that we will be able to with water quality standards, the designed to consistently comply with do so. potential for both arbitrarily established water quality standards that have been Public Hearing limits and conflict with the Clean Water promulgated to protect such uses, based Act is eliminated. Therefore, the new upon scientific study, the material If you wish to speak at the public definition is more objective. damage definition provides a seamless hearing, contact the person listed under Second, the WVDEP stated that the interface between the State’s clean water FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 old definition could be read to mean regulatory program and regulation of p.m. (local time), on June 1, 2007. If you that a single, minor exceedence of impacts from mining on the hydrologic are disabled and need special threshold limits or ranges which did not balance under the surface mining accommodations to attend a public result in any perceptible damage regulatory program. In the opinion of hearing, contact the person listed under constitutes material damage. For the State, these amendments render the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27786 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

will arrange the location and time of the programs and program amendments National Environmental Policy Act hearing with those persons requesting submitted by the States must be based This rule does not require an the hearing. If no one requests an solely on a determination of whether the environmental impact statement opportunity to speak, we will not hold submittal is consistent with SMCRA and because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 a hearing. its implementing Federal regulations U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency To assist the transcriber and ensure an and whether the other requirements of accurate record, we request, if possible, decisions on proposed State regulatory 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have program provisions do not constitute that each person who speaks at the been met. public hearing provide us with a written major Federal actions within the copy of his or her comments. The public Executive Order 13132—Federalism meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the hearing will continue on the specified National Environmental Policy Act (42 This rule does not have Federalism date until everyone scheduled to speak U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). implications. SMCRA delineates the has been given an opportunity to be Paperwork Reduction Act heard. If you are in the audience and roles of the Federal and State have not been scheduled to speak and governments with regard to the This rule does not contain wish to do so, you will be allowed to regulation of surface coal mining and information collection requirements that speak after those who have been reclamation operations. One of the require approval by OMB under the scheduled. We will end the hearing after purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. everyone scheduled to speak and others nationwide program to protect society 3507 et seq.). present in the audience who wish to and the environment from the adverse Regulatory Flexibility Act speak, have been heard. effects of surface coal mining operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of The Department of the Interior Public Meeting SMCRA requires that State laws certifies that this rule will not have a If only one person requests an regulating surface coal mining and significant economic impact on a opportunity to speak, we may hold a reclamation operations be ‘‘in substantial number of small entities public meeting rather than a public accordance with’’ the requirements of under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 hearing. If you wish to meet with us to SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7) requires U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, discuss the amendment, please request that State programs contain rules and which is the subject of this rule, is based a meeting by contacting the person regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ upon counterpart Federal regulations for listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION regulations issued by the Secretary which an economic analysis was CONTACT. All such meetings will be pursuant to SMCRA. prepared and certification made that open to the public and, if possible, we such regulations would not have a will post notices of meetings at the Executive Order 13175—Consultation significant economic effect upon a locations listed under ADDRESSES. We and Coordination With Indian Tribal substantial number of small entities. In will make a written summary of each Governments making the determination as to whether meeting a part of the Administrative this rule would have a significant In accordance with Executive Order Record. economic impact, the Department relied 13175, we have evaluated the potential upon the data and assumptions for the V. Procedural Determinations effects of this rule on Federally- counterpart Federal regulations. recognized Indian tribes and have Executive Order 12630—Takings determined that the rule does not have Small Business Regulatory Enforcement This rule does not have takings substantial direct effects on one or more Fairness Act implications. This determination is Indian tribes, on the relationship This rule is not a major rule under 5 based on the analysis performed for the between the Federal Government and counterpart Federal regulation. U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory power and responsibilities between the This rule: (a) Does not have an annual Planning and Review Federal Government and Indian tribes. effect on the economy of $100 million; The basis for this determination is that This rule is exempt from review by (b) Will not cause a major increase in our decision is on a State regulatory the Office of Management and Budget costs or prices for consumers, program and does not involve a Federal under Executive Order 12866. individual industries, Federal, State, or regulation involving Indian lands. local government agencies, or Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice geographic regions; and (c) Does not Reform Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, have significant adverse effects on The Department of the Interior has Distribution, or Use of Energy competition, employment, investment, conducted the reviews required by productivity, innovation, or the ability section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and On May 18, 2001, the President issued of U.S.-based enterprises to compete has determined that this rule meets the Executive Order 13211 which requires with foreign-based enterprises. This applicable standards of subsections (a) agencies to prepare a Statement of determination is based upon the and (b) of that section. However, these Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) analysis performed under various laws standards are not applicable to the considered significant under Executive and executive orders for the counterpart actual language of State regulatory Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a Federal regulations. programs and program amendments significant adverse effect on the supply, because each program is drafted and distribution, or use of energy. Because Unfunded Mandates promulgated by a specific State, not by this rule is exempt from review under This rule will not impose an OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of Executive Order 12866 and is not unfunded mandate on State, local, or SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and expected to have a significant adverse tribal governments or the private sector the Federal regulations at 30 CFR effect on the supply, distribution, or use of $100 million or more in any given 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects year. This determination is based upon decisions on proposed State regulatory is not required. the analysis performed under various

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27787

laws and executive orders for the personal information provided, unless Generating Unit Multi-Pollutant counterpart Federal regulations. the comment includes information Regulation. claimed to be Confidential Business List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948 I. Background Information (CBI) or other information Intergovernmental relations, Surface whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Regulation No. 1146 establishes NOX, mining, Underground mining. Do not submit information that you SO2 and mercury emissions limits to Dated: April 19, 2007. consider to be CBI or otherwise achieve reductions of those pollutants from Delaware’s large EGUs of coal-fired Michael K. Robinson, protected through http:// and residual oil-fired EGUs with a Acting Regional Director, Appalachian www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is nameplate capacity rating of 25 Region. megawatts (MW) or greater generating [FR Doc. E7–9506 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] an (anonymous access( system, which means EPA will not know your identity capacity. Only the NOX and SO2 BILLING CODE 4310–05–P or contact information unless you sections of this regulation will be provide it in the body of your comment. discussed in this rulemaking. The If you send an e-mail comment directly mercury sections of this regulation will ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION to EPA without going through http:// be discussed in a separate rulemaking. AGENCY www.regulations.gov, your e-mail Regulation No. 1146 will help Delaware attain and maintain the 40 CFR Part 52 address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment national ambient air quality standards [EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0027; FRL–8316–3] that is placed in the public docket and (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate made available on the Internet. If you matter (PM2.5) and will assist Delaware Approval and Promulgation of Air submit an electronic comment, EPA in achieving the emissions reductions Quality Implementation Plans; needed to support Delaware’s 8-hour recommends that you include your Delaware; Electric Generating Unit ozone reasonable further progress plan name and other contact information in Multi-Pollutant Regulation (RFP). This multi-pollutant regulation the body of your comment and with any will not replace the Federal Clean Air disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA AGENCY: Environmental Protection Interstate Rule (CAIR) requirements and cannot read your comment due to Agency (EPA). does not relieve affected sources from technical difficulties and cannot contact ACTION: Proposed rule. participating in and complying with all you for clarification, EPA may not be CAIR cap-and-trade program SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve able to consider your comment. requirements. a State Implementation Plan (SIP) Electronic files should avoid the use of revision submitted by the State of special characters, any form of II. Summary of SIP Revision Delaware. This revision pertains to encryption, and be free of any defects or Regulation No. 1146 applies to coal- establishing limits on the emissions of viruses. fired and residual oil-fired EGUs located nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur Docket: All documents in the in Delaware with a nameplate capacity dioxide (SO2) from Delaware’s large electronic docket are listed in the rating of 25 MW or greater. The large electric generation units (EGUs). This http://www.regulations.gov index. EGUs subject to Regulation No. 1146 are action is being taken under the Clean Although listed in the index, some Conective Delmarva Generating, Inc.’s Air Act (CAA or the Act). information is not publicly available, Edge Moor Generating Station Units 3, DATES: Written comments must be i.e., CBI or other information whose 4 and 5 located in New Castle County; received on or before June 18, 2007. disclosure is restricted by statute. the City of Dover’s McKee Run ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Certain other material, such as Generating Station Unit 3 located in identified by Docket ID Number EPA– copyrighted material, is not placed on Kent County; and NRG Energy, Inc.’s R03–OAR–2007–0027 by one of the the Internet and will be publicly Indian River Generating Station Units 1, following methods: available only in hard copy form. 2, 3 and 4 located in Sussex County. A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow Publicly available docket materials are Regulation No. 1146 also contains the on-line instructions for submitting available either electronically in http:// definitions; emissions limitations for comments. www.regulations.gov or in hard copy NOX and SO2; recordkeeping and B. E-mail: [email protected]. during normal business hours at the Air reporting; compliance plan; and annual C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0027, Protection Division, U.S. Environmental mass emission limits for NOX and SO2. Linda Miller, Acting Chief, Air Quality Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 A. Emissions Limitations Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Environmental Protection Agency, 19103. Copies of the State submittal are 1. NOX Region III, 1650 Arch Street, available at the Delaware Department of Regulation No. 1146 includes short Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Natural Resources & Environmental term NOX emission rate limits and will D. Hand Delivery: At the previously- Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box be implemented in a phased manner. listed EPA Region III address. Such 1401, Dover, Delaware 19901. For Phase I, May 1, 2009 through deliveries are only accepted during the December 31, 2011, the short term NO FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose X Docket’s normal hours of operation, and emission rate limit is 0.15 lb/MMBTU of Quinto, (215) 814–2182, or by e-mail at special arrangements should be made heat input on a rolling 24-hour average [email protected]. for deliveries of boxed information. basis. For Phase II, January 1, 2012 and Instructions: Direct your comments to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On beyond, the short term NOX emission Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2007– November 16, 2006, the Delaware rate limit is 0.125 lb/MMBTU of heat 0027. EPA’s policy is that all comments Department of Natural Resources and input on a rolling 24-hour average basis. received will be included in the public Environmental Control (DNREC) A unit subject to this regulation shall docket without change, and may be submitted a revision to its State not emit annual NOX mass emissions made available online at http:// Implementation Plan (SIP) for that exceed the values shown in Table www.regulations.gov, including any Regulation No. 1146—Electric I on or after January 1, 2009.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27788 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

TABLE I.—ANNUAL NOX MASS monitoring, recordkeeping, quality contain any unfunded mandate or EMISSIONS LIMITS assurance/quality control (QA/QC), and significantly or uniquely affect small reporting requirements. These are the governments, as described in the Control period same requirements that are necessary for Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 mass Unit NOX compliance with EPA’s CAIR program, (Pub. L. 104–4). This proposed rule also emissions limit does not have a substantial direct effect (tons) for which each of the units subject to this regulation are also subject. on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Edge Moor 3 ...... 773 C. Compliance Plan Edge Moor 4 ...... 1339 Government and Indian tribes, or on the Edge Moor 5 ...... 1348 Regulation No. 1146 requires a distribution of power and Indian River 1 ...... 601 submission of a compliance plan from responsibilities between the Federal Indian River 2 ...... 628 the owner or operator of a unit subject Government and Indian tribes, as Indian River 3 ...... 977 to this regulation to DNREC on or before specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 Indian River 4 ...... 2032 July 1, 2007. FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will McKee Run 3 ...... 244 D. Recordkeeping and Reporting it have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the 2. SO 2 Regulation No. 1146 requires national government and the States, or Regulation No. 1146 includes short compliance with all applicable on the distribution of power and term SO2 emission rate limits and will recordkeeping and reporting responsibilities among the various also be implemented in a phased requirements of 40 CFR part 75. Owner levels of government, as specified in manner. For Phase I, May 1, 2009 or operator of a unit subject to this Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, through December 31, 2011, the short regulation shall maintain for a period of August 10, 1999), because it merely term SO2 emission rate limit is 0.37 lb/ at least 5 years, copies of all proposes to approve a state rule MMBTU of heat input on a rolling 24- measurements, tests, reports and other implementing a Federal requirement, hour average basis. For Phase II, January information required by 40 CFR part 75. and does not alter the relationship or 1, 2012 and beyond, the short term SO2 This information shall be provided to the distribution of power and emission rate limit is 0.26 lb/MMBTU of DNREC upon request at anytime. responsibilities established in the Clean heat input on a rolling 24-hour average III. Proposed Action Air Act. This proposed rule also is not basis. subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR A unit subject to this regulation shall EPA is proposing to approve the 19885, April 23, 1997), because it not emit annual SO2 mass emissions Delaware SIP revision for Regulation approves a state rule implementing a that exceed the values shown in Table No. 1146—Electric Generating Unit Federal standard. II on or after January 1, 2009. Multi-Pollutant Regulation submitted on In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s November 16, 2006 pertaining to NOX role is to approve state choices, TABLE II.—ANNUAL SO2 MASS and SO2. This regulation will result in provided that they meet the criteria of EMISSIONS LIMITS the reduction of NOX and SO2 emissions the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the from the affected sources. EPA is absence of a prior existing requirement Control period soliciting public comments on the for the State to use voluntary consensus Unit SO2 mass issues discussed in this document. standards (VCS), EPA has no authority emissions limit These comments will be considered (tons) to disapprove a SIP submission for before taking final action. failure to use VCS. It would thus be Edge Moor 3 ...... 1391 IV. Statutory and Executive Order inconsistent with applicable law for Edge Moor 4 ...... 2410 Reviews EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, Edge Moor 5 ...... 2427 to use VCS in place of a SIP submission Indian River 1 ...... 1082 Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Indian River 2 ...... 1130 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed the Clean Air Act. Thus, the Indian River 3 ...... 1759 action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory requirements of section 12(d) of the Indian River 4 ...... 3657 action’’ and therefore is not subject to McKee Run 3 ...... 439 National Technology Transfer and review by the Office of Management and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Budget. For this reason, this action is B. Compliance Demonstration 272 note) do not apply. As required by also not subject to Executive Order section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 NOX and SO2 emissions from multiple 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing units subject to Regulation No. 1146 at That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, this proposed rule, EPA has taken the a common facility may be averaged on Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May necessary steps to eliminate drafting a heat input basis to demonstrate 22, 2001)). This action merely proposes errors and ambiguity, minimize compliance. to approve state law as meeting Federal potential litigation, and provide a clear Regulation No. 1146 requires requirements and imposes no additional legal standard for affected conduct. EPA compliance demonstration with the requirements beyond those imposed by has complied with Executive Order emissions limitations for NOX and SO2 state law. Accordingly, the 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by through the use of EPA and DNREC Administrator certifies that this examining the takings implications of approved continuous emissions proposed rule will not have a significant the rule in accordance with the monitoring systems (CEMS). Regulation economic impact on a substantial ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental No. 1146 also requires that these CEMS number of small entities under the Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk must be installed, certified, calibrated, Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 and Avoidance of Unanticipated operated, and maintained in accordance et seq.). Because this rule proposes to Takings’’ issued under the executive with EPA requirements. For NOX and approve pre-existing requirements order. SO2 emissions, Regulation No. 1146 under state law and does not impose This proposed rule pertaining to specifies that CEMS must comply with any additional enforceable duty beyond Delaware’s Electric Generating Unit all 40 CFR part 75; including that required by state law, it does not Multi-Pollutant Regulation, does not

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27789

impose an information collection New York, New York 10007, Attention two Docket Facilities. The OW Docket burden under the provisions of the Docket ID No. OW–2007–0259. Center is open from 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 • Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, p.m, Monday through Friday, excluding U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). EPA West Room 3334, 1301 legal holidays. The Docket telephone Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, number is (202) 566–2426 and the List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 DC, 20004 or Docket Manager, Proposed Docket address is OW Docket, EPA Environmental protection, Air Water Quality Standards for Puerto West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, Rico, U.S. EPA Region 2, 290 Broadway, Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. The Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping New York, New York 10007, Attention Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile Docket ID No. OW–2007–0259. Such a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through organic compounds. deliveries are only accepted during the Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Docket’s normal hours of operation, and telephone number for the Public special arrangements should be made Reading Room is (202) 566–1744. Dated: May 10, 2007. for deliveries of boxed information. Publicly available docket materials are William T. Wisniewski, Instructions: Direct your comments to also available in hard copy at U.S. EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2007– Region 2, 290 Broadway, 24th Floor, [FR Doc. E7–9519 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 0259. EPA’s policy is that all comments New York, New York 10007. This BILLING CODE 6560–50–P received will be included in the public location is open from 8:30 a.m. until docket without change and may be 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, made available online at excluding legal holidays. The telephone ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION www.regulations.gov, including any number is (212) 637–3807. Publicly AGENCY personal information provided, unless available docket materials will be the comment includes information viewable electronically at the Caribbean 40 CFR Part 131 claimed to be Confidential Business Environmental Protection Division, U.S. [EPA–HQ–OW–2007–0259; FRL–8315–3] Information (CBI) or other information EPA Region 2, 1492 Ponce De Leon whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Avenue, Suite 417, Centro Europa Water Quality Standards for Puerto Do not submit information that you Building, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00907. Rico consider to be CBI or otherwise This facility is open from 9 a.m. to 3:30 protected through www.regulations.gov p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding AGENCY: Environmental Protection or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Agency (EPA). legal holidays. The telephone number is website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ (787) 977–5848. ACTION: Proposed rule. system, which means EPA will not FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: know your identity or contact SUMMARY: Wayne Jackson, U.S. EPA Region 2, EPA is proposing water information unless you provide it in the quality standards that would establish Division of Environmental Planning and body of your comment. If you send an Protection, 290 Broadway, New York, methods to implement Puerto Rico’s e-mail comment directly to EPA without New York 10007 (telephone: 212–637– existing antidegradation policy for going through www.regulations.gov your 3807 or e-mail: [email protected]) waters in the Commonwealth of Puerto e-mail address will be automatically or Danielle Fuligni, U.S. EPA Rico. captured and included as part of the Headquarters, Office of Science and DATES: Comments must be received on comment that is placed in the public Technology, 1200 Pennsylvania or before June 18, 2007. docket and made available on the Avenue, NW., Mail Code 4305T, EPA will hold a public hearing on this Internet. If you submit an electronic Washington, DC 20460 (telephone: 202– proposed rule on Monday June 4, 2007, comment, EPA recommends that you 566–0793 or e-mail: from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. and from 7 p.m. include your name and other contact [email protected]). to 9 p.m. The public hearing will occur information in the body of your at the Universidad Metropolitana comment and with any disk or CD–ROM SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This (UMET) Theatre, Ave. Ana G. Mendez, you submit. If EPA cannot read your section is organized as follows: Km 0.3, Cupey, Puerto Rico 00928. If comment due to technical difficulties Table of Contents you need special accommodations at and cannot contact you for clarification, this meeting, including wheelchair I. General Information EPA may not be able to consider your A. What Entities May be Affected by This access or sign language interpreter, you comment. Electronic files should avoid Action? should contact Yasmin Laguer at 787– the use of special characters, any form B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare my 997–5848 at least 10 business days prior of encryption, and be free of any defects Comments for EPA? to the meeting so that we can make or viruses. For additional information II. Background appropriate arrangements. about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA A. What Are the Applicable Federal ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Docket Center homepage at http:// Statutory and Regulatory Requirements? www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. B. Why Is EPA Proposing Federal identified by Docket Id. No. [EPA–HQ– Antidegradation Implementation OW–2007–0259], by one of the Docket: All documents in the docket Methods for the Commonwealth of following methods: are listed in the www.regulations.gov Puerto Rico? • www.regulations.gov: Follow the index. Although listed in the index, III. This Proposed Rule on-line instructions for submitting some information is not publicly A. What Are the Proposed Antidegradation comments. available, e.g., CBI or other information Implementation Methods to Protect • E-mail: [email protected]. whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Puerto Rico’s High Quality Waters? • Mail to either: Water Docket, Certain other material, such as B. How Will Puerto Rico Implement the USEPA, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 copyrighted material, will be publicly Proposed Antidegradation Implementation Methods? Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, available only in hard copy. Publicly C. What Are the Cost Implications of the DC 20460 or Docket Manager, Proposed available docket materials are available Proposed Rule? Water Quality Standards for Puerto either electronically in D. Request for Comment Rico, U.S. EPA Region 2, 290 Broadway, www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27790 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Planning and Review) To Address Environmental Justice in (hereafter, ‘‘the Commonwealth’’ or B. Paperwork Reduction Act Minority Populations and Low-Income ‘‘Puerto Rico’’). Entities discharging C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Populations) D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act K. Endangered Species Act pollutants to the surface waters of E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) Puerto Rico could be indirectly affected F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation I. General Information by this rulemaking since water quality and Coordination With Indian Tribal A. What Entities May Be Affected by standards are used in determining Governments) National Pollutant Discharge G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of This Action? Children From Environmental Health Elimination System (NPDES) permit Citizens concerned with water quality limits, CWA section 404 dredge and fill Risks and Safety Risks) in Puerto Rico may be interested in this H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That permits, and other activities requiring Significantly Affect Energy Supply, rulemaking. Today’s proposal, if made CWA section 401 certification. final, will establish Federal Distribution or Use) Categories and entities that may antidegradation implementation I. National Technology Transfer and ultimately be affected include: Advancement Act of 1995 methods by regulation for waters in the

Category Examples of potentially affected entities

Industry ...... Industries discharging pollutants to surface waters in Puerto Rico. Municipalities ...... Discharges from publicly-owned facilities such as publicly owned treatment works and water filtration facili- ties.

This table is not intended to be information (subject heading, Federal designated use or uses to be made of the exhaustive, but rather provides a guide Register date and page number). water, the water quality criteria for readers regarding NPDES-regulated • Follow directions—The agency may necessary to protect those uses and an entities likely to be affected by this ask you to respond to specific questions antidegradation policy. States are action. This table lists the types of or organize comments by referencing a required to review their water quality entities that EPA is now aware could Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part standards at least once every three years potentially be affected by this action. or section number. and, if appropriate, revise or adopt new Other types of entities not listed in the • Explain why you agree or disagree; standards. The results of this triennial table could also be affected. To suggest alternatives and substitute review must be submitted to EPA, and determine whether your facility may be language for your requested changes. EPA must approve or disapprove any • affected by this action, you should Describe any assumptions and new or revised standards. carefully examine today’s proposed provide any technical information and/ Section 303(c) of the CWA authorizes or data that you used. the EPA Administrator to promulgate rule. If you have questions regarding the • applicability of this action to the If you estimate potential costs or water quality standards to supersede particular entity, consult the person burdens, explain how you arrived at State standards that EPA has your estimate in sufficient detail to listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER disapproved or in any case where the allow for it to be reproduced. Administrator determines that a new or INFORMATION CONTACT section. • Provide specific examples to revised standard is needed to meet the B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare illustrate your concerns, and suggest CWA’s requirements. In a February 14, My Comments for EPA? alternatives. • 2007, Opinion and Order from the Explain your views as clearly as United States District Court for the i. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this possible, avoiding the use of profanity information to EPA through District of Puerto Rico in the case of or personal threats. CORALations and the American Littoral www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly • Make sure to submit your mark the part or all of the information Society v. United States Environmental comments by the comment period Protection Agency, et al. (No. 02–1266 that you claim to be CBI. For CBI deadline identified. information in a disk or CD ROM that (JP) (D. Puerto Rico)), the Court ordered you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the II. Background EPA to ‘‘prepare and publish new or disk or CD ROM as CBI and then revised water quality standards A. What Are the Applicable Federal identifying antidegradation methods for identify electronically within the disk or Statutory and Regulatory Requirements? Puerto Rico within 60 days’’ (April 17, CD ROM the specific information that is Section 303 (33 U.S.C. 1313) of the 2007). The Court has since granted claimed as CBI. In addition to one Clean Water Act (CWA or ‘‘the Act’’) EPA’s motion for an additional 30 days. complete version of the comment that directs States, Territories, and EPA is, therefore, proposing Federal includes information claimed as CBI, a authorized Tribes (hereafter referred to water quality standards for these waters copy of the comment that does not as ‘‘States’’), with oversight by EPA, to in Puerto Rico. contain the information claimed as CBI adopt water quality standards to protect As one of the minimum elements that must be submitted for inclusion in the the public health and welfare, enhance must be included in a State’s water public docket. Information so marked the quality of water and serve the quality standards, antidegradation is an will not be disclosed except in purposes of the CWA. Under section important tool for States and authorized accordance with procedures set forth in 303, States are required to develop Tribes to use in meeting the CWA’s 40 CFR part 2. water quality standards for navigable requirement that water quality ii. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. waters of the United States within the standards protect public health or When submitting comments, remember State. Section 303(c) and EPA’s welfare, enhance the quality of water to: implementing regulations at 40 CFR part and meet the objective of the CWA to • Identify the rulemaking by docket 131 require State and Tribal water restore and maintain the chemical, number and other identifying quality standards to include the physical and biological integrity of the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27791

nation’s waters. Antidegradation maintained and protected (see 40 CFR quality is necessary to accommodate requirements help ensure that any 131.12(a)(3)). important economic or social development in degradation in water quality is subject In addition to requiring States and the area where the waters are located. In to review and approval by the State authorized Tribes to adopt an allowing such lower water quality, the Board antidegradation policy, 40 CFR 131.12 shall require a water quality level adequate even in cases where the existing water to protect existing uses fully. Further, the quality far exceeds the water quality requires States to identify methods for Board will require that: criteria and designated use applicable to implementing such a policy. Such (1) The highest statutory and regulatory individual waters. methods are not required to be requirements for all new and/or existing EPA’s regulation at 40 CFR 131.12 contained in the State’s regulation, but point sources be achieved and requires that States and authorized because they inform EPA’s judgment (2) All cost-effective and reasonable best Tribes adopt antidegradation policies regarding whether the State’s management practices for non-point source and identify implementation methods to antidegradation policy is consistent control be implemented. provide three levels or tiers of water with the Federal regulations at 40 CFR Where high quality waters constitute an 131.12, they are subject to EPA review. outstanding national resource, such as waters quality protection. The first level of of El Yunque National Forest and State parks, protection at 40 CFR 131.12(a)(1), also Where the State chooses to make such wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional known as Tier 1 of antidegradation, methods part of its water quality recreational or ecological significance, that requires the maintenance and protection standards regulations, section 303(c)(3) water quality shall be maintained and of existing instream water uses and the of the CWA and EPA’s implementing protected. level of water quality necessary to regulations require them to be submitted Where potential water quality impairment protect those existing uses. Protection of to EPA for review and approval. When is associated with a thermal discharge, this existing uses is the floor of water quality a State or authorized Tribe chooses to thermal discharge must comply with Section protection afforded to all waters of the develop such methods as guidance or 316 of the Clean Water Act as amended. United States. Existing uses are ‘‘*** outside of regulation, EPA reviews the The Environmental Quality Board of those uses actually attained in the water methods in the context of determining the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (EQB body on or after November 28, 1975, whether the State’s antidegradation or Board) first adopted an whether or not they are included in the policy as interpreted and implemented antidegradation policy in its water water quality standards.’’ (40 CFR through the methods, is consistent with quality standards regulation in June 131.3(e)) 40 CFR 131.12. 1973. EQB is responsible, in part, for The second level of protection, or Tier EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 131.12 developing and recommending to the 2 of antidegradation, is for high quality provide a great deal of discretion to Governor public policy to encourage waters. High quality waters are defined States regarding the amount of and promote the improvement of in 40 CFR 131.12(a)(2) as waters where specificity required in a State’s environmental quality so as to meet the the quality of the waters is better than antidegradation implementation conservation, social, economic, health the levels necessary to support methods. The regulations do not specify and other requirements and goals of the propagation of fish, shellfish, and minimum elements for such methods, Commonwealth. One of the specific wildlife and recreation in and on the but do require that such methods not functions of EQB is to develop and water. This water quality is to be undermine the intent of the adopt water quality standards, which maintained and protected unless the antidegradation policy. See Advanced are intended to ‘‘enhance, maintain and State or authorized Tribe finds, after Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 63 FR preserve the quality of the waters of public participation and 36742, 36781, July 7, 1998. Puerto Rico compatible with the social intergovernmental review, that allowing B. Why Is EPA Proposing Federal and economic needs of Puerto Rico.’’ lower water quality is necessary to Antidegradation Implementation This antidegradation policy was accommodate important economic or Methods for the Commonwealth of approved by EPA on November 15, social development in the area in which Puerto Rico? 1973. Puerto Rico’s antidegradation the waters are located. In allowing lower policy statement remained unchanged Puerto Rico has an existing EPA- water quality, the State or authorized until 1990. In August 1990, the approved antidegradation policy, which Tribe must assure water quality Commonwealth of Puerto Rico adopted was adopted on October 27, 1990 and adequate to protect existing uses. revisions to the Puerto Rico Water approved by EPA on March 28, 2002. Further, the State or authorized Tribe Quality Standards Regulation This antidegradation policy mirrors that must ensure that all applicable statutory (PRWQSR). These were sent to EPA of the federal regulation. The policy and regulatory requirements are Region 2 on September 21, 1990, with states the following: achieved for all new and existing point the caveat from the Chairman of the sources and all cost-effective and It is the policy of the Government of Puerto EQB that the transmittal may not be the reasonable best management practices Rico to conserve and protect the existing uses final submittal, since EQB was going to are achieved for nonpoint source of the Waters of Puerto Rico. The water hold additional public hearings on quality necessary to protect the existing uses, control. including threatened and endangered species November 1, 1990 regarding certain Finally, the third and highest level of shall be maintained and protected. aspects of the revisions. Because of this antidegradation protection, or Tier 3, is In those water bodies where the quality caveat, and because the requisite for outstanding national resource waters exceeds levels necessary to support certification from the Commonwealth’s (ONRWs). If a State or authorized Tribe propagation of fish, shellfish, wildlife, Secretary of Justice was not submitted determines that the characteristics of a desirable species including threatened or with the revisions as required by 40 CFR water body constitute an outstanding endangered species and recreation in and on 131.6(e), EPA did not act on these national resource, such as waters of the water, that quality shall be maintained revisions immediately. and protected. A lower water quality may be National and State parks and wildlife allowed when the EQB finds, after full From 1991 to 1993, EPA Region 2 refuges and waters of exceptional satisfaction of the intergovernmental worked with EQB on a series of recreational or ecological significance, coordination and public participation subsequent draft revisions to the and designates a water body as such, provisions of the Board’s Continuing PRWQSR. These drafts were never then that water quality must be Planning Process that allowing lower water adopted by Puerto Rico.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27792 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

The requisite certification from the opinion ruling that EPA had failed to and EPA’s regulations leave to the States Commonwealth’s Secretary of Justice execute a mandatory duty to propose and authorized Tribes the decision was ultimately submitted to EPA on antidegradation implementation whether to regulate nonpoint sources by February 25, 2002. Upon receipt of this methods for Puerto Rico and ordered requiring that they undergo certification EPA took final action on all EPA to prepare and publish new or antidegradation review. American new and revised provisions of the 1990 revised water quality standards Wildlands v. Browner, 260 F.3d 1192, PRWQSR on March 28, 2002. These identifying antidegradation 1198 (10th Cir. 2001). To date, Puerto revisions included the above-referenced implementation methods for Puerto Rico has not chosen to subject nonpoint revisions to the Puerto Rico Rico within 60 days. The court has since sources to antidegradation review. As a antidegradation policy. granted a 30-day extension. result, EPA is not proposing to apply Prior to October 2001, Puerto Rico Puerto Rico’s methods to sources other III. This Proposed Rule had antidegradation implementation than point sources. methods set forth in a document known EPA is proposing federal water In addition, as envisioned by Puerto as its Continuing Planning Process quality standards identifying methods Rico, the proposed methods provide (CPP). In the fall of 2001, EPA for implementing Puerto Rico’s that the antidegradation review would commenced work with the Puerto Rico antidegradation policy. Consistent with occur as part of Puerto Rico’s CWA EQB to enhance their antidegradation section 303(c)(4) of the CWA, if during section 401 certification process. EPA implementation methods. EQB the Federal rulemaking process, Puerto issues all of the National Pollutant submitted its first reasonably complete Rico incorporates into Commonwealth Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) draft of its consolidation of regulation its own antidegradation permits under CWA section 402 for the antidegradation implementation implementation methods and EPA Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. As part methods on September 3, 2003. approves Puerto Rico’s action, EPA of this process, Puerto Rico must certify On February 20, 2002, CORALations, would not finalize this proposal. In under CWA section 401 that those American Littoral Society, and the addition, if Puerto Rico incorporates permits comply with Puerto Rico’s American Canoe Association filed a into Commonwealth regulation its own water quality requirements. Conducting complaint in the U.S. District Court for antidegradation implementation the antidegradation review process the District of Puerto Rico. In this methods following publication of a final during this certification is a logical time action, the plaintiffs alleged, among Federal rule, EPA would withdraw its for this review to occur, since this is the other things, that a September 4, 1992 rule. time when EQB conducts its formal letter from a EPA Region 2 Division A. What Are the Proposed analysis to determine, in part, if a Director to the EQB had triggered a Antidegradation Implementation proposed action will comply with all mandatory duty under section 303(c)(4) Methods To Protect Puerto Rico’s High aspects of the Puerto Rico Water Quality of the CWA for EPA to prepare and Quality Waters? Standards Regulation (PRWQSR). propose regulations for Puerto Rico To implement Tier 1, it is important setting forth a revised water quality These proposed antidegradation to explain what is meant by the term standard for antidegradation implementation methods are the same ‘‘existing in-stream water use’’ (40 CFR implementation methods. as the implementation methods Puerto 131.12 (a)(1)) and explain how the level In October and December 2003, EQB Rico provided to EPA in 2004. EPA of water quality will be identified that submitted two revised drafts of its reviewed those and on July 9, 2004, sent is required to allow an existing use to consolidation of antidegradation a letter from Walter Mugdan, Director of continue to occur. Section 131.3 of the implementation methods. The EPA Region 2’s Division of federal regulations defines existing uses December 2003 draft was submitted Environmental Planning and Protection as ‘‘those uses actually attained in the under cover of a letter dated December Division to Esteban Mujica Cotto, water body on or after November 28, 16, 2003 from Ruben Gonzalez Delgado, President of Puerto Rico’s 1975 * * * ’’. The proposed methods Director of EQB’s Water Quality Area, to Environmental Quality Board stating provide that where there are Walter Mugdan, Director of the EPA that these methods meet the concentrations or levels of a particular Region 2’s Division of Environmental requirements of 40 CFR 131.12(a). (It pollutant that have caused a waterbody Planning and Protection. This letter should be noted that subsequent to the to be listed as impaired under section stated that it was EQB’s intent to issuance of EPA’s July 9, 2004 letter, 303(d) of the CWA, no additional promulgate this consolidation as part of EQB incorporated some non-substantive degradation may occur in the the PRWQSR in order to consolidate updates to its consolidation of waterbody. Puerto Rico’s methods EQB’s existing antidegradation implementation methods. The purpose provide that this would be assured implementation methods ‘‘either of these updates is to reflect the fact that through water quality-based effluent explicitly or by reference, into one the Puerto Rico Environmental Public limits meeting water quality criteria document so that it is readily accessible Policy Act (12 LPRA 8001 et seq.), ‘‘end-of-pipe’’. EPA believes this to the public and the regulated which is one of the referenced approach will protect the quality of community.’’ documents in the consolidation water in the waterbody from further On June 17, 2004, EQB submitted to document, was amended and re-issued degradation, which will lead to the EPA its final revised consolidation on September 22, 2004. The June 17, protection of the existing uses. document. This consolidation 2004 version of the consolidation EPA has articulated that states may document, however, was not adopted as document had referenced the previously take one of two approaches in a regulation. In a letter dated July 9, applicable version of the Puerto Rico identifying their high quality waters, 2004, from Mr. Mugdan to EQB’s Environmental Public Policy Act. The also known as Tier 2 of antidegradation: President, Esteban Mujica Cotto, EPA proposed methods reflect this update). a parameter-by-parameter approach or a stated that these methods meet the Consistent with Puerto Rico’s waterbody-by-waterbody approach. requirements of the Clean Water Act antidegradation implementation Under the parameter-by-parameter and 40 CFR 131.12(a). methods, the proposed methods provide approach, States and authorized Tribes On February 14, 2007, the U.S. that all point sources would be subject determine whether water quality is District Court of Puerto Rico issued an to antidegradation review. The CWA better than the applicable criteria for a

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27793

specific parameter or pollutant that activities will be prohibited. This quality standards. A copy of the intent would be affected by a new discharge or approach, also contained in Puerto to issue or deny a WQC, whichever the an increase in an existing discharge of Rico’s methods, would assure that the case, will be sent to EPA and the the pollutant. The water body-by-water water quality in waters identified as petitioner. A public notice and body approach weighs the chemical, ONRWs be maintained and protected. comment period follows. EQB then physical, biological, or other factors to decides to issue the WQC or denial. B. How Will Puerto Rico Implement the judge a water body’s overall quality. In Petitioners have the ability to seek Proposed Antidegradation EPA’s Advanced Notice of Proposed reconsideration before the WQC Implementation Methods? Rulemaking (ANPRM), EPA discussed decision becomes final. the advantages and disadvantages to Puerto Rico will implement the 4. In conducting an antidegradation both approaches to designating high proposed antidegradation review as part of the CWA section 401 quality waters. 63 FR 36782, 36783, July implementation methods through its certification process, EQB first 7, 1998. EPA also discussed these issues ongoing CWA section 401 certification determines which level of in the preamble to its proposed rule process. As described earlier in Section antidegradation applies based upon a regarding antidegradation III.A., EPA Region 2 issues the NPDES review of existing water quality data, implementation methods for Kentucky. permits for the Commonwealth of and other required information, to be 67 FR 68971, 67798–99, November 14, Puerto Rico. The permit issuance and provided by the applicant. Based upon 2002. EPA interprets its regulation to preparation of the water quality this review, EQB then determines if authorize either approach. Consistent certification occurs sequentially as additional information is necessary in with the implementation methods described below. order to make a determination. In the identified by Puerto Rico, EPA is today Section 6.11 of the PRWQSR case of Tier I waters, a determination is proposing that antidegradation reviews describes how the EQB will issue CWA made as to whether a discharge would for high quality waters in Puerto Rico section 401 Water Quality Certifications lower water quality such that it would occur on a parameter-by-parameter (WQC) for federally-issued permits, no longer be sufficient to protect and basis. such as NPDES permits. This provision maintain the existing and designated Under the proposed methods, Puerto provides, in part, that when requesting uses of that water body. When the Rico would implement protection of a WQC, an applicant must submit, as assimilative capacity of a water body is waters it identifies as ONRWs, also part of the application, all relevant determined to be insufficient to protect known as Tier 3 of antidegradation, information to demonstrate to the existing and designated uses with an through a requirement that prohibits satisfaction of the Board that the additional load to the water body, EQB point source discharges in ONRWs. As proposed action will not cause a does not allow a discharge increase by described earlier in this section, the violation of any applicable water quality requiring that the applicable water proposed methods mirror those methods standards in the receiving water body. quality standards be met at the end of already identified by Puerto Rico for Puerto Rico’s requirements for the pipe. In order to allow the lowering implementing its antidegradation conducting CWA section 401 of water quality in Tier 2 waters, EQB implementation policy. EPA believes certifications, which include evaluates the existing and protected this approach is more than sufficient to antidegradation reviews, are found in quality of the receiving water on a meet the federal requirements at 40 CFR Resolution R–89–2–2 of the Governing parameter-by-parameter basis. In those 131.12(a)(3) to maintain and protect the Board of EQB—February 2, 1989, and cases where a potential increase in water quality of waters identified as are summarized as follows. loading from a discharge may result in ONRWs and is consistent with Puerto 1. EPA Region 2 (the Region) receives the lowering of water quality, the Rico’s preferred approach. an application from a discharger for a applicant must show and justify the Consistent with the antidegradation NPDES permit, or for the renewal or necessity for such lowering of water methods identified by Puerto Rico, the modification of an existing NPDES quality. As part of the Tier 2 proposed rule includes methods for permit. The applicant also submits a antidegradation review process, EQB implementing Puerto Rico’s copy of the application to the EQB. provides a public comment period of at antidegradation policy for permits 2. The Region reviews the application, least 30 days. In the case of Tier 3 issued under section 404 of the CWA or and, if necessary, obtains additional waters, no point source discharge will permits issued under section 10 of the information from the applicant. After all be allowed. River and Harbors Act. The proposed information is submitted, and EPA 5. If EQB issues a 401 certification, methods would require that the completes its review, EPA solicits then EPA Region 2 incorporates the discharge of dredged or fill material not certification from EQB in accordance WQC into the draft permit and issues have an unacceptable adverse impact with 40 CFR Part 124. public notice of its intention to issue a either individually or in combination 3. EQB evaluates the application/draft final permit pursuant to 40 CFR Part with other activities affecting the permit and issues or denies a 401 122. wetland before they can be allowed to certification, or waives the right. (EQB discharge. Further, the proposed will not waive the right when an initial C. What Are the Cost Implications of the methods provide that any proposed environmental assessment indicates that Proposed Rule? discharge will not be allowed if there is the discharge for which a permit is Puerto Rico’s existing antidegradation a practicable alternative that would sought will have a significant impact on implementation methods are the same have less adverse impact. With regard to the environment, triggering the need for as the antidegradation methods set forth how the permits for these types of an antidegradation review.) In summary, in this proposed rule. Thus, while not activities would be implemented in if EQB plans to certify the discharge, an in regulation, the proposed waters identified by Puerto Rico as intent to issue a WQC will be prepared. implementation methods are already in ONRWs, the proposed methods provide If EQB plans to deny the certification, place in Puerto Rico and as such, EPA’s that any proposed permitted activity an intent to deny a WQC will be proposed antidegradation methods are under these sections of the statutes be prepared, including the basis of the not expected to result in any additional treated the same as NPDES-permitted determination that the discharge will monetary costs. Nonetheless, EPA dischargers, that is, that these types of not comply with applicable water prepared an analysis to evaluate

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27794 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

potential impacts to the Commonwealth this proposed rule could potentially 1. Identifying Affected Entities of Puerto Rico associated with future incur costs to comply with the rule’s implementation of EPA’s Federal provisions. The types of affected EPA identified approximately 265 standards. This analysis is documented facilities may include industrial point source facilities that may be in the ‘‘Economics Analysis of Proposed facilities and publicly owned treatment affected by the rule. Of these potentially Antidegradation Implementation works (POTWs). EPA did not consider affected facilities, 76 are classified as Methods for the Commonwealth of the potential costs for nonpoint sources, major dischargers, and 189 are minor Puerto Rico,’’ which can be found in the such as agricultural and forestry-related dischargers. record for this rulemaking and nonpoint sources, because EPA’s Exhibit 1 provides a summary of concludes that the total annualized proposed rule would only require that facilities that are currently permitted to costs of EPA’s proposed rule for both antidegradation be applied to point discharge to Puerto Rico surface waters, the Commonwealth and the point sources. In addition, EPA did not as identified in EPA’s Permit source dischargers could range from Compliance System (PCS). There are a $14,500 to $32,900. address the potential monetary benefits Any NPDES-permitted facility that of this proposed rule for Puerto Rico. total of 265 facilities, 71 percent of discharges to water bodies affected by which are minor dischargers.

EXHIBIT 1.—POTENTIALLY AFFECTED INDIVIDUAL NPDES PERMITTED DISCHARGERS IN PUERTO RICO

Number of facilities Facility type Majors 1 Minors 2 Total

Municipal ...... 36 33 69 Industrial ...... 40 156 196

Total ...... 76 189 265 Sources: U.S. EPA (2007) and U.S. EPA Region 2 (2007). 1 Major dischargers are facilities discharging greater than 1 million gallons per day (mgd) and likely to discharge toxic pollutants in toxic amounts. 2 Minor dischargers are defined as facilities discharging less than 1 million gallons per day (mgd) and not likely to discharge toxic pollutants in toxic amounts.

In the case of Tier 1 waters, EQB preparing the review material and $27,600 per year. EPA also estimated would make a determination as to necessary data, and costs associated that Puerto Rico’s EQB may incur whether a discharge would lower water with the Commonwealth’s review of the annual costs to review the requests of quality such that it would no longer be facility information and certification approximately $5,300. Thus, total sufficient to protect and maintain the process. The cost incurred by facilities annual costs of the proposed rule could existing and designated uses of that represents the cost of a preliminary be $14,500 to $32,900. water body. For Tier 2 waters, EQB engineering analysis and the subsequent D. Request for Comment would evaluate the existing and financial analysis for which EPA protected quality of the receiving water provides guidance and a workbook. This EPA solicits comment on the on a parameter-by-parameter basis. analysis could cost between one percent antidegradation methods it is proposing. Under this approach, EQB would and three percent of the installed cost of The Agency will evaluate any determine whether water quality is additional pollution controls. comments, data and information better than the applicable criteria for a The cost potentially incurred by submitted to EPA by the close of the specific parameter or pollutant that Puerto Rico’s Environmental Quality public comment period. After full would be affected by a new discharge or Board (EQB) represents the cost of consideration of such comments, data, an increase in an existing discharge of reviewing the engineering cost analysis and information, EPA will make a final the pollutant. In addition, no point and financial impact analysis, validating decision on the appropriateness of the source discharges would be allowed to source data and checking calculations, antidegradation methods it is proposing. Tier 3 waters. evaluating the engineering design and IV. Statutory and Executive Order 2. Method for Estimating Potential the conclusions regarding potential Reviews Compliance Costs financial and community impacts, evaluating the information provided A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory EPA Region 2 indicates that is has regarding the importance of the Planning and Review) received five antidegradation review proposed development to the economic This action is not a ‘‘significant requests within the last five years, or and social conditions of the affected regulatory action’’ under the terms of approximately one request per year. community, and reviewing and Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR This includes antidegradation reviews responding to comments from the 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore for both existing and new facilities. EPA public. EPA estimated the total time not subject to review under the EO. assumed that each type of facility (e.g., requirement to process each request to Puerto Rico is already implementing major municipal, minor municipal, be 140 hours. the antidegradation methods set forth in major industrial, and minor industrial) 3. Results this proposed rule. Therefore, these is equally likely to request an EPA-proposed methods are not expected antidegradation review. Based on the potential number of to result in any additional monetary Costs for the proposed antidegradation requests, EPA estimated costs. However, EPA has prepared an antidegradation implementation that point source dischargers may incur analysis of the costs and benefits of the methods include costs to facilities for total annual costs from $9,200 to Puerto Rico antidegradation policy and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27795

methods. This analysis is contained in enterprise which is independently government agency plan. The plan must the ‘‘Economic Analysis of Proposed owned and operated and is not provide for notifying potentially Antidegradation Implementation dominant in its field. affected small governments, enabling Methods for the Commonwealth of After considering these economic officials of affected small governments Puerto Rico’’. A copy of the analysis is impacts of today’s proposed rule on to have meaningful and timely input in available in the docket for this action small entities, I certify that this action the development of EPA regulatory and is briefly summarized in Section IV. will not have a significant economic proposals with significant Federal of today’s notice. impact on a substantial number of small intergovernmental mandates, and entities. Puerto Rico’s existing informing, educating, and advising B. Paperwork Reduction Act antidegradation implementation small governments on compliance with This rule does not impose an methods are the same as the the regulatory requirements. information collection burden under the antidegradation implementation EPA has determined that this rule provisions of the Paperwork Reduction methods set forth in this proposed rule. does not contain a Federal mandate that Act of 1995. It does not include any Thus, while not in regulation, the may result in expenditures of $100 information collection, reporting or proposed implementation methods are million or more for State, local, and recordkeeping requirements. already in place in Puerto Rico and, as tribal governments, in the aggregate, or Burden means the total time, effort, or a result, the proposed implementation the private sector in any one year. financial resources expended by persons methods are not expected to result in Therefore, this rule is not subject to the to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose any additional monetary costs. requirements of sections 202 and 205 of or provide information to or for a Nonetheless, EPA prepared an analysis the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. Federal agency. This includes the time to evaluate potential impacts to the EPA has determined that this rule needed to review instructions; develop, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico contains no regulatory requirements that acquire, install, and utilize technology associated with future implementation might significantly or uniquely affect and systems for the purposes of of EPA’s Federal standards. This small governments. Thus, this rule is collecting, validating, and verifying analysis is documented in the not subject to the requirements of information, processing and ‘‘Economic Analysis of Proposed section 203 of the Unfunded Mandates maintaining information, and disclosing Antidegradation Implementation Reform Act. and providing information; adjust the Methods for the Commonwealth of E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) existing ways to comply with any Puerto Rico,’’ which can be found in the previously applicable instructions and record for this rulemaking. Executive Order 13132, entitled requirements; train personnel to be able ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, to respond to a collection of D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 1999), requires EPA to develop an information; search data sources; Title II of the Unfunded Mandates accountable process to ensure complete and review the collection of Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State information; and transmit or otherwise Law 104–4, establishes requirements for and local officials in the development of disclose the information. Federal agencies to assess the effects of regulatory policies that have federalism An agency may not conduct or their regulatory actions on State, local, implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have sponsor, and a person is not required to and tribal governments and the private federalism implications’’ is defined in respond to a collection of information sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the Executive Order to include unless it displays a currently valid OMB EPA generally must prepare a written regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct control number. The OMB control statement, including a cost-benefit effects on the States, on the relationship numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 analysis, for proposed and final rules between the national government and CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may the States, or on the distribution of result in expenditures to State, local, power and responsibilities among the C. Regulatory Flexibility Act and tribal governments, in the aggregate, various levels of government.’’ The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) or to the private sector, of $100 million This proposed rule would not affect generally requires an agency to prepare or more in any one year. Before the nature of the relationship between a regulatory flexibility analysis of any promulgating an EPA rule for which a EPA and States generally, for the rule rule subject to notice and comment written statement is needed, section 205 would only apply to waters within rulemaking requirements under the of the UMRA generally requires EPA to Puerto Rico’s jurisdiction. Further the Administrative Procedure Act or any identify and consider a reasonable proposed rule would not substantially other statute unless the agency certifies number of regulatory alternatives and affect the relationship of EPA and the that the rule will not have significant adopt the least costly, most cost- Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the economic impact on a substantial effective or least burdensome alternative distribution of power or responsibilities number of small entities. Small entities that achieves the objectives of the rule. between EPA and the various levels of include small businesses, small The provisions of section 205 do not government. Because Puerto Rico is organizations, and small governmental apply when they are inconsistent with already implementing these proposed jurisdictions. applicable law. Moreover, section 205 antidegradation methods, this proposed For purposes of assessing the impacts allows EPA to adopt an alternative other rule would not change the of this action on small entities, small than the least costly, most cost-effective Commonwealth’s ability to implement entity is defined as: (1) A small business or least burdensome alternative if the these methods. Further, this proposed as defined by the Small Business Administrator publishes with the final rule would not preclude Puerto Rico Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 rule an explanation why that alternative from adopting its own antidegradation CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental was not adopted. Before EPA establishes methods that meet the requirements of jurisdiction that is a government of a any regulatory requirements that may the CWA into its own regulations. Thus, city, county, town, school district or significantly or uniquely affect small Executive Order 13132 does not apply special district with a population of less governments, including tribal to this rule. than 50,000; and (3) a small governments, it must have developed Although section 6 of Executive Order organization that is any not-for-profit under section 203 of the UMRA a small 13132 does not apply to this proposed

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27796 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

rule, EPA did consult with the I. National Technology Transfer will continue to work closely with the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in Advancement Act Services to ensure that the final rule developing this proposed rule. Section 12(d) of the National will not adversely affect or jeopardize In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, Technology Transfer and Advancement the continued existence of threatened or and consistent with EPA policy to Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– endangered species or their critical promote communications between EPA 113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs habitat. and State and local governments, EPA EPA to use voluntary consensus specifically solicits comment on this List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 131 standards in its regulatory activities proposed rule from State and local Environmental protection, unless to do so would be inconsistent officials. Antidegradation, Water quality with applicable law or otherwise standards. F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation impractical. Voluntary consensus and Coordination With Indian Tribal standards are technical standards (e.g., Dated: May 10, 2007. Governments) materials specifications, test methods, Stephen L. Johnson, Executive Order 13175, entitled sampling procedures, and business Administrator. ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with practices) that are developed or adopted For the reasons set forth in the Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR by voluntary consensus standards preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to CFR part 131 as follows: to develop an accountable process to provide Congress, through OMB, ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by explanations when the Agency decides PART 131—WATER QUALITY tribal officials in the development of not to use available and applicable STANDARDS regulatory policies that have tribal voluntary consensus standards. This proposed rulemaking does not 1. The authority citation for part 131 implications.’’ This proposed rule does continues to read as follows: not have tribal implications, as specified involve technical standards. Therefore, in Executive Order 13175, because no EPA is not considering the use of any Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. voluntary consensus standards. Indian Tribal Governments exist in Subpart D—[Amended] Puerto Rico. Thus, Executive Order J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal 13175 does not apply to this rule. Actions To Address Environmental 2. Section 131.42 is added to read as G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Justice in Minority Populations and follows: Children From Environmental Health Low-Income Populations) § 131.42 Antidegradation Implementation and Safety Risks) Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 Methods for the Commonwealth of Puerto Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal Rico. Children From Environmental Health executive policy on environmental (a) General Policy Statement. (1) All Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, justice. Its main provision directs point sources of pollution are subject to April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: federal agencies, to the greatest extent an antidegradation review. (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically practicable and permitted by law, to (2) An antidegradation review shall be significant’’ as defined under Executive make environmental justice part of their initiated as part of the Section 401— Order 12866, and (2) concerns an mission by identifying and addressing, ‘‘Water Quality Certification Process’’ of environmental health or safety risk that as appropriate, disproportionately high the Clean Water Act. EPA has reason to believe may have a and adverse human health or (3) The 401 Certification Process shall disproportionate effect on children. If environmental effects of their programs, follow the procedures established by the the regulatory action meets both criteria, policies, and activities on minority February 2, 1989 Resolution R–89–2–2 the Agency must evaluate the populations and low-income of the Governing Board of the Puerto environmental health or safety effects of populations in the United States. Rico Environmental Quality Board the planned rule on children, and EPA has determined that this (EQB). explain why the planned regulation is proposed rule will not have (4) The following are not subject to an preferable to other potentially effective disproportionately high and adverse antidegradation review due to the fact and reasonably feasible alternatives human health or environmental effects that they are non discharge systems and considered by the Agency. on minority or low-income populations are managed by specific applicable This proposed rule is not subject to because it does not affect the level of Puerto Rico regulations: the Executive Order because it is not protection provided to human health or (i) All nonpoint sources of pollutants. economically significant and EPA does the environment. The antidegradation (ii) Underground Storage Tanks. not have reason to believe the implementation methods set forth in (iii) Underground Injection Facilities. environmental health or safety risks this proposed rule are the same as the (5) The protection of water quality addressed by this action present a implementation methods Puerto Rico shall include the maintenance, disproportionate risk to children. provided to EPA in 2004, which Puerto migration, protection, and propagation Rico is already implementing. of desirable species, including H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That threatened and endangered species Significantly Affect Energy Supply, K. Endangered Species Act identified in the local and federal Distribution, or Use) EPA is transmitting this proposed rule regulations. This proposed rule is not subject to to the FWS and NMFS for review and (b) Definitions. (1) All the definitions Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions comment concurrent with the included in Article 1 of the Puerto Rico Concerning Regulations That publication of today’s notice. That Water Quality Standards Regulation Significantly Affect Energy Supply, transmittal constitutes EPA’s initiation (PRWQSR), as amended, are applicable Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May of informal consultation with the to this procedure. 22, 2001), because it is not a significant Services on this rulemaking, pursuant to (2) High Quality Waters: regulatory action under Executive Order section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (i) Are waters whose quality is better 12866. and its implementing regulations. EPA than the mandatory minimum level to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27797

support the CWA Section 101(a)(2) goals (ii) Treatment technologies applied to Best Available Technology and of propagation of fish, shellfish, wildlife the pollutants to be discharged. Secondary Treatment). and recreation in and on the waters. (iii) Nature of the applicant’s (B) To implement Tier 1 High Quality Waters are to be identified business. antidegradation, EQB shall determine if by EQB on a parameter-by-parameter (iv) Daily maximum and average flow a discharge would lower the water basis. to be discharged. quality to the extent that it would no (ii) [Reserved]. (v) Effluent characterization. longer be sufficient to protect and (3) Outstanding National Resources (vi) Effluent limitations requested to maintain the existing and designated Waters (ONRW): be applied to the discharge according to uses of that waterbody. (i) Are waters classified as SA or SE Section 6.11 of the PRWQSR. (C) When a waterbody has been in the PRWQSR, as amended, or any (vii) Location of the point of affected by a parameter of concern other water designated by Resolution of discharge. causing it to be included on the 303(d) the Governing Board of EQB. ONRWs (viii) Receiving waterbody name. List, then EQB will not allow an are waters that are recreationally or (ix) Water quality data of the receiving increase of the concentration of the ecologically important, unique or waterbody. parameter of concern or pollutants sensitive. (x) Receiving waterbody minimum affecting the parameter of concern in the (ii) [Reserved]. flow (7Q2 and 7Q10) for stream waters. waterbody. This no increase will be (xi) Location of water intakes within (c) Antidegradation Review achieved by meeting the applicable the waterbody. Procedure. (1) The antidegradation water quality standards at the end of the (xii) In the event that the proposed review will commence with the pipe. Until such time that a Total discharge will result in the lowering of submission of the CWA Section 401 Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is water quality, data and information water quality certification request. EQB developed for the parameter of concern demonstrating that the discharge is uses a parameter-by-parameter approach for the waterbody, no discharge will be necessary to accommodate important for the implementation of the anti- allowed to cause or contribute to further economic or social development in the degradation policy and will review each degradation of the waterbody. area where the receiving waters are parameter separately as it evaluates the (D) When the assimilative capacity of request for certification. The 401 located. (4) Determine if additional a waterbody is not sufficient to ensure certification/antidegradation review maintenance of the water quality shall comply with Article 4(B)(3) of the information or assessment is necessary to make the decision. standard for a parameter of concern Puerto Rico Environmental Public with an additional load to the Policy Act, (Law No. 416 of September (5) Prepare an intent to issue or deny the 401 water quality certificate and waterbody, EQB will not allow an 22, 2004, as amended (12 LPRA 8001 et increase of the concentration of the seq.). Compliance with Article 4(B)(3) publishes a notice in a newspaper of wide circulation in Puerto Rico parameter of concern or pollutants shall be conducted in accordance with affecting the parameter of concern in the the Reglamento de la Junta de Calidad informing the public of EQB’s preliminary decision and granting a waterbody. This no increase will be Ambiental para el Proceso de achieved by meeting the applicable ´ ´ ´ public participation period of at least Presentacion, Evaluacion y Tramite de water quality standards at the end of the Documentos Ambientales (EQB’s thirty (30) days. (6) Address the comments received pipe. Until such time that a TMDL is Environmental Documents Regulation). developed for the parameter of concern As part of the evaluation of the from the interested parties and consider such comments as part of the decision for the waterbody, no discharge will be Environmental Document an allowed to cause or contribute to further alternatives analysis shall be conducted making process. (7) Make the final determination to degradation of the waterbody. (12 LPRA 8001(a)(5), EQB’s (ii) Tier 2—Protection of High Quality Environmental Documents Regulation, issue or deny the requested 401 certification. Such decision is subject to Waters: e.g., Rules 211E and 253C), and a public (A) To verify that a waterbody is a participation period and a public the reconsideration procedure established in Law 170 of August 12, high quality water for a parameter of hearing shall be provided (12 LPRA concern which initiates a Tier 2 8001(a), EQB’s Environmental 1988, Ley de Procedimiento Administrativo Uniforme del Estado antidegradation review, EQB shall Documents Regulation, Rule 254). evaluate and determine: (2) In conducting an antidegradation Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico (3 LPRA (1) The existing water quality of the review, EQB will sequentially apply the 2165). waterbody; following steps: (d) Implementation Procedures. (1) (i) Determine which level of Activities Regulated by NPDES Permits (2) The projected water quality of the antidegradation applies: (i) Tier 1—Protection of Existing and waterbody pursuant to the procedures (A) Tier 1—Protection of Existing and Designated Uses: established in the applicable provisions Designated Uses. (A) Tier 1 waters are: of Articles 5 and 10 of the PRWQSR (B) Tier 2—Protection of High Quality (1) Those waters of Puerto Rico including but not limited to, Sections Waters. (except Tier 2 or Tier 3 waters) 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, and (C) Tier 3—Protection of ONRWs. identified as impaired and that have 10.6; (ii) [Reserved]. been included on the list required by (3) That the existing and designated (3) Review existing water quality data Section 303(d) of the CWA; and uses of the waterbody will be fully and other information submitted by the (2) Those waters of Puerto Rico maintained and protected in the event applicant. The applicant shall provide (except Tier 2 and Tier 3 waters) for of a lowering of water quality. EQB with the information regarding the which attainment of applicable water In multiple discharge situations, the discharge, as required by the PRWQSR quality standards has been or is effects of all discharges shall be including, but not limited to the expected to be, achieved through evaluated through a waste load following: implementation of effluent limitations allocation analysis in accordance with (i) A description of the nature of the more stringent than technology-based the applicable provisions of Article 10 pollutants to be discharged. controls (Best Practicable Technology, of the PRWQSR or the applicable

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27798 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules

provisions of Article 5 regarding mixing fill material shall be certified unless defined group of harvesters under a zones. appropriated and practicable steps have LAPP; limit the bycatch of halibut and (B) In order to allow the lowering of been taken which minimize potential crab resources; assign Amendment 80 water quality in high quality waters, the adverse impacts of the discharge on the quota share (QS) that could be used to applicant must show and justify the recipient ecosystem. The discharge of yield an exclusive harvest privilege on necessity for such lowering of water dredged or fill material to ONRWs, an annual basis; allow Amendment 80 quality through compliance with the however, shall be governed by QS holders to form a cooperative with requirements of Section 6.11 of the paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section. other Amendment 80 QS holders on an PRWQSR. EQB will not allow the entire annual basis to receive an exclusive [FR Doc. E7–9409 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] assimilative capacity of a waterbody for harvest privilege; implement use caps to a parameter of concern to be allocated BILLING CODE 6560–50–P limit the amount of Amendment 80 QS to a discharger, if the necessity of the a person could hold; limit the total requested effluent limitation for the amount of catch in other groundfish parameter of concern is not DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE fisheries that could be taken by demonstrated to the full satisfaction of participants in the Program; ensure National Oceanic and Atmospheric EQB. minimum retention of groundfish while Administration (iii) Tier 3—Protection of ONRWs: fishing in the BSAI; and establish (A) EQB may designate a water as necessary monitoring and enforcement 50 CFR Part 679 Class SA or SE (ONRWs) through a standards. Amendment 80 was Resolution (PRWQSR Sections 2.1.1 and [I.D. 041307D] approved by the North Pacific Fishery 2.2.1). Additionally, any interested Management Council (Council) on June party may nominate a specific water to Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 9, 2006. be classified as an ONRW and the Zone Off Alaska; Allocating Bering In addition to other laws, the Program Governing Board of EQB will make the Sea/Aleutian Islands Fishery is specifically designed to meet the final determination. Classifying a water Resources; Notice of Limited Access requirements of: as an ONRW may result in the water Privilege Program Public Workshop • Section 219 of the Consolidated being named in either Section 2.1.1 or Appropriations Act of 2005 (Public Law AGENCY: 2.2.2 of the PRWQSR, which would National Marine Fisheries 108–447; December 8, 2004), which require an amendment of the PRWQSR. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and defined the Amendment 80 sector and The process for amending the PRWQSR, Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), implemented a capacity reduction including public participation, is set Commerce. program for several catcher/processor forth in Section 8.6 of said regulation. ACTION: Notification of public workshop. sectors; (B) The existing characteristics of • Section 416 of the Coast Guard and Class SA and SE waters shall not be SUMMARY: NMFS will present a public Maritime Transportation Act of 2006 altered, except by natural causes, in workshop on the proposed program to (Public Law 109–241; July 11, 2006), order to preserve the existing natural implement the Amendment 80 Program which amended provisions of the phenomena. (Program) for potentially eligible Community Development Quota (CDQ) (1) No point source discharge will be participants and other interested parties. Program in the Magnuson-Stevens allowed in ONRWs. The Program would implement a Fishery Conservation and Management (2) [Reserved]. limited access privilege program (LAPP) Act (MSA); and (2) Activities Regulated by CWA for specific groundfish fisheries in the • The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Section 404 or Rivers and Harbors Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Conservation and Management Action Section 10 Permits (Discharge of management area (BSAI). At the Reauthorization Act (Public Law 109– dredged or fill material) workshop, NMFS will provide an 479, January 12, 2007), which modified (i) EQB will only allow the discharge overview of the proposed Program, provisions related to the CDQ Program of dredged or fill material into a wetland discuss the key proposed Program and instituted other measures if it can be demonstrated that such elements, and answer questions. NMFS applicable to LAPPs. discharge will not have an unacceptable is conducting this public workshop to NMFS anticipates that a proposed adverse impact either individually or in provide assistance to fishery rule implementing the Program will be combination with other activities participants in understanding and published by mid-May. NMFS is affecting the wetland of concern. The reviewing this proposed Program. conducting this public workshop to impacts to the water quality or the DATES: The workshop will be held on provide assistance to fishery aquatic or other life in the wetland due Wednesday, May 23, 2007, from 1 p.m. participants in understanding and to the discharge of dredged or fill to 4 p.m. Pacific standard time. reviewing the proposed requirements. material should be avoided, minimized ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held At the workshop, NMFS will provide an and mitigated. at the Leif Erikson Lodge, 2245 NW 57th overview of the proposed Program, and (ii) The discharge of dredged or fill Street, Seattle, WA 98119. discuss the key Program elements, material shall not be certified if there is including: quota share application; a practicable alternative to the proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: cooperative and limited access discharge which would have less Glenn Merrill, 907–586–7228 or participation provisions; cooperative adverse impact on the recipient [email protected]. quota transfer provisions; measures to ecosystem, so long as the alternative SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS establish sideboard limits to protect does not have other more significant intends to publish a proposed rule that non-LAPP fishery participants, the adverse environmental consequences. would implement a LAPP for appeals process; catch accounting; Activities which are not water Amendment 80 to the Fishery monitoring and enforcement; and dependent are presumed to have Management Plan for BSAI Groundfish electronic reporting. Additionally, practicable alternatives, unless the (FMP). Among other things, NMFS will answer questions from applicant clearly demonstrates Amendment 80 would allocate specific workshop participants. For further otherwise. No discharge of dredged and BSAI groundfish resources among a information on the Program, please visit

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Proposed Rules 27799

the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at Requests for special accommodations Dated: May 11, 2007. http://www.fakr.noaa.gov. should be directed to Glenn Merrill (see James P. Burgess Special Accommodations FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at Acting Director, Office of Sustainable least 5 working days before the Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. This workshop is physically workshop date. [FR Doc. E7–9530 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] accessible to people with disabilities. BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:03 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS 27800

Notices Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 95

Thursday, May 17, 2007

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Perce National Forest, under class of contains documents other than rules or vehicle and seasons of use, as they are Purpose and Need for Action proposed rules that are applicable to the presently (April, 2007). This action public. Notices of hearings and investigations, In November 2005, the USDA would close the forest to cross-country committee meetings, agency decisions and published the Travel Management; motorized travel except in specifically rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Designated Routes and Areas for Motor designated areas or to over snow vehicle petitions and applications and agency Vehicle Use; Final Rule [36 CFR parts statements of organization and functions are use (see attached map and legend). examples of documents appearing in this 212, 251, 261, and 295] (the rule). This The proposed action also includes a section. rule requires designations of those distance 300 feet from center of road roads, trails, and areas that are open to which allows for motorized use for the motor vehicle use. Designations will be purposes of dispersed camping only, in DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE made by class of vehicle, and if areas where geography and resource appropriate, by time of year. The final protection are not limiting factors (e.g., Forest Service rule prohibits the use of motor vehicles cliffs, streams, etc.). off the designated system, as well as the This action does not supersede CFR Nez Perce National Forest, Idaho use of motor vehicles on routes and in 261.12 National Forest System roads County; ID; Designated Route and areas not consistent with those and trails; * * * prohibition (c) Motorized Vehicle Use designations. The rule seeks to create a Damaging and leaving in a damaged AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. system of routes and areas where condition any such road, trail, or segment thereof. Nor will this action ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an motorized use is appropriate. The supersede CFR 261.15 Use of vehicles environmental impact statement. primary difference from our current system that will occur when off roads; It is prohibited to operate any SUMMARY: The Nez Perce National Forest implementing the rule is that routes and vehicle off National Forest System, is undergoing planning efforts to areas are closed to motorized use unless State, or County roads; (h) In a manner comply with the designated routes and specifically designated open. which damages or unreasonably areas for motor vehicle use rule of The following vehicles and uses are disturbs the land, wildlife, or vegetative November 9, 2005. The forest is exempt from Provisions in the rule [36 resources. proposing to analyze motorized routes CFR 212.51]: Responsible Official and areas forest-wide to determine a Aircraft, Watercraft, Over-snow vehicles, Jane Cottrell, Forest Supervisor, Nez base system, while considering the Limited administrative use by Forest Service, needs of the users, resources effects, Use of any fire, military, emergency, of law Perce National Forest, 1005 Highway 13, rule requirements, and fiscal enforcement vehicles for emergency Grangeville, ID 83530 is the responsible capabilities for continued maintenance. purposes, Authorized use of any combat or official for this proposal. DATES: Comments concerning the scope combat support vehicle for national defense Nature of Decision To Be Made purposes, Law enforcement [in] response to of the analysis must be received by 45 violations of law, and, any motor vehicle use The Nez Perce National Forest will days after the date of publication in the that is specifically authorized under a written decide what routes and areas are Federal Register. The draft authorization issued under Federal law or appropriate to designate and manage for environmental impact statement is regulation. motor vehicle use by class of vehicle expected June of 2008 and the final Current direction for the Nez Perce and seasons of use. Additionally, we environmental impact statement is National Forest, under the Nez Perce will determine whether to amend the expected February 2009. National Forest Plan (1987) Amendment Nez Perce Forest Plan to remove certain ADDRESSES: Send written comments to No. 2, October 1988, allows cross- existing standards applicable to Jane Cottrell, Forest Supervisor, 1005 country motorized travel unless motorized routes and area management. Highway 13, Grangeville, ID 83530, otherwise designated closed. Scoping Process Attn: Designated Routes and Areas for The Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle Use. Motor Vehicle Use planning effort is The U.S. Forest Service uses the The Nez Perce National Forest has designed to bring the direction for the process required by the National scheduled public meetings, to be held in Nez Perce National Forest in Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). three separate locations, to introduce compliance with the Executive orders of NEPA requires a systematic, this project and discuss the most the rule that ‘‘direct Federal agencies to interdisciplinary approach to ensure effective ways the public can become ensure that the use of off road vehicles integrated application of the natural and involved. Meetings will take place in on public lands will be controlled and social sciences and the environmental Elk City, ID on May 29, in Grangeville, directed so as to protect the resources of design arts in any planning and ID on May 30, and in Riggins, ID on May those lands, to promote the safety of all decisionmaking that affects the human 31, 2007. Additional information will be users of those lands, and to minimize environment (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(A)). provided in the local newspaper prior to conflicts among various uses of those Comments are accepted for 45 days after meeting times. lands’’. notification in the Federal Register. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: These comments help identify Alexandra Botello, Project Lead, 1005 Proposed Action significant issues and/or eliminate Highway 13, Grangeville, ID 83530, The proposed action is to designate nonsignificant issues from detailed Attn: Designated Routes and Areas for the current National Forest System study in the environmental impact Motor Vehicle Use. (NFS) motorized routes on the Nez statement.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27801

Comment Requested National Environmental Policy Act at 40 the finished product (duty–free to 6.5%) CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. for the components used in production This notice of intent initiates the Comments received, including the when the finished products are entered scoping process which guides the names and addresses of those who for U.S. consumption from the zone. development of the environmental comment, will be considered part of the The application indicates that the impact statement. The Nez Perce public record on this proposal and will company would also realize duty National Forest is seeing comments and be available for public inspection. deferral and certain logistical/supply issues you may have regarding this (Authority: chain savings. project. Comments are most useful if 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Public comment is invited from they are specific. Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 21.) interested parties. Submissions (original Early Notice of Importance of Public Dated: May 10, 2007. and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Participation in Subsequent Jane L. Cottrell, Board’s Executive Secretary at the Environmental Review: A draft following address: Office of the Nez Perce National Forest Supervisor. environmental impact statement will be Executive Secretary, Room 2111, U.S. prepared for comment. The comment [FR Doc. 07–2419 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Department of Commerce, 1401 period on the draft environmental BILLING CODE 3410–11–M Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, impact statement will be 45 days from DC 20230. The closing period for receipt the date the Environmental Protection of comments is June 18, 2007. Agency publishes the notice of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE A copy of the application will be availability in the Federal Register. available for public inspection at the Foreign–Trade Zones Board The Forest Service believes, at this Office of the Foreign–Trade Zones early stage, it is important to give [Docket T–3–2007] Board’s Executive Secretary at the reviewers notice of several court rulings address listed above. For further related to public participation in the Foreign–Trade Zone 7 - - Mayaguez, information, contact Christopher Kemp environmental review process. First, Puerto Rico, Application for at: [email protected], or reviewers of draft environmental impact Temporary/Interim Manufacturing (202) 482–0862. Authority, Merck Sharpe & Dohme statements must structure their Dated: May 10, 2007. participation in the environmental Quimica De Puerto Rico, Inc., (Pharmaceutical Products), Caguas, Andrew McGilvray, review of the proposal so that it is Executive Secretary. meaningful and alerts an agency to the Puerto Rico [FR Doc. E7–9539 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] reviewer’s position and contentions. An application has been submitted to BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. the Executive Secretary of the Foreign– NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,553 (1978). Also, Trade Zones Board (the Board) by the environmental objections that could be Puerto Rico Industrial Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE raised at the draft environmental impact Company (PRIDCO), grantee of FTZ 7, statement stage but that are not raised requesting temporary/interim International Trade Administration until after completion of the final manufacturing (T/IM) authority within [A–201–830] environmental impact statement may be FTZ 7 at the MOVA Pharmaceutical waived or dismissed by the courts. City Corporation (MOVA) facility in Caguas, Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, Puerto Rico, on behalf of Merck Sharp Rod from Mexico: Extension of Time 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin & Dohme Quimica De Puerto Rico, Inc. Limits for the Preliminary Results of Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. (MSDQ). The application was filed on Antidumping Duty Administrative 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of May 10, 2007. Review these court rulings, it is very important The MOVA facility (650 employees, that those interested in this proposed 250,000 sq. ft.) is located at State Road AGENCY: Import Administration, action participate by the close of the 45 1, Km 34.8, within the Villa Blanca International Trade Administration, day comment period so that comments Industrial Park in Caguas (Site 1, Parcel Department of Commerce. and objections are made available to the 2). T/IM procedures would be used for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Forest Service at a time when it can pharmaceutical manufacturing Jolanta Lawska or John Conniff, AD/ meaningfully consider them and involving two products, MK–431A and CVD Operations, Office 3, Import respond to them in the final sitagliptin (HTSUS 3004.90 and Administration, International Trade environmental impact statement. 2933.59) on behalf of MSDQ for the U.S. Administration, U.S. Department of To assist the Forest Service in market and export. Foreign components Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution identifying and considering issues nd that would be used in the Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20230; concerns on the proposed action, manufacturing process (up to 25% of telephone: (202) 482–8362 or (202) 482– comments on the draft environmental total content) include sitagliptin, 1009, respectively. impact statement should be as specific metformin hydrochloride, enamine SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: as possible. It is also helpful if amide and butyl josphos (duty rates of comments refer to specific pages or 3.7 to 6.5%). MSDQ has also submitted Background chapters of the draft statement. a request for permanent FTZ On November 27, 2006, the Comments may also address the manufacturing authority (which will be Department of Commerce adequacy of the draft environmental docketed with the Board separately). (‘‘Department’’) published a notice of impact statement or the merits of the FTZ procedures would exempt MSDQ initiation of the administrative review of alternatives formulated and discussed in from Customs duty payments on foreign the antidumping duty order on carbon the statement. Reviewers may wish to components used in production for and certain alloy steel wire rod from refer to the Council on Environmental export to non–NAFTA countries. For Mexico, covering the period October 1, Quality Regulations for implementing domestic and NAFTA markets, MSDQ 2005, to September 30, 2006. See the procedural provisions of the could select the duty rate that applies to Initiation of Antidumping and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27802 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Countervailing Duty Administrative DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE issued supplemental questionnaires: Reviews and Request for Revocation in one regarding possible affiliation Part (71 FR 68535). The preliminary International Trade Administration between NSM and Siam Cement Group results of this review are currently due (A–549–817) (‘‘Siam’’) and one requesting certain no later than July 3, 2007. additional cost information. NSM Certain Hot–Rolled Carbon Steel Flat provided responses to these Extension of Time Limit of Preliminary Products from Thailand: Final Results supplemental questionnaires on Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative November 17, and November 21, 2006, Review and Partial Rescission of respectively. Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act Because the Department determined of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), Antidumping Duty Administrative Review that it was not practicable to complete requires the Department to make a the final results of this review within preliminary determination within 245 AGENCY: Import Administration, the original time period, the Department days after the last day of the anniversary International Trade Administration, extended the time limit for completion month of an order or finding for which Department of Commerce. of the final results of this administrative a review is requested. Section SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce review in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act further states that (‘‘the Department’’) has conducted an 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as if it is not practicable to complete the administrative review of the amended (‘‘the Act’’). See Certain Hot– review within the time period specified, antidumping duty order on certain hot– Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the administering authority may extend rolled carbon steel flat products from Thailand: Extension of Time Limit for the 245-day period to issue its Thailand produced and/or exported by the Final Results of the Antidumping preliminary results by up to 120 days. Nakornthai Strip Mill Public Co., Ltd. Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 9515 (‘‘NSM’’) and G Steel Public Company (March 2, 2007). We determine that completion of the Limited (‘‘G Steel’’). The period of Partial Rescission preliminary results of this review within review (‘‘POR’’) is November 1, 2004, the 245-day period is not practicable for through October 31, 2005. Based on our In our Preliminary Results, we the following reasons. There have been analysis of comments received, we have announced our preliminary decision to significant changes in the ownership made certain clerical error corrections rescind the review with respect to G and operating structure of Hylsa from for these final results which change the Steel because this company had no the previous review period. To conduct margin. The final results are listed entries of hot–rolled steel from Thailand the sales and cost analyses of Hylsa below in the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ during the POR. See Preliminary requires the Department to gather and section. Results. We have received no new information contradicting this decision. analyze a significant amount of EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 2007. Therefore, we are rescinding the information pertaining to Hylsa’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: modified sales practices, manufacturing administrative review with respect to G Stephen Bailey or Angelica Mendoza, Steel. costs and corporate relationships. Given Import Administration, International the number and complexity of issues in Trade Administration, U.S. Department Scope of the Antidumping Duty Review this case, and in accordance with of Commerce, 14th Street and The products covered by this section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, we are Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, DC antidumping duty review are certain extending the time period for issuing 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0193 and hot–rolled carbon steel flat products of the preliminary results of review to 365 (202) 482–3019, respectively. a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 days. Therefore, the preliminary results SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor are now due no later than October 31, coated with metal and whether or not Background 2007. The final results continue to be painted, varnished, or coated with due 120 days after publication of the On November 8, 2006, the Department plastics or other non–metallic preliminary results. published the preliminary results and substances, in coils (whether or not in This notice is issued and published in partial rescission of its administrative successively superimposed layers), accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of review of the antidumping duty order regardless of thickness, and in straight the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). on certain hot–rolled carbon steel flat lengths, of a thickness of less than 4.75 products (‘‘hot–rolled steel’’) from mm and of a width measuring at least Dated: May 11, 2007. Thailand. See Certain Hot–Rolled 10 times the thickness. Universal mill Stephen J. Claeys, Carbon Steel Flat Products From plate (i.e., flat–rolled products rolled on Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Thailand; Preliminary Results of four faces or in a closed box pass, of a Administration. Antidumping Duty Administrative width exceeding 150 mm, but not [FR Doc. E7–9540 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Review and Rescission in Part, 71 FR exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 65458 (November 8, 2006) (Preliminary of not less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and Results). without patterns in relief) of a thickness We invited parties to comment on our not less than 4.0 mm is not included Preliminary Results. We received case within the scope of this review. briefs from respondent NSM, United Specifically included within the States Steel Corporation (‘‘petitioner’’), scope of this review are vacuum and a domestic interested party, Nucor degassed, fully stabilized (commonly Corporation (‘‘Nucor’’), on January 8, referred to as interstitial–free (IF)) steels, 2007. We received rebuttal briefs from high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels, NSM, petitioner and Nucor on January and the substrate for motor lamination 16, 2007. No public hearing was held. steels. IF steels are recognized as low Additionally, on November 8, and carbon steels with micro–alloying levels November 13, 2006, the Department of elements such as titanium or niobium

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27803

(also commonly referred to as and which have assumed the character Carbon Steel Flat Products from columbium), or both, added to stabilize of articles or products classified outside Thailand’’ from Stephen J. Claeys, carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA chapter 72 of the HTSUS. Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import steels are recognized as steels with The merchandise subject to this Administration, to David M. Spooner, micro–alloying levels of elements such review is classified in the HTSUS at Assistant Secretary, Import as chromium, copper, niobium, subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, Administration, dated May 7, 2007 vanadium, and molybdenum. The 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, (Proprietary Decision Memorandum), substrate for motor lamination steels 7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, which is also hereby adopted by this contains micro–alloying levels of 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, notice. Attached to this notice as an elements such as silicon and aluminum. 7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, Appendix is a list of the issues that Steel products to be included in the 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, petitioner, Nucor, and NSM have raised scope of this review, regardless of 7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, and to which we have responded to in definitions in the Harmonized Tariff 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, the Decision Memorandum and Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), 7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, Proprietary Decision Memorandum. are products in which: i) iron 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, Parties can find a complete discussion predominates, by weight, over each of 7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, of all issues raised in this review and the other contained elements; ii) the 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, the corresponding recommendations in carbon content is 2 percent or less, by 7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, the Decision Memorandum, which is on weight; and iii) none of the elements 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, file in the Department’s Central Records listed below exceeds the quantity, by 7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, Unit, located at 14th Street and weight, respectively indicated: 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, Constitution Avenue, NW, Room B–099. 1.80 percent of manganese, or 7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. In addition, a complete version of the 2.25 percent of silicon, or Certain hot–rolled carbon steel flat Decision Memorandum can be accessed 1.00 percent of copper, or products covered by this review, directly on the Import Administration 0.50 percent of aluminum, or including: vacuum degassed fully website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ under 1.25 percent of chromium, or stabilized; high strength low alloy; and the heading Federal Register Notices. 0.30 percent of cobalt, or the substrate for motor lamination steel The paper copy and electronic version 0.40 percent of lead, or may also enter under the following tariff of the Decision Memorandum are 1.25 percent of nickel, or numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, identical in content. Access to the 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, proprietary version of the Proprietary 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, Decision Memorandum is only through 0.10 percent of niobium, or 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, administrative protective order.1 0.15 percent of vanadium, or 7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 0.15 percent of zirconium. 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, Changes Since the Preliminary Results All products that meet the physical 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and Based on our analysis of comments and chemical description provided 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise received, we made the following above are within the scope of this may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, changes from the preliminary results: review unless otherwise excluded. The 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 1) We recalculated comparison market following products, by way of example, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and net price and duty drawback to avoid are outside or specifically excluded 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS double conversion; from the scope of this review: subheadings are provided for 2) We adjusted NSM’s reported costs • Alloy hot–rolled steel products in convenience and CBP purposes, the to reflect the higher of transfer price or which at least one of the chemical written description of the merchandise market price for the scrap purchased elements exceeds those listed above is dispositive. from one of NSM’s affiliated suppliers (including, e.g., American Society for (i.e., transactions disregarded rule); Analysis of Comments Received Testing and Materials (ASTM) 3) We constructed a market price for specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, The Department has received case and a particular type of scrap with no A506). rebuttal briefs from petitioner, Nucor market price for the purpose of applying • Society of Automotive Engineers and NSM. All case and rebuttal briefs the major input rule under section (SAE)/American Iron & Steel Institute for the final results are addressed in the 773(f)(3) of the Act; (AISI) grades of series 2300 and higher. ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for 4) We adjusted variable cost of • Ball bearing steels, as defined in the the Final Results of Antidumping Duty manufacture to account for scrap HTSUS. Administrative Review and Partial purchases and losses on scrap; and • Tool steels, as defined in the Rescission of Antidumping Duty 5) We used home market net quantity HTSUS. Administrative Review of Certain Hot– in our analysis. • Silico–manganese (as defined in the Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Final Results of Review Thailand’’ from Stephen J. Claeys, HTSUS) or silicon electrical steel with We determine that the following Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent. dumping margin exists for the period • Administration, to David M. Spooner, ASTM specifications A710 and November 1, 2004, through October 31, Assistant Secretary, Import A736. 2005: • USS abrasion–resistant steels (USS Administration, dated May 7, 2007 AR 400, USS AR 500). (Decision Memorandum), which is Manufacturer/Exporter Margin (Percent) • All products (proprietary or hereby adopted by this notice. otherwise) based on an alloy ASTM Additionally, certain issues that contain NSM ...... 8.23 specification (sample specifications: proprietary information and arguments ASTM A506, A507). are addressed in the memorandum • Non–rectangular shapes, not in ‘‘Proprietary Arguments from the Issues 1 A public version of the Proprietary Decision Memorandum is on file in the Department’s Central coils, which are the result of having and Decision Memorandum for the Records Unit, located at 14th Street and been processed by cutting or stamping Final Results of Certain Hot–Rolled Constitution Avenue, NW, Room B-099.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27804 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Assessment Rates manufacturer of the merchandise; and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The Department will determine, and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other National Oceanic and Atmospheric U.S. Customs and Border Protection manufacturers or exporters will Administration (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping continue to be 3.86 percent, the ‘‘all duties on all appropriate entries, others’’ rate established in the LTFV [XRIN: 0648–XA33] pursuant to section 751(a)(1)(B) of the investigation (66 FR 49622 September Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The 28, 2001). These deposit requirements Western Pacific Regional Fishery Department calculated importer– shall remain in effect until further Management Council; Public Meeting specific duty assessment rates on the notice. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries basis of the ratio of the total amount of Notification of Interested Parties Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and antidumping duties calculated for the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), examined sales to the total entered This notice also serves as a final Commerce. value of the examined sales for that reminder to importers of their ACTION: Notice of public meeting. importer. responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) The Department clarified its to file a certificate regarding the SUMMARY: The 95th meeting of the ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on reimbursement of antidumping duties Western Pacific Regional Fishery May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This prior to liquidation of the relevant Management Council’s (Council) clarification will apply to entries of entries during this review period. Scientific and Statistical Committee subject merchandise during the period (SSC) meeting will be held between 9 of review produced by companies Failure to comply with this requirement a.m. and 5 p.m. on Tuesday, June 12, included in these final results of could result in the Secretary’s 2007, and between 8:30 am and 5 p.m. reviews for which the reviewed presumption that reimbursement of on Wednesday and Thursday June 13– companies did not know their antidumping duties occurred and the 14, 2007. merchandise was destined for the subsequent assessment of doubled United States. In such instances, we will antidumping duties. DATES: The SSC will convene Tuesday, instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed This notice also serves as a reminder June 12, 2007, through Thursday June 14, 2007(see SUPPLEMENTARY entries at the All–Others rate if there is to parties subject to administrative INFORMATION for the agenda). no rate for the intermediate protective orders (‘‘APO’’) of their company(ies) involved in the responsibility concerning the return or ADDRESSES: The SSC meeting will be transaction. For a full discussion of this destruction of proprietary information held at the Council Office Conference clarification, see Notice of Policy disclosed under APO in accordance Room, 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI; telephone: (808) 522– Concerning Assessment of Antidumping with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 8220. Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). to govern business proprietary Antidumping duties for the rescinded information in this segment of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: company G Steel, shall be assessed at proceeding. Timely written notification Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; rates equal to the cash deposit of of the return/destruction of APO telephone: (808)-522–8220. estimated antidumping duties required materials or conversion to judicial SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in protective order is hereby requested. Agenda accordance with 19 CFR Failure to comply with the regulations 9 a.m. Tuesday, June 12, 2007 351.212(c)(1)(I). The Department and terms of an APO is a violation, intends to issue assessment instructions which is subject to sanction. 1. Introductions to CBP 15 days after the date of We are issuing and publishing these 2. Approval of Draft Agenda and publication of these final results of final results and notice in accordance Assignment of Rapporteurs review. with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of 3. Approval of the Minutes of the 94th the Act. Meeting Cash Deposit Requirements 4. Report from the NMFS Pacific The following deposit requirements Dated: May 7, 2007. Science Center Director will be effective upon publication of David M. Spooner, 5. Insular Fisheries this notice of final results of Assistant Secretary for Import A. Bottomfish and Seamount administrative review all shipments of Administration. Groundfish hot–rolled steel from Thailand entered, 1. MHI Bottomfish (ACTION ITEM) Appendix or withdrawn from warehouse, for a. Seasonal Closures, TACs and consumption on or after the date of List of Comments and Issues in the Commercial Reporting publication, as provided by section Decision Memorandum b. Recreational Permits and Reporting 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit c. Federal Recreational Bag Limits rates for the reviewed companies will be Comment 1: Affiliation 2. Risk Analysis of Potential TACs the rates indicated above; (2) for Comment 2: Date of Sale 3. Updated Analysis of HDAR Survey previously investigated companies not Comment 3: Major Input Rule of BF Registered Vessel Owners listed above, the cash deposit rate will 4. Bottomfish education and outreach continue to be the company–specific Comment 4: Depreciation Expense program rate published for the most recent Comment 5: Commissions Offset 5. Advisory Panel Recommendations period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm Comment 6: Clerical Errors 6. Public Comment covered in this review, or in the less– 7. Discussion and Recommendations [FR Doc. E7–9526 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] than-fair–value (‘‘LTFV’’) investigation, B. Precious Corals but the manufacturer is, then the cash BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 1. Potential for Auau Limited Entry deposit rate will be the rate established Program (ACTION ITEM) for the most recent period for the 2. Plan Team Recommendations

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27805

3. Public Comment ACTION: Notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 4. Discussion and Recommendations Lillian Dote, (202) 606–6984, or by SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, June 13, 2007 e-mail at [email protected]. and Community Service (hereinafter the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 6. Pelagic Fisheries ‘‘Corporation’’), as part of its continuing The Corporation is particularly A. Longline Management effort to reduce paperwork and interested in comments that: 1. Longline Tuna TAC Framework respondent burden, conducts a pre- • Evaluate whether the proposed (ACTION ITEM) clearance consultation program to collection of information is necessary 2. Guam Longline Area Closure provide the general public and federal for the proper performance of the (ACTION ITEM) agencies with an opportunity to functions of the Corporation, including 3. Review of Report on Transferred comment on proposed and/or whether the information will have Effects B. American Samoa and Hawaii continuing collections of information in practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the Longline Quarterly Reports accordance with the Paperwork C. International Fisheries Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 agency’s estimate of the burden of the 1. ISC Bycatch Working Group U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program proposed collection of information, 2. IATTC Stock Assessment Working helps to ensure that requested data can including the validity of the be provided in the desired format, methodology and assumptions used; Group • 3. WCPFC- SC3 Agenda reporting burden (time and financial Enhance the quality, utility, and 4. SPC/PNG Tuna Tagging resources) is minimized, collection clarity of the information to be 5. FAO Report instruments are clearly understood, and collected; and • D. Plan Team Recommendations the impact of collection requirement on Minimize the burden of the E. Advisory Panel Recommendations respondents can be properly assessed. collection of information on those who F. Public Comment Currently, the Corporation is are expected to respond, including the G. Discussion and Recommendations soliciting comments on the proposed use of appropriate automated, 8:30 a.m. Thursday, June 14, 2007 follow-up survey for the National electronic, mechanical, or other Evaluation of Youth Corps. This survey technological collection techniques or 7. Ecosystem And Habitat other forms of information technology A. Use of Traditional Knowledge in will be completed by individuals 18 months after they were randomly (e.g., permitting electronic submissions Marine Resource Management of responses). B. Report on American Samoa Coral assigned to participate in either a youth Reef Fisheries corps program or a control group. These Background C. Report on Hawaii Ulua Tagging Data individuals completed a baseline survey The Corporation is interested in Analysis at the time of application to a youth learning about the effects of national D. Report on MSRA Annual Catch corps program. Many of the youth corps service on its participants. This study Limit Guidance programs receive all or part of their will use an experimental design to E. Advisory Panel Recommendations funding from the Corporation. F. REAC Reports assess the outcomes associated with Copies of the information collection participation in national service. This G. Public Comment requests can be obtained by contacting H. Discussion and Recommendations survey will be completed by individuals 8. Other Business the office listed in the address section 18 months after they were randomly A. 96th SSC meeting of this notice. assigned to participate in either a youth 9. Summary of SSC Recommendations DATES: Written comments must be corps program or a control group. These to the Council submitted to the individual and office individuals completed a baseline survey ADDRESSES at the time of application to a youth Special Accommodations listed in the section by July 16, 2007. corps program. These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Current Action Requests for sign language identified by the title of the information This is an application for a new data interpretation or other auxiliary aids collection activity, by any of the collection. It is anticipated that data should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, following methods: collection will begin in January 2008. (808)522–8220 (voice) or (808)522–8226 (1) By mail sent to: Corporation for Type of Review: New. (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting National and Community Service; Agency: Corporation for National and date. Attention: Lillian Dote, Program Officer; Community Service. Office of Research and Policy Title: National Evaluation of Youth Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Development, Room 10901C; 1201 New Corps. Dated: May 14, 2007. York Avenue, NW.; Washington, DC OMB Number: None. Tracey L. Thompson, 20525. Agency Number: None. Acting Director, Office of Sustainable (2) By hand delivery or by courier to Affected Public: Individuals who have Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. the Corporation’s mailroom at Room agreed to participate in the evaluation [FR Doc. E7–9487 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 8102C at the mail address given in and who have completed a baseline BILLING CODE 3510–22–S paragraph (1) above, between 9 a.m. and survey. 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Total Respondents: 3,000. Frequency: One time. Federal holidays. Average Time Per Response: Averages CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND (3) By fax to: (202) 606–3464, COMMUNITY SERVICE 45 minutes. Attention: Lillian Dote, Program Officer, Estimated Total Burden Hours: 2,250 Office of Research and Policy hours. Proposed Information Collection; Development. Comment Request Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): (4) Electronically through the None. AGENCY: Corporation for National and Corporation’s e-mail address system: Total Burden Cost (operating/ Community Service. [email protected]. maintenance): None.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27806 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Comments submitted in response to DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of this notice will be summarized and/or the Commission’s Rules of Practice and included in the request for Office of Office of the Secretary Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Management and Budget approval of the 385.214). Protests will be considered by information collection request; they will Meeting of the President’s the Commission in determining the also become a matter of public record. Commission on Care for America’s appropriate action to be taken, but will Returning Wounded Warriors Dated: May 10, 2007. not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to Robert Grimm, AGENCY: Department of Defense ACTION: become a party must file a notice of Director, Office of Research and Policy Federal Advisory Committee Sub Committee Meeting notice. intervention or motion to intervene, as Development. appropriate. Such notices, motions, or [FR Doc. E7–9446 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal protests must be filed in accordance BILLING CODE 6050–$$–P Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 with the provisions of Section 154.210 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the of the Commission’s regulations (18 CFR Sunshine in the Government Act of 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended) and or protest must serve a copy of that DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) document on the Applicant. Anyone §§ 102–3.140 through 160, the filing an intervention or protest on or Office of the Secretary Department of Defense announces the before the intervention or protest date forthcoming sub committee meeting. need not serve motions to intervene or Notification of an ‘‘Open Meeting’’ of Subcommittees of the Commission protests on persons other than the the National Defense University will conduct preparatory work meetings Applicant. Visitors (BOV) in the Chicago area to gather The Commission encourages information, conduct research and electronic submission of protests and AGENCY: Department of Defense; analyze issues and facts in preparation interventions in lieu of paper using the National Defense University. for a meeting of the Commission. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. ACTION: Notice of ‘‘Open Meeting.’’ Pursuant to section 102–3.160(a) of 41 Persons unable to file electronically Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), should submit an original and 14 copies SUMMARY: The National Defense these subcommittee meetings are not of the protest or intervention to the University (NDU), Designated Federal open to the public, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Officer, has scheduled a meeting of the subcommittees are required to report 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Board of Visitors. Request subject notice their findings to the Commission for 20426. be published in the Federal Register. further deliberation. Locations include This filing is accessible on-line at The National Defense University Board the DoD/VA combined Health Center at http://www.ferc.gov, using the of Visitors is a Federal Advisory Board. Naval Training Center Great Lakes. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for The Board meets twice a year in Additionally, the Sub Committees will review in the Commission’s Public proceedings that are open to the public. visit public and private hospitals in the Reference Room in Washington, DC. area for investigation of Centers of There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the DATES: The meeting will be held on May Excellence that apply to the Web site that enables subscribers to 21–22, 2007 from 1100 to 1700 on the Commission’s Charter. receive e-mail notification when a 21st and continuing on the 22nd from Dated: May 11, 2007. document is added to a subscribed 0830 to 1330. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC L.M. Bynum, Location: The Board of Visitors Online service, please e-mail Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison [email protected], or call meeting will be held at Building 62, Officer, DoD. (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Marshall Hall, Room 155, National [FR Doc. 07–2421 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Defense University, 300 5th Avenue, (202) 502–8659. BILLING CODE 5001–06–M Fort McNair, Washington, DC 20319– Kimberly D. Bose, 5066. Secretary. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FR Doc. E7–9459 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] point of contact for this notice of an BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ‘‘Open Meeting’’ is Mr. Roy Austin (202) Federal Energy Regulatory 685–2649, Fax (202) 685–3935 or Austin Commission [email protected]. [Docket No. RP00–305–031] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: State of CenterPoint Energy—Mississippi River Federal Energy Regulatory the University, National Security Transmission Corporation; Notice of Commission Education, Accreditation, and Federal Negotiated Rate [Docket No. CP07–328–000] Policy. The meeting is open to the public; limited space is made available May 10, 2007. Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, for observers and will be allocated on a Take notice that on April 27, 2007, Inc.; Notice of Application first come first serve basis. CenterPoint Energy—Mississippi River May 10, 2007. Dated: May 1, 2007. Transmission Corporation (MRT) tendered for filing a negotiated rate Take notice that on May 3, 2007, L.M. Bynum, agreement for Rate Schedule ITS service Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison from ConocoPhillips Company to WRB (Southern Star), 4700 Highway 56, Officer, DoD. Refining, LLC., effective May 1, 2007. Owensboro, Kentucky 42301, filed an [FR Doc. 07–2420 Filed 5–15–07; 9:25 am] Any person desiring to intervene or to application in Docket No. CP07–328– BILLING CODE 5001–06–M protest this filing must file in 000 pursuant to section 7(b) of the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27807

Natural Gas Act (NGA) for permission completion of all necessary reviews, and project provide copies of their protests and approval to abandon Southern the subsequent need to complete all only to the applicant. However, the non- Star’s Cement-Drumright line comprised federal authorizations within 90 days of party commenters will not receive of approximately 40.83 miles of 12-inch the date of issuance of the Commission copies of all documents filed by other and 16-inch diameter pipeline and staff’s FEIS or EA. parties or issued by the Commission appurtenances located in Grady and There are two ways to become (except for the mailing of environmental Comanche Counties, Oklahoma, by sale involved in the Commission’s review of documents issued by the Commission) to DCP Midstream, LP. Southern Star this project. First, any person wishing to and will not have the right to seek court further requests that the Commission obtain legal status by becoming a party review of the commission’s final order. find the facilities, when sold, as exempt to the proceeding for this project The Commission strongly encourages from the Commission’s jurisdiction should, on or before the comment date electronic filings of comments, protests, pursuant to section 1(b) of the NGA, all stated below, file with the Federal and interventions via the internet in lieu as more fully set forth in the application Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) First Street, NE., Washington, DC. which is on file with the Commission and the instructions on the and open to public inspection. 20426, a motion to intervene in Commission’s Web site under the Southern Star states that the facilities accordance with the requirements of the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. were originally constructed to support Commission’s Rules of Practice and its former merchant function and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) Comment Date: May 31, 2007. provide mainline transmission, but in and the Regulations under the NGA (18 Kimberly D. Bose, more recent years has only served to CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party Secretary. gather gas from local producers and status will be placed on the service list provided limited gas service to various maintained by the Secretary of the [FR Doc. E7–9462 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] parties along the system, which will Commission and will receive copies of BILLING CODE 6717–01–P continue upon the transfer of the all documents filed by the applicant and facilities to DCP Midstream, LP. by all other parties. A party must submit DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY This filing is available for review at 14 copies of filings made with the the Commission in the Public Reference Commission and must mail a copy to Federal Energy Regulatory Room or may be viewed on the the applicant and to every other party in Commission Commission’s Web site at http:// the proceeding. Only parties to the www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. proceeding can ask for court review of Enter the docket number excluding the Commission orders in the proceeding. [Project No. 2576–083] last three digits in the docket number However, a person does not have to Northeast Generation Company; field to access the document. For intervene to have comments considered. Notice Granting Late Intervention assistance, contact FERC Online The second way to participate is by Support at filing with the Secretary of the May 10, 2007. [email protected] or Commission, as soon as possible, an Telephone: 202–502–6652; Toll-free: original and two copies of comments in On August 2, 2006, the Commission 1–866–208–3676; or for TTY, contact support of or in opposition to this issued a notice of application soliciting (202) 502–8659. project. The Commission will consider comments, motions to intervene, and Any initial questions regarding this these comments in determining the protest for the Housatonic River application should be directed to Tim appropriate action to be taken, but the Hydroelectric Project No. 2576, located Thompson, Attorney, Southern Star filing of a comment alone will not serve on the Housatonic River, in Fairfield, Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., 4700 to make the filer a party to the Litchfield, and New Haven Counties, Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky proceeding. The Commission’s rules Connecticut. The notice established 42301, or call (270) 852–4943. require that persons filing comments in September 1, 2006, as the deadline for Pursuant to section 157.9 of the opposition to the project provide copies filing motions to intervene in the Commission’s rules, 18 CFR 157.9, of their protests only to the party or proceeding. within 90 days of this Notice the parties directly involved in the protest. On September 8, 2006, the Commission staff will either: Complete Persons who wish to comment only Candlewood Lake Authority filed a late its environmental assessment (EA) and on the environmental review of this motion to intervene in the proceeding. place it into the Commission’s public project, should submit an original and Granting the late motion to intervene record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or two copies of their comments to the will not unduly delay or disrupt the issue a Notice of Schedule for Secretary of the Commission. proceeding, or prejudice other parties to Environmental Review. If a Notice of Environmental commenters will be it. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 214,1 the Schedule for Environmental Review is placed on the Commission’s late motion to intervene filed by the issued, it will indicate, among other environmental mailing list, will receive Candlewood Lake Authority is granted, milestones, the anticipated date for the copies of the environmental documents, subject to the Commission’s rules and Commission staff’s issuance of the final and will be notified of meetings regulations. environmental impact statement (FEIS) associated with the Commission’s or EA for this proposal. The filing of the environmental review process. Kimberly D. Bose, EA in the Commission’s public record Environmental commenters will not be Secretary. for this proceeding or the issuance of a required to serve copies of filed [FR Doc. E7–9460 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Notice of Schedule for Environmental documents on all other parties. The BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Review will serve to notify federal and Commission’s rules require that persons state agencies of the timing for the filing comments in opposition to the 1 18 CFR 385.214 (2006).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27808 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CFR, Part 402; and (b) the State Historic ‘‘Request for Cooperating Agency Preservation Officer, as required by Status,’’ or ‘‘Communications to and Federal Energy Regulatory section 106, National Historical from Commission Staff.’’ Any Commission Preservation Act, and the implementing individual or entity interested in [Project No. 2615–035] regulations of the Advisory Council on submitting study requests, commenting Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2. on the PAD or Scoping Document, and Madison Paper Industries, FPL Energy l. With this notice, we are designating any agency requesting cooperating Maine Hydro LLC, Merimil Limited FPL Energy Maine Hydro LLC, Madison status must do so by July 27, 2007. Partnership, and Brassua Paper Industries, and Merimil Limited Comments on the PAD and Scoping Hydroelectric Limited Partnership; Partnership the Commission’s non- Document, study requests, requests for Notice of Intent to File License federal representative for carrying out cooperating agency status, and other Application, Filing of Pre-Application informal consultation, pursuant to permissible forms of communications Document, Commencement of section 7 of the Endangered Species Act with the Commission may be filed Licensing Proceeding, Scoping and section 106 of the National Historic electronically via the Internet in lieu of Meetings, Solicitation of Comments on Preservation Act. paper. The Commission strongly the Pad and Scoping Document, and m. FPL Energy Maine Hydro LLC, encourages electronic filings. See 18 Identification of Issues and Associated Madison Paper Industries, and Merimil CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Study Requests Limited Partnership filed a Pre- instructions on the Commission’s Web Application Document (PAD); including site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e- May 10, 2007. a proposed process plan and schedule filing’’ link. a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to with the Commission, pursuant to 18 p. At this time, Commission staff File License Application for a New CFR 5.6 of the Commission’s intends to prepare a single License and Pre-Application Document; regulations. Environmental Assessment for the Commencing Licensing Proceeding. n. Copies of the PAD and Scoping project, in accordance with the National b. Project No.: 2615–035. Document are available for review at the Environmental Policy Act. c. Dated Filed: March 29, 2007. Commission in the Public Reference d. Submitted By: Madison Paper Room or may be viewed on the Scoping Meetings Industries, FPL Energy Maine Hydro Commission’s Web site (http:// We will hold two scoping meetings at LLC, Merimil Limited Partnership, and www.ferc.gov), using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ the times and places noted below. The Brassua Hydroelectric Limited link. Enter the docket number, daytime meeting will focus on resource Partnership (current co-licensee Brassua excluding the last three digits in the agency, Indian tribes, and non- Hydroelectric Limited Partnership will docket number field to access the governmental organization concerns, no longer be a licensee after the document. For assistance, contact FERC while the evening meeting is primarily termination of the existing license on Online Support at for receiving input from the public. We March 31, 2012, in accordance with an [email protected] or toll invite all interested individuals, indenture of lease dated October 15, free at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, organizations, and agencies to attend 1989). (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available one or both of the meetings, and to e. Name of Project: Brassua Project. for inspection and reproduction at the assist staff in identifying particular f. Location: On the northern Moose address in paragraph h. study needs, as well as the scope of River in Sumerset, County, Maine. The Register online at http://ferc.gov/ environmental issues to be addressed in project does not occupy any federal esubscribenow.htm to be notified via e- the environmental document. The times lands. mail of new filing and issuances related and locations of these meetings are as g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR Part 5 of to this or other pending projects. For follows: the Commission’s Regulations. assistance, contact FERC Online h. Potential Applicant Contact: Mr. Support. Daytime Scoping Meeting Frank Dunlap, Senior Environmental o. With this notice, we are soliciting Date and Time: Thursday, June 28, Specialist, FPL Energy Maine Hydro comments on the PAD and Scoping 2007, 12 to 3 p.m. (EST). LLC, 160 Capital Street, Augusta, ME Document as well as study requests. All Location: Holiday Inn, York Room, 04330, (207) 623–8417 or e-mail at comments on the PAD and Scoping 110 Community Drive, Augusta, Maine [email protected]. Document, and study requests should be 04330. i. FERC Contact: John Costello (202) sent to the address above in paragraph For Directions: Call Holiday Inn at 502–6119 or e-mail at h. In addition, all comments on the PAD (207) 622–4751. [email protected]. and Scoping Document, study requests, j. We are asking federal, state, local, requests for cooperating agency status, Evening Scoping Meeting and tribal agencies with jurisdiction and all communications to Commission Date and Time: Wednesday, June 27, and/or special expertise with respect to staff related to the merits of the 2007, 7 to 10 p.m. (EST). environmental issues to cooperate with potential application (original and eight Location: The Community House, 6 us in the preparation of the copies) must be filed with the Lakeville Street, Greenville, Maine environmental document. Agencies who Commission at the following address: 04441. would like to request cooperating status Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal For Directions: Please call the should follow the instructions for filing Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Moosehead Historical Society at (207) comments described in paragraph o First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 695–2909. below. All filings with the Commission must Scoping Document, which outlines k. With this notice, we are initiating include on the first page, the project the subject areas to be addressed in the informal consultation with: (a) The U.S. name (Brassua Project) and number (P– environmental document, has been Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA 2615–035), and bear the heading mailed to the individuals and entities Fisheries under section 7 of the ‘‘Comments on Pre-Application on the Commission’s mailing list. Endangered Species Act and the joint Document,’’ ‘‘Study Requests,’’ Copies of the Scoping Document will be agency regulations thereunder at 50 ‘‘Comments on Scoping Document 1,’’ available at the scoping meetings, or

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27809

may be viewed on the web at http:// ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Collection Request Supporting www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. AGENCY Statement Toxic Equivalency Reporting, Community-Right-to-Know, Toxic Follow the directions for accessing [FRL–8315–8] information in paragraph n. Depending Chemicals (Final Rule); in 40 CFR on the extent of comments received, a Agency Information Collection 372.85; was approved 04/25/2007; OMB Scoping Document 2 may or may not be Activities OMB Responses Number 2025–0007; expires 04/30/2010. issued. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Short Term Extensions Site Visit Agency (EPA). EPA ICR No. 0370.22; Information ACTION: Notice. Collection Request for the Revision to FPL will conduct a tour of the project Federal UIC Requirements for Class I on Wednesday, June 27, 2007, starting at SUMMARY: This document announces the Municipal Wells in Florida (Final Rule); 9 a.m. All participants interested in Office of Management and Budget’s OMB Number 2040–0042; on 04/24/ attending should meet at the project’s (OMB) responses to Agency Clearance 2007 OMB extended the expiration date dam located on Route 15. All requests, in compliance with the through 09/30/2007. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. participants attending the site visit Comment Filed should be prepared to provide their own 3501 et seq). An agency may not transportation and lunch. Anyone in conduct or sponsor, and a person is not EPA ICR No. 1730.05; NSPS for need of directions to the dam should required to respond to, a collection of Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste contact Mr. Frank Dunlap of FPL at information unless it displays a Incinerators (Proposed Rule); in 40 CFR currently valid OMB control number. part 60, subpart Ec; OMB Number 2060– (207) 623–8417. Those individuals The OMB control numbers for EPA’s 0363; OMB filed comment on 4/13/ planning to participate in the site visit regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 2007. are asked to notify Mr. Dunlap of their and 48 CFR chapter 15. EPA ICR No. 1684.09; Emissions intent, no later than June 14, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Certification, Compliance and In-Use Scoping Meeting Objectives Susan Auby (202) 566–1672, or email at Testing Requirements for On-Highway [email protected] and please refer to Heavy Duty Engines and Vehicles At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) the appropriate EPA Information Equipped with On-Board Diagnostics Present the proposed list of issues to be Collection Request (ICR) Number. (Amendment) (Proposed Rule); OMB addressed in the EA; (2) review and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: filed comment on 04/16/2007; OMB discuss existing conditions and resource Number 2060–0287; expires 03/31/2008. agency management objectives; (3) OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests Dated: May 9, 2007. review and discuss existing information Sara Hisel-McCoy, and identify preliminary information OMB Approvals Acting Director, Collection Strategies and study needs; (4) review and discuss EPA ICR No. 0658.09; NSPS for Division. the process plan and schedule for pre- Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label [FR Doc. E7–9503 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] filing activity that incorporates the time Surface Coating (Renewal); in 40 CFR BILLING CODE 6560–50–P frames provided for in Part 5 of the part 60, subpart RR; was approved 05/ Commission’s regulations and, to the 02/2007; OMB Number 2060–0004; extent possible, maximizes coordination expires 05/31/2010. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION of federal, state, and tribal permitting EPA ICR No. 1066.05; NSPS for AGENCY and certification processes; and (5) Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing [EPA–HQ–SFUND–2004–0014; FRL–8315–7] discuss requests by any federal or state Plants; in 40 CFR part 60, subpart PP; agency or Indian tribe acting as a was approved 05/02/2007; OMB Agency Information Collection cooperating agency for development of Number 2060–0032; expires 05/31/2010. Activities; Submission to OMB for an environmental document. EPA ICR No. 1157.08; NSPS for Review and Approval; Comment Flexible Vinyl Urethane Coating and Request; The 2007 National Survey of Meeting participants should come Printing (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 60, Local Emergency Planning prepared to discuss their issues and/or subpart FFF; was approved 05/02/2007; Committees (Reinstatement); EPA ICR concerns. Please review the Pre- OMB Number 2060–0073; expires 05/ No. 1903.02, OMB Control No. 2050– Application Document in preparation 31/2010. 0162 for the scoping meetings. Directions on EPA ICR No. 2205.01; Focus Groups how to obtain a copy of the PAD and as Used by EPA for Economics Projects; AGENCY: Environmental Protection Scoping Document are included in item was approved 05/01/2007; OMB Agency (EPA). n. of this document. Number 2090–0028; expires 11/30/2008. ACTION: Notice. EPA ICR No. 1801.06; NESHAP for Meeting Procedures the Portland Cement Manufacturing SUMMARY: In compliance with the Industry (Final Rule); in 40 CFR part 63, Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 The meetings will be recorded by a subpart LLL; was approved 04/30/2007; U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document stenographer and will become part of OMB Number 2060–0416; expires 04/ announces that an Information the formal Commission record on the 30/2010. Collection Request (ICR) has been project. EPA ICR No. 2044.03; NESHAP for forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and Kimberly D. Bose, Plastic Parts and Products Surface Coating (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, approval. This is a request to reinstate Secretary. subpart PPPP; was approved 04/16/ a previously approved collection. The [FR Doc. E7–9461 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 2007; OMB Number 2060–0537; expires ICR, which is abstracted below, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 04/30/2010. describes the nature of the information EPA ICR No. 2086.02; Dioxin and collection and its estimated burden and Dioxin-Like Compounds, Information cost.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27810 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

DATES: Additional comments may be viewing at www.regulations.gov as EPA The primary goals of this research are submitted on or before June 18, 2007. receives them and without change, to: (1) Track the progress of LEPCs by ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, unless the comment contains assessing their current activity referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– copyrighted material, CBI, or other compared to some of the data collected SFUND–2004–0014, to (1) EPA online information whose public disclosure is in 1999 survey; and (2) probe current using www.regulations.gov (our restricted by statute. For further LEPC practices and preferences preferred method), by email to information about the electronic docket, regarding several important sets of [email protected], or by mail go to www.regulations.gov. issues, including: Communications with to: Environmental Protection Agency, Title: The 2007 National Survey of local citizens, proactive accident EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Local Emergency Planning Committees. prevention efforts, and the effectiveness Superfund Docket, Mail Code 2822T, ICR number: EPA ICR No. 1903.02, of selected OEM products and services. 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., OMB Control No. 2050–0162. This collection will also contribute to Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by ICR Status: This ICR is for a reporting requirements of the mail to: Office of Information and reinstatement of a previously approved Government Performance and Results Regulatory Affairs, Office of collection. An Agency may not conduct Act (GPRA) of 1993, which stipulates Management and Budget (OMB), or sponsor, and a person is not required that agencies evaluate program activities Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 to respond to, a collection of in terms of outputs and outcomes. This 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC information, unless it displays a survey is necessary to evaluate whether 20503. currently valid OMB control number. OEM is successfully providing national leadership and assistance to local FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sicy The OMB control numbers for EPA’s communities in preparing for and Jacob, Office of Emergency Management regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when preventing chemical emergencies. (OEM), OSWER, Mail Code 5104A, Burden Statement: The annual public Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by publication in reporting and recordkeeping burden for Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, this collection of information is DC 20460; telephone number: 202–564– the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the estimated to average 0.25 hours per 8019; fax number: 202–564–2625; e-mail response. Burden means the total time, address: [email protected]. related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control effort, or financial resources expended SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has by persons to generate, maintain, retain, submitted the following ICR to OMB for numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. or disclose or provide information to or review and approval according to the for a Federal agency. This includes the Abstract: The U.S. Environmental procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. time needed to review instructions; Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Solid On September 13, 2005 (70 FR 54044), develop, acquire, install, and utilize Waste and Emergency Response EPA sought comments on this ICR technology and systems for the purposes (OSWER), Office of Emergency pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA of collecting, validating, and verifying Management (OEM) plans to collect received 4 comments during the information, processing and information through a one-time, web- comment period, which are addressed maintaining information, and disclosing based, voluntary nationwide survey of in the ICR. Any additional comments on and providing information; adjust the representatives from Local Emergency this ICR should be submitted to EPA existing ways to comply with any Planning Committees (LEPCs). The and OMB within 30 days of this notice. previously applicable instructions and establishment of LEPCs is required EPA has established a public docket requirements which have subsequently under The Emergency Planning and for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA– changed; train personnel to be able to Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 HQ–SFUND–2004–0014, which is respond to a collection of information; (EPCRA). These broad committees, available for online viewing at search data sources; complete and composed of representatives from the www.regulations.gov, or in person review the collection of information; public safety, health care, and industry viewing at the Superfund Docket in the and transmit or otherwise disclose the sectors, as well as environmental and EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA information. West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution community organizations, are charged Respondents/Affected Entities: People Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/ with developing and maintaining who hold a leadership position on Local DC Public Reading Room is open from emergency plans for their communities. Emergency Planning Committees 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through LEPCs foster a valuable dialogue (LEPCs). It is anticipated that the Friday, excluding legal holidays. The between members of government, majority of respondents will be LEPC telephone number for the Reading Room industry, and the public to prevent and chairs. is 202–566–1744, and the telephone prepare for the accidental (and terrorist- Estimated Number of Respondents: number for the Superfund Docket is related) releases of hazardous 3,500. 202–566–0276. chemicals. Frequency of Response: One time Use EPA’s electronic docket and This proposed information collection collection. comment system at will build upon previous LEPC surveys, Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: www.regulations.gov to submit or view which measured levels of compliance 875. public comments, access the index and proactivity of LEPCs. Since the last Estimated Total Annual Cost: listing of the contents of the docket, and survey in 1999, no systematic $40,285, which is exclusively for labor, to access those documents in the docket nationwide analysis of LEPC activity as there are no annualized capital or that are available electronically. Once in has been conducted. In the six years O&M costs. the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then since September 11th, local emergency Changes in the Estimates: As this ICR key in the docket ID number identified planning has evolved, most notably, in was previously discontinued, there are above. Please note that EPA’s policy is the amount of information that is now no currently approved burdens and that public comments, whether available to assist LEPCs in preparing costs. Accordingly, this ICR requests a submitted electronically or in paper, for and preventing chemical new one-time labor burden of 875 will be made available for public emergencies. hours.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27811

Dated: May 9, 2007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean 4:30 p.m. and Wednesday, June 20, Sara Hisel-McCoy, Air Act affords EPA a 45-day period to 2007, from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. Acting Director, Collection Strategies review and object to, as appropriate, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Division. operating permits proposed by state the River House, Stennis Space Center, [FR Doc. E7–9504 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] permitting authorities. Section 505(b)(2) Mississippi 39529, (228) 688–3726. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P of the CAA authorizes any person to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: petition the EPA Administrator within Gloria D. Car, Designated Federal 60 days after the expiration of this Officer, Gulf of Mexico Program Office, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION review period to object to a state Mail Code EPA/GMPO, Stennis Space AGENCY operating permit if EPA has not done so. Center, MS 39529–6000 at (228) 688– Petitions must be based only on 2421. objections to the permit that were raised [FRL–8315–6] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The with reasonable specificity during the proposed agenda includes the following public comment period provided by the Clean Air Act Operating Permit topics: Gulf of Mexico Program Updates; state, unless the petitioner demonstrates Program; Petition To Object to Title V Presentation on Liquified Natural Gas Permits for Potlatch Corporation’s that it was impracticable to raise these Facilities; Nature Conservancy Clearwater Wood Products Facility, issues during the comment period or Presentation; Priority Interests of the Idaho Pulp and Paperboard Division, that the grounds for the objection or Citizens Advisory Committee; Citizens and Consumer Products Division, other issue arose after the comment Advisory Committee membership Lewiston, ID period. status. On February 7, 2003, EPA received a The meeting is open to the public. AGENCY: Environmental Protection petition from Mr. Mark Solomon, Agency (EPA). representing the Idaho Conservation Dated: May 10, 2007. ACTION: Notice of final order on petition League, Friends of the Clearwater, and Gloria D. Car, to object to state operating permits himself, requesting that EPA object to Designated Federal Officer. the issuance of the Potlatch permits. [FR Doc. E7–9505 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act The petition alleged that: (1) The three BILLING CODE 6560–50–P (CAA) section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR Potlatch divisions should be covered by 70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed a single Title V operating permit; and (2) an order dated May 7, 2007, denying a IDEQ used the wrong model in FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS petition to object to state operating determining the ambient air quality COMMISSION permits issued by the Idaho Department impacts of the Potlatch facilities. The [MM Docket No. 93–8; DA 07–2005] of Environmental Quality to Potlatch order explains the reasons behind EPA’s Corporation’s Clearwater Wood decision to deny the petition for Commission Seeks To Update the Products Facility, Idaho Pulp and objection on all grounds. Paperboard Division, and Consumer Record for a Petition for Products Division, all located in Ronald Kreizenbeck, Reconsideration Regarding Home Shopping Stations Lewiston, Idaho (Potlatch permits). This Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 10. order constitutes final action on the [FR Doc. 07–2439 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Federal Communications petition submitted by Mr. Mark BILLING CODE 6560–50–M Commission. Solomon, representing the Idaho ACTION: Notice. Conservation League, Friends of the Clearwater, and himself, on February 7, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SUMMARY: In this document, the 2003, requesting that EPA object to the AGENCY Commission seeks to update the record for a Petition for Reconsideration filed issuance of the Potlatch permits. [FRL–8316–2] Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the by the Center for the Study of CAA, any person may seek judicial Gulf of Mexico Program Citizens Commercialism (CSC), concerning review in the United States Court of Advisory Committee Meeting stations that air home shopping Appeals for the appropriate circuit programming and their status. The within 60 days of this notice under AGENCY: Environmental Protection Commission seeks comment on CSC’s section 307 of the CAA. Agency (EPA). argument that the Commission failed to consider in its public interest analysis ADDRESSES: Copies of the final order, the ACTION: Notice of meeting. petition, and all pertinent information the significant amount of commercial SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory programming broadcast by home relating thereto are on file at the Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), EPA shopping stations; on the specific issues following location: Environmental gives notice of a meeting of the Gulf of concerning how home shopping stations Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Mexico Program (GMP) Citizens serve the people in their communities, Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT–107), Advisory Committee (CAC). including the elderly and homebound; 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington For information on access or services on CSC’s assertion that the Commission 98101. The final order is also available for individuals with disabilities, please failed to consider information relevant electronically at the following Web site: contact Gloria Car, U.S.EPA, at (228) to one of three statutory factors, i.e., http://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/ 688–2421 or [email protected]. To competing demands for the spectrum; artd/air/title5/petitiondb/ request accommodation of a disability, and on CSC’s assertion that the Cable petitiondb.htm. please contact Gloria Car, preferably at Act requires the Commission to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: least 10 days prior to the meeting, to consider non-broadcast uses in its Doug Hardesty, Office of Air, Waste and give EPA as much time as possible to analysis of competing demands for Toxics, EPA Region 10, telephone (208) process your request. spectrum. The Commission would like 378–5759, e-mail DATES: The meeting will be held on to update the record for this proceeding [email protected]. Tuesday, June 19, 2007, from 1 p.m. to before ruling on the petition.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27812 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

DATES: Comments for this proceeding stations that air home shopping account the competing demands of are due on or before June 18, 2007; reply programming and their status under television broadcasters for the television comments are due on or before July 2, section 4(g) of the Cable Television broadcast spectrum. Finally, turning to 2007. Consumer Protection and Competition the third factor, the Commission found ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Act of 1992. In the Report and Order, that the existence and carriage of home identified by MM Docket No. 93–8, by the Commission concluded that shopping broadcast stations play a role any of the following methods: television broadcast stations that are in providing competition for • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// used predominantly for the nonbroadcast services supplying similar www.regulations.gov. Follow the transmission of sales presentations or programming. Thus, the Commission instructions for submitting comments. program length commercials (such as found that each of the three statutory • Federal Communications home shopping stations) serve the factors supported a conclusion that Commission’s Web site: http:// public interest and are therefore home shopping stations are serving the www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the qualified for mandatory cable carriage. public interest. instructions for submitting comments. The Center for the Study of 4. In addition, the Commission found • People with Disabilities: Contact Commercialism (CSC) filed a petition that other factors, including the the FCC to request reasonable for reconsideration of that order. We following, supported its conclusion: (1) accommodations (accessible format issue this Public Notice because the Home shopping stations provide a documents, sign language interpreters, Commission would like to update the needed and valuable service to people CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] record for this proceeding before ruling without the time or ability to obtain or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– on the petition. goods outside the home, including the 418–0432. 2. On January 14, 1993, the disabled, elderly, and homebound; (2) For detailed instructions for Commission opened a proceeding to home shopping stations fulfill public submitting comments and additional implement section 4(g) of the Cable Act interest programming obligations; (3) information on the rulemaking process, of 1992. The Cable Act requires the the role played by the Home Shopping see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Commission to determine, regardless of Network in assisting minority- section of this document. prior proceedings, whether home controlled and other small and marginal shopping broadcast stations are serving stations to attain financial viability; and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the public interest, convenience, and (4) lack of evidence that the marketplace additional information on this necessity. Pursuant to this provision, if had failed to serve television viewers proceeding, contact Belinda Nixon, the Commission finds that these stations based on the then-present number and [email protected] of the Media serve the public interest, it must qualify variety of home shopping services. Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418– them as local commercial television Accordingly, the Commission 1382. Press inquiries should be directed stations for the purposes of mandatory concluded that home shopping stations to Mary Diamond of the Media Bureau, cable carriage, or must-carry. If the serve the public interest, and it therefore (202) 418–2388. TTY: (202) 418–7172 or Commission found that one or more qualified them as local commercial (888) 835–5322. such stations did not serve the public television stations for the purposes of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a interest, then the Act required the mandatory cable carriage. summary of the Commission’s Public Commission to provide them with 5. CSC argues that (1) the Commission Notice, DA 07–2005 released on May 4, reasonable time to provide different did not consider the amount of the 2007. The full text of this document is programming. The Cable Act further commercial programming home available for public inspection and provides that the Commission consider shopping stations broadcast when it copying during regular business hours three factors in making its public concluded that such stations discharge in the FCC Reference Center, Federal interest determination: ‘‘The viewing of their obligation to broadcast Communications Commission, 445 12th home shopping stations, the level of programming that is in the public Street, SW., CY–A257, Washington, DC competing demands for the spectrum interest; and (2) the Commission did not 20554. These documents will also be allocated to such stations, and the role consider information relevant to the available via ECFS (http://www.fcc.gov/ of such stations in providing second of the three factors in section cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available competition to nonbroadcast services 4(g) relating to competing uses for the electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/ offering similar programming.’’ television broadcast spectrum. or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete text 3. In the Report and Order, the 6. In order to update our records for may be purchased from the Commission noted that the this proceeding, we seek comment on Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th overwhelming majority of commenters the issues presented in the petition for Street, SW., Room CY–B402, in the proceeding contended that home reconsideration filed by CSC. CSC Washington, DC 20554. To request this shopping stations do serve the public argues that the Commission failed to document in accessible formats interest, that their programming format consider in its public interest analysis (computer diskettes, large print, audio should not adversely affect their the significant amount of commercial recording, and Braille), send an e-mail renewal expectancy, and that they programming broadcast by home to [email protected] or call the should be eligible for must-carry status. shopping stations. We seek comments Commission’s Consumer and Addressing the first of the three factors on this assertion. Additionally, in order Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) enumerated in Section 4(g), the to update the record, we’re now seeking 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 Commission found that home shopping comment on the specific issues (TTY). stations have significant viewership. concerning how home shopping stations With respect to the second factor, the serve the people in their communities, Summary of the Notice Commission found that it must consider including the elderly and homebound. 1. In this Public Notice, the the demands only of other television 7. We also seek comment on CSC’s Commission seeks to update the record broadcasters and not the demands of assertion that the Commission failed to for a Petition for Reconsideration of its services other than broadcast television. consider information relevant to the Report and Order in MM Docket No. The Commission further found that the second statutory factor, i.e., competing 93–8 (58 FR 39156–01), concerning licensing process adequately took into demands for the spectrum. Specifically,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27813

CSC claims that the Commission failed provided on the website for submitting FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM to consider evidence regarding comments. Congressional intent that the • For ECFS filers, in completing the Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of Board Commission consider non-broadcast transmittal screen, filers should include Approval Under Delegated Authority uses for the television broadcast their full name, U.S. Postal service and Submission to OMB spectrum, such as those of police and mailing address, and the applicable fire departments. We seek comment on docket number: MM Docket No. 93–8. AGENCY: Board of Governors of the CSC’s assertion that the Cable Act Parties may also submit an electronic Federal Reserve System requires the Commission to consider comment by Internet e-mail. To get SUMMARY: non-broadcast uses in its analysis of filing instructions, filers should send an competing demands for spectrum. Background. e-mail to [email protected], and include the 8. Finally, given the passage of time following words in the body of the Notice is hereby given of the final since the Report and Order was message: ‘‘get form’’. A sample form and approval of proposed information collections by the Board of Governors of adopted, we seek comment on the instructions will be sent in response. the Federal Reserve System (Board) current number of broadcast stations • that provide home shopping programs Paper Filers: Parties who choose to under OMB delegated authority, as per for the majority of their broadcast day. file by paper must file an original and 5 CFR 1320.16 (OMB Regulations on How do home shopping stations meet four copies of each filing. Filings can be Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the their public interest obligations? In sent by hand or messenger delivery, by Public). Board–approved collections of particular, how do they comply with the commercial overnight courier, or by information are incorporated into the requirements of the Children’s first-class or overnight U.S. Postal official OMB inventory of currently Television Act of 1990 and licensees’ Service mail (although we continue to approved collections of information. obligation to provide coverage of issues experience delays in receiving U.S. Copies of the Paperwork Reduction Act facing their communities? Postal Service mail). All filings must be Submission, supporting statements and 9. Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding addressed to the Commission’s approved collection of information will be treated as a ‘‘permit-but- Secretary, Office of the Secretary, instruments are placed into OMB’s disclose’’ proceeding subject to the Federal Communications Commission. public docket files. The Federal Reserve ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ requirements • The Commission’s contractor will may not conduct or sponsor, and the under section 1.1206(b) of the receive hand-delivered or messenger- respondent is not required to respond Commission’s rules. Ex parte delivered paper filings for the to, an information collection that has presentations are permissible if Commission’s Secretary at 236 been extended, revised, or implemented disclosed in accordance with Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, on or after October 1, 1995, unless it Commission rules, except during the Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours displays a currently valid OMB control Sunshine Agenda period when at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All number. presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are hand deliveries must be held together FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: generally prohibited. Persons making with rubber bands or fasteners. Any Federal Reserve Board Clearance Officer oral ex parte presentations are reminded envelopes must be disposed of before ––Michelle Shore––Division of Research that a memorandum summarizing a entering the building. and Statistics, Board of Governors of the presentation must contain a summary of • Federal Reserve System, Washington, Commercial overnight mail (other DC 20551 (202–452–3829). the substance of the presentation and than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail not merely a listing of the subjects OMB Desk Officer––Alexander T. and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 Hunt––Office of Information and discussed. More than a one- or two- East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, sentence description of the views and Regulatory Affairs, Office of MD 20743. arguments presented is generally Management and Budget, New • required. Additional rules pertaining to U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Executive Office Building, Room 10235, oral and written presentations are set Express Mail, and Priority Mail should Washington, DC 20503. forth in section 1.1206(b). be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Final approval under OMB delegated 10. Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and Washington, D.C. 20554. authority of the extension for three 1.419 of the Commission’s rules, • People with Disabilities: To request years, without revision, of the following interested parties may file comments materials in accessible formats for reports: and reply comments on or before the persons with disabilities (Braille, large 1. Report title: Notification of dates indicated on the first page of this print, electronic files, audio format), Nonfinancial Data Processing Activities document. All filings must be submitted send an e-mail to [email protected] or Agency form number: FR 4021 in MM Docket No. 93–8. Pleadings sent contact the Consumer and OMB control number: 7100–0306 via e-mail to the Commission will be Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) Frequency: On occasion considered informal and will not be part 418–0530 or (202) 418–7365 (TTY). Reporters: Bank holding companies Annual reporting hours: 4 hours of the official record. Comments may be • Copies of any filed documents in filed using: (1) The Commission’s Estimated average hours per response: this matter are also available for 2 hours Electronic Comment Filing System inspection in the Commission’s (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government’s Number of respondents: 2 Reference Information Center: 445 12th General description of report: This eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, information collection is required to paper copies. (202) 418–7092. obtain a benefit. (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8), (j) • Electronic Filers: Comments may be Federal Communications Commission. and (k)) and may be given confidential filed electronically using the Internet by treatment upon request (5 U.S.C. Elizabeth Andrion, accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/ 552(b)(4)). cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking Deputy Chief, Media Bureau. Abstract: Bank holding companies Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. [FR Doc. E7–9552 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] submit this notification to request Filers should follow the instructions BILLING CODE 6712–01–P permission to administer the 49–percent

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27814 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

revenue limit on nonfinancial data acquisition applications and to evaluate period for this notice expired on May 8, processing activities on a business–line changes in competition that would 2007. No substantive comments were or multiple–entity basis. A request may result from proposed transactions. received. be filed in a letter form; there is no 4. Report title: Notice of Branch Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve reporting form for this information Closure System, May 11, 2007. collection. Agency form number: FR 4031 Jennifer J. Johnson 2. Report title: Survey of Financial OMB control number: 7100–0264 Secretary of the Board. Management Behaviors of Military Frequency: On occasion [FR Doc. E7–9444 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Personnel Reporters: State member banks Agency form number: FR 1375 Annual burden hours: 423 hours BILLING CODE 6210–01–S OMB control number: 7100–0307 Estimated average hours per response: Reporting requirements, 2 hours; Frequency: Semi–annually FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Reporters: Military personnel Disclosure requirements, 1 hour; Annual reporting hours: 2,640 hours Recordkeeping requirements, 8 hours. Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Estimated average hours per response: Number of respondents: 124 Mergers of Bank Holding Companies 20 minutes General description of report: This Number of respondents: 4,000 information collection is mandatory (12 The companies listed in this notice General description of report: This U.S.C. 1831r–l(a)(1)) and may be given have applied to the Board for approval, information collection is voluntary. The confidential treatment upon request (5 pursuant to the Bank Holding Company statutory basis for collecting this U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) information is section 2A of the Federal Abstract: The mandatory reporting, (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part Reserve Act [12 U.S.C. § 225a]; the Bank recordkeeping, and disclosure 225), and all other applicable statutes Merger Act [12 U.S.C. § 1828(c)]; and requirements regarding the closing of and regulations to become a bank sections 3 and 4 of the Bank Holding any branch of an insured depository holding company and/or to acquire the Company Act [12 U.S.C. §§ 1842 and institution are imposed by section 228 assets or the ownership of, control of, or 1843 and 12 U.S.C. §§ 353 and 461]. No of the Federal Deposit Insurance the power to vote shares of a bank or issue of confidentiality normally arises Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. bank holding company and all of the because names and any other There is no reporting form associated banks and nonbanking companies characteristics that would permit with the reporting portion of this owned by the bank holding company, personal identification of respondents information collection; state member including the companies listed below. will not be reported to the Board. banks notify the Federal Reserve by The applications listed below, as well Abstract: This survey gathers data letter prior to closing a branch. The as other related filings required by the from two groups of military personnel: Federal Reserve uses the information to Board, are available for immediate (1) those completing a financial fulfill its statutory obligation to inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank education course as part of their supervise state member banks. indicated. The application also will be advanced training and (2) those not 5. Report title: Reports Related to available for inspection at the offices of completing a financial education course. Securities of State Member Banks as the Board of Governors. Interested These two groups are surveyed on their Required by Regulation H persons may express their views in financial management behaviors and Agency form number: Reg H–1 writing on the standards enumerated in changes in their financial situations OMB Control number: 7100–0091 the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the over time. Data from the survey help to Frequency: Quarterly and on occasion proposal also involves the acquisition of determine the effectiveness of financial Reporters: State member banks a nonbanking company, the review also education for young adults in the Annual reporting hours: 1,477 hours includes whether the acquisition of the military and the durability of the effects Estimated average hours per response: nonbanking company complies with the as measured by financial status of those 5.11 hours standards in section 4 of the BHC Act receiving financial education early in Number of respondents: 17 (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise their military careers. General description of report: This noted, nonbanking activities will be 3. Report title: Survey to Obtain information collection is mandatory (15 conducted throughout the United States. Information on the Relevant Market in U.S.C. 781(i)) and is not given Additional information on all bank Individual Merger Cases confidential treatment. holding companies may be obtained Agency form number: FR 2060 Abstract: The Federal Reserve’s from the National Information Center OMB control number: 7100–0232 Regulation H requires certain state website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. Frequency: On occasion member banks to submit information Unless otherwise noted, comments Reporters: Small businesses and relating to their securities to the Federal regarding each of these applications consumers Reserve on the same forms that bank must be received at the Reserve Bank Annual reporting hours: 18 hours holding companies and nonbank indicated or the offices of the Board of Estimated average hours per response: entities use to submit similar Governors not later than June 11, 2007. Small businesses, 10 minutes; information to the Securities and A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Consumers, 6 minutes. Exchange Commission. The information (W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200 Number of respondents: 25 small is primarily used for public disclosure North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201- businesses and 50 consumers per survey and is available to the public upon 2272: General description of report: This request. 1. Umphrey II Family Limited information collection is voluntary (12 Current Actions: On March 9, 2007, Partnership and Hillister Enterprises II, U.S.C. 1817(j), 1828(c), and 1842)) and the Federal Reserve published a notice Inc., Beaumont, Texas; to become bank is given confidential treatment (5 U.S.C. in the Federal Register (72 FR 10762) holding companies by acquiring 19.61 552 (b)(4) and (b)(6)). requesting public comment for 60 days percent of the voting shares of CBFH, Abstract: The Federal Reserve uses on the extension, without revision, of Inc., Beaumont, Texas, and thereby this information to define relevant the: FR 4021, FR 1375, FR 2060, FR indirectly acquire voting shares of banking markets for specific merger and 4031, and Reg H–1. The comment County Bancshares, Inc., Newton,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27815

Texas; Newton Delaware Financial Organizations (FBOs) in Accessing (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health Corporation, Dover, Delaware; and Grants study will identify perceived or (NIH). CountyBank, National Association, underlying barriers faith-based ACTION: Request for comments, Newton, Texas. organizations may face in applying for submission of relevant data, and In connection with this application, federal discretionary grants, as well as nominations of scientific experts. CBFH, Inc., Beaumont, Texas, also has identify the strategies and approaches applied to become a bank holding used by successful applicants. The data SUMMARY: The Interagency Coordinating company by acquiring 100 percent of gathered will help Health and Human Committee on the Validation of the voting shares of County Bancshares, Services understand the effectiveness of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) received Inc., Newton, Texas, and thereby its past internal efforts to ensure that a nomination from the U.S. Consumer indirectly acquire voting shares of FBOs had equal access to grants, and Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to Newton Delaware Financial whether additional steps should be evaluate the validation status of: (1) The Corporation, Dover, Delaware, and considered. Additionally, this study murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) CountyBank, National Association, should provide future FBO grant as a stand-alone assay for determining Newton, Texas. applicants, as well as other nonprofit potency (including severity) for the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve organizations, information that could be purpose of hazard classification; (2) the System, May 11, 2007. used to improve the quality of their ‘‘cut-down’’ or ‘‘limit dose’’ LLNA Jennifer J. Johnson, grant applications and their capacity to approach; (3) non-radiolabeled LLNA Secretary of the Board. seek federal funding. methods; (4) the use of the LLNA for Frequency: Single time. [FR Doc. E7–9441 Filed 5–17–07; 8:45 am] testing mixtures, aqueous solutions, and Affected Public: Not-for-profit metals; and (5) the current applicability BILLING CODE 6210–01–S institutions. domain (i.e., the types of chemicals and Annual Number of Respondents: 290. substances for which the LLNA has Total Annual Responses: 290. been validated). ICCVAM reviewed the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND nomination, assigned it a high priority, HUMAN SERVICES Average Burden Per Response: 35.2 minutes. and proposed that NICEATM and Office of the Secretary Total Annual Hours: 170. ICCVAM carry out the following To obtain copies of the supporting activities in its evaluation: (1) Initiate a [Document Identifier: OS–0990–0000] statement and any related forms for the review of the current literature and available data, including the preparation 30-Day Notice proposed paperwork collections referenced above, e-mail your request, of a comprehensive background review AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. including your address, phone number, document, and (2) convene a peer ACTION: Agency information collection OMB number, and OS document review panel to review the various activities: proposed collection; comment identifier, to proposed LLNA uses and procedures for request. [email protected], or call which sufficient data and information the Reports Clearance Office on (202) are available to adequately assess their In compliance with the requirement 690–6162. Written comments and validation status. ICCVAM also of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the recommendations for the proposed recommends development of Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information collections must be performance standards for the LLNA. At Office of the Secretary (OS), Department received within 30 days of this notice this time, NICEATM requests: (1) Public of Health and Human Services, is directly to the Desk Officer at the comments on the appropriateness and publishing the following summary of a address below: relative priority of these activities, (2) proposed collection for public OMB Desk Officer: John Kraemer, nominations of expert scientists to comment. Interested persons are invited OMB Human Resources and Housing consider as members of a possible peer to send comments regarding this burden Branch, Attention: (OMB #0990–0000), review panel, and (3) submission of data estimate or any other aspect of this New Executive Office Building, Room for the LLNA and/or modified versions collection of information, including any 10235, Washington DC 20503. of the LLNA. of the following subjects: (1) The Dated: May 10, 2007. DATES: Submit comments, data, and necessity and utility of the proposed Alice Bettencourt, nominations by June 15, 2007. Relevant information collection for the proper data will also be accepted after this date performance of the agency’s functions; Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer. and considered when feasible. (2) the accuracy of the estimated ADDRESSES: Dr. William S. Stokes, burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, [FR Doc. E7–9529 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] NICEATM Director, NIEHS, P.O. Box utility, and clarity of the information to BILLING CODE 4154–07–P 12233, MD EC–17, Research Triangle be collected; and (4) the use of Park, NC 27709, (fax) 919–541–0947, automated collection techniques or DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND (e-mail) [email protected]. Courier other forms of information technology to HUMAN SERVICES address: NICEATM, 79 T.W. Alexander minimize the information collection Drive, Building 4401, Room 3128, burden. National Toxicology Program (NTP) Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Type of Information Collection Interagency Center for the Evaluation Responses can be submitted Request: New collection. of Alternative Toxicological Methods electronically at the ICCVAM– Title of Information Collection: (NICEATM); the Murine Local Lymph NICEATM Web site: http:// Understanding Barriers and Successful Node Assay: Request for Comments, iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/contact/ Strategies for Faith-Based Organizations Nominations of Scientific Experts, and FR_pubcomment.htm or by e-mail, mail, in Accessing Grants. Submission of Data or fax. Form/OMB No.: OS–0990–0000. Use: The Understanding Barriers and AGENCY: National Institute of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Successful Strategies for Faith-Based Environmental Health Sciences Other correspondence should be

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27816 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

directed to Dr. William S. Stokes (919– nominated activities will move forward will also be included in a database to 541–2384 or [email protected]). will be made subsequent to this review support the investigation of other test SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and after consideration of comments by methods for assessing skin sensitization. the public and the Scientific Advisory When submitting chemical and Background Committee on Alternative Toxicological protocol information/test data, please ICCVAM previously evaluated the Methods (SACATM). If a decision is reference this Federal Register notice validation status of the LLNA as a stand- made to proceed with evaluation of and provide appropriate contact alone alternative method to the Guinea these test methods, ICCVAM and information (name, affiliation, mailing Pig Maximization Test (GPMT) and the NICEATM propose convening a peer address, phone, fax, e-mail, and Buehler Assay (NIH publication No. 99– review panel to review the usefulness sponsoring organization, as applicable). 4494; available at http:// and limitations of each of the LLNA NICEATM prefers data to be iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/ methods listed above. The panel would submitted as copies of pages from study immunotox/llna.htm). Based on this also formulate conclusions on the notebooks and/or study reports, if evaluation, ICCVAM recommended the adequacy of draft ICCVAM performance available. Raw data and analyses LLNA as a valid substitute for the standards, any proposed future available in electronic format may also guinea pig methods for most testing validation studies, and draft ICCVAM- be submitted. Each submission for a situations. The Environmental proposed standardized test method chemical should preferably include the Protection Agency, Food and Drug protocols. following information, as appropriate: Administration, and the CPSC Request for Public Comments and • Common and trade name. subsequently accepted the method as a Nominations of Scientific Experts • Chemical Abstracts Service Registry valid substitute. The OECD also adopted Number (CASRN). NICEATM requests public comments the LLNA as OECD Test Guideline 429. • Chemical class. In January 2007, the CPSC submitted on the appropriateness and relative • Product class. a nomination to NICEATM (http:// priority of the nominated activities. • Commercial source. iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/SuppDocs/ NICEATM also requests the • nominations of scientists with relevant LLNA protocol used. submission.htm) requesting that • knowledge and experience to serve on Individual animal responses. ICCVAM assess the validation status of: • • The LLNA as a stand-alone test for the panel if a panel meeting occurs. The extent to which the study potency determinations (including Areas of relevant expertise include, but complied with national or international severity) for the purpose of hazard are not limited to: physiology, Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) classification. pharmacology, immunology, skin guidelines. • LLNA protocols that do not require sensitization testing in animals, • Date and testing organization. the use of radioactive materials. development and use of in vitro • Sensitization data from other test • The LLNA ‘‘cut-down’’ or ‘‘limit methodologies, biostatistics, knowledge methods. dose’’ procedure. about the use of chemical datasets for Consideration by SACATM • The ability of the LLNA to test validation of toxicity studies, and mixtures, aqueous solutions, and hazard classification of chemicals and On June 12, 2007, SACATM will meet metals. products. Each nomination should at the Marriott Bethesda North Hotel • The current applicability domain include the person’s name, affiliation, and Conference Center in Bethesda, (i.e., the types of chemicals and contact information (i.e., mailing Maryland. The agenda includes substances for which the LLNA has address, e-mail address, telephone and consideration of the nominated LLNA been determined to be useful). fax numbers), curriculum vitae, and a activities, priorities, and proposed Since 2003, ICCVAM has routinely brief summary of relevant experience activities http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/ developed performance standards for and qualifications. 7441) and an opportunity for oral public test methods; however, they were not comments. The SACATM meeting was developed for the LLNA, which was Request for Data announced in a separate Federal reviewed in 1999. Accordingly, NICEATM invites the submission of Register notice (Federal Register Vol. ICCVAM proposes to now develop data from standard LLNA testing (i.e., 72, No. 83, pp. 23831–32, May 1, 2007). performance standards for the LLNA. OECD TG 429) with mixtures, aqueous Performance standards communicate solutions, and/or metals, as well as Background Information on ICCVAM the basis by which new proprietary and corresponding data from human and and NICEATM nonproprietary test methods have been other animal studies. In addition, ICCVAM is an interagency committee determined to have sufficient relevance NICEATM invites the submission of composed of representatives from 15 and reliability for specific testing data supporting the use of (1) the LLNA federal regulatory and research agencies purposes. Performance standards based as a stand-alone test for determining that use or generate toxicological on test methods accepted by regulatory potency (including severity) for the information. ICCVAM conducts agencies can be used to evaluate the purpose of hazard classification, (2) the technical evaluations of new, revised, reliability and relevance of other test LLNA ‘‘cut-down’’ or ‘‘limit dose’’ and alternative methods with regulatory methods that are based on similar procedure, and (3) LLNA protocols that applicability and promotes the scientific scientific principles and measure or do not require the use of radioactivity. validation and regulatory acceptance of predict the same biological or toxic Although data can be accepted at any toxicological test methods that more effect. On January 24, 2007, ICCVAM time, data submitted by June 15, 2007, accurately assess the safety and hazards unanimously endorsed with a high will be considered during the ICCVAM of chemicals and products and that priority: (1) Developing performance evaluation process. Submitted data will refine, reduce, or replace animal use. standards for the LLNA and (2) be used to further evaluate the The ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000 initiating a review of the available data usefulness and limitations of the LLNA (42 U.S.C. 285l–3, available at http:// and information associated with the and may be incorporated into future iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/about/ CPSC nominated activities. A NICEATM and ICCVAM reports and PL106545.htm) establishes ICCVAM as a determination of which (if any) of the publications as appropriate. The data permanent interagency committee of the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27817

NIEHS under NICEATM. NICEATM authority to sign Federal Register notices Dated: May 10, 2007. administers ICCVAM and provides pertaining to announcements of meetings and Elaine L. Baker, scientific and operational support for other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Acting Director, Management Analysis and ICCVAM-related activities. NICEATM Substances and Disease Registry. Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and ICCVAM work collaboratively to and Prevention. Dated: May 10, 2007. evaluate new and improved test [FR Doc. E7–9479 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] methods applicable to the needs of Elaine L. Baker, BILLING CODE 4163–18–P federal agencies. Additional information Acting Director, Management Analysis and about ICCVAM and NICEATM is Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. available on the following Web site: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND [FR Doc. E7–9498 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov. HUMAN SERVICES BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Dated: May 8, 2007. David A. Schwartz, National Institutes of Health Director, National Institute of Environmental DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Proposed Collection; Comment Health Sciences and National Toxicology HUMAN SERVICES Program. Request; Physicians’ Experience of [FR Doc. E7–9544 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Centers for Disease Control and Ethical Dilemmas and Resource BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Prevention Allocation

Healthcare Infection Control Practices SUMMARY: In compliance with the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Advisory Committee (HICPAC): requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of HUMAN SERVICES Meeting the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, for opportunity for public comment on In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of Centers for Disease Control and proposed data collection projects, the Prevention the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease National Institute of Dental and Disease, Disability, and Injury Control and Prevention (CDC) Craniofacial Research (NIDCR), the Prevention and Control Special announces the aforementioned meeting. National Institutes of Health (NIH) will Emphasis Panel: Evaluation of publish periodic summaries of proposed Times and Dates: 8:30 a.m.–5 p.m., June projects to be submitted to the Office of Vaccination Reminder/Recall Systems 11, 2007. 8:30 a.m.–3 p.m., June 12, 2007. for Adolescent Patients, Funding Place: CDC Roybal Campus, Bldg 19, Management and Budget (OMB) for Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Auditorium B3, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., review and approval. Atlanta, GA 30333. IP07–007, Strategies to Reach the Proposed Collection ‘‘Unreachable’’ Through Immunization Status: Open to the public, limited only by Registries, FOA IP07–010, and Using the space available. Title: Physicians’ Experience of Purpose: The Committee is charged with Provider Reminder/Recall to Enhance providing advice and guidance to the Ethical Dilemmas and Resource Up-to-Date Coverage of 18-Month Olds, Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Health, Allocation. FOA IP07–012 the Director, CDC, and the Director, National Type of Information Collection Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID), Request: New. In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of regarding (1) the practice of hospital the Federal Advisory Committee Act infection control; (2) strategies for Need and Use of Information (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease surveillance, prevention, and control of Collection: Health care costs are rising Control and Prevention (CDC) infections (e.g., nosocomial infections), ceaselessly and there are currently no announces a meeting of the antimicrobial resistance, and related events generally accepted way of controlling aforementioned Special Emphasis in settings where healthcare is provided; and (3) periodic updating of guidelines and other them. This study will access the Panel. experience of physicians regarding Time and Date: 12 p.m.–4 p.m., June 18, policy statements regarding prevention of 2007 (Closed). healthcare-associated infections and resource allocation in clinical practice, Place: Teleconference. healthcare-related conditions. and how allocation decisions made at Status: The meeting will be closed to the Matters to be Discussed: Agenda items will other levels shapes this experience. The public in accordance with provisions set include: Guideline Planning, Discussion of primary objectives of the study are to forth in section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 Norovirus Guideline, Discussion of Urinary determine if physicians make decisions Track Infection Guideline, Healthcare U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, to withhold interventions on the basis of Management Analysis and Services Office, Infection Control Information Technology CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92–463. follow up and Surveillance Definitions cost, how often they report doing so, Matters to be Discussed: The meeting will discussion. what types of care are withheld, and include the review, discussion, and Agenda items are subject to change as what criteria are used in making such evaluation of research grant applications in priorities dictate. decisions. The findings will provide response to FOA IP07–007, ‘‘Evaluation of Contact Person for More Information: valuable information concerning: (1) Angela B. Scott, Committee Management Vaccination Reminder/Recall Systems for The practice of resource allocation in Adolescent Patients,’’ FOA IP07–010, Specialist, HICPAC, Division of Healthcare ‘‘Strategies to Reach the ‘‘Unreachable’’ Quality Promotion, NCID, CDC, l600 Clifton clinical practice, (2) the possible effects Through Immunization Registries,’’ and FOA Road, NE., M/S A–07, Atlanta, GA 30333, of perceived constraints on this practice, IP07–012, ‘‘Using Provider Reminder/Recall telephone 404/639–1526. and (3) international comparisons on to Enhance Up-to-Date Coverage of 18-Month The Director, Management Analysis and these two aspects. Olds.’’ Services Office, has been delegated the For Further Information Contact: Trudy authority to sign Federal Register notices Frequency of Response: Once. Messmer, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official, pertaining to announcements of meetings and Affected Public: Individuals or 1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop C–19, Atlanta, other committee management activities, for households; Businesses or other for- GA 30333, telephone (404) 639–3770. both the Centers for Disease Control and profit; Not-for-profit institutions. The Director, Management Analysis and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Services Office, has been delegated the Substances and Disease Registry. Type of Respondents: Physicians.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27818 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

The annual reporting burden is as Average Burden Hours Per Response: Capital Costs, Operating Costs and/or follows: .0.3674; and Maintenance Costs to report. Estimated Number of Respondents: Estimated Total Annual Burden 250; Hours Requested: 91.85. Estimated Number of Responses per The annualized cost to respondents is Respondent: 1; estimated at: $5,218. There are no

A.12–1.—ESTIMATES OF HOUR BURDEN

Average time Type of Number of Frequency of per Annual hour respondents respondents response response burden

Physicians (internists) ...... 250 1 0.3674 91.85

Total ...... 250 ...... 91.85

Request for Comments: Written DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND human antibody framework. comments and/or suggestions from the HUMAN SERVICES Additionally, the method identifies public and affected agencies are invited Specificity Determining Residues on one or more of the following points: National Institutes of Health (SDRs), the amino acid residues in the (1) Whether the proposed collection of hypervariable regions of an antibody information is necessary for the proper Government-Owned Inventions; that are most critical for antigen binding performance of the function of the Availability for Licensing activity and of rendering any antibody agency, including whether the AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, minimally immunogenic in humans by information will have practical utility; Public Health Service, HHS. transferring the SDRs of the antibody to a human antibody framework. The (2) The accuracy of the agency’s ACTION: Notice. estimate of the burden of the proposed resulting humanized antibodies, collection of information, including the SUMMARY: The inventions listed below including CDR variants thereof validity of the methodology and are owned by an agency of the U.S. (including a CH2 deleted version), are assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance Government and are available for also embodied in the invention, as are the quality, utility, and clarity of the licensing in the U.S. in accordance with methods of using the antibodies for information to be collected; and (4) 35 U.S.C. 207 to achieve expeditious therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. Ways to minimize the burden of the commercialization of results of Furthermore, these antibodies are collection of information on those who federally-funded research and suitable for radiolabeling for the are to respond, including the use of development. Foreign patent application in radioimmunotherapy appropriate automated, electronic, applications are filed on selected (RIT) based treatment of several cancers. mechanical, or other technological inventions to extend market coverage Phase I results of radioimmunotherapy 90 collection techniques or other forms of for companies and may also be available for ovarian cancer using Yttrium-CC49 information technology. for licensing. murine monoclonal antibodies have shown promising results and confirms ADDRESSES: Licensing information and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To feasibility of the use of these antibodies copies of the U.S. patent applications request more information on the for RIT. Promising pharmacokinetic data listed below may be obtained by writing proposed project or to obtain a copy of for the radiolabeled humanized to the indicated licensing contact at the the data collection plans and antibodies in colon carcinoma xenograft Office of Technology Transfer, National instruments, contact Dr. Marion Danis, models were recently published. Department of Clinical Bioethics, Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive Building 10, room 1C118, National Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, Applications and Modality Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD Maryland 20852–3804; telephone: 301/ 1. A humanized anti-cancer CC49 20892, or call non-toll-free number 301– 496–7057; fax: 301/402–0220. A signed monoclonal antibody has been 435–8727 or e-mail your request, Confidential Disclosure Agreement will developed. including your address to: be required to receive copies of the 2. New methods of humanization of [email protected]. patent applications. rodent antibodies have been identified. 3. The antibody(s) has been shown to Comments Due Date: Comments Humanized Anti-Carcinoma CC49 Monoclonal Antibodies react with Tumor Associated regarding this information collection are Glycoprotein 72 (TAG–72), an antigen best assured of having their full effect if Description of Technology: The which is expressed on human breast, received within 60-days of the date of technology describes the humanization ovarian, colorectal, and other this publication. of a murine anti-carcinoma antibody carcinomas. CC49 which has been shown to react David K. Henderson, 4. These antibodies are suitable for with Tumor Associated Glycoprotein 72 radiolabeling for the application in Deputy Director, Warren G. Magnuson (TAG–72), an antigen which is Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health. radioimmunotherapy (RIT) based expressed on human breast, ovarian, treatment of several cancers. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, colorectal, and other carcinomas. 5. These antibodies can be useful in Director, Department of Clinical Bioethics, The invention includes a new method diagnosis and treatment of several Warren G. Magnuson Clinical Center, of humanization of a rodent antibody cancers. National Institutes of Health. which is based on grafting all the Development Status: The technology [FR Doc. E7–9543 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Complementarity Determining Residues is currently in the pre-clinical stage of BILLING CODE 4140–01–P (CDRs) of a rodent antibody onto a development. Phase I results of

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27819

radioimmunotherapy for ovarian cancer 12. U.S. Patent No. 6,737,061 issued results support the greater effect of using 90Yttrium-CC49 murine May 18, 2004 [HHS Ref. No. D–001– TRICOM to activate both CD4+ and monoclonal antibodies have shown 1996/1–US–04]; CD8+ T cells. The invention also promising results and confirms 13. U.S. Patent No. 6,753,152 issued describes the use of at least one target feasibility of the use of these antibodies June 22, 2004 [HHS Ref. No. D–001– antigen or immunological epitope as an for radioimmunotherapy (RIT). 1996/1–US–05]; immunogen or vaccine in conjunction Inventors: Syed V. Kashmiri (NCI), 14. U.S. Patent No. 6,752,990 issued with TRICOM. The antigens include Eduardo A. Padlan (NIDDK), Jeffrey June 22, 2004 [HHS Ref. No. D–001– but are not limited to carcinoembryonic Schlom (NCI). 1996/1–US–06]; antigen (CEA), prostate-specific antigen 15. U.S. Patent No. 6,329,507 issued Publications (PSA), and MUC–1. December 11, 2001 [HHS Ref. No. D– The combination of CEA, MUC–1, and 1. RD Alvarez et al. A Phase I study 001–2006/0–US–01] and TRICOM is referred to as PANVAC 90 of combined modality Yttrium-CC49 16. U.S. Patent No. 6,071,515 issued and the combination of PSA and intraperitoneal radioimmunotherapy for June 6, 2000 [HHS Ref. No. D–001– TRICOM is referred to as PROSTVAC. ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2002 2006/0–US–03]. Licensing Availability: The technology Sep; 8(9):2806–2811. Licensing Availability: Available for is available for exclusive and non- 2. A Forero et al. A novel monoclonal exclusive and non-exclusive licensing. exclusive licensing in combinations and antibody design for Licensing Contact: Michelle Booden, for different fields of use. Some radioimmunotherapy. Cancer Biother PhD.; 301/451–7337; potential licensing opportunities are as Radiopharm. 2003 Oct;18(5):751–759. [email protected] follows: 3. PC Chinn et al. Pharmacokinetics Collaborative Research Opportunity: 1. TRICOM (alone or with a and tumor localization of (111) in- The National Cancer Institute’s transgene for a tumor antigen and/or an labeled HuCC49DeltaC(H)2 in BALB/c Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and immunostimulatory molecule); mice and athymic murine colon Biology is seeking statements of 2. The antigens only, including but carcinoma xenograft. Cancer Biother capability or interest from parties not limited to CEA, PSA, and MUC–1; Radiopharm. 2006 Apr;21(2):106–116. interested in collaborative research to 3. PANVAC and/or PROSTVAC; Patent Status further develop, evaluate, or and commercialize anti-carcinoma 1. U.S. Patent No. 6,818,749 issued 4. Recombinant fowlpox-GM–CSF. antibodies. Please contact John D. Application(s) and Modality: Vector- November 16, 2004 and U.S. Patent Hewes, Ph.D. at 301–435–3121 or based TRICOM (alone or with a Application 10/927,433 filed August 25, [email protected] for more transgene for a tumor antigen and/or an 2004 as well as issued and pending information. immunostimulatory molecule), foreign counterparts [HHS Ref. No. E–   259–1998]; Enhanced T-cell Activation by PANVAC and PROSTVAC and 2. European Patent No. 00365997 Costimulation: an Effective combinations thereof can be a potential issued September 14, 1994 and its Immunotherapy for Cancer and novel immunotherapeutic approach for counterpart in Japan [HHS Ref. Nos. D– Infectious Diseases the treatment of cancer and infectious diseases. 003–1992/0–EP–07 and D–003–1992/0– Description of Technology: Cancer JP–05]; immunotherapy is a recent approach Advantages 3. U.S. Patent No. 5,472,693 issued where tumor associated antigens 1. The technology is beyond proof-of- December 5, 1995 [HHS Ref. No. D–003– (TAAs), which are primarily expressed 1992/2–US–01]; concept, supported by laboratory results in human tumor cells and not expressed and publications. 4. U.S. Patent No. 6,051,225 issued or minimally expressed in normal April 18, 2000 [HHS Ref. No. D–003– 2. Phase I and Phase II clinical data tissues, are employed to generate a 1992/3–US–01]; available. tumor specific immune response. 5. U.S. Patent No. 5,993,813 issued 3. Fewer validation studies are November 30, 1999 [HHS Ref. No. D– Specifically, these antigens serve as required compared to other 003–1992/2–US–02]; targets for the host immune system and immunotherapy related technologies. 6. U.S. Patent No. 6,641,999 issued elicit responses that result in tumor Development Status: Phase I and November 4, 2003 [HHS Ref. No. D– destruction. The initiation of an Phase II results available for poxvirus 003–1992/2–US–04]; effective T-cell immune response to recombinants containing transgenes for 7. European Patent No. 628078 issued antigens requires two signals. The first TRICOM, CEA–TRICOM, PANVAC, December 8, 1999 and its counterparts one is antigen specific via the peptide/ and PROSTVAC. Further clinical in Japan, Canada and Australia [HHS major histocompatibility complex and studies are ongoing for other Ref. Nos. D–004–1992/0–EP–06, D–004– the second or ‘‘costimulatory’’ signal is combinations. 1992/0–JP–03, D–004–1992/0–CA–04 required for cytokine production, Inventors: Jeffrey Schlom (NCI) et al. proliferation, and other aspects of T-cell and D–004–1992/0–AU–05]; Publications 8. U.S. Patent No. 5,877,291 issued activation. March 2, 1999 [HHS Ref. No. D–004– The present technology describes 1. Kaufman HL, Cohen S, Cheung K, 1992/1–US–01]; recombinant poxvirus vectors encoding DeRaffele, Mitcham J, Moroziewicz D, 9. U.S. Patent No. 5,892,020 issued at least three or more costimulatory Schlom J, and Hesdorffer C. Local April 6, 1999 [HHS Ref. No. D–004– molecules and TAAs. The use of three delivery of vaccinia virus expressing 1992/1–US–01] and its foreign costimulatory molecules such as B7.1, multiple costimulatory molecules for  counterparts; ICAM–1 and LFA–3 (TRICOM ) has the treatment of established tumors. 10. Taiwanese Patent No. 173667 been shown to act in synergy with Human Gene Ther. 17:239–244, 2006. issued July 10, 2003 [HHS Ref. No. D– several tumor antigens and antigen 2. Kantoff PW GL, Tannenbaum SI, 001–1996/0–TW–03]; epitopes to activate T cells. The effects Bilhartz DL, Pittman WG, Schuetz TJ. 11. U.S. Patent No. 6,737,060 issued with TRICOM were significantly Randomized, double-blind, vector- May 18, 2004 [HHS Ref. No. D–001– greater than with one or two controlled study of targeted 1996/1–US–03]; costimulatory molecules. Laboratory immunotherapy in patients (pts) with

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27820 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

hormone-refractory prostate cancer immunity and long-term survival in 8. U.S. Patent Application Nos. 10/ (HRPC). 2006 ASCO Annual Meeting CEA.Tg/MIN mice. Cancer Res. 197,127 and 08/686,280 filed July 17, Proceedings, Part I, abstract 2501. J Clin 64:3668–3678, 2004. 2002 and July 25, 1996 [HHS Ref. No E– Oncol.; 24. 12. Palena C, Zhu M–Z, Schlom J, and 259–1994/3–US–08 and /4–US–01]; 3. Marshall J, Gulley JL, Arlen PM, Tsang K–Y. Human B cells that 9. U.S. Patent No. 6,946,133 issued Beetham PK, Tsang KY, Slack R, Hodge hyperexpress a triad of costimulatory September 20, 2005 as well as issued JW, Doren S, Grosenbach DW, Hwang J, molecules via avipoxvector infection: an and pending foreign counterparts [HHS Fox E, Odogwa L, Park S, Panicali D, alternative source of efficient antigen- Ref. No E–062–1996/0–US–01]; Schlom J. A phase I study of sequential presenting cells. Blood 104:192–199, 10. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/ vaccinations with fowlpox-CEA(6D)- 2004. 606,929 filed December 1, 2006 [E–062– TRICOM (B7–1/ICAM–1/LFA–3) alone 13. Kudo-Saito C, Schlom J, and 1996/0–US–11]; and sequentially with vaccinia- Hodge JW. Intratumoral vaccination and 11. U.S. Patent Nos. 6,893,869, CEA(6D)-TRICOM, with and without diversified subcutaneous/intratumoral 6,548,068 and 6,045,802 issued May 17, GM–CSF, in patients with CEA- vaccination with recombinant 2005, April 15, 2003 and April 4, 2000 expressing carcinomas. J Clin Oncol. poxviruses encoding a tumor antigen respectively, as well as issued and 23:720–731, 2005. and multiple costimulatory molecules. pending foreign counterparts [HHS Ref. 4. Palena C, Foon KA, Panicali D, Clin Cancer Res. 10:1090–1099, 2004. Nos. E–260–1994/1–US–03, US–02, US– Yafal AG, Chinsangaram J, Hodge JW, 14. Hodge JW, Poole DJ, Aarts WM, 01]; and Schlom J, and Tsang KY. A potential Gomez Yafal A, Gritz L, and Schlom J. 12. U.S. Patent. Application No. 11/ approach to immunotherapy of chronic Modified vaccinia virus ankara 090,686 filed March 8, 2005 [HHS Ref. lymphocytic leukemia (CLL): enhanced recombinants are as potent as vaccinia No E–260–1994/1–US–04]. immunogenicity of CLL cells via recombinants in diversified prime and Licensing Contact: Michelle Booden, infection with vectors encoding for boost vaccine regimens to elicit PhD, 301/451–7337; multiple costimulatory molecules. therapeutic antitumor responses. Cancer [email protected]. Cooperative Research and Blood 106:3515–3523, 2005. Res. 63:7942–7949, 2003. 5. Gulley J, Todd N, Dahut W, Schlom 15. Hodge JW, Grosenbach DW, Aarts Development Agreement (CRADA) J, Arlen P. A phase II study of Wm, Poole DJ, and Schlom J. Vaccine Opportunity: A CRADA partner for the further co-development of this PROSTVAC–VF vaccine, and the role of therapy of established tumors in the technology is currently being sought by GM–CSF, in patients (pts) with absence of autoimmunity. Clin Cancer the Laboratory of Tumor Immunology metastatic androgen insensitive prostate Res. 9:1837–1849, 2003. cancer (AIPC) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 16. Aarts WM, Schlom J, and Hodge and Biology, Center for Cancer 2005; 23 (16S Pt 1): 2504. JW. Vector-based vaccine/cytokine Research, NCI. 6. Yang S, Hodge JW, Grosenbach DW, The CRADA partner will: combination therapy to enhance 1. Generate and characterize and Schlom J. Vaccines with enhanced induction of immune responses to a recombinant poxviruses expressing costimulation maintain high avidity self-antigen and anti-tumor activity. specific tumor-associated antigens, memory CTL. J. Immunol. 175:3715– Cancer Res. 62:5770–5777, 2002. cytokines, and/or T-cell costimulatory 3723, 2005. 17. Hodge JW, Sabzevari H, Yafal AG, factors, 7. Yang S, Tsang KY, and Schlom J. Gritz L, Lorenz MG, Schlom J. A triad 2. Analyze the recombinant Induction of higher avidity human CTL of costimulatory molecules synergize to poxviruses containing these genes with by vector-mediated enhanced amplify T-cell activation. Cancer Res. respect to appropriate expression of the costimulation of antigen-presenting 59: 5800–5807, 1999. encoded gene product(s), cells. Clin Cancer Res. 11:5603–5615, Patent Status 3. Supply adequate amounts of 2005. recombinant virus stocks for preclinical 8. Hodge JW, Chakraborty M, Kudo- 1. U.S. Patent No. 6,969,609 issued testing, Saito C, Garnett CT, Schlom J. Multiple November 29, 2005 as well as issued 4. Manufacture and test selected costimulatory modalities enhance CTL and pending foreign counterparts [HHS recombinant viruses for use in human avidity. J Immunol. 174:5994–6004, Ref. No. E–256–1998/0]; clinical trials, 2005. 2. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/ 5. Submit Drug Master Files detailing 9. Tsang K–Y, Palena C, Yokokawa J, 321,868 filed December 30, 2005 [HHS the development, manufacture, and Arlen PM, Gulley JL, Mazzara GP, Gritz Ref. No. E–256–1998/1]; and testing of live recombinant vaccines to L, Go´mez Yafal A, Ogueta S, Greenhalgh 3. U.S. Patent No. 6,756,038 issued support the NCI-sponsored INDs, P, Manson K, Panicali D, and Schlom J. June 29, 2004 as well as issued and 6. Supply adequate amounts of Analyses of recombinant vaccinia and pending foreign counterparts [HHS Ref. clinical grade recombinant poxvirus fowlpox vaccine vectors expressing No. E–099–1996/0]; vaccines for clinical trials conducted at transgenes for two human tumor 4. U.S. Patent No. 6,001,349 issued the NCI Center for Cancer Research antigens and three human costimulatory December 14, 1999 as well as issued and (CCR), and molecules. Clin Cancer Res. 11:1597– pending foreign counterparts [HHS Ref. 7. Provide adequate amounts of 1607, 2005. No E–200–1990/3–US–01]; vaccines for extramural clinical trials 10. Chakraborty M, Abrams SI, 5. U.S. Patent No. 6,165,460 issued through a clinical agreement with the Coleman CN, Camphausen K, Schlom J, December 26, 2000; as well as issued Division of Cancer Treatment and Hodge JW. External beam radiation of and pending foreign counterparts [HHS Diagnosis, NCI. tumors alters phenotype of tumor cells Ref. No E–200–1990/4–US–01]; NCI will: to render them susceptible to vaccine- 6. U.S. Patent No. 7,118,738 issued 1. Provide genes of tumor-associated mediated T-cell killing. Cancer Res. October 10, 2006 as well as issued and antigens, cytokines and other 64:4328–4337, 2004. pending foreign counterparts [HHS Ref. immunostimulatory molecules for 11. Zeytin HE, Patel AC, Rogers CJ, et No E–154–1998/0–US–07]; incorporation into poxvirus vectors, al. Combination of a poxvirus-based 7. PCT Application No. PCT/US97/ 2. Evaluate recombinant vectors in vaccine with a cyclooxygenase-2 12203 filed July 15, 1997 [HHS Ref. No preclinical models alone and in inhibitor (celecoxib) elicits antitumor E–259–1994/3–PCT–02]; combination therapies,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27821

3. Conduct clinical trials of Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Dated: May 8, 2007. recombinant vaccines alone and in Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Jennifer Spaeth, combination therapies, and applications. Director, Office of Federal Advisory 4. Provide Drug Master Files currently Place: Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Committee Policy. supporting the clinical use of the Road, Bethesda, MD 20814. [FR Doc. 07–2425 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Contact Person: Martina Schmidt, Ph.D, recombinant poxvirus vaccines. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M If interested in the above described Scientific Review Administrator, Office of CRADA, please submit a statement of Scientific Review, National Center for interest and capability to Kevin Chang, Complementary, and Alternative Medicine, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND PhD, in the NCI Technology Transfer NIH, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 401, HUMAN SERVICES Center at [email protected] or 301– Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–3456. 496–0477. [email protected]. National Institutes of Health Dated: May 8, 2007. Dated: May 11, 2007. National Eye Institute; Notice of Steven M. Ferguson, Jennifer Spaeth, Meeting Director, Division of Technology Development Director, Office of Federal Advisory and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the National Institutes of Health. [FR Doc. 07–2427 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Federal Advisory Committee Act, as [FR Doc. E7–9541 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140–01–M amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice BILLING CODE 4140–01–P is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Eye Council. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND The meeting will be open to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES public as indicated below, with HUMAN SERVICES attendance limited to space available. National Institutes of Health National Institutes of Health Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign National Center for Complementary National Eye Institute; Notice of Open language interpretation or other and Alternative Medicine; Notice of Meeting reasonable accommodations, should Closed Meeting notify the Contact Person listed below The National Eye Institute will host in advance of the meeting. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the an Ocular Epidemiology Program The meeting will be closed to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Planning Panel Meeting to discuss public in accordance with the amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice research needs and opportunities in provisions set forth in sections is hereby given of the following ocular epidemiology. The meeting will 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., meetings. be open to the public. as amended. The grant applications and The meetings will be closed to the the discussions could disclose public in accordance with the The thoughts and input from this confidential trade secrets or commercial provisions set forth in sections meeting will be given by the panel property such as patentable material, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., members individually and incorporated and personal information concerning as amended. The grant applications and into a report that will be given to the individuals associated with the grant the discussions could disclose National Eye Institute. applications, the disclosure of which confidential trade secrets or commercial Name of Panel: Ocular Epidemiology would constitute a clearly unwarranted property such as patentable material, Panel. invasion of personal privacy. and personal information concerning Date: May 24–25, 2007. Name of Committee: National Advisory individuals associated with the grant Time: 8 a.m.–5 p.m. Eye Council. applications, the disclosure of which Agenda: To discuss the Ocular would constitute a clearly unwarranted Date: June 7, 2007. Epidemiology Research. Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. invasion of personal privacy. Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Center for Bethesda Metro Center, (7400 Wisconsin applications. Complementary and Alternative Medicine Avenue), Bethesda, MD 20814. Place: National Institutes of Health, Special Emphasis Panel; Basic Science. Contact Person: Mr. Michael Davis, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Date: June 11–12, 2007. Associate Director for Science Policy and Conference Room D, Bethesda, MD 20892. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Legislation, National Eye Institute, Bldg. 31; Open: 10:30 a.m. to Adjournment. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Room 6A25, 31 Center Drive MSC 2510, Agenda: Following opening remarks by the applications. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496–4308. Director, NEI there will be presentations by Place: Courtyard Marriott, Washingtonian This notice is being published less than 15 the staff of the Institute and discussions Center, 240 Boardwalk Place (Rio), concerning Institute programs. days prior to the meeting due to the timing Gaithersburg, MD 20878. Place: National Institutes of Health, Contact Person: Dale L. Birkle, Ph.D, limitations imposed by the review and Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Scientific Review Administrator, Office of funding cycle. Conference Room D, Bethesda, MD 20892. Scientific Review, National Center for Any interested person may file written Contact Person: Lore Anne McNicol, PhD, Complementary, and Alternative Medicine, comments with the panel by forwarding the Director, Division of Extramural Research, NIH, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 401, statement to the Contact Person listed on this National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451–6570. notice. The statement should include the Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451–2020. [email protected]. name, address, telephone number and when Any interested person may file written Name of Committee: National Center for applicable, the business or professional comments with the committee by forwarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine affiliation of the interested person. the statement to the Contact Person listed on Special Emphasis Panel; Centers of this notice. The statement should include the Excellence for Research on Complementary (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance name, address, telephone number and when and Alternative Medicine. Program Nos. 93.867, Vision Research, applicable, the business or professional Date: June 20–22, 2007. National Institutes of Health, HHS) affiliation of the interested person.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27822 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

In the interest of security, NIH has Dated: May 8, 2007. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice instituted stringent procedures for entrance Jennifer Spaeth, is hereby given of the following onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, Director, Office of Federal Advisory meetings. including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles Committee Policy. will be inspected before being allowed on The meetings will be closed to the campus. Visitors will be asked to show one [FR Doc. 07–2429 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] public in accordance with the form of identification (for example, a BILLING CODE 4140–01–M provisions set forth in sections government-issued photo ID, driver’s license, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit. DEPARTMENT OF HEATLH AND as amended. The grant applications and Information is also available on the HUMAN SERVICES the discussions could disclose Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// confidential trade secrets or commercial www.nei.nih.gov, where an agenda and any National Institutes of Health property such as patentable material, additional information for the meeting will and personal information concerning be posted when available. National Human Genome Research individuals associated with the grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting applications, the disclosure of which Program Nos. 93.867, Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Pursuant to section 10(d) of the would constitute a clearly unwarranted Federal Advisory Committee Act, as invasion of personal privacy. Dated: May 11, 2007. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Jennifer Spaeth, Name of Committee: Microbiology, is hereby given of the following Infectious Diseases and AIDS Initial Review Director, Office of Federal Advisory meeting. Group; Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Committee Policy. The meeting will be closed to the B Subcommittee; MID–B, June 2007. [FR Doc. 07–2452 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] public in accordance with the Date: June 6, 2007. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M provisions set forth in sections Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Agenda: To review and evaluate grant as amended. The grant applications and applications. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND the discussions could disclose Place: Holiday Inn Georgetown, 2101 HUMAN SERVICES confidential trade secrets or commercial Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC property such as patentable material, 20007. National Institutes of Health and personal information concerning Contact Person: Gary S. Madonna, PhD, individuals associated with the grant Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific National Human Genome Research applications, the disclosure of which Review Program, Division of Extramural Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting would constitute a clearly unwarranted Activities, National Institutes of Health/ invasion of personal privacy. NIAID, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Name of Committee: National Human Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–496–3528, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as [email protected]. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Genome Research Institute Initial Review Group; Genome Research Review Committee. is hereby given of the following Name of Committee: Microbiology, Date: June 8, 2007. Infectious Diseases and AIDS Initial Review meeting. Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Group; Microbiology and Infectious Diseases The meeting will be closed to the Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Research Committee; MID, June 2007. public in accordance with the applications. Place: National Institutes of Health, 5635 Date: June 7–8, 2007. provisions set forth in sections Fishers Lane, Bethesda, MD 20892 Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., (Telephone Conference Call). Agenda: To review and evaluate grant as amended. The grant applications and Contact Person: Ken D. Nakamura, PhD, applications. the discussions could disclose Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville confidential trade secrets or commercial Scientific Review, National Human Genome (Previously the Double Tree), 1750 Rockville property such as patentable material, Research Institute, National Institutes of Pike, Regency Room, Rockville, MD 20852. Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402–0838. and personal information concerning Contact Person: Annie Walker-Abbey, PhD, individuals associated with the grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Program Nos. 93.172, Human Genome Review Program, Division of Extramural applications, the disclosure of which Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS). would constitute a clearly unwarranted Activities, NIH/NIAID/DHHS, 6700B invasion of personal privacy. Dated: May 9, 2007. Rockledge Drive, RM. 3126, Bethesda, MD Jennifer Spaeth, 20892–7616, 301–451–2671, Name of Committee: National Human Director, Office of Federal Advisory [email protected]. Genome Research Institute Special Emphasis Committee Policy. Panel; MAP Review Panel. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Date: June 29, 2007. [FR Doc. 07–2432 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Time: 2 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Microbiology and Infectious Diseases applications. Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Place: National Institutes of Health, 5635 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Dated: May 8, 2007. Fishers Lane, Bethesda, MD 20892 HUMAN SERVICES (Telephone Conference Call). Jennifer Spaeth, Contact Person: Rudy O. Pozzatti, PhD, National Institutes of Health Director, Office of Federal Advisory Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Committee Policy. Scientific Review, National Human Genome National Institute of Allergy and [FR Doc. 07–2426 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Research Institute, National Institutes of Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402–0838. Meetings (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human Genome Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Federal Advisory Committee Act, as

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27823

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Dated: May 8, 2007. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Jennifer Spaeth, HUMAN SERVICES Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Institutes of Health Committee Policy. National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and [FR Doc. 07–2428 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] National Institute of Neurological Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Disorders and Stroke; Amended Notice of Meeting of Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Notice is hereby given of a change in Federal Advisory Committee Act, as HUMAN SERVICES the meeting of the National Advisory amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Neurological Disorders and Stroke is hereby given of the following National Institutes of Health Council, May 24, 2007, 8 a.m. to May meeting. 24, 2007, 10 a.m., National Institutes of The meetig will be open to the public National Institute of Allergy and Health, Building 31, 31 Center Drive, as indicated below, with attendance Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Bethesda, MD 20892 which was limited to space availalbe. Individuals Meeting published in the Federal Register on who plan to attend and need special May 1, 2007, FR: 07–2128; 72. assistance, such as sign language Pursuant to section 10(d) of the The Clinical Trials Subcommittee interpretation or other reasonable Federal Advisory Committee Act, as meeting scheduled for May 24, 2007, accommodations, should notify the amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice open and closed sessions have changed Contact person listed below in advance is hereby given of the following to closed from 8–8:45 a.m. and open of the meeting. meeting. from 8:45–10 a.m. The meeting is The meeting will be closed to the The meeting will be closed to the partially closed to the public. public in accordance with the public in accordance with the Dated: May 8, 2007. provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., provisions set forth in sections Jennifer Spaeth, as amended. The grant applications and 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Director, Office of Federal Advisory the discussions could disclose as amended. The grant applications and Committee Policy. confidential trade secrets or commercial the discussions could disclose [FR Doc. 07–2431 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] property such as patentable material confidential trade secrets or commercial BILLING CODE 4140–01–M and personal information concerning property such as patentable material, individuals associated with the grant and personal information concerning applications, the disclosure of which individuals associated with the grant DEPARTMENT OF HEATLH AND would constitute a clearly unwarranted applications, the disclosure of which HUMAN SERVICES would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. National Institutes of Health Name of Committee: National Institute of invasion of personal privacy. Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Name of Committee: National Institute of National Institute of Arthritis and initial Review Group, Digestive Diseases and Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; Nutrition C Subcommittee. Emphasis Panel; Integrated Preclinical/ Notice of Meeting Date: June 28–29, 2007. Clinical Program for HIV Topical Open: June 28, 2007, 2 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. Microbicides. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Agenda: To review procedures and discuss Federal Advisory Committee Act, as policy. Date: June 7–8, 2007. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Place: Courtyard by Marriott Crystal City, is hereby given of a meeting of the 2899 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 22202. applications. National Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Closed: June 28, 2007, 2:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. Place: Hilton/Washington, DC/Rockville, and Skin Diseases Advisory Council. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Executive Meeting Center, 1750 Rockville The meeting will be open to the applications. Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. public in indicated below, with Place: Courtyard by Marriott Crystal City, Contact Person: Clayton C. Huntley, PhD, attendance limited to space available. 2899 Jefferson David Highway, Arlington, VA Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Individuals who plan to attend and 22202. Review Program, Division of Extramural need special assistance, such as sign Closed: June 29, 2007, 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. Activities, National Institutes of Health/ language interpretation or other Agenda: To review and evaluate grant reasonable accommodations, should applications. NIAID/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC Place: Courtyard by Marriott Crystal City, 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892–7616, 301–451– notify the Contact Person listed below 2899 Jefferson David Highway, Arlington, VA 2570, [email protected]. in advance of the meeting. 22202. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance The meeting will be closed to the Contact Person: Dan E. Matsumoto, PhD, Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, public in accordance with the Scientific Review Administrator, Review and Transplantation Research; 93.856, provisions set forth in sections Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S., Health, Room 749, 6707 Democracy Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) as amended. The grant applications and Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892–5452, (301) the discussions could disclose 594–8894, [email protected]. Dated: May 8, 2007. confidential trade secrets or commercial (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Jennifer Spaeth, property such as patentable material, Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Director, Office of Federal Advisory and personal information concerning Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; Committee Policy. 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition individuals associated with the grant Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology [FR Doc. 07–2430 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] applications, the disclosure of which and Hematology Research, National Institutes BILLING CODE 4140–01–M would constitute a clearly unwarranted of Health, HHS) invasion of personal privacy.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27824 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Name of Committee: National Arthritis and individuals associated with the contract Executive Blvd., Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Advisory proposals, the disclosure of which 20892, (301) 435–6902, [email protected]. Council. would constitute a clearly unwarranted (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Date: June 12, 2007. invasion of personal privacy. Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; Open: 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; Agenda: To discuss administrative details Name of Committee: National Institute of 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin relating to Council business and special Research; 93.209, Contraception and reports. Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Place: National Institutes of Health, Clearinghouse Contract Review. Institutes of Health, HHS) Building 31, 31 Center Drive, Conference Date: June 5, 2007. Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892. Time: 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Dated: May 9, 2007. Closed: 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Jennifer Spaeth, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Director, Office of Federal Advisory applications. Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Committee Policy. Place: National Institutes of Health, Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. Building 31, 31 Center Drive, Conference Contact Person: Helen Lin, PhD, Scientific [FR Doc. 07–2435 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892. Review Administrator, NIH/NIAMS/RB, 6701 BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Contact Person: Madeline K. Turkeltaub, Democracy Blvd., Suite 800, Plaza One, Phd, Deputy Director, Extramural Program, Bethesda, MD 20817, 301–594–4952, NIH/NIAMS, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 [email protected]. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Democracy Blvd., Suite 800, MSC 4872, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance HUMAN SERVICES Bethesda, MD 20892–4872, 301–451–5888, Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, [email protected]. Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health Any interested person may file written National Institutes of Health, HHS). comments with the committee by forwarding Dated: May 9, 2007. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse the statement to the Contact Person listed on and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed this notice. The statement should include the Jennifer Spaeth, name, address, telephone number and when Director, Office of Federal Advisory Meeting applicable, the business or professional Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the affiliation of the interested person. [FR Doc. 07–2434 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] In the interest of security, NIH has Federal Advisory Committee Act, as instituted procedures for entrance onto the BILLING CODE 4140–01–M amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including is hereby given of the following taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be meeting. inspected before allowed on campus. Visitors DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND will be asked to show one form of HUMAN SERVICES The meeting will be closed to the identification (for example, a government- public in accordance with the issued photo ID, driver’s license, or passoirt) National Institutes of Health provisions set forth in sections and to state the purpose of their visit. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistant National Institute of Child Health and as amended. The grant applications and Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, Human Development, Notice of Closed the discussions could disclose Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, Meeting confidential trade secrets or commercial National Institutes of Health, HHS) Pursuant to section 10(d) of the property such as patentable material, Dated: May 9, 2007. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as and personal information concerning Jennifer Spaeth, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice individuals associated with the grant Director, Office of Federal Advisory is hereby given of the following applications, the disclosure of which Committee Policy. meeting. would constitute a clearly unwarranted [FR Doc. 07–2433 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] The meeting will be closed to the invasion of personal privacy. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M public in accordance with the Name of Committee: National Institute on provisions set forth in sections Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Initial 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Review Group; Biomedical Research Review DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND as amended. The contract proposals and Subcommittee. HUMAN SERVICES the discussions could disclose Date: June 4–5, 2007. confidential trade secrets or commercial Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant property such as patentable material, applications. National Institute of Arthritis and and personal information concerning Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, Rockville, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; individuals associated with the contract MD 20852. Notice of Closed Meeting proposals, the disclosure of which Contact Person: Philippe Marmillot, PhD, would constitute a clearly unwarranted Scientific Review Administrator, NIH/ Pursuant to section 10(d) of the invasion of personal privacy. NIAAA, OEA, room 3045, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852, 301–443–2861, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Name of Committee: National Institute of [email protected]. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Child Health and Human Development This notice is being published less than 15 is hereby given of the following Special Emphasis Panel, National Children’s days prior to the meeting due to the timing meeting. Study—East Coast Review. The meeting will be closed to the Date: June 10–12, 2007. limitations imposed by the review and public in accordance with the Time: 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. funding cycle. provisions set forth in sections Agenda: To review and evaluate contract (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., proposals. Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Developmental Awards for Scientists as amended. The contract proposals and Place: Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 20814. and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National the discussions could disclose Contact Person: Hameed Khan, PhD, Research Service Awards for Research confidential trade secrets or commercial Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; property such as patentable material, Scientific Review, National Institute of Child 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants, and personal information concerning Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 National Institutes of Health, HHS)

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27825

Dated: May 9, 2007. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND is hereby given of the following Jennifer Spaeth, HUMAN SERVICES meeting. Director, Office of Federal Advisory The meeting will be closed to the Committee Policy. National Institutes of Health public in accordance with the [FR Doc. 07–2436 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] provisions set forth in sections National Institute on Alcohol Abuse 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., BILLING CODE 4140–01–M and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed as amended. The grant applications and Meeting the discussions could disclose DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Pursuant to section 10(d) of the confidential trade secrets or commercial HUMAN SERVICES Federal Advisory Committee Act, as property such as patentable material, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice and personal information concerning National Institutes of Health is hereby given of the following individuals associated with the grant meeting. applications, the disclosure of which National Institute on Alcohol Abuse The meeting will be closed to the would constitute a clearly unwarranted and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed public in accordance with the invasion of personal privacy. Meeting provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: National Institute on 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Pursuant to section 10(d) of the as amended. The grant applications and Emphasis Panel HH-90 Alcohol Education Federal Advisory Committee Act, as the discussions could disclose Project Grants (R25). amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice confidential trade secrets or commercial Date: July 26, 2007. is hereby given of the following property such as patenable material, and Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant meeting. personal information concerning applications. The meeting will be closed to the individuals associated with the grant Place: Doubletree Hotel and Executive public in accordance with the applications, the disclosure of which Meeting Center, Bethesda, MD. provisions set forth in sections would constitute a clearly unwarranted Contact Person: Lorraine Gunzerath PhD, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., invasion of personal privacy. MBA, Scientific Review Administrator, as amended. The grant applications and National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcoholism, Office of Extramural Activities, Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special the discussions could disclose Extramural Project Review Branch, 5635 Emphasis Panel HH–91 SEP. confidential trade secrets or commercial Fishers Lane, Room 3043, Bethesda, MD Date: June 27, 2007. property such as patentable material, 20892–9304, 301–443–2369, Time: 8:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. and personal information concerning [email protected]. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant individuals associated with the grant applications. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance applications, the disclosure of which Place: Doubletree Hotel and Executive Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research would constitute a clearly unwarranted Meeting Center, Bethesda, MD. Career, Development Awards for Scientists invasion of personal privacy. Contact Person: Lorraine Gunzerath, PhD, and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National MBA, Scientific Review Administrator, Research Service Awards for Research Name of Committee: National Institute on National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Initial Alcoholism, Office of Extramural Activities, 93.892, Alcohol Research Center Grants, Review Group, Health Services and Extramural Project Review Branch, 5635 National Institutes of Health, HHS). Behavioral Research Review Subcommittee. Fishers Lane, Room 3043, Bethesda, MD Dated: May 11, 2007. Date: June 27–28, 2007. 20892–9304, 301–443–2369, Jennifer Spaeth, Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. [email protected]. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. applications. Program Nos. 92.271, Alcohol Research Place: Doubletree Hotel & Executive Career Development Awards for Scientists [FR Doc. 07–2444 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Meeting Center, Bethesda, MD. and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Research Service Awards for Research Contact Person: Lorraine Gunzerath, PhD, Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; MBA, Scientific Review Administrator, 92.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and National Institutes of Health, HHS) Alcoholism, Office of Extramural Activities, HUMAN SERVICES Dated: May 11, 2007. Extramural Project Review Branch, 5635 National Institutes of Health Fishers Lane, Room 3043, Bethesda, MD Jennifer Spaeth, 20892–9304, 301–443–2369, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. National Institute of Dental & [email protected]. Craniofacial Research; Notice of [FR Doc. 07–2443 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Closed Meetings Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Career Development Awards for Scientists Pursuant to section 10(d) of the and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Research Service Awards for Research DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; HUMAN SERVICES is hereby given of the following 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants, meetings. National Institutes of Health National Institutes of Health, HHS) The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the Dated: May 11, 2007 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse provisions set forth in sections Jennifer Spaeth, and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Meeting 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Director, Office of Federal Advisory as amended. The grant applications and Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the the discussions could disclose [FR Doc. 07–2442 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Federal Advisory Committee Act, as confidential trade secrets or commercial BILLING CODE 4140–01–M amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice property such as patentable material,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:31 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27826 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., individuals associated with the grant applications. as amended. The grant applications and applications, the disclosure of which Place: National Institutes of Health, the discussions could disclose would constitute a clearly unwarranted Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, confidential trade secrets or commercial MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). invasion of personal privacy. Contact Person: Sooyoun (Sonia) Kim, MS, property such as patentable material, Name of Committee: National Institute of 45 Center Dr., 4An 32B, Division of and personal information concerning Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Extramural Research, National Inst. of Dental individuals associated with the grant Emphasis Panel 07–61, Review R01s. & Craniofacial Research, National Institutes applications, the disclosure of which Date: June 6, 2007. of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594– would constitute a clearly unwarranted Time: 4 pm to 5 pm. 4827, [email protected]. invasion of personal privacy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Institute of Name of Committee: National Institute of applications. Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Place: National Institutes of Health, Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel 07–65, Review R21. Emphasis Panel, NIAID Competing Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Date: June 28, 2007. MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). Supplements (revisions) for B Cell Time: 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. Immunology and HIV–1 Neutralizing Contact Person: Sooyoun (Sonia) Kim, MS, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 45 Center Dr, 4An 32B, Division of Antibody Projects (R01). applications. Date: June 11, 2007. Extramural Research, National Inst. of Dental Place: National Institutes of Health, & Craniofacial Research, National Institute of Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–4827, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). kims&email.nidr.nih.gov. applications. Contact Person: Sooyoun (Sonia) Kim, MS, Place: Bethesda North Marriott and Name of Committee: National Institute of 45 Center Dr., 4An 32B, Division of Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Extramural Research, National Inst. of Dental North Bethesda, MD 20852. Emphasis Panel 07–66, Review R21. & Craniofacial Research, National Institutes Contact Person: Quirijn Vos, PhD, Date: June 13, 2007. of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594– Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Time: 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. 4827, [email protected]. Review Program, Division of Extramural Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Institute of Activities, National Institutes of Health/ applications. Dental and Craniofacial Research Special NIAID, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Place: National Institutes of Health, Emphasis Panel 07–58, Review R21s. Bethesda, MD 20892–7616, 301–496–2550, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Date: August 9, 2007. [email protected]. MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). Time: 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Name of Committee: National Institute of Contact Person: Sooyoun (Sonia) Kim, MS, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 45 Center Dr. 4An 32B, Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special applications. Emphasis Panel, Mechanisms of Extramural Research, National Inst. of Dental Place: National Institutes of Health, & Craniofacial Research, National Institute of Autoimmunity Program Project. Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Date; June 14, 2007. Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–4827, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). kims&email.nidr.nih.gov. Time: 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Contact Person: Peter Zelazowski, PhD, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Institute of Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific applications. Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Review Branch, Division of Extramural Place: National Institutes of Health, Emphasis Panel 07–63, Review R21. Activities, National Inst. of Dental & Rockledge 6700, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Date: June 14, 2007. Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Room 3119, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Time: 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. Health, Bethesda, MD 20892–6402, 301–593– Conference Call). Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 4861, [email protected]. Contact Person: Thomas J. Palker, PhD, applications. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Place: National Institutes of Health, Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and Review Program, DHHS/NIH/NIAID/DEA, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Disorders Research, National Institutes of Room 2217, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC– MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). Health, HHS) 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892–7616, 301–496– Contact Person: Sooyoun (Sonia) Kim, MS, 2550, [email protected]. 45 Center Dr, 4An 32B, Division of Dated: May 11, 2007. Extramural Research, National Inst. of Dental Jennifer Spaeth, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, & Craniofacial Research, National Institute of Director, Office of Federal Advisory and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–4827, Committee Policy. kims&email.nidr.nih.gov. Microbiology and Infectious Diseases [FR Doc. 07–2446 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Name of Committee: National Institute of BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Dated: May 11, 2007. Emphasis Panel 07–64, Review R21. Jennifer Spaeth, Date: June 25, 2007. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Director, Office of Federal Advisory Time: 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. Committee Policy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant HUMAN SERVICES [FR Doc. 07–2447 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] applications. Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Health BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). National Institute of Allergy and Contact Person: Yujing Liu, MD, PhD, Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Scientific Review Administrator, National Meetings HUMAN SERVICES Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Res., 45 Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Center Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN38E, National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–3169, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as [email protected]. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice National Institute on Aging; Notice of Name of Committee: National Institute of is hereby given of the following Closed Meetings Dental and Craniofacial Research Special meetings. Emphasis Panel 07–62, Review R21. The meetings will be closed to the Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Date: June 27, 2007. public in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Time: 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. provisions set forth in sections amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27827

is hereby given of the following Review Office, National Institute on Aging, government-issued photo ID, driver’s license, meetings. Gateway Bld., 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin or passport) and to state the purpose of their The meetings will be closed to the Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814, 301–402– visit. public in accordance with the 7701, [email protected]. Information is also available on the (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Institute’s/Center’s home page: provisions set forth in sections www4.od.nih.gov/oba/, where an agenda and 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) any additional information for the meeting as amended. The grant applications and will be posted when available. the discussions could disclose Dated: May 11, 2007. OMB’s ‘‘Mandatory Information confidential trade secrets or commercial Jennifer Spaeth, Requirements for Federal Assistance Program property such as patentable material, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Announcements’’ (45 FR 39592, June 11, and personal information concerning Committee Policy. 1980) requires a statement concerning the individuals associated with the grant [FR Doc. 07–2448 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] official government programs contained in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. applications, the disclosure of which BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Normally NIH lists in its announcements the would constitute a clearly unwarranted number and title of affected individual invasion of personal privacy. programs for the guidance of the public. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Name of Committee: National Institute on Because the guidance in this notice covers Aging Initial Review Group, Neuroscience of HUMAN SERVICES virtually every NIH and Federal research program in which DNA recombinant Aging Review Committee. National Institutes of Health Date: June 4–5, 2007. molecule techniques could be used, it has been determined not to be cost effective or Time: 3 p.m. to 3 p.m. Office of the Director, National Agenda: To review and evaluate grant in the public interest to attempt to list these applications. Institutes of Health; Notice of Meeting programs. Such a list would likely require Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 several additional pages. In addition, NIH Pursuant to section 10(a) of the could not be certain that every Federal Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Contact Person: Louise L. Hsu, PhD, Health program would be included as many Federal Scientist Administrator, Scientific Review amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice agencies, as well as private organizations, Office, National Institute on Aging, Gateway is hereby given of a meeting of the both national and international, have elected Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue/Suite Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee. to follow the NIH Guidelines. In lieu of the 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496–7705, The meeting will be open to the individual program listing NIH invites [email protected]. public, with attendance limited to space readers to direct questions to the information above about whether individual programs Name of Committee: National Institute on available. Individuals who plan to listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Aging Initial Review Group, Behavior and attend and need special assistance, such Assistance are affected. Social Science of Aging Review Committee. as sign language interpretation or other Date: June 7–8, 2007. reasonable accommodations, should (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Time: 4 p.m. to 2 p.m. Program Nos. 93.14, Intramural Research notify the Contact Person listed below Training Award; 93.22, Clinical Research Agenda: To review and evaluate grant in advance of the meeting. applications. Loan Repayment Program for Individuals Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Name of Committee: Recombinant DNA from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; 93.232, Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. Advisory Committee. Loan Repayment Program for Research Contact Person: Jon E. Rolf, PhD, Scientific Date: June 19–21, 2007. Generally; 93.39, Academic Research Review Administrator, Scientific Review Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Enhancement Award; 93.936, NIH Acquired Office, National Institute on Aging, National Agenda: The Recombinant DNA Advisory Immunodeficiency Syndrome Research Loan Institutes of Health, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue/ Committee will review and discuss selected Repayment Program; 93.187, Undergraduate Room 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) human gene transfer protocols as well as Scholarship Program for Individuals from 402–7703, [email protected]. related data management acivities. There will Disadvantaged Backgrounds, National be a discussion of recent results regarding Institutes of Health, HHS). Name of Committee: National Institute on immune responses to AAV vectors and a Aging Initial Review Group, Clinical Aging Dated: May 11, 2007. discussion of proposed experiments Review Committee. involving Chlamydia Trachomatis that would Jennifer Spaeth, Date: June 7–8, 2007. require a Major Action under section III–A– Director, Office of Federal Advisory Time: 6 p.m. to 5 p.m. 1 of the NIH Guidelines for Research. Committee Policy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: National Institutes of Health, applications. [FR Doc. 07–2445 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Building 31, 31 Center Drive, Floor 6C, Room BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 10, Bethesda, MD 20892. Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. Contact Person: Laurie Lewallen, Advisory Contact Person: Alicja L. Markowska, PhD, Committee Coordinator, Office of DSC, National Institute on Aging, National Biotechnology Activities, National Institutes DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Institutes of Health, Gateway Building 2C212, of Health, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Room 750, HUMAN SERVICES 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD Bethesda, MD 20892–7985, 301–496–9838, 20892, 301–496–9666, [email protected]. National Institutes of Health [email protected]. Any interested person may file written Name of Committee: National Institute on comments with the committee by forwarding Notice of Meeting Aging Initial Review Group, Biological Aging the statement to the Contact Person listed on Review Committee. this notice. The statement should include the Chairpersons, Board of Scientific Date: June 15, 2007. name, address, telephone number and when Counselors for Institutes and Centers at Time: 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. applicable, the business or professional the National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant affiliation of the interested person. Notice is hereby given of a meeting applications. In the interest of security, NIH has scheduled by the Deputy Director for Place: National Institute on Aging, instituted stringent procedures for entrance Gateway Bldg., Rm. 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, Intramural Research at the National Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles Institutes of Health (NIH) with the Conference Call). will be inspected before being allowed on Chairpersons of the Boards of Scientific Contact Person: Bita Nakhai, PhD, campus. Visitors will be asked to show one Counselors. The Boards of Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific form of identification (for example, a Counselors are advisory groups to the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27828 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Scientific Directors of the Intramural Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4016K, Place: The William F. Bolger Center, Main Research Programs at the NIH. This MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451– Building, 9600 Newbridge Drive, Potomac, meeting will take place on June 11, 1327, [email protected]. MD 20854. 2007, from 10 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., at the Name of Committee: Musculoskeletal, Oral Contact Person: Richard J. Bartlett, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for NIH, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, and Skin Sciences Integrated Review Group, Skeletal Biology Development and Disease Scientific Review, National Institutes of MD, Building 1, Wilson Hall. The Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4110, meeting will include a discussion of Study Section. Date: June 3–5, 2007. MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– policies and procedures that apply to Time: 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. 6809, [email protected]. the regular review of NIH intramural Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Musculoskeletal, Oral scientists and their work, with special applications. and Skin Sciences Integrated Review Group, emphasis on clinical research. Place: Watergate Hotel, 2650 Virginia Skeletal Muscle and Exercise Physiology The meeting will be open to the Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Study Section. public, with attendance limited to space Contact Person: Priscilla B. Chen, PhD, Date: June 11–12, 2007. available. Individuals who plan to Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. attend and need special assistance, such Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4104, applications. as sign language interpretation or other Place: The William F. Bolger Center, Main reasonable accommodations, should MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451– 1787, [email protected]. Building, 9600 Newbridge Drive, Potomac, contact Ms. Colleen Crone at the Office MD 20854. Name of Committee: Bioengineering of Intramural Research, NIH, Building 1, Contact Person: Richard J. Bartlett, PhD, Sciences & Technologies Integrated Review Room 160, Telephone (301) 496–1921 or Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Group, Modeling and Analysis of Biological Scientific Review, National Institutes of FAX (301) 402–4273 in advance of the Systems Study Section. meeting. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4110, Date: June 4–5, 2007. MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Dated: May 11, 2007. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. 6809, [email protected]. Jennifer Spaeth, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Director, Office of Federal Advisory Place: Georgetown Inn, 1310 Wisconsin Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Committee Policy. Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20007. Conflict: Sensory Integration. [FR Doc. 07–2450 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Contact Person: Malgorzata Klosek, PhD, Date: June 11, 2007. Time: 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4188, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 DEPARTMENT OF HEATLH AND MSC 7849, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 HUMAN SERVICES 2211, [email protected]. (Telephone Conference Call). Name of Committee: Cell Biology National Institutes of Health Contact Person: Bernard F. Driscoll, PhD, Integrated Review Group, Intercellular Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Interactions Study Section. Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: June 7, 2007. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5184, Closed Meetings Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1242, [email protected]. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the applications. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Name of Committee: Endocrinology, Place: The Hotel Lombardy, 2019 Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC is hereby given of the following Sciences Integrated Review Group, 20006. Integrative and Clinical Endocrinology and meetings. Contact Person: David Balasundaram, PhD, Reproductive Study Section. The meetings will be closed to the Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Date: June 14–15, 2007. public in accordance with the Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. provisions set forth in sections Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5189, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., MSC 7840, Bethesda MD 20892, 301–435– applications. as amended. The grant applications and 1022, [email protected]. Place: Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill the discussions could disclose Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Road, Bethesda, MD 20814. confidential trade secrets or commercial Review Special Emphasis Panel, Targeting Contact Person: Krish Krishnan, PhD, property such as patentable material, Protein Misfolding Review Meeting. Scientific Road Administrator, Center for Date: June 8, 2007. and personal information concerning Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6164, individuals associated with the grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– applications, the disclosure of which applications. 1041, [email protected]. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Place: Embassy Suites Hotel at Chevy Name of Committee: Immunology invasion of personal privacy. Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW., Integrated Review Group, Vaccines against Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Washington, DC 20015. Microbial Diseases Study Section. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Dental Contact Person: George W. Chacko, PhD, Date: June 14–15, 2007. Developmental Biology; Special Emphais Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Panel. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 1, 2007. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5170, applications. Time: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. MSC 7849, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1245, [email protected]. Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel, Skeletal Contact Person: Jian Wang, MD, PhD, Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Muscle Small Business Review. Scientific Road Administrator, Center for (Telephone Conference Call). Date: June 10, 2007. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Contact Person: Tamizchelvi Thyagarajan, Time: 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4218, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– for Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. 2778, [email protected].

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27829

Name of Committee: Health of the Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Population Integrated Review Group, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2204, applications. Community Influences on Health Behavior. MSC 7890, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Place: Embassy Suites Hotel, 1250 22nd Date: June 14–15, 2007. 1045, [email protected]. Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Name of Committee: Cardiovascular Contact Person: Julius Cinque, MS, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Sciences Integrated Review Group, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications. Cardiovascular Differentiation and Scientific Review, National Institutes of Place: The William F. Bolger Center, 9600 Development Study Section. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5186, Newbridge Drive, Potomac, MD 20854. Date: June 21–22, 2007. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Contact Person: Ellen K. Schwartz, EdD, Time: 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. 1252, [email protected]. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Immunology Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Integrated Review Group, Innate Immunity Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3168, Place: Melrose Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania and Inflammation Study Section. MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Date: June 21–22, 2007. 0681, [email protected]. Contact Person: Maqsood A. Wani, PhD, Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific DVM, Scientific Review Administrator, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Special Emphasis Panel, Prion Center for Scientific Review, National applications. Diseases. Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Place: Crystal City Courtyard Marriott, Date: June 18, 2007. Room 4136, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 2899 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA Time: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. 301–435–2270, [email protected]. 22202. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Contact Person: Tina McIntyre, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications. Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Scientific Review, National Institutes of Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Group, Clinical Neuroplasticity and Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4202, Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Neurotransmitters Study Section. MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594– (Telephone Conference Call.) Date: June 21–22, 2007. 6375, [email protected]. Contact Person: Rossana Berti, PhD, Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Risk, Prevention and Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Health Behavior Integrated Review Group, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3191, Place: Savoy Georgetown, 2505 Wisconsin Social Psychology, Personality and MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402– Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20007. Interpersonal Processes Study Section. 6411, [email protected]. Contact Person: Suzan Nadi, PhD, Date: June 21–22, 2007. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Special Emphasis Panel, Mosquito Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Vectors. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5217B, Place: Melrose Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania Date: June 19, 2007. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– 1259, [email protected]. Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Time: 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Contact Person: Anna L. Riley, PhD, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Small Scientific Review, National Institutes of Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Business: Medical Imaging. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3114, Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Date: June 21–22, 2007. MSC 7759, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– (Telephone Conference Call). Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 2889, [email protected]. Contact Person: Fouad A. El-Zaatari, PhD, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications. Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Scientific Review, National Institutes of Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3206, Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Group, Developmental Brain Disorders Study Section. MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20814–9692, (301) Contact Person: Leonid V. Tsap, PhD, Date: June 21–22, 2007. 435–1149, [email protected]. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 , Rockledge Drive, Room 5128, Review Special Emphasis Panel, Radiation applications. MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Oncology. Place: Westin Washington DC City Center 2507, [email protected]. Date: June 19, 2007. (formally Wyndham Washington DC), 1400 Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Name of Committee: Molecular, Cellular M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant and Developmental Neuroscience Integrated Contact Person: Pat Manos, PhD, Scientific applications. Review Group, Biophysics of Neural Systems Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Study Section. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Date: June 21–22, 2007. Rockledge Drive, Room 5200, MSC 7846, (Telephone Conference Call). Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–1785, Contact Person: Manzoor Zarger, MS, PhD, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications. Name of Committee: Bioengineering Scientific Review, National Institutes of Place: Jurys Washington Hotel, 1500 New Sciences & Technologies Integrated Review Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6208, Hampshire Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Group, Instrumentation and Systems MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 20032. Development Study Section. 2477, [email protected]. Contact Person: Geoffrey G. Schofields, Date: June 21–22, 2007. Name of Committee: Genes, Genomes, and PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Genetics Integrated Review Group, Ethical, for Scientific Review National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Legal, and Social Implications of Human Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4040–A, applications. Genetics Study Section. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Place: Ritz-Carlton Hotel at Pentagon City, Date: June 21–22, 2007. 1235, [email protected]. 1250 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA Time: 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and 22202. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Contact Person: Ping Fan, MD, PhD, applications. Group, Neural Basis of Psychopathology, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Place: The Watergate, 2650 Virginia Addictions and Sleep Disorders Study Scientific Review, National Institutes of Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Section. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5154, Contact Person: Cheryl M. Corsaro, Date: June 21–22, 2007. MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 1740, [email protected].

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27830 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Name of Committee: Health of the Rockledge Drive, Room 5184, MSC 7846, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Population Integrated Review Group, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1184, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6200, Neurological, Aging and Musculoskeletal [email protected]. MSC 7804, (For courier delivery, use MD Epidemiology Study Section. Name of Committee: Hematology 20817), Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–1715, Date: June 21–22, 2007. Integrated Review Group, Hemostasis and [email protected] Time: 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. Thrombosis Study Section. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 21, 2007. applications. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Place: One Washington Circle Hotel, One Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Washington Circle, Washington, DC 20037. applications. 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Contact Person: Heidi B. Friedman, PhD, Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. institutes of Health, HHS) Scientific Review, National Institutes of Contact Person: Chhanda L. Ganguly, PhD, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1012A, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Dated: May 8, 2007 MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Scientific Review, National Institutes of Jennifer Spaeth, 1721, [email protected]. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4118, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases MSC 7802, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Committee Policy. 1739, [email protected]. and Microbiology Integrated Review Group, [FR Doc. 07–2418 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Vector Biology Study Section. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Date: June 21, 2007. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Chemoprevention. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 21, 2007. applications. Time: 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Place: The Watergate, 2650 Virginia Agenda: To review and evaluate grant HUMAN SERVICES Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037. applications. Contact Person: John C. Pugh, PhD, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 National Institutes of Health Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Scientific Review, National Institutes of (Telephone Conference Call). Center for Scientific Review, Amended Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1206, Contact Person: Manzoor Zarger, MS, PhD, Notice of Meeting MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 2398, [email protected]. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6208, Notice is hereby given of a change in Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– the meeting of the Central Visual and Microbiology Integrated Review Group, 2477, [email protected]. Processing Study Section, June 19, 2007, Virology—B Study Section. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific 8 a.m. to June 20, 2007, 5 p.m. Date: June 21–22, 2007. DoubleTree Hotel, 8120 Wisconsin Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Gene Therapy and Inborn Errors. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814 which Date: June 22, 2007. applications. was published in the Federal Register Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Place: Tysons Corner Marriott Hotel, 8028 on May 4, 2007, 72 FR 25324–25325. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Leesburg Pike, Vienna, VA 22182. applications. The meeting will be held one day Contact Person: Robert Freund, PhD, Place: The Watergate, 2650 Virginia only on June 29, 2007. The meeting time Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037. and location remains the same. The Scientific Review, National Institutes of Contact Person: Richard Panniers, PhD, meeting is closed to the public. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3200, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Scientific Review, National Institutes of Dated: May 8, 2007. 1050, [email protected]. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2212, Jennifer Spaeth, Name of Committee: Health of the MSC 7890, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Director, Office of Federal Advisory Population Integrated Review Group, Social 1741, [email protected]. Committee Policy. Sciences and Population Studies Study Name of Committee: Center for Scientific [FR Doc. 07–2422 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Section. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Clinical Date: June 21, 2007. Hematology. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Date: June 22, 2007. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Place: Admiral Fell Inn, 888 South applications. HUMAN SERVICES Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231. Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 Contact Person: Bob Weller, PhD, Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. National Institutes of Health Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Contact Person: Chhanda L. Ganguly, PhD, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Center for Scientific Review, Amended Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3160, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Notice of Meeting MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4120, 0694, [email protected]. MSC 7802, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Notice is hereby given of a change in Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and 1739, [email protected]. the meeting of the Neurotoxicology and Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Group, Clinical Neuroimmunology and Brain Review Special Emphasis Panel, Alcohol Study Section, June 14, 2007, 8 Tumors Study Section. Chromosomal Instability and Cancer. a.m. to June 15, 2007, 5 p.m., Churchill Date: June 21–22, 2007. Date: June 22, 2007. Hotel, 1914 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Time: 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. Washington, DC 20009 which was Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant published in the Federal Register on applications. applications. April 24, 2007, 72 FR 20352–20354. Place: The Fairmont Washington, DC, 2401 Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 The meeting will be held one day Contact Person: Jay Joshi, PhD, Scientific (Telephone Conference Cal). only on June 14, 2007. The meeting time Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Contact Person: Angela Y. Ng, PhD, MBA, and location remains the same. The Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Scientific Review Administrator, Center for meeting is closed to the public.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27831

Dated: May 8, 2007. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Jennifer Spaeth, HUMAN SERVICES Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Institutes of Health Contact Person: Michael Selmanoff, PhD, Committee Policy. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for [FR Doc. 07–2423 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Scientific Review, National Institutes of BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Closed Meetings Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3134, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892–7844, 301– Pursuant to section 10(d) of the 435–1119, [email protected]. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Name of Committee: Integrative, HUMAN SERVICES amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience is hereby given of the following Integrated Review Group, National Institutes of Health meetings. Neuroendocrinology, Neuroimmunology, and The meetings will be closed to the Behavior Study Section. Date: June 7–8, 2007. Center for Scientific Review, Amended public in accordance with the Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Notice of Meeting provisions set forth in sections Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., applications. Notice is hereby given of a change in as amended. The grant applications and Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One the meeting of the Center for Scientific the discussions could disclose Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Review Special Emphasis Panel, June confidential trade secrets or commercial Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. 15, 2007, 8 a.m. to June 15, 2007, 5 p.m. property such as patentable material, Contact Person: Michael Selmanoff, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Serrano Hotel, 405 Taylor Street, San and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of Francisco, CA 94102 which was Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3134, published in the Federal Register on applications, the disclosure of which MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– May 4, 2007, 72 FR 25324–25325. would constitute a clearly unwarranted 1119, [email protected]. invasion of personal privacy. The meeting will be held one day Name of Committee: Center for Scientific only on June 14, 2007. The meeting time Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Review Special Emphasis Panel, Cancer, Diet Conflict: Visual Systems Anatomy and and location remains the same. The and Chemoprevention. Physiology. meeting is closed to the public. Date: May 30, 2007. Date: June 7, 2007. Dated: May 8, 2007. Time: 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. Time: 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Jennifer Spaeth, applications. applications. Director, Office of Federal Advisory Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Committee Policy. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 [FR Doc. 07–2424 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] (Telephone Conference Call). (Telephone Conference Call). Contact Person: Eun Ah Co, PhD, Scientific Contact Person: John Bishop, PhD, BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Scientific Review, National Institutes of Rockledge Drive, Room 6202, MSC 7804, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5180, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451–4467, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– HUMAN SERVICES [email protected]. 1250, [email protected]. This notice is being published less than 15 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific National Institutes of Health days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Conflict: Anxiety, Feeding and Gastric Center for Scientific Review; Amended funding cycle. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Function. Notice of Meeting Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Date: June 7, 2007. Conflict: Cognition, Perception and Imaging. Time: 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Notice is hereby given of a change in Date: June 1, 2007. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant the meeting of the Cognitive Time: 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. applications. Neuroscience Study Section, June 5, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 2007, 8 a.m. to June 6, 2007, 5 p.m. (Telephone Conference Call). DoubleTree Hotel, 8120 Wisconsin Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Contact Person: Christine L. Melchior, Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814 which (Telephone Conference Call). PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center was published in the Federal Register Contact Person: John Bishop, PhD, for Scientific Review, National Institutes of on April 5, 2007, 72 FR 16805–16806. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5176, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– The meeting will be held one day Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5180, 1713, [email protected]. only on June 5, 2007. The meeting time MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Name of Committee: Center for Scientific and location remains the same. The 1250, [email protected]. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Small meeting is closed to the public. This notice is being published less than 15 Business: Bioengineering and Psychology. Dated: May 8, 2007. days prior to the meeting due to the timing Date: June 11, 2007. limitations imposed by the review and Time: 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Jennifer Spaeth, funding cycle. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Director, Office of Federal Advisory Name of Committee: Integrative, applications. Committee Policy. Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience Place: Holiday Inn Georgetown, 2101 [FR Doc. 07–2437 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Integrated Review Group, Biological Rhythms Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC and Sleep Study Section. 20007. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Date: June 6, 2007. Contact Person: Pushpa Tandon, PhD, Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5104,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27832 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Dated: May 11, 2007. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 2397, [email protected]. Jennifer Spaeth, SECURITY Name of Committee: Cell Biology Director, Office of Federal Advisory Integrated Review Group, Membrane Biology Committee Policy. Coast Guard and Protein Processing Study Section. [FR Doc. 07–2449 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] [USCG–2007–28121] Date: June 11–12, 2007. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Collection of Information Under Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review by Office of Management and applications. Budget: OMB Control Numbers: 1625– Place: Jurys Washington Hotel, 1500 New DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Hampshire Ave., NW., Washington, DC HUMAN SERVICES 0025 and 1625–0058 20036. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Contact Person: Janet M. Larkin, PhD, National Institutes of Health ACTION: Request for comments. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Center for Scientific Review; Notice of SUMMARY: In compliance with the Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1102, Closed Meeting Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, 310–435– U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit 1026, [email protected]. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Information Collection Requests (ICRs) Name of Committee: Bioengineering Federal Advisory Committee Act, as to the Office of Management and Budget Sciences & Technologies Integrated Review amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice (OMB) requesting an extension of their Group, Microscopic Imaging Study Section. is hereby given of the following approval for the following collections of Date: June 20, 2007. meeting. information: (1) 1625–0025, Carriage of Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Bulk Solids Requiring Special Agenda: To review and evaluate grant The meeting will be closed to the Handling—46 CFR part 148; and (2) applications. public in accordance with the Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 provisions set forth in sections 1625–0058, Application for Permit to Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Transport Municipal and Commercial Contact Person: Ross D. Shonat, PhD, as amended. The grant applications and Waste. Before submitting these ICRs to Scientific Review Administrator, Center for the discussions could disclose OMB, the Coast Guard is inviting Scientific Review, National Institutes of confidential trade secrets or commercial comments as described below. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1115, property such as patentable material, DATES: Comments must reach the Coast MSC 7849, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Guard on or before July 16, 2007. 2786, [email protected]. and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant ADDRESSES: To make sure your Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications, the disclosure of which comments and related material do not Review Special Emphasis Panel, enter the docket [USCG–2007–28121] Neuroimmunology and Oligodendrocyte would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. more than once, please submit them by Differentiation. only one of the following means: Date: June 20, 2007. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (1) By mail to the Docket Management Time: 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Facility, U.S. Department of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Conflict: Plasticity and Biophysics. applications. aTransportation (DOT), room PL–401, Date: May 22, 2007. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, Time: 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 DC 20590–0001. (Telephone Conference Call). Agenda: To review and evaluate grant (2) By delivery to room PL–401 on the Contact Person: Peter B. Guthrie, PhD, applications. Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, (Telephone Conference Call). through Friday, except Federal holidays. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Contact Person: John Bishop, PhD, The telephone number is 202–366– 1239, [email protected]. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 9329. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review, National Institutes of (3) By fax to the Docket Management Review Special Emphasis Panel, Clinical Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5180, Facility at 202–493–2251. Neurophysiology, Devices and MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– (4) Electronically through the Web Neuroprosthetics. 1250, [email protected]. Site for the Docket Management System Date: June 21–22, 2007. This notice is being published less than 15 at http://dms.dot.gov. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. days prior to the meeting due to the timing The Docket Management Facility Agenda: To review and evaluate grant limitations imposed by the review and maintains the public docket for this applications. funding cycle. notice. Comments and material received Place: Churchill Hotel, 1914 Connecticut (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance from the public, as well as documents Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20009. Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; mentioned in this notice as being Contact Person: Rene Etcheberrigaray, MD, 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.306, 93.333, available in the docket, will become part Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Scientific Review, National Institutes of of this docket and will be available for Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5196, 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National inspection or copying at room PL–401 MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Institutes of Health, HHS) on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, 1246, [email protected]. Jennifer Spaeth, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Director, Office of Federal Advisory Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; through Friday, except Federal holidays. Committee Policy. 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, You may also find this docket on the 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, [FR Doc. 07–2451 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Copies of complete ICRs are available Institutes of Health, HHS) through this docket on the Internet at

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27833

http://dms.dot.gov, and also from Privacy Act: Anyone can search the Dated: May 8, 2007. Commandant (CG–611), U.S. Coast electronic form of all comments C.S. Johnson, Jr., Guard Headquarters, room 10–1236 received in dockets by the name of the Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Assistant (Attn: Mr. Arthur Requina), 2100 2nd individual submitting the comment (or Commandant for Command, Control, Street SW., Washington, DC 20593– signing the comment, if submitted on Communications Computers and Information 0001. The telephone number is 202– behalf of an association, business, labor Technology. 475–3523. union, etc.). You may review the [FR Doc. E7–9494 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Privacy Act Statement of DOT in the BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Arthur Requina, Office of Information Federal Register published on April 11, Management, telephone 202–475–3523, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit or fax 202–475–3929, for questions on http://dms.dot.gov. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY these documents; or telephone Ms. Information Collection Request Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Coast Guard Docket Operations, 202–493–0402, for 1. Title: Carriage of Bulk Solids questions on the docket. Requiring Special Handling—46 CFR [USCG–2007–28217] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Part 148. Relocation of DOT’s Docket Public Participation and Request for OMB Control Number: 1625–0025. Operations Facility and Equipment and Comments Summary: The information specified Temporary Docket Office Closure for We encourage you to respond to this in 46 CFR part 148 for an application for the United States Coast Guard request by submitting comments and a Special Permit allows Coast Guard to Electronic Public Dockets determine the manner of safe carriage of related materials. We will post all AGENCY: unlisted materials. The information Coast Guard, DHS. comments received, without change, to ACTION: Notice. http://dms.dot.gov; they will include required by Dangerous Cargo Manifests any personal information you provided. and Shipping Papers permits vessel SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces We have an agreement with DOT to use crews and emergency personnel to the relocation and service disruption of the Docket Management Facility. Please properly/safely respond to accidents the Coast Guard’s electronic public see the paragraph on DOT’s ‘‘Privacy involving hazardous substances. See dockets. The U.S. Department of Act Policy’’ below. §§ 148.02–1 and 148.02–3. Transportation (DOT) Docket Submitting comments: If you submit a Need: The Coast Guard administers Operations facility, which manages the comment, please include your name and and enforces statutes and rules for the Document Management System (DMS) address, identify the docket number safe transport and stowage of hazardous containing the electronic public dockets [USCG–2007–28121], indicate the materials, including bulk solids. See 49 for the U.S. Coast Guard, is relocating to specific section of the document to U.S.C. 5103. a new building. This notice also which each comment applies, providing Respondents: Owners and operators provides the information related to two a reason for each comment. You may of vessels that carry certain bulk solids. open Coast Guard rulemaking dockets submit your comments and material by impacted by this relocation. Frequency: On occasion. electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery DATES: Docket Management Facility will to the Docket Management Facility at Burden Estimate: The estimated be closed May 25 until May 29, 2007. the address under ADDRESSES; but burden has decreased from 1,130 hours The Docket Management System will be please submit them by only one means. to 899 hours a year. unavailable from June 13 until 17, 2007. If you submit them by mail or delivery, 2. Title: Application for Permit to ADDRESSES: You may submit comments submit them in an unbound format, no Transport Municipal and Commercial identified by Coast Guard docket larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for Waste. numbers USCG–2007–27373 and copying and electronic filing. If you OMB Control Number: 1625–0058. USCG–2007–27761 to the Docket submit them by mail and would like to Management Facility at the U.S. Summary: This information collection know that they reached the Facility, Department of Transportation. Two provides the basis for issuing or denying please enclose a stamped, self-addressed different locations are listed under the a permit for the transportation of postcard or envelope. We will consider mail and delivery options below municipal or commercial waste in the all comments and material received because the Document Management coastal waters of the United States. during the comment period. We may Facility is moving May 30, 2007. To change the documents supporting this Need: In accordance with 33 U.S.C. avoid duplication, please use only one collection of information or even the 2602, the U.S. Coast Guard issued of the following methods: underlying requirements in view of regulations requiring a vessel owner or (1) Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. them. operator to apply for a permit to (2) Mail: Viewing comments and documents: transport municipal or commercial • Address mail to be delivered before View comments and documents waste in the United States. Accordingly, May 30, 2007, as follows: Docket mentioned in this notice as being the vessel owner or operator is required Management Facility, U.S. Department available in the docket, go to http:// to display an identification number or of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street dms.dot.gov to view at any time and other marking on their vessel as SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001. conduct a simple search using the indicated in 33 CFR part 151, subpart B. • Address mail to be delivered on or docket number. You may also visit the Respondents: Owners and operators after May 30, 2007, as follows: Docket Docket Management Facility in room of vessels. Management Facility, U.S. Department PL–401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Frequency: Every 18 months. Avenue SE., West Building Ground Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 Burden Estimate: The estimated Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC p.m., Monday through Friday, except burden has increased from 69 hours to 20590. Federal holidays. 116 hours a year. (3) Fax: 202–493–2251.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27834 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

(4) Delivery: unavailable for use from Wednesday, dwelling damage and verify personal • Before May 30, 2007, deliver June 13, 2007, through Sunday, June 17, information of applicants for FEMA comments to: Room PL–401 on the 2007. The electronic docket will be disaster assistance in federally declared Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 available to users on June 18, 2007. disasters areas. Because FEMA needs to Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC For more information on how to evaluate the inspectors’ performance, 20590. submit documents to Coast Guard FEMA conducts surveys to measure the • On or after May 30, 2007, deliver electronic dockets is located in the satisfaction level of the applicants with comments to: Room W12–140 on the ADDRESSES section of this notice. their inspection experience. FEMA Ground Floor of the West Building, As of the date of signature of this Inspection Services Managers and Task 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., document, there are two Coast Guard Monitors generally use the survey Washington, DC 20590. dockets open for public comment on the results to gauge and make At either location, deliveries may be DMS system that will be affected by this improvements to disaster services that made between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., relocation. They are: increase customer satisfaction and Monday through Friday, except Federal 1. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: program effectiveness. The information holidays. The telephone number is 202– Docket number USCG–2007–27373 is shared with Regional staff specific to 366–9329. entitled ‘‘Regattas and Marine Parades; the federal declaration for which the (5) Federal eRulemaking Portal: Great Lakes Annual Marine Events,’’ survey is conducted. http://www.regulations.gov. comments due on or before June 5, Affected Public: Individuals and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 2007. households. you have questions on this notice, call 2. Interim Rule: Docket number Number of Respondents: 10,608. Amy Bunk, Attorney-Advisor, Coast USCG–2007–27761 entitled ‘‘Large Estimated Time per Respondent: 0.25 Guard, telephone 202–372–3864. If you Passenger Vessel Crew Requirements,’’ hours. have questions on viewing or submitting comments due on or before July 23, Estimated Total Annual Time Burden: material to the docket, contact Renee V. 2007. 2,652 hours. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Annual Frequency of Response: 1. Operations, Office of Information Dated: May 11, 2007. Stefan G. Venckus, Comments: Interested persons are Services, Office of the Assistant invited to submit written comments on Secretary for Administration, Office of Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States Coast the proposed information collection to the Secretary, 400 7th Street, SW., the Office of Information and Regulatory Washington, DC 20590 until May 24, Guard. [FR Doc. E7–9485 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Affairs, Office of Management Budget, 2007, and at M–30, West Building Attention: Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Department of Homeland Security/ New Jersey Avenue, SE. after that; FEMA, and sent via electronic mail to telephone number: 202–366–9826; e- [email protected] or faxed mail address: [email protected]. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY to (202) 395–6974. Comments must be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submitted on or before June 18, 2007. Background and Purpose Federal Emergency Management FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Agency The notice announces the relocation Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection and service disruption of the Coast Agency Information Collection Guard’s electronic public dockets. The should be made to Chief, Records Activities: Submission for OMB Management, FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Coast Guard’s electronic dockets are Review; Comment Request currently maintained by the Department Room 609, Washington, DC 20472, of Transportation (DOT) Docket AGENCY: Federal Emergency facsimile number (202) 646–3347, or e- Operations facility, which manages the Management Agency, DHS. mail address FEMA-Information- Document Management System (DMS). ACTION: Notice and request for [email protected]. This notice also provides the comments. Dated: May 10, 2007. information related to two open Coast John A. Sharetts-Sullivan, SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Guard rulemaking dockets impacted by Chief, Records Management and Privacy this relocation. The DOT Docket Management Agency (FEMA) has Information Resources Management Branch, Operations facility is moving to 1200 submitted the following information Information Technology Services Division, New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, collection to the Office of Management Federal Emergency Management Agency, DC 20590 and will be located on the and Budget (OMB) for review and Department of Homeland Security. West Building Ground Floor, Room clearance in accordance with the [FR Doc. E7–9507 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] W12–140. Hours for the new facility requirements of the Paperwork BILLING CODE 9111–23–P will continue to be 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Reduction Act of 1995. The submission Monday through Friday, excluding describes the nature of the information Federal holidays. The Docket collection, the categories of DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Operations telephone number will respondents, the estimated burden (i.e., SECURITY continue to be (202) 366–9826. the time, effort and resources used by 1. To prepare for the relocation to the respondents to respond) and cost, and Federal Emergency Management new facility, the Docket Operations includes the actual data collection Agency facility will be closed to the public on instruments FEMA will use. [FEMA–1699–DR] Friday, May 25, 2007, through Tuesday, Title: Federal Emergency Management May 29, 2007. The office will reopen to Agency Housing Inspection Services Kansas; Major Disaster and Related the public on Wednesday, May 30, 2007 Customer Satisfaction Survey. Determinations at the new facility. OMB Number: 1660–NW31. 2. To move the computers that host Abstract: FEMA Housing Inspection AGENCY: Federal Emergency the electronic dockets, the DMS will be Services contracts inspectors to assess Management Agency, DHS.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27835

ACTION: Notice. is appointed to act as the Federal Cumberland and York Counties for Coordinating Officer for this declared Individual Assistance. SUMMARY: This is a notice of the disaster. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Presidential declaration of a major I do hereby determine the following Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used disaster for the State of Kansas (FEMA– areas of the State of Kansas to have been for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 1699–DR), dated May 6, 2007, and affected adversely by this declared Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora related determinations. major disaster: Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis EFFECTIVE DATE: May 6, 2007. Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Kiowa County for Individual Assistance Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Public Assistance. Direct Federal Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance assistance is authorized. Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Directorate, Federal Emergency All counties within the State of Kansas are Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Management Agency, Washington, DC eligible to apply for assistance under the Households Disaster Housing Operations; Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. 20472, (202) 646–2705. 97.050 Individuals and Households (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation hereby given that, in a letter dated May for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Grant Program.) 6, 2007, the President declared a major Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora R. David Paulison, disaster under the authority of the Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 5121–5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows: Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management [FR Doc. E7–9502 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Assistance; 97.048, Individual and BILLING CODE 9110–10–P I have determined that the damage in Household Housing; 97.049, Individual and certain areas of the State of Kansas resulting Household Disaster Housing Operations; from severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding 97.050 Individual and Household Program- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance beginning on May 4, 2007, and continuing, SECURITY is of sufficient severity and magnitude to Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) warrant a major disaster declaration under Federal Emergency Management the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and R. David Paulison, Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. Agency Administrator, Federal Emergency §§ 5121–5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I [FEMA–1695–DR] declare that such a major disaster exists in Management Agency. the State of Kansas. [FR Doc. E7–9509 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] New Hampshire; Amendment No. 2 to In order to provide Federal assistance, you BILLING CODE 9110–10–P Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as AGENCY: Federal Emergency you find necessary for Federal disaster DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Management Agency, DHS. assistance and administrative expenses. SECURITY ACTION: Notice. You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public Assistance in the Federal Emergency Management SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice designated areas, Hazard Mitigation Agency of a major disaster declaration for the throughout the State, and any other forms of State of New Hampshire (FEMA–1695– assistance under the Stafford Act that you [FEMA–1693–DR] deem appropriate subject to completion of DR), dated April 27, 2007, and related Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDAs), Maine; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of determinations. unless you determine that the incident is of a Major Disaster Declaration EFFECTIVE DATE: May 10, 2007. such unusual severity and magnitude that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PDAs are not required to determine the need AGENCY: Federal Emergency Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance for supplemental Federal assistance pursuant Management Agency, DHS. Directorate, Federal Emergency to 44 CFR 206.33(d). Direct Federal ACTION: Notice. Management Agency, Washington, DC assistance is authorized. Consistent with the requirement that SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice 20472, (202) 646–2705. Federal assistance be supplemental, any of a major disaster declaration for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Federal funds provided under the Stafford State of Maine (FEMA–1693–DR), dated of a major disaster declaration for the Act for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, April 25, 2007, and related State of New Hampshire is hereby and Other Needs Assistance will be limited determinations. amended to include the following areas to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. among those areas determined to have EFFECTIVE DATE: Further, you are authorized to make May 9, 2007. been adversely affected by the changes to this declaration to the extent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: catastrophe declared a major disaster by allowable under the Stafford Act. Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance the President in his declaration of April The time period prescribed for the Directorate, Federal Emergency 27, 2007: implementation of section 310(a), Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705. Belknap County for Individual Assistance Priority to Certain Applications for (already designated for Public Public Facility and Public Housing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Assistance.) Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for of a major disaster declaration for the Coos County for Public Assistance. a period not to exceed six months after State of Maine is hereby amended to the date of this declaration. include the Individual Assistance (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic The Federal Emergency Management program for the following areas among Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that those areas determined to have been Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora pursuant to the authority vested in the adversely affected by the catastrophe Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Administrator, Department of Homeland declared a major disaster by the Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Security, under Executive Order 12148, President in his declaration of April 25, Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment as amended, Michael L. Karl, of FEMA 2007: Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27836 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Grant Program.) SECURITY Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households R. David Paulison, Federal Emergency Management Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public Administrator, Federal Emergency Agency Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Management Agency. [FEMA–1698–DR] Grant Program.) [FR Doc. E7–9511 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] R. David Paulison, BILLING CODE 9110–10–P Vermont; Major Disaster and Related Administrator, Federal Emergency Determinations Management Agency. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND AGENCY: Federal Emergency [FR Doc. E7–9513 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] SECURITY Management Agency, DHS. BILLING CODE 9110–10–P ACTION: Notice. Federal Emergency Management Agency SUMMARY: This is a notice of the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Presidential declaration of a major SECURITY [FEMA–1697–DR] disaster for the State of Vermont (FEMA–1698–DR), dated May 4, 2007, Federal Emergency Management and related determinations. Agency Texas; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FEMA–1692–DR] AGENCY: Federal Emergency Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Management Agency, DHS. Directorate, Federal Emergency New York; Amendment No. 2 to Notice Management Agency, Washington, DC ACTION: Notice. of a Major Disaster Declaration 20472, (202) 646–2705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is AGENCY: Federal Emergency SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice hereby given that, in a letter dated May Management Agency, DHS. of a major disaster declaration for the 4, 2007, the President declared a major State of Texas (FEMA–1697–DR), dated ACTION: Notice. disaster under the authority of the May 1, 2007, and related Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and determinations. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. of a major disaster declaration for the EFFECTIVE DATE: May 7, 2007. 5121–5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows: State of New York (FEMA–1692–DR), I have determined that the damage in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: dated April 24, 2007, and related certain areas of the State of Vermont resulting determinations. Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance from severe storms and flooding during the Directorate, Federal Emergency period of April 15–21, 2007, is of sufficient EFFECTIVE DATE: May 9, 2007. Management Agency, Washington, DC severity and magnitude to warrant a major 20472, (202) 646–2705. disaster declaration under the Robert T. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121–5206 (the Directorate, Federal Emergency of a major disaster declaration for the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such Management Agency, Washington, DC State of Texas is hereby amended to a major disaster exists in the State of 20472, (202) 646–2705. include the following area among those Vermont. areas determined to have been adversely In order to provide Federal assistance, you SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice affected by the catastrophe declared a are hereby authorized to allocate from funds of a major disaster declaration for the major disaster by the President in his available for these purposes such amounts as State of New York is hereby amended to declaration of May 1, 2007: you find necessary for Federal disaster include the following areas among those assistance and administrative expenses. areas determined to have been adversely Denton County for Individual Assistance. You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the designated areas, Hazard (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic affected by the catastrophe declared a Mitigation throughout the State, and any major disaster by the President in his Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used other forms of assistance under the Stafford declaration of April 24, 2007: for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Act that you deem appropriate. Consistent Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Ulster County for Individual Assistance with the requirement that Federal assistance Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis be supplemental, any Federal funds provided (already designated for Public Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance Assistance.) Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 Montgomery County for Public Assistance. Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management percent of the total eligible costs. If Other (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Needs Assistance under Section 408 of the Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Stafford Act is later requested and warranted, for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Households Disaster Housing Operations; Federal funding under that program will also Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora 97.050 Individuals and Households be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Further, you are authorized to make Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services changes to this declaration to the extent Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation allowable under the Stafford Act. Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Grant Program.) Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management The Federal Emergency Management R. David Paulison, Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Administrator, Federal Emergency pursuant to the authority vested in the Households Disaster Housing Operations; Management Agency. Administrator, under Executive Order 97.050 Individuals and Households [FR Doc. E7–9510 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 12148, as amended, Michael L. Parker, Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public BILLING CODE 9110–10–P of FEMA is appointed to act as the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27837

Federal Coordinating Officer for this Upshur, and Webster Counties for Public § 668dd–668ee), requires the Service to declared disaster. Assistance. develop a comprehensive conservation I do hereby determine the following (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic plan for each national wildlife refuge. areas of the State of Vermont to have Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used The purpose in developing a been affected adversely by this declared for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, comprehensive conservation plan is to major disaster: Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora provide refuge managers with a 15-year Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Bennington, Caledonia, Essex, Orange, Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services strategy for achieving refuge purposes Rutland, Windham, and Windsor Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment and contributing to the mission of the Counties for Public Assistance. Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management National Wildlife Refuge System, All counties within the State of Vermont Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and consistent with sound principles of fish are eligible to apply for assistance under the Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and and wildlife management, conservation, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. Households Disaster Housing Operations; legal mandates, and Service policies. In 97.050 Individuals and Households Program- (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic addition to outlining broad management Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance direction on conserving wildlife and for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant their habitats, plans identify wildlife- Program.) Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora dependent recreational opportunities Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis R. David Paulison, available to the public, including Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Administrator, Federal Emergency opportunities for hunting, fishing, Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Management Agency. Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management wildlife observation, wildlife Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and [FR Doc. E7–9508 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] photography, and environmental Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and BILLING CODE 9110–10–P education and interpretation. Households Disaster Housing Operations; We establish each unit of the National 97.050 Individuals and Households Wildlife Refuge System with specific Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR purposes. We use these purposes to Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation develop and prioritize management Grant Program.) Fish and Wildlife Service goals and objectives within the National R. David Paulison, Wildlife Refuge System mission, and to Administrator, Federal Emergency Holla Bend National Wildlife Refuge in guide which public uses will occur on Management Agency. Pope and Yell Counties, AR these refuges. The planning process is a [FR Doc. E7–9512 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] way for us and the public to evaluate AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service. BILLING CODE 9110–10–P management goals and objectives for the ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a best possible conservation efforts of comprehensive conservation plan and these important wildlife habitats, while DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND environmental assessment; request for providing for wildlife-dependent SECURITY comments. recreation opportunities that are compatible with the refuge’s Federal Emergency Management SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife establishing purpose and the mission of Agency Service, intend to gather information necessary to prepare a comprehensive the National Wildlife Refuge System. [FEMA–1696–DR] conservation plan and associated We will conduct a comprehensive environmental documents for Holla conservation planning process that will West Virginia; Amendment No. 1 to provide opportunity for Tribal, State, Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration Bend National Wildlife Refuge. We furnish this notice in compliance with and local governments; agencies; AGENCY: Federal Emergency our comprehensive conservation organizations; and the public to Management Agency, DHS. planning policy to advise other agencies participate in issue scoping and public comment. We request input for issues, ACTION: Notice. and the public of our intentions, and to obtain suggestions and information on concerns, ideas, and suggestions for SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice the scope of issues to be considered management of the Holla Bend National of a major disaster declaration for the during the planning process. Wildlife Refuge. We invite anyone State of West Virginia (FEMA–1696– interested to respond to the following DATES: To ensure consideration, we two questions: DR), dated May 1, 2007, and related must receive your written comments by determinations. 1. What problems or issues do you June 18, 2007. want to see addressed in the EFFECTIVE DATE: May 10, 2007. ADDRESSES: Send your comments or comprehensive conservation plan? FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requests for more information to: Ben 2. What improvements would you Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Mense, Refuge Manager, Holla Bend recommend for the Holla Bend National Directorate, Federal Emergency National Wildlife Refuge, 10448 Holla Wildlife Refuge? Management Agency, Washington, DC Bend Road, Dardanelle, AR 72834; We have provided the above 20472, (202) 646–2705. Telephone: 479/229–4300; or questions for your optional use; you are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice electronically to: [email protected]. not required to provide information to of a major disaster declaration for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: With this us. Our Planning Team developed these State of West Virginia is hereby notice, we initiate the process for questions to gather information about amended to include the following areas developing a comprehensive individual issues and ideas concerning among those areas determined to have conservation plan for Holla Bend this refuge. Our Planning Team will use been adversely affected by the National Wildlife Refuge in Dardanelle, comments it receives as part of the catastrophe declared a major disaster by AR. planning process; however, we will not the President in his declaration of May The National Wildlife Refuge System reference individual comments in our 1, 2007: Administration Act of 1966, as amended reports or directly respond to them. Barbour, Gilmer, Grant, Hardy, Lewis, by the National Wildlife Refuge System We will conduct the environmental McDowell, Pendleton, Pocahontas, Putnam, Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. review of this project in accordance

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27838 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

with the requirements of the National Improvement Act of 1997 and the Production Areas. The WMD was Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as National Environmental Policy Act of established with the purposes of amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); NEPA 1969, describes how the Service intends assuring the long-term viability of the Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508); to manage the Complex, which includes breeding waterfowl population and other appropriate Federal laws and Long Lake National Wildlife Refuge production through the acquisition and regulations; and our policies and (NWR), Slade NWR, Florence Lake management of Waterfowl Production procedures for compliance with those NWR, and Long Lake Wetland Areas, while considering the needs of regulations. All comments we receive Management District (WMD), for the other migratory birds, threatened and on our environmental assessment next 15 years. endangered species and other wildlife; become part of the official public ADDRESSES: A copy of the final CCP or ‘‘as Waterfowl Production Areas subject record. We will handle requests for such Summary is available by writing to to all provisions of the Migratory Bird comments in accordance with the Bernardo Garza, Planning Team Leader, Conservation Act except the inviolate Freedom of Information Act, NEPA [40 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box sanctuary provisions’’; and ‘‘for any CFR 1506.6(f)], and other Departmental 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, other management purposes, for and Service policies and procedures. Colorado 80225; or download from migratory birds, and for conservation When we receive a request, we generally http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/ purposes.’’ will provide comment letters with the planning. This final CCP identifies goals, names and addresses of the individuals objectives and strategies for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: who wrote the comments. management of the Complex that Bernardo Garza, (303) 236–4377, or John Holla Bend National Wildlife Refuge emphasize restoration and maintenance Esperance, (303) 236–4369. was established in 1957, under the of Long Lake and other native habitats Transfer of Real Property Act, as a result SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: in vigorous condition to promote of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Background biological diversity. The CCP places navigation and flood control project. high importance on the control of The Complex is located within This 6,616-acre refuge is six miles south invasive plant species with partners and Burleigh, Emmons and Kidder Counties of Dardanelle, Arkansas, just off of State integrated pest management. It seeks to in south-central North Dakota. The final Highway 155. The refuge lies along the provide habitats in order to contribute CCP for this Complex includes three Arkansas River and is bounded by an to conservation, enhancement and NWRs and one WMD: old oxbow that was created when the production of migratory bird species, • Long Lake NWR (22,310 acres in Corps of Engineers cut a channel while protecting federally listed species. size) was established on February 25, through the bend in the river to promote The availability of the draft CCP and 1932, ‘‘as a refuge and breeding ground navigation and flood control. The Environmental Assessment (EA) for a for migratory birds and wild animals’’; primary objectives of the refuge are to: 30-day public review and comment and ‘‘for use as an inviolate sanctuary, (1) Provide habitat for migratory period was announced in the Federal or for any other management purpose, waterfowl; (2) provide habitat for Register on July 10, 2006 (71 FR 38892– for migratory birds.’’ This refuge endangered species; (3) provide habitat 38893). The draft CCP/EA evaluated encompasses 15,000 acres of brackish to for resident wildlife; and (4) provide four alternatives for managing the saline marsh and lake; 1,000 acres of interpretation and recreation to the Complex for the next 15 years. other wetlands; and approximately The preferred alternative will expand public. 6,000 acres of tame and native the scope and level of efforts of the Authority: This notice is published under grassland, woodland, and cropland. The current management of habitats by the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge refuge serves as an important staging incorporating adaptive resource System Improvement Act of 1997, Public area for migrating sandhill cranes, management. This alternative will seek Law 105–57. Canada geese and other waterfowl, to improve and develop public use Dated: March 29, 2007. shorebirds, and other migratory birds. facilities to maximize existing and Cynthia K. Dohner, Endangered whooping cranes often potential wildlife-dependent priority Acting Regional Director. utilize refuge marshes during Spring public use opportunities when they are [FR Doc. E7–9483 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] and Fall migrations. compatible with other management • BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Slade NWR (3,000 acres in size) was objectives. Under this alternative, the established on October 10, 1944, ‘‘for Complex will strive to develop use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any partnerships; encourage research that DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR other management purpose, for provides the necessary knowledge and migratory birds.’’ data to guide habitat management Fish and Wildlife Service • Florence Lake NWR was established decisions and activities; and to protect on May 10, 1939, ‘‘as a refuge and and/or restore additional wildlife Final Comprehensive Conservation breeding ground for migratory birds and habitats. Plan for Long Lake National Wildlife other wildlife’’; and ‘‘for use as an This alternative was selected based on Refuge Complex, Moffit, ND inviolate sanctuary, or for any other the EA, comments received, and AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, management purpose, for migratory because it best meets the purposes and Interior. birds.’’ The fee portion of this refuge goals of the Complex, as well as the ACTION: Notice of availability. consists of 1,468 acres. goals of the National Wildlife Refuge • Long Lake WMD manages 1,036 System. The management direction of SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife perpetual wetland easements, 93 the Complex is expected to also benefit Service (Service) announces that a final perpetual grassland easements, 16 federally listed species, large ungulates, Comprehensive Conservation Plan Farmers Home Administration shore birds, migrating and nesting (CCP) for the Long Lake National perpetual easements, 2,759 upland waterfowl, and neotropical migrants. It Wildlife Refuge Complex (Complex) is acres, one Garrison Diversion Unit identifies increased environmental available. This CCP, prepared pursuant mitigation tract managed as a Wildlife education and partnerships that are to the National Wildlife Refuge System Development Area, and 78 Waterfowl likely to result in improved wildlife-

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27839

dependent recreational opportunities. Public Review and Comment Applicant’s Proposal Finally, the CCP places high importance on the protection of cultural and Please reference permit number The applicant is requesting take of historical resources. TE151083–0 for Parrish Medical Center approximately 6.93 ac of occupied in all requests or comments. Please scrub-jay habitat incidental to the Dated: January 17, 2007. include your name and return address construction of a health center. The James J. Slack, in your e-mail message. If you do not project is located within Section 26 and Deputy Regional Director, Region 6, Denver, receive a confirmation from us that we 27, Township 23 South, Range 35 East, Colorado. have received your e-mail message, Port St. John, Brevard County, Florida, [FR Doc. E7–9493 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] contact us directly at the telephone on the south side of the Port St. John BILLING CODE 4310–55–P number listed under FOR FURTHER Interchange, west of Grissom Parkway. INFORMATION CONTACT. Our practice is to Development of the project, including infrastructure, parking areas and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, landscaping, preclude retention of Fish and Wildlife Service available for public review during scrub-jay habitat onsite. Therefore, the regular business hours. We will make all applicant proposes to mitigate for the Construction of a Health Center in submissions from organizations or loss of 6.93 ac of occupied scrub-jay Brevard County, FL businesses, and from individuals habitat by donating $254,051 to the Florida Scrub-jay Fund administered by AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, identifying themselves as representatives or officials of The Nature Conservancy. Funds in this Interior. account are earmarked for use in the ACTION: Notice: receipt of application for organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. conservation and recovery of scrub-jays an incidental take permit; request for and may include habitat acquisition, comments. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other restoration, and/or management. The SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife personal identifying information in your applicant also proposed to preserve and Service (Service), announce the comment, you should be aware that manage 6 ac of scrub habitat for scrub- availability of an incidental take permit your entire comment—including your jays on site as described in their HCP. (ITP) application and Habitat personal identifying information—may We have determined that the Conservation Plan (HCP). Parrish be made publicly available at any time. applicant’s proposal, including the Medical Center (applicant) requests an While you can ask us in your comment proposed mitigation and minimization incidental take permit (ITP) for a to withhold your personal identifying measures, would have minor or duration of 2 years pursuant to section information from public review, we negligible effects on the species covered 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species cannot guarantee that we will be able to in the HCP. Therefore, the ITP is a ‘‘low- Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The do so. effect’’ project and qualifies for applicant anticipates taking categorical exclusions under the approximately 6.93 acre (ac) of Florida Background National Environmental Policy Act scrub-jay (Alphelocoma coerulescens)— (NEPA), as provided by the Department occupied habitat incidental to The Florida scrub-jay (scrub-jay) is of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 constructing a health center in Brevard found exclusively in peninsular Florida Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6 Appendix 1). County, Florida (project). The and is restricted to xeric uplands This preliminary information may be applicant’s HCP describes the mitigation (predominately in oak-dominated revised based on our review of public and minimization measures the scrub). Increasing urban and agricultural comments that we receive in response to applicant proposes to address the effects development has resulted in habitat loss this notice. A low-effect HCP is one of the project to the scrub-jay. and fragmentation, which have involving (1) Minor or negligible effects DATES: We must receive any written adversely affected the distribution and on federally listed or candidate species comments on the ITP application and numbers of scrub-jays. and their habitats, and (2) minor or HCP on or before June 18, 2007. The total estimated population is negligible effects on other ADDRESSES: If you wish to review the between 7,000 and 11,000 individuals. environmental values or resources. application and HCP, you may write the The decline in the number and We will evaluate the HCP and Field Supervisor at our Jacksonville distribution of scrub-jays in east-central comments submitted thereon to Field Office, 6620 Southpoint Drive Florida has been exacerbated by determine whether the application South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, FL, tremendous urban growth in the past 50 meets the requirements of section 10(a) 32216, or make an appointment to visit years. Much of the historic commercial of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If we during normal business hours. If you and residential development has determine that the application meets wish to comment, you may mail or hand occurred on the dry soils which those requirements, we will issue the deliver comments to the Jacksonville previously supported scrub-jay habitat. ITP for incidental take of the Florida Field Office, or you may e-mail Much of this area of Florida was settled scrub-jay. We will also evaluate whether comments to [email protected]. For early because few wetlands restricted issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP more information on reviewing urban and agricultural development. complies with section 7 of the Act by documents and public comments and Due to the effects of urban and conducting an intra-Service section 7 submitting comments, see agricultural development over the past consultation. We will use the results of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 100 years, much of the remaining scrub- this consultation, in combination with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin jay habitat is now relatively small and the above findings, in our final analysis Gawera, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, isolated. What remains is largely to determine whether or not to issue the Jacksonville Field Office (see degraded due to the exclusion of fire, ITP. ADDRESSES); telephone: 904/232–2580, which is needed to maintain xeric Authority: We provide this notice under ext. 121. uplands in conditions suitable for scrub- Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: jays. and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27840 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Dated:April 17, 2007. personal identifying information in your will include incorporation of a natural David L. Hankla, comment, you should be aware that path with educational signage, to serve Field Supervisor, Jacksonville Field Office. your entire comment—including your as an educational tool for the [FR Doc. E7–9481 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] personal identifying information—may elementary school students. The BILLING CODE 4310–55–P be made publicly available at any time. conservation areas are expected to While you can ask us in your comment increase the overall functional value of to withhold your personal identifying the habitat given the existing conditions DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR information from public review, we versus the proposed conditions of these cannot guarantee that we will be able to conservation areas. Fish and Wildlife Service do so. We have determined that the Please reference permit number applicant’s proposal, including the Construction of an Elementary School TE132192–0 for the Lake County School proposed mitigation and minimization in Lake County, FL Board Project in all requests or measures, would have minor or AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, comments. Please include your name negligible effects on the species covered Interior. and return address in your e-mail in the HCP. Therefore, the ITP is a ‘‘low- message. If you do not receive a ACTION: Notice: receipt of application for effect’’ project and qualifies for confirmation from us that we have an incidental take permit; request for categorical exclusions under the received your e-mail message, contact comments. National Environmental Policy Act us directly at the telephone number (NEPA), as provided by the Department SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 Service (Service), announce the CONTACT. Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6 Appendix 1). availability of an Incidental Take Permit Background This preliminary information may be (ITP) Application and Habitat The sand skink is known to occur in revised based on our review of public Conservation Plan (HCP). The Lake comments that we receive in response to County School Board (applicant) Lake County, primarily within the Lake Wales Ridge, and much less frequently this notice. A low-effect HCP is one requests an ITP for a duration of 20 involving (1) Minor or negligible effects years under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the within the Mt. Dora Ridge. Although originally thought to inhabit xeric, scrub on federally listed or candidate species Endangered Species Act of 1973, as and their habitats, and (2) minor or amended (Act). The applicant habitat exclusively, the sand skink is currently being identified in non- negligible effects on other anticipates taking approximately 0.48 environmental values or resources. acre (ac) of sand skink (Neoseps traditional areas with sub-marginal habitat, including pine plantation, We will evaluate the HCP and reynoldsi)—occupied habitat incidental abandoned citrus groves, and disturbed comments submitted thereon to to constructing a two-story elementary areas. Sand skinks require soil moisture determine whether the application school and accessory structures, play for thermoregulation, egg incubation, meets the requirements of section 10(a) areas, and infrastructure in Lake and prey habitat. High activity periods, of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If we County, Florida (Project). The which have been associated with the determine that the application meets applicant’s HCP describes the mitigation breeding season for this species, range those requirements, we will issue the and minimization measures the from mid-February to early May, with ITP for incidental take of the sand skink. applicant proposes to address the effects egg-hatching typically occurring from We will also evaluate whether issuance of the Project to the sand skink. June through July. Due to the reduction of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP complies DATES: We must receive any written in quality and acreage and the rapid with section 7 of the Act by conducting comments on the ITP application and development of xeric upland an intra-Service section 7 consultation. HCP on or before June 18, 2007. communities, the sand skink is We will use the results of this ADDRESSES: If you wish to review the reportedly declining throughout most of consultation, in combination with the application and HCP, you may write the its range. However, biological above findings, in the final analysis to Field Supervisor at our Jacksonville information regarding the sand skink is determine whether or not to issue the Field Office, 6620 Southpoint Drive limited, due to the cryptic nature of the ITP. South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, FL species. Authority: We provide this notice under 32216, or make an appointment to visit Applicant’s Proposal Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act during normal business hours. If you and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). wish to comment, you may mail or hand The applicant is requesting take of Dated: May 10, 2007. deliver comments to the Jacksonville approximately 0.48 acres of occupied Field Office, or you may e-mail sand skink habitat incidental to the David L. Hankla, comments to [email protected]. For Project. The ±19.1 acre Project currently Field Supervisor, Jacksonville Field Office. more information on reviewing includes an elementary school site and [FR Doc. E7–9482 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] documents and public comments and accessory structures, play areas, and BILLING CODE 4310–55–P submitting comments, see infrastructure encompassing ±16.0 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. acres. In order to mitigate for the loss of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 0.48 acres of sand skink habitat, the Paula Sisson, Fish and Wildlife Applicant proposes to restore and Fish and Wildlife Service Biologist, Jacksonville Field Office (see manage ±2.14 acres of occupied sand ADDRESSES); telephone: 904/232–2580, skink habitat to remain on-site, as well Receipt of Applications for Incidental ± ext. 126. as a 0.96 acre mitigation area (currently Take Permit for Four Condominium SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: unoccupied by the species). Restoration Complexes in Escambia County, will be achieved through a combination Florida Public Availability of Comments of tree removal (planted pine and citrus) Before including your address, phone and a planting effort of scrub oak AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, number, e-mail address, or other species. Additional mitigation measures Interior.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27841

ACTION: Notice. provide for: (1) Minimizing the footprint We will evaluate the HCPs, of the development; (2) restoring, applications and any received SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service preserving, and maintaining onsite comments to determine whether the announces the availability of four beach mouse habitat at the project site; applications meet the requirements of habitat conservation plans (HCPs), (3) incorporating requirements in the section 10(a) of the Act. If it is accompanying applications, and an operation of the residence that provide determined that those requirements are environmental assessment (EA). One EA for the conservation of the beach mouse; met, the ITPs will be issued for the has been prepared for the four projects (4) monitoring the status of the beach incidental take of the Perdido Key beach and analyzes the take of Perdido Key mouse at the project site post- mouse. We will also evaluate whether beach mice (Peromyscus polionotus construction; (5) donating funds issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITPs trissyllepsis) incidental to developing, initially and on an annual basis to comply with section 7 of the constructing, and human occupancy of Perdido Key beach mouse conservation Endangered Species Act by conducting Acropolis Development Enterprises, efforts; (6) including conservation an intra-Service section 7 consultation. LLC, Midnight Property, Lorelei measures to protect nesting sea turtles The results of this consultation, in Development, LLC, and The Millennium and non-breeding piping plover; and, (7) combination with the above findings, Group I, LLC (Applicants) four funding the mitigation measures. will be used in the final analysis to condominium complexes in Escambia If you wish to comment, you may determine whether or not to issue the County, Florida (Projects). The submit comments by any one of several ITPs. applicants request incidental take methods. Please reference permit Dated: February 13, 2007. permits (ITPs) pursuant to section numbers TE–143687–0, TE–143686–0, 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Jackie Parrish, TE–143685–0, and TE–143688–0 in Acting Regional Director. Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. The such comments. You may mail [FR Doc. E7–9484 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Applicants’ HCPs describe the comments to the Fish and Wildlife mitigation and minimization measures Service’s Regional Office (see BILLING CODE 4310–55–P proposed to address the effects of the ADDRESSES). You may also comment via Project to the Perdido Key beach mouse. _ the internet to aaron [email protected]. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DATES: Written comments on the ITP Please include your name and return applications and HCPs should be sent to address in your internet message. If you Bureau of Land Management the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Regional do not receive a confirmation from us Office (see ADDRESSES) and should be that we have received your internet [NM220–1430 ES; NM–114207] received on or before July 16, 2007. message, contact us directly at either Recreation and Public Purposes ADDRESSES: Documents will be available telephone number listed below (see (R&PP) Act Classification; New Mexico for public inspection by appointment FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). during normal business hours at the Finally, you may hand-deliver AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service’s Regional comments to either Fish and Wildlife Interior. Office, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite Service office listed (see ADDRESSES). ACTION: Notice of realty action. 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 (Attn: Aaron Our practice is to make comments, SUMMARY: Valenta); or Field Supervisor, Fish and including names and home addresses of The Bureau of Land Wildlife Service, 1601 Balboa Avenue, respondents, available for public review Management (BLM) has determined that Panama City, FL 32405. during regular business hours. land located in Santa Fe County, New FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Individual respondents may request that Mexico is suitable for classification for Aaron Valenta, Regional HCP we withhold their home address from lease or conveyance to Santa Fe County Coordinator (see ADDRESSES), telephone: the administrative record. We will under authority of the Recreation and 404/679–4144, or Ms. Sandra honor such requests to the extent Public Purposes Act (R&PP), as Sneckenberger, Field Office Project allowable by law. There may also be amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.). The Manager (see ADDRESSES), at 850/769– other circumstances in which we would county plans to use the land for an 0552, ext. 239. withhold from the administrative record organized, county recreation area. DATES: Interested parties may submit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We a respondent’s identity, as allowable by specifically request information, views, law. If you wish us to withhold your comments to the BLM Taos Field Office and opinions from the public via this name and address, you must state this Manager at the address below. notice on the Federal action, including prominently at the beginning of your Comments must be received by no later the identification of any other aspects of comments. We will not, however, than July 2, 2007. the human environment not already consider anonymous comments. We ADDRESSES: Address all written identified in the EA. Further, we will make all submissions from comments concerning this Notice to specifically solicit information organizations or businesses, and from Sam DesGeorges, BLM Taos Field Office regarding the adequacy of the HCPs as individuals identifying themselves as Manager, 226 Cruz Alta Road, Taos, measures against our ITP issuance representatives or officials of New Mexico 87571. criteria found in 50 CFR parts 13 and organizations or businesses, available FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 17. for public inspection in their entirety. Francina Martinez, Realty Specialist, at The EA is an assessment of the likely The areas encompassed under the the above address or (505) 758–8851. environmental impacts associated with four ITPs total 5.77 acres along the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Projects and considers the beachfront of the Gulf of Mexico. Three accordance with section 7 of the Taylor environmental consequences of two of the projects are located on the Grazing Act, as amended, 43 U.S.C. alternatives and the proposed action. western portion of Perdido Key, a 16.9 315f, the following described land has The proposed action alternative is mile barrier island, and one project is been examined and found suitable for issuance of the ITPs and located centrally on the Key. Perdido classification for a non-profit, public implementation of the HCPs as Key constitutes the entire historic range purpose—specificially a site for a submitted by the Applicants. The HCPs of the Perdido Key beach mouse. county owned and operated, organized

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27842 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

recreation area; and the land is hereby to withhold your personal identifying The area described contains 39.3 acres in classified accordingly. The land is information from public review, we Uinta County. located at: cannot guarantee that we will be able to DATES: Interested persons may submit do so. written comments to the BLM at the New Mexico Principal Meridian You may submit comments regarding address stated below. Comments must T. 20 N., R. 9 E., the suitability of the lands for a be received no later than July 2, 2007. sec. 18, lots 17 and 18. recreation facility site. Comments on the ADDRESSES: Bureau of Land The area described contains 12.03 acres, classification are restricted to four Management, Kemmerer Field Office, more or less, in Santa Fe County. subjects: 312 Highway 189 North, Kemmerer, WY Santa Fe County proposes to develop (1) Whether the land is physically 83101. suited for the proposal; the lands to construct a recreational FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: facility for the purpose of meeting a (2) Whether the use will maximize the future use or uses of the land; Kelly Lamborn, Realty Specialist, at the community need for an organized address above or at 307–828–4505. recreational site. The site would be (3) Whether the use is consistent with leased for a period of 5 years with local planning and zoning; and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The above option to purchase after the site is (4) If the use is consistent with State described public land in Uinta County, developed according to the Santa Fe and Federal programs. Wyoming has been examined and found County Plan of Development. Conveying Comments may be submitted suitable for classification for title to the affected public land is regarding the specific use proposed in conveyance under the provisions of the consistent with current BLM land use the application and plan of R&PP Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et planning. development, and whether the BLM seq.), and is hereby classified The lease or conveyance, when followed proper administrative accordingly. In accordance with the issued, would be subject to the procedures in reaching the decision. R&PP Act and implementing following terms, conditions, and The State Director will review any regulations, at 43 CFR [art 2740, Uinta reservations: adverse comments. In the absence of County has requested purchase of their 1. Provisions of the R&PP Act and to adverse comment, the classification will existing R&PP lease for the continued all applicable regulations of the become effective 60 days from the date operation of the Bridger Valley Landfill. Secretary of the Interior. of publication of this notice in the The conveyance of these lands to Uinta 2. A right-of-way for ditches and Federal Register. The land will not be County for sanitary landfill purposes is canals constructed by the authority of offered for lease or conveyance until consistent with the BLM Kemmerer the United States, Act of August 30, after the classification becomes Resource Management Plan and would 1890 (43 U.S.C. 945). effective. be in the public interest. The planning 3. The United States will reserve all (Authority: 43 CFR 2741.5) document and environmental assessment covering the proposed sale minerals together with the right to Sam DesGeorges, prospect for, mine, and remove the are available for review at the BLM, Field Office Manager. minerals. Kemmerer Field Office, Kemmerer, 4. Those rights for a road right-of-way [FR Doc. E7–9528 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Wyoming. The conveyance, when granted to New Mexico Department of BILLING CODE 4310–FB–P issued, will be subject to the following Transportation by permit No. NMNM terms, conditions, and reservations: 0023278. 1. Provisions of the Recreation and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Additional detailed information Public Purposes Act and to all applicable regulations, including but concerning this Notice of Realty Action, Bureau of Land Management including environmental documents, not limited to the regulations stated in are available for review at the address [WY–090–1310–ES; WYW–48304] 43 CFR part 2740, and policy and above. guidance of the Secretary of the Interior. Upon publication of this notice in the Notice of Realty Action: Recreation 2. Reservation of a right-of-way to the Federal Register, the lands described and Public Purposes Act (R&PP) United States for ditches and canals above will be segregated from all other Classification; Wyoming pursuant to the Act of August 30, 1890 forms of appropriation under the public AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, (43 U.S.C. 945). land laws, including the mining and Interior. 3. All minerals shall be reserved to the United States, together with the mineral leasing laws, except for lease or ACTION: Notice of realty action. conveyance under the R&PP Act. right to prospect for, mine, and remove Comments may be submitted SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land such minerals from the same under regarding the proposed classification, Management (BLM) has examined and applicable law and such regulations as lease or conveyance of the land to the found suitable for classification for the Secretary of the Interior may Field Office Manager, BLM Taos Field conveyance under the provisions of the prescribe, including all necessary access Office, for a period of 45 days from the R&PP Act, as amended, (43 U.S.C. 869 and exit rights. date of publication of this notice in the et seq.), the following parcel of public 4. No portion of the lands patented Federal Register. Only written lands located in the Bridger Valley area, shall revert back to the United States comments will be accepted. Before in Uinta County, Wyoming. The land under any circumstance. In addition, including your address, phone number, has been leased under the R&PP Act to the patentee shall comply with all e-mail address, or other personal Uinta County for use as a sanitary Federal and State laws applicable to the identifying information in your landfill since 1977. The lands are disposal, placement, or release of comment, you should be aware that described as follows: hazardous substances (substance as your entire comment—including your defined in 40 CFR part 302) and personal identifying information—may Sixth Principal Meridian indemnify the United States against any be made publicly available at any time. T. 16 N., R. 115 W., sec. 10, W1⁄2NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 legal liability or future costs that may While you can ask us in your comment and E1⁄2NW1⁄4SE1⁄4. arise out of any violation of such laws.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27843

5. The above-described land has been remedial action or other actions related who may sustain, vacate, or modify this used for solid waste disposal. Solid in any manner to said solid or realty action. Before including your waste commonly includes small hazardous substance(s) or waste(s); or address, phone number, e-mail address, quantities of commercial hazardous (6) Natural resource damages as defined or other personal identifying waste and household hazardous waste by Federal and State law. This covenant information in your comment, you as determined in the Resource shall be construed as running with the should be aware that your entire Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, parcels of land patented or otherwise comment—including your personal as amended (42 U.S.C. 6901), and conveyed by the United States, and may identifying information—may be made defined in 40 CFR 261.4 and 261.5. be enforced by the United States in a publicly available at any time. While Pursuant to the requirements court of competent jurisdiction. you can ask us in your comment to established by section 120(h) of the Conveyance of these lands to Uinta withhold your personal identifying Comprehensive Environmental County is consistent with applicable information from public review, we Response, Compensation and Liability Federal and county land use plans and cannot guarantee that we will be able to Act (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)) (CERCLA), as will help meet the needs of Uinta do so. amended by the Superfund County residents for solid waste In the absence of any adverse Amendments and Reauthorization Act disposal. Detailed information on this comments, the classification will of 1988 (100 Stat. 1670), notice is hereby proposed action, including but not become effective 60 days after May 17, given that the above-described lands limited to documentation relating to 2007. The land will not be offered for have been examined and no evidence compliance with applicable patent until after the classification was found to indicate that any environmental and cultural resource becomes effective. hazardous substances had been stored laws, is available for review at the BLM, (Authority: 43 CFR 2741.5) Kemmerer Field Office, 312 Highway for one year or more, nor had any Dated: March 26, 2007. hazardous substances been disposed of 189 North, Kemmerer, Wyoming 83101, Mary Jo Rugwell, or released on the subject property. (307) 828–4502. Until July 2, 2007, interested parties Field Manager. 6. The purchaser (patentee), by may submit comments regarding the [FR Doc. E7–9527 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] accepting a patent, covenants and agrees proposed conveyance or classification of BILLING CODE 4310–22–P to indemnify, defend, and hold the the land to the Field Manager, BLM, 312 United States harmless from any costs, Highway 189 North, Kemmerer, damages, claims, causes of action, Wyoming 83101, telephone : 307–828– DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR penalties, fines, liabilities, and 4505. judgments of any kind or nature arising On May 17, 2007, the above described National Park Service from the past, present, and future acts lands will be segregated from all other Notice of Intent to Repatriate a Cultural or omissions of the patentees or their forms of appropriation under the public Item: U.S. Department of Agriculture, employees, agents, contractors, lessees, land laws, including the general mining Forest Service, Cibola National Forest, or any third party, arising out of or in laws, except for lease or conveyance connection with the patentee’s use, under the R&PP Act and leasing under Albuquerque, NM occupancy, or operations on the the mineral leasing laws. Interested AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. patented real property. This parties may submit written comments ACTION: Notice. indemnification and hold harmless regarding the proposed conveyance or agreement includes, but is not limited classification of the lands to the Field Notice is here given in accordance to, acts and omissions of the patentee Manager, BLM, Kemmerer Field Office, with the Native American Graves and their employees, agents, at the address stated above in this notice Protection and Repatriation Act contractors, or lessees, or any third for that purpose. Comments must be (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent party, arising out of or in connection received no later than July 2, 2007. to repatriate a cultural item in the with the use and/or occupancy of the Classification Comments: Interested possession of the U.S. Department of patented real property which has parties may submit comments involving Agriculture, Forest Service, Cibola already resulted or does hereafter result the suitability of the lands for National Forest, Albuquerque, NM that in: (1) Violations of Federal, State, and conveyance for the landfill. Comments meets the definition of ‘‘sacred object’’ local laws and regulations that are now on the classification are restricted to under 25 U.S.C. 3001. or may in the future become, applicable whether the land is physically suited for This notice is published as part of the to the real property; (2) Judgments, the proposal, whether the use will National Park Service’s administrative claims or demands of any kind assessed maximize the future use or uses of the responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 against the United States; (3) Costs, land, and whether the use is consistent U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations expenses, or damages of any kind with local planning and zoning, or if the in this notice are the sole responsibility incurred by the United States; (4) use is consistent with State and Federal of the museum, institution, or Federal Releases or threatened releases of solid programs. agency that has control of the cultural or hazardous waste(s), and/or hazardous Application Comments: Interested items. The National Park Service is not substance(s), as defined by Federal or parties may submit comments regarding responsible for the determinations in State environmental laws, off, on, into the specific use proposed in the this notice. or under land, property and other application for conveyance and plan of In 1973, one pair of leggings was interests of the United States; (5) development, whether the BLM illegally removed from a site located on Activities by which solid waste or followed proper administrative lands administered by the Cibola hazardous substance(s) or waste, as procedures in reaching the decision, or National Forest in west central New defined by Federal and State any other factor not directly related to Mexico. In 2003, the U.S. Department of environmental laws are generated, the suitability of the land for a sanitary Agriculture, Forest Service Law released, stored, used or otherwise landfill. Enforcement Officers recovered the disposed of on the patented real Any adverse comments will be leggings as a part of an Archeological property, and any cleanup response, reviewed by the BLM State Director, Resources Protection Act investigation.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27844 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ancestors utilized this portion of Forest Service Law Enforcement Savannah River valley in eastern Officers held the leggings until they National Park Service Georgia. were released by the court to the Cibola Descendants of the Cherokee are National Forest following the successful Notice of Inventory Completion: members of the Cherokee Nation, prosecution of the case in 2006. Augusta State University, Department Oklahoma; Eastern Band of Cherokee The leggings are made from human of History, and Anthropology, and Indians of North Carolina; and United hair and were made in the late Philosophy, Archaeology Laboratory, Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in prehistoric to early historic period Augusta, GA Oklahoma. Descendants of the Creek are (approximately A.D. 1100–1700). The members of the Alabama-Quassarte AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. site from which the leggings were Tribal Town, Oklahoma; Kialegee Tribal removed contained pottery sherds of ACTION: Notice. Town, Oklahoma; Muscogee (Creek) Puebloan manufacture from the late Notice is here given in accordance Nation of Oklahoma; Poarch Band of prehistoric and/or early historic periods. with the Native American Graves Creek Indians of Alabama; and Expert witnesses for the court case Protection and Repatriation Act Thlopthlocco Tribal Town, Oklahoma. Officials of the Augusta State determined that the leggings were of (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the University have determined that, Puebloan construction from the late completion of an inventory of human pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the prehistoric to early historic period. remains in the possession of Augusta human remains described above During consultation, representatives of State University, Department of History represent the physical remains of at the Pueblo of Acoma, New Mexico and Anthropology and Philosophy, least one individual of Native American demonstrated that the leggings were of Archaeology Laboratory, Augusta, GA. ancestry. Officials of the Augusta State Acoma manufacture and that they were The human remains were removed from University also have determined that, a sacred object associated with the Columbia County, GA. pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is Acoma religion and needed by A detailed assessment of the human a relationship of shared group identity traditional Acoma religious leaders for remains was made by Augusta State that can be reasonably traced between the present-day practice of their University professional staff in the Native American human remains religion. consultation with the Eastern Band of Officials of the U.S. Department of and the Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Cherokee Indians of North Carolina and Agriculture, Forest Service, Cibola Town, Oklahoma; Cherokee Nation, Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma. National Forest have determined that, Oklahoma; Eastern Band of Cherokee The following tribe was invited to pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(C), the Indians of North Carolina; Kialegee consult but did not participate: the one cultural item described above is a Tribal Town, Oklahoma; Muscogee Poarch Band of Creek Indians of specific ceremonial object needed by (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma; Poarch Alabama. traditional Native American religious Band of Creek Indians of Alabama; In the early to mid–1980s, human leaders for the practice of traditional Thlopthlocco Tribal Town, Oklahoma; remains representing a minimum of one Native American religions by their and United Keetoowah Band of individual were removed from Stalling’s present-day adherents. Officials of the Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma. Island (9–CB–1), Columbia County, GA. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Representatives of any other Indian The human remains were given to the Service, Cibola National Forest also tribe that believes itself to be culturally Augusta College (now Augusta State have determined that, pursuant to 25 affiliated with the human remains University) anthropology program by a U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship should contact Dr. Christopher Murphy, former student. No known individual of shared group identity that can be Augusta State University, 2500 Walton was identified. No associated funerary reasonably traced between the sacred Way, Augusta, GA 30904, telephone objects are present. object and the Pueblo of Acoma, New (706) 667–4562, before June 18, 2007. The material the student donated Mexico. Repatriation of the human remains to consisted of a paper bag containing Representatives of any other Indian the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of many fragmentary pieces of bone which tribe that believes itself to be culturally North Carolina and Muscogee (Creek) at that time were not identified as affiliated with the sacred object should Nation of Oklahoma may proceed after human remains. No formal records of contact Dr. Frank E. Wozniak, NAGPRA that date if no additional claimants dates, details, or inventory were made at Coordinator, Southwestern Region, come forward. that time. In 1993, the remains were USDA Forest Service, 333 Broadway Augusta State University is examined and non-human, osteological Blvd., SE, Albuquerque, NM 87102, responsible for notifying the Alabama- material (deer) and human remains were telephone (505) 842–3238, before June Quassarte Tribal Town, Oklahoma; identified. The animal bones are not 18, 2007. Repatriation of the sacred Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Eastern considered to be associated funerary object to the Pueblo of Acoma, New Band of Cherokee Indians of North objects. Based on the donor information Mexico may proceed after that date if no Carolina; Kialegee Tribal Town, and provenience, it is reasonable to additional claimants come forward. Oklahoma; Muscogee (Creek) Nation of The U.S. Department of Agriculture, believe that the human remains are Oklahoma; Poarch Band of Creek Forest Service, Cibola National Forest is Native American. Indians of Alabama; Thlopthlocco responsible for notifying the Pueblo of Stalling’s Island is a locally well- Tribal Town, Oklahoma; and United Acoma, New Mexico and Pueblo of known late Archaic Period site in the Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Laguna, New Mexico that this notice has Savannah River above Augusta, GA. Oklahoma that this notice has been been published. During the late Archaic period, pre- published. Creek or pre-Cherokee peoples occupied Dated: March 20, 2007. the central Savannah River valley which Dated: April 12, 2007. Sherry Hutt, today lies in the states of Georgia and Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. South Carolina. Authoritative sources Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E7–9450 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] and descendants of both Creek and [FR Doc. E7–9453 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–50–S Cherokee tribes claim that their BILLING CODE 4312–50–S

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27845

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Department of the Interior, Bureau of National Park Service is not responsible Indian Affairs and University of for the determinations in this notice. National Park Service Colorado Museum also have determined A detailed assessment of the human that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), remains was made by the Museum of Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. there is a relationship of shared group Anthropology, Washington State Department of the Interior, Bureau of identity that can be reasonably traced University professional staff in Indian Affairs, Washington, DC and between the Native American human consultation with representatives of the University of Colorado Museum, remains and the Crow Tribe of Montana. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Boulder, CO Representatives of any other Indian Reservation, Washington. In 1969 and 1970, human remains AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. tribe that believes itself to be culturally representing a minimum of nine ACTION: Notice. affiliated with the human remains should contact Donald Sutherland, individuals were removed from the Minard site (45–GH–15) in Grays Harbor Notice is here given in accordance Acting Chief, Division of Environmental County, WA, by Richard Daugherty, an with the Native American Graves and Cultural Resources Management, employee, and Thomas E. Roll, graduate Protection and Repatriation Act 1849 C St. NW, Washington, DC 20240, student, of Washington State University. (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the telephone (703) 390–6470, or Steve The excavations were conducted under completion of an inventory of human Lekson, Curator of Anthropology, research funds allocated by the remains and associated funerary objects University of Colorado Museum, Washington State Legislature. No in the control of the U.S. Department of Henderson Building, Campus Box 218, known individuals were identified. The the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Boulder, CO 80309–0218, telephone (303) 492–6671, before June 18, 2007. 82 associated funerary objects are 2 Washington, DC and in the possession nipple topped mauls, 1 ground slate of the University of Colorado Museum, Repatriation of the human remains to the Crow Tribe of Montana may proceed knife, 1 ground stone club, 1 necklace Boulder, CO. The human remains were of rolled copper and dentalium beads, 1 after that date if no additional claimants removed from the Crow Indian straight adze with a carved whale bone come forward. Reservation, MT. handle, 1 knife or small adze-chisel, 1 This notice is published as part of the The University of Colorado Museum metal chisel, 1 metal awl, 1 lot of metal National Park Service’s administrative is responsible for notifying the Crow fragments from wood working tools, 5 responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 Tribe of Montana that this notice has lots of nails, 2 lots of glass beads, 2 lots U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations been published. of tin can fragments, 5 lots of in this notice are the sole responsibility Dated: April 4, 2007. unidentified metal fragments, 2 spoons, of the museum, institution, or Federal Sherry Hutt, 3 lots of wood fragments, 14 thimbles on agency that has control of the Native Manager, National NAGPRA Program. a string, 1 lot of unidentified plant American human remains. The National [FR Doc. E7–9451 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] material, and 38 lots of dishes and dish Park Service is not responsible for the fragments. determinations in this notice. BILLING CODE 4312–50–S A detailed assessment of the human Osteological evidence indicates that remains was made by University of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the human remains from the Minard site Colorado Museum professional staff in represent nine individuals of Native consultation with the Bureau of Indian National Park Service American ancestry. The associated Affairs professional staff and funerary objects found with one of the representatives of the Crow Tribe of Notice of Inventory Completion: individuals indicate an interment Montana. Museum of Anthropology, Washington during the early 19th century. In 1912, human remains representing State University, Pullman, WA Stratigraphic information indicates that a minimum of one individual were the other individuals were interred removed from the Crow Indian AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. within the last 1,000 years. The Minard Reservation, 18 miles south of Billings, ACTION: Notice. site is located at or near the traditional MT, near Pryor Creek, by Ralph Copalis village of Oyhut. The Copalis Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard later sent the Notice is here given in accordance are considered to have been a band of human remains to the University of with provisions of the Native American the Lower Chehalis whose traditional Colorado Museum (Catalog number Graves Protection and Repatriation Act territory encompassed the lower reaches 4799). No known individual was (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the of the Chehalis River and the present- identified. No associated funerary completion of an inventory of human day county of Grays Harbor. The Minard objects are present. remains and associated funerary objects site is located within the area identified Based on the provenience and in the possession of the Museum of by the Indian Claims Commission as the physical morphology, the human Anthropology, Washington State aboriginal territory of the Confederated remains are those of a Native American University, Pullman, WA. The human Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, adult male. Based on the provenience, remains and associated funerary objects Washington. Continuities within the the human remains are Crow. were removed from Grays Harbor archeological record and oral tradition, Descendants of the Crow are members of County, WA. indicates that ancestors of the present- the Crow Tribe of Montana. This notice is published as part of the day Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Officials of the U.S. Department of the National Park Service’s administrative Reservation, Washington resided at the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs and responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 Minard site during the prehistoric and University of Colorado Museum have U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations early historic periods. determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. in this notice are the sole responsibility Officials of the Museum of 3001 (9–10), the human remains of the museum, institution, or Federal Anthropology, Washington State described above represent the physical agency that has control of the Native University have determined that, remains of one individual of Native American human remains and pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the American ancestry. Officials of the U.S. associated funerary objects. The human remains described above

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27846 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

represent the physical remains of nine This notice is published as part of the between the Native American human individuals of Native American National Park Service’s administrative remains and the Confederated Tribes of ancestry. Officials of the Museum of responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 the Umatilla Reservation, Oregon. Anthropology, Washington State U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations Representatives of any other Indian University also have determined that, in this notice are the sole responsibility tribe that believes itself to be culturally pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(A), the 82 of the museum, institution, or Federal affiliated with the human remains objects described above are reasonably agency that has control of the Native should contact Dr. John Finney, believed to have been placed with or American human remains. The National Associate Dean, University of Puget near individual human remains at the Park Service is not responsible for the Sound, 1500 N. Warner, Tacoma, WA time of death or later as part of the death determinations in this notice. 98416, telephone (253) 879–3207, before rite or ceremony. Lastly, officials of the A detailed assessment of the human June 18, 2007. Repatriation of the Museum of Anthropology, Washington remains was made by the Slater human remains to the Confederated State University have determined that, Museum of Natural History, University Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is of Puget Sound professional staff and a Oregon may proceed after that date if no a relationship of shared group identity consultant in consultation with additional claimants come forward. that can be reasonably traced between representatives of the Confederated The Slater Museum of Natural History the Native American human remains Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, is responsible for notifying the and associated funerary objects and the Oregon. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis On an unknown date, human remains Reservation, Oregon that this notice has Reservation, Washington. representing a minimum of one been published. individual were probably removed from Representatives of any other Indian Dated: March 27, 2007. Oregon by Robert McManus and given tribe that believes itself to be culturally Sherry Hutt, affiliated with the human remains and to Stanley G. Jewett. Mr. Jewett donated Manager, National NAGPRA Program. associated funerary objects should the human remains to the Slater contact Mary Collins, Associate Museum in 1955. No known individual [FR Doc. E7–9449 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Director, Museum of Anthropology, was identified. No associated funerary BILLING CODE 4312–50–S Washington State University, P.O. Box objects are present. Written on the right side of the skull 62291, Pullman, WA 99164–4910, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR telephone (509) 335–4314, before June is, ‘‘One of Poker Jim’s warriors found near where he was killed. April 1918, 18, 2007. Repatriation of the human National Park Service remains and associated funerary objects Robt. McManus’’ and next to it ‘‘SGJ’’ circled in ink. Poker Jim was a Umatilla to the Confederated Tribes of the Notice of Inventory Completion: Texas chief (Dorys N. Crow, ‘‘Poker Jim: Chief Chehalis Reservation, Washington may Archeological Research Laboratory, of the Walla Wallas,’’ The Sunday proceed after that date if no additional The University of Texas at Austin, Oregonian Magazine, December 7, 1952; claimants come forward. Austin, TX The Museum of Anthropology, Diana LaSarge, Cultural Affiliation Washington State University is Document for the Cayuse, Umatilla, and AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. responsible for notifying the Walla Walla Tribes, 2002; Jennifer ACTION: Notice. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Karson, Wiyaxayxt/ Wiyaakaa’awn/As Notice is here given in accordance Reservation, Washington that this notice Days Go by: Our History, Our Land, Our with the Native American Graves has been published. People: The Cayuse, Umatilla, And Walla Walla, 2006). Protection and Repatriation Act Dated: April 15, 2007. The individual is most likely of (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the Sherry Hutt, Native American ancestry as indicated completion of an inventory of human Manager, National NAGPRA Program. by morphological features. The remains and associated funerary objects [FR Doc. E7–9455 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] geographical location where the human in the control of the Texas BILLING CODE 4312–50–S remains were presumably recovered is Archeological Research Laboratory, The consistent with the historically University of Texas at Austin, Austin, documented territory of the tribes now TX. The human remains and associated DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR represented by the Confederated Tribes funerary objects were removed from of the Umatilla Reservation, Oregon. Fisher and Lubbock Counties, TX. National Park Service Information provided during This notice is published as part of the consultation with tribal representatives, National Park Service’s administrative Notice of Inventory Completion: Slater indicates that the human remains share responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 Museum of Natural History, University a common ancestry with members of U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations of Puget Sound, Tacoma, WA tribes now represented by the in this notice are the sole responsibility AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla of the museum, institution, or Federal ACTION: Notice. Reservation, Oregon. agency that has control of the Native Officials of the Slater Museum of American human remains and Notice is here given in accordance Natural History have determined that, associated funerary objects. The with the Native American Graves pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the National Park Service is not responsible Protection and Repatriation Act human remains described above for the determinations in this notice. (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the represent the physical remains of one A detailed assessment of the human completion of an inventory of human individual of Native American ancestry. remains was made by Texas remains in the possession of the Slater Officials of the Slater Museum of Archeological Research Laboratory Museum of Natural History, University Natural History also have determined professional staff in consultation with of Puget Sound, Tacoma, WA. The that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), representatives of the Comanche Nation, human remains were probably removed there is a relationship of shared group Oklahoma. The Kiowa Tribe of Indians from Oregon. identity that can be reasonably traced of Oklahoma did not respond when

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27847

invited to consult with the Texas The Fisher and Lubbock Counties are Protection and Repatriation Act Archeological Research Laboratory within the territory inhabited by both (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the professional staff. the Comanche and Kiowa Indians completion of an inventory of human In 1951, human remains representing during the 1800s. remains and associated funerary objects a minimum of one individual were Officials of the Texas Archeological in the control of the Washington State removed out of a wall of the Research Laboratory have determined Parks and Recreation Commission, Yellowhouse Canyon, east of Lubbock, that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), Olympia, WA and in the physical Lubbock County, TX, by Dr. Grayson the human remains described above custody of the Thomas Burke Memorial Meade, a geologist at Texas represent the physical remains of two Washington State Museum (Burke Technological College. Subsequently, individuals of Native American Museum), University of Washington, the human remains were given to the ancestry. Officials of the Texas Seattle, WA. The human remains and Texas Memorial Museum at The Archeological Research Laboratory also associated funerary objects were University of Texas at Austin. The have determined that, pursuant to 25 removed from Old Man House State human remains were recently U.S.C. 3001 (3)(A), the 276 objects Park, Kitsap County, WA. discovered in an unrelated department described above are reasonably believed This notice is published as part of the and transferred to Texas Archeological to have been placed with or near National Park Service’s administrative Research Laboratory in 2006. No known individual human remains at the time of responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 individual was identified. The 136 death or later as part of the death rite U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations associated funerary items are 1 lot or ceremony. Lastly, officials of the in this notice are the sole responsibility moccasin fragments; 6 copper bell Texas Archeological Research of the museum, institution, or Federal fragments; 1 belt cap box; 1 hinge-clasp Laboratory have determined that, agency that has control of the Native ring; 1 metal bucket; 1 metal buckle pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is American human remains and with a fragment of leather belt; 1 piece a relationship of shared group identity associated funerary objects. The of glass; 1 Remington-Beals cap and ball that can be reasonably traced between National Park Service is not responsible revolver (first manufactured in 1858); 12 the Native American human remains for the determinations in this notice. buttons; 1 lot of hair and twine; 2 and associated funerary objects and the A detailed assessment of the human grommets on wool fabric; 2 Comanche Nation, Oklahoma and remains was made by Washington State conglomerates of leather, soil, cloth, and Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma. Parks and Recreation Commission and rock; 2 metal ornaments; 1 lot of metal Representatives of any other Indian Burke Museum professional staff in pieces; 63 separate metal pieces; 3 iron tribe that believes itself to be culturally consultation with representatives of the rings; 1 bridle bit; 4 metal and leather affiliated with the human remains and Port Gamble Indian Community of the fragments; 4 metal pins and ring associated funerary objects should Port Gamble Reservation, Washington fragments; 1 iron knife with a wooden contact Darrell Creel, Director, Texas and Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port handle in a leather scabbard; 6 metal Archeological Research Laboratory, 1 Madison Reservation, Washington. conchos; 2 lots of leather fragments; 7 University Station R7599, Austin, TX In 1951, human remains representing separate grommeted leather pieces; 7 78712, telephone (512) 471–6007, before a minimum of three individuals were metal fragments with leather strips; 1 lot June 18, 2007. Repatriation of the removed from Old Man House (45–KP– of tubular bone pipe beads; 1 lot of glass human remains and associated funerary trade beads; 1 lot of leather, metal, and 2) in Kitsap County, WA, by Warren objects to the Comanche Nation, Snyder, as part of a University of fabric fragments; 1 antler flaking tool; Oklahoma may proceed after that date if and 1 piece of cinnabar (mercury ore). Washington field expedition. The no additional claimants come forward. human remains were transferred to the The mode of interment and the The Texas Archeological Research associated funerary objects indicate a Burke Museum where they were later Laboratory is responsible for notifying accessioned (Burke Accn. #1966–81). late Historic Southern Plains the Comanche Nation, Oklahoma and association. No known individuals were identified. Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma that The 29 associated funerary objects are In 1960, human remains representing this notice has been published. a minimum of one individual were 28 shells and 1 cedar wood fragment. removed from the Watson site (41FS1), Dated: April 12, 2007. Archeological information suggests Fisher County, TX, by an amateur Sherry Hutt, that the Old Man House site was used archeologist. The burial was in a Manager, National NAGPRA Program. for over 2000 years. The human remains standing position in a crevice in the [FR Doc. E7–9454 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] were buried in a semi-flexed position ground facing to the southwest. No BILLING CODE 4312–50–S and covered with red ochre. One burial known individual was identified. The had a group of dentalium shells placed 140 associated funerary objects are 13 over the individual. The burial practices brass bracelets, 1 brass button, 8 brass DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR are consistent with burial practices of rings, 15 cloth fragments, 1 lot of glass the Puget Sound Coast Salish. beads, 1 piece of hammered copper, 42 National Park Service The Lushootseed name for the Old hawk bells, 1 iron axe, 3 iron nails, 9 Man House site is D’Suq’wub. Members leather fragments, approximately 40 Notice of Inventory Completion: of the Suquamish tribe speak the metal fragments, 1 mirror glass, and 5 Washington State Parks and Lushootseed language. The site is also pieces of wood. Recreation Commission, Olympia, WA the location of the long house where Dr. Doug Owsley, Forensic and Thomas Burke Memorial ‘‘Chief’’ Sealth, also known as Chief Anthropologist, National Museum of Washington State Museum, University Seattle, a leader of the Suquamish, once Natural History, reports that the of Washington, Seattle, WA lived. The earliest written ethnographic physical characteristics of this AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. information describing the longhouse individual indicate a Comanche or ACTION: Notice. referred to as Old Man House was by Kiowa affiliation. The associated George Gibbs in 1855. Descendants of funerary objects indicate the human Notice is here given in accordance the Puget Sound Coast Salish and remains are from the historic period. with the Native American Graves Suquamish are members of the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27848 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port Dated: March 15, 2007. Response, Compensation and Liability Madison Reservation, Washington. Sherry Hutt, Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9607, In 1855, the Point Elliot Treaty Manager, National NAGPRA Program. natural resources damages and allocated the land where Old Man [FR Doc. E7–9452 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] assessment costs incurred in response to House was to the Suquamish. The BILLING CODE 4312–50–S releases of hazardous substances at the Suquamish were later removed from Newton County Wells Superfund Site these lands in 1904 and 1905, when the (‘‘the Site’’), in Newton and Jasper United States government seized the INTERNATIONAL TRADE counties, Missouri. The proposed land. By 1950, Washington State Parks COMMISSION consent decree will resolve the United and Recreation Commission acquired States’ natural resource damages claims the land where site 45–KP–2 is located. [Inv. No. 337–TA–604] against defendant F.A.G. Bearings LLC under Section 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. Based on archeological, historic, In the Matter of Certain Sucralose, 9607, at the Site. Under the terms of the ethnographic, and morphological Sweeteners Containing Sucralose, and proposed consent decree, defendant evidence the human remains are Related Intermediate Compounds F.A.G. Bearings will make cash determined to be culturally affiliated Thereof; Correction payments of $6,739 and $130,724 to the with the Suquamish Indian Tribe of the United States. The funds will be paid to Port Madison Reservation, Washington. AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. the Department of Interior’s Natural Officials of the Washington State Resource Damage and Restoration Fund. ACTION: Correcting amendment. Parks and Recreation Commission and In return, the United States will grant Burke Museum have determined that, SUMMARY: This correcting amendment F.A.G. Bearings a covenant not to sue pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the corrects a typographical error in the for natural resource damages under human remains described above institution of investigation notice CERCLA with respect to the Site. represent the physical remains of three published in the Federal Register on individuals of Native American The Department of Justice will receive May 10, 2007 (72 FR 26645). The notice for a period of thirty (30) days from the ancestry. Officials of the Washington published in the Federal Register on date of this publication comments State Parks and Recreation Commission May 10 inadvertently cited the incorrect relating to the proposed consent decree. and Burke Museum also have section of the U.S. Code. Therefore, the Comments should be addressed to the determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. Commission is amending the second Assistant Attorney General, 3001 (3)(A), the 29 objects described sentence in the third from the last Environment and Natural Resources above are reasonably believed to have paragraph to read ‘‘In instituting this Division, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. been placed with or near individual investigation, the Commission has not Department of Justice, Washington, DC human remains at the time of death or made any determination as to the scope 20044–7611, and should refer to the later as part of the death rite or of 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)(ii) or whether proposed consent decree with defendant ceremony. Lastly, officials of the 337(a)(1)(B)(ii) is sufficiently broad as to F.A.G. Bearings LLC in United States v. Washington State Parks and Recreation encompass such processes.’’ F.A.G. Bearings LLC, D.J. Ref. 90–11–3– Commission and Burke Museum have DATES: Effective on May 17, 2007. 08871. determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 3001 (2), there is a relationship of The proposed consent decree may be Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the shared group identity that can be examined at the office of the United Commission, 202–205–2000 (e-mail: reasonably traced between the Native States Attorney, 901 St. Louis, Suite [email protected]). American human remains and 500, Springfield, Missouri 65806. associated funerary objects and the Issued: May 11, 2007. During the public comment period, the Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port By Order of the Commission. Consent Decree may be examined on the Madison Reservation, Washington. Marilyn R. Abbott, following Department of Justice Web Secretary to the Commission. site: http://www.udoj.gov/enrd/ Representatives of any other Indian Consent_Decrees.html and at the [FR Doc. E7–9456 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] tribe that believes itself to be culturally Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, affiliated with the human remains and BILLING CODE 7020–02–P U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, associated funerary objects should DC 20044–7611 or by faxing a request to contact Cindy Sulenes Farr, Washington Tonia Fleetwood, fax no. (202) 514– State Parks & Recreation Commission, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 0097, phone confirmation number (202) 7150 Cleanwater Lane, P.O. Box 42650, 514–1547. In requesting a copy please Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Olympia, WA 98504, telephone (360) refer to the referenced case and enclose Under the Comprehensive 902–8623 before June 18, 2007. a check in the amount of $4.50 (25 cents Environmental Response, Repatriation of the human remains and per page reproduction costs), payable to Compensation and Liability Act associated funerary objects to the the U.S. Treasury. Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port Under 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby Public comments may be submitted Madison Reservation, Washington may given that on May 2, 2007, a proposed proceed after that date if no additional by e-mail to the following e-mail consent decree with defendant F.A.G. address: pubcomment- claimants come forward. Bearings LLC was lodged in the civil [email protected]. The Burke Museum is responsible for action United States v. F.A.G. Bearings notifying the Port Gamble Indian LLC, Civil Action No. 3:07–cv–5036, in Robert E. Maher, Jr., Community of the Port Gamble the United States District Court of the Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Reservation, Washington and Western District of Missouri. Section, Environmental and Natural Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port In this action the United States seeks, Resources Division. Madison Reservation, Washington that pursuant to Section 107 of the [FR Doc. 07–2412 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] this notice has been published. Comprehensive Environmental BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27849

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE by e-mail or fax, forward a check in that Hampshire, 55 Pleasant Street, Room amount to the Consent Decree Library at 352, Concord, New Hampshire 03301, Notice of Lodging of Stipulated Order the stated address. and at U.S. EPA Region 1, 1 Congress Under the Clean Water Act Street, Suite 1100, Boston, Henry Friedman, Massachusetts 02114 (contact John Notice is hereby given that on May 8, Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Kilborn). During the public comment 2007, a proposed Stipulated Order in Section, Environment and Natural Resources period, the Consent Decree also may be United States and State of Hawaii v. Division. examined on the following Department City and County of Honolulu, Case No. [FR Doc. 07–2407 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] of Justice Web site: http:// CV 07–00235 HG–KS (D. Hawaii), BILLING CODE 4410–15–M www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ relating to the City and County of Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the Honolulu’s (CCH) sanitary sewage Consent Decree also may be obtained by collection system, was lodged with the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE mail from the Consent Decree Library, United States District Court for the Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of District of Hawaii. Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, or The proposed Stipulated Order is a Under the Clean Water Act by faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia settlement of claims for injunctive relief Notice is hereby given that on April Fleetwood ([email protected]), brought against CCH pursuant to the 30, 2007, a proposed Consent Decree in fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251–1387, United States v. Hudson Sand and confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In for the unauthorized discharge of Gravel, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 07– requesting a copy from the Consent pollutants into waters of the United CV–00128–SM, was lodged with the Decree Library, please enclose a check States. The proposed Stipulated Order United States District Court for the in the amount of $11.00 (25 cents per requires CCH to: (1) Construct District of New Hampshire. page reproduction cost) payable to the replacement force mains; (2) assess the In this action, the United States U.S. Treasury, or, if by email or fax, condition of specific force mains and a sought a civil penalty and injunctive forward a check in that amount to the pump station and implement necessary relief for violations of the Clean Water Consent Decree Library at the stated repairs; and (3) submit site-specific spill Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq., and its address. contingency plans for designated force implementing regulations, in mains. connection with a sand and gravel Ronald Gluck, The Department of Justice will receive mining operation located off Pettingill Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement for a period of thirty (30) days from the Road in the town of Londonderry, New Section, Environment and Natural Resources date of this publication comments Hampshire owned and/or operated by Division. relating to the Stipulated Order. the settling defendants. Specifically, the [FR Doc. 07–2411 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Comments should be addressed to the United States alleged that the settling BILLING CODE 4410–15–M Assistant Attorney General, defendants discharged stormwater from Environment and Natural Resources the property into waters of the United Division, and either e-mailed to States without an appropriate permit, in DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [email protected], or violation of 33 U.S.C. 1311 and 1318, Notice of Lodging of a Settlement mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. and that the settling defendants Agreement Under the Comprehensive Department of Justice, Washington, DC discharged pollutants into waters of the Environmental Response, 20044–7611, with a copy to Robert United States without a permit from the Compensation, and Liability Act Mullaney, U.S. Department of Justice, United States Army Corps of Engineers, 301 Howard Street, Suite 1050, San in violation of 33 U.S.C. 1344. The Notice is hereby given that on April Francisco, CA 94105, and should refer Consent Decree requires the settling 19, 2007, a proposed Settlement to United States and State of Hawaii v. defendants to implement injunctive Agreement in In Re Keystone City and County of Honolulu, D.J. Ref. relief, including obtaining a proper Environmental Services, Inc. 90–5–1–1–3825/1. stormwater permit for the property and Bankruptcy Petition: 04–24279, was The Stipulated Order may be delineating all wetlands on the property lodged with the United States examined at U.S. EPA Region 9, Office and undertaking appropriate restoration, Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern of Regional Counsel, 75 Hawthorne if necessary. The Decree also requires District of Pennsylvania. Street, San Francisco, California. During the settling defendants to pay $250,000 In this bankruptcy proceeding brought the public comment period, the civil penalty. under Chapter 7 of Title 11 of the Stipulated Order may also be examined The Department of Justice will receive United States Code, 11 U.S.C. 101 et on the following Department of Justice for a period of thirty (30) days from the seq., the United States filed a general Web site: http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ date of this publication comments unsecured claim pursuant to the Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the relating to the proposed Consent Decree. Comprehensive Environmental Stipulated Order may also be obtained Comments should be addressed to the Response, Compensation and Liability by mail from the Consent Decree Assistant Attorney General, Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department Environmental and Natural Resources for approximately $2 million in of Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611 Division, and either e-mailed to unreimbursed environmental response or by faxing or e-mailing a request to [email protected], or costs incurred by the United States at Tonia Fleetwood mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. the Malvern Superfund Site, located in ([email protected]), fax number Department of Justice, Washington, DC Chester County, Pennsylvania, and at (202) 514–0097, phone confirmation 20044–7611, and should refer to United the Spectron Superfund Site, located in number (202) 514–1547. In requesting a States v. Hudson Sand and Gravel, Inc., Cecil County, Maryland. Under the copy from the Consent Decree Library, et al., D.J. Ref #90–5–1–1–08363. Settlement Agreement, the Debtor will please enclose a check in the amount of The Consent Decree may be examined make a payment of $440,000, of which $9.75 (25 cents per page reproduction at the Office of the United States the United States will receive $233,200. cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if Attorney for the District of New The remainder will be paid to the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27850 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

private parties that are performing the the United States District Court for the In requesting a copy from the Consent remedial work at these Superfund sites. Southern District of Mississippi. Decree Library, please refer to United The Department of Justice will In this action, the United States States v. Pursue Energy Corporation receive, for a period of thirty (30) days sought to establish the amount of the (Settlement Agreement with Pursue from the date of this publication, defendant’s liability, pursuant to Energy Corporation, DOJ Ref. No. 90– comments relating to the Settlement Section 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607, 11–3–06625/2), and enclose a check in Agreement. Comments should be for the costs incurred and to be incurred the amount of $2.00 (25 cents per page addressed to the assistant Attorney by the United States in responding to reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. General, Environment and Natural the release and/or threatened release of Treasury or, if by e-mail or fax, forward Resources Division, and either e-mailed hazardous substances at and from the a check in that amount to the Consent to [email protected], or Industrial Pollution Control Site in Decree Library at the states address. mailed to: P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Jackson, Hinds County, Mississippi. Department of Justice, Washington, DC Henry S. Friedman, Under the proposed Settlement Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 20044–7611, and should refer to: In Re Agreement, Defendant Pursue Energy Keystone Environmental Services, Inc., Enforcement Section, Environment and Corporation a debtor in the Chapter 11 Natural Resources Division. D.J. Ref. 90–11–3–1731/7. backruptcy proceeding In re: Pursue The Settlement Agreement may be [FR Doc. 07–2409 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Energy Corporation, Chap. 11, Bankr. BILLING CODE 4410–15–M examined at U.S. EPA Region III, Office No. 3–02–05339–JEE (Bankr. S.D. Miss.), of Regional Counsel, 1650 Arch Street, will pay $25,000 to the Hazardous Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029, c/o Joan Substances Superfund in DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE A. Johnson or Humane Zia. During the reimbursement of costs incurred by the public comment period, the Settlement United States at the Site. The Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Agreement may also be examined on the Bankruptcy Court has approved the Pursuant to the Comprehensive following Department of Justice Web debtor’s entry into the proposed Environmental Response, site: http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ Settlement Agreement, and under the Compensation and Liability Act Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the terms of the proposed Settlement Settlement Agreement may also be In accordance with Departmental agreement the United States will have obtained by mail from the Consent policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby an allowed general unsecured claim of Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. given that a proposed consent decree in $25,000. According to the debtor’s Department of Justice, Washington, DC United States v. The Tire Depot, Inc., et debtor’s confirmed bankruptcy plan of 20044–7611 or by faxing or e-mailing a al., Civil Action No. CV–07–50–M– reorganization, allowed general request to Tonia Fleetwood DWM, was lodged with the United unsecured claims are to be paid in full. ([email protected]), fax no. States District Court for the District of (202) 514–0097, phone confirmation The Department of Justice will receive Montana on May 1, 2007. This proposed number (202) 514–1547. In requesting a for a period of thirty (30) day from the consent decree would resolve the copy from the Consent Decree Library, date of this publication comments United States’ CERCLA claims against please enclose a check in the amount of relating to the Settlement Agreement. The Tire Depot, Inc., Vernon Reum, and $4.75 (25 cents per page reproduction Comments should be addressed to the Roxanne Reum related to the Pablo Tire cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if Assistant Attorney General, Fire Site in and near Ronan, Montana. by e-mail or fax, forward a check in that Environment and Natural Resources Under the terms of the proposed amount to the Consent Decree Library at Division, and either e-mailed consent decree, the defendants will pay the stated address. [email protected] or the United States $50,000 to reimburse mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. the Environmental Protection Agency Robert Brook, Department of Justice, Washington, DC for cleanup costs incurred at the Site. Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement 20044–7611, and should refer to United The settlement is based in part on Section, Environment and Natural Resources States v. Pursue Energy Corporation defendants’ ability to pay. Division. (Settlement Agreement with Pursue The Department of Justice will [FR Doc. 07–2410 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Energy Corporation, DOJ Ref. No. 90– receive, for a period of thirty (30) days BILLING CODE 4410–15–M 11–3–06625/2). from the date of this publication, The Settlement Agreement may be comments relating to the proposed examined at U.S. EPA Region 4, Atlanta consent decree. Comments should be DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., addressed to the Assistant Attorney Notice of Lodging of Settlement Atlanta, Georgia 30303 (contact General, for the Environment and Agreement Under the Comprehensive Matthew Hicks, Esq (404) 562–9670). Natural Resources Division, and either Environmental Response, During the public comment period, the e-mailed to pubcomment- Compensation, and Liability Act of Settlement Agreement may also be [email protected] or mailed to P.O. 1980 (‘‘CERCLA’’) examined on the following Department Box 7611, Department of Justice, of Justice Web site, http:// Washington, DC 20530, and should refer Consistent with Section 122(d) of the www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ to United States v. The Tire Depot, Inc., Comprehensive Environmental Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the et al., Civil Action No. CV–07–50–M– Response, Compensation, and Liability Settlement Agreement may also be DWM, and Department of Justice Act of 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’) obtained by mail from the Consent Reference No. 90–11–3–08429. 42 U.S.C. 9622(d), and 28 CFR 50.7, Decree Library, U.S. Department of The decree may be examined on the notice is hereby given that on May 3, Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC following Department of Justice Web 2007, a proposed Settlement Agreement 20044–7611 or by faxing e-mailing a site http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ with Pursue Energy Corporation in request to Tonia Fleetwood open.html. A copy of the decree may United States v. Pursue Energy ([email protected]), fax no. also be obtained by mail from the Corporation, No. 3:03–CV–00325– (202) 512–0097, phone confirmation Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, HTW–JCS (S.D. Miss.), was lodged with number (202) 514–1547. U.S. Department of Justice, Washington,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27851

DC 20044–7611 or by faxing or e- and consumer affiliation or government DEPARTMENT OF LABOR mailing a request to Tonia Fleetwood designation along with a short statement [email protected]), fax no. describing the topic to be addressed and Employment and Training (202) 514–0097, phone confirmation the time needed for the presentation. A Administration number (202) 514–1547. In requesting a requestor will ordinarily be allowed no copy from the Consent Decree Library, more than 15 minutes to present a topic. Investigations Regarding Certifications please enclose a check in the amount of DATES: The APB will meet in open of Eligibility To Apply for Worker $5.75 ($.25 per page) payable to the U.S. session from 8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m., on Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Treasury. June 13–14, 2007. Trade Adjustment Assistance Robert D. Brook, ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place Petitions have been filed with the Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement at the Adam’s Mark Buffalo Niagra, 120 Section, Environment and Natural Resources Church Street, Buffalo, New York, (716) Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) Division. 845–5100. of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) and [FR Doc. 07–2408 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: are identified in the Appendix to this BILLING CODE 4410–15–M Inquiries may be addressed to Mrs. notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, Rebecca S. Durrett, Management and the Director of the Division of Trade Program Analyst, Advisory Groups Adjustment Assistance, Employment DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Management Unit, Programs Support and Training Administration, has Section, FBI CJIS Division, Module C3, instituted investigations pursuant to Federal Bureau of Investigation 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, Section 221(a) of the Act. Meeting of the CJIS Advisory Policy West Virginia 26306–0149, telephone The purpose of each of the Board (304) 625–2617, facsimile (304) 625– investigations is to determine whether 5090. the workers are eligible to apply for AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Investigation Dated: May 7, 2007. adjustment assistance under Title II, (FBI). Roy G. Weise, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations ACTION: Meeting Notice. Senior CJIS Advisor, Criminal Justice will further relate, as appropriate, to the Information Services Division, Federal Bureau determination of the date on which total SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is of Investigation. to announce the meeting of the Criminal or partial separations began or [FR Doc. 07–2455 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Justice Information Services (CJIS) threatened to begin and the subdivision Advisory Policy Board (APB). The CJIS BILLING CODE 4410–02–M of the firm involved. APB is a Federal advisory committee The petitioners or any other persons established pursuant to the Federal showing a substantial interest in the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Advisory Committee Act. This meeting subject matter of the investigations may announcement is being published as Employment and Training request a public hearing, provided such required by Section 10 of the FACA. Administration request is filed in writing with the The CJIS APB is responsible for Director, Division of Trade Adjustment reviewing policy issues and appropriate [TA–W–61,260] Assistance, at the address shown below, technical and operational issues related to the programs administered by the Bayer Clothing Group, Target Sales not later than May 29, 2007. FBI’s DJIS Division, and thereafter, Corp., Frisco, TX; Notice of Interested persons are invited to making appropriate recommendations to Termination of Investigation submit written comments regarding the the FBI Director. The program subject matter of the investigations to Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade administered by the CJIS Division are the Director, Division of Trade the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on April 6, Adjustment Assistance, at the address Identification System, the Interstate shown below, not later than May 29, Identification Index, Law Enforcement 2007 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of 2007. Online, National Crime Information workers at Bayer Clothing Group, Target Center, the National Instant Criminal The petitions filed in this case are Sales Corp., Frisco, Texas. Background Check System, the National available for inspection at the Office of The petitioning group of workers is Incident-Based Reporting System, Law the Director, Division of Trade covered by an active certification, (TA– Enforcement National Data Exchange, Adjustment Assistance, Employment W–59,299C as amended) which expires and Uniform Crime Reporting. and Training Administration, U.S. on May 31, 2008. Consequently, further The meeting will be open to the Department of Labor, Room C–5311, 200 investigation in this case would serve public on a first-come, first-seated basis. Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, no purpose, and the investigation has Any member of the public wishing to DC 20210. been terminated. file a written statement concerning the Signed at Washington, DC this 9th day of Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of CJIS Division programs or wishing to May 2007. address this session should notify May 2007. Ralph DiBattista, Senior CJIS Advisor Roy G. Weise at Richard Church, (304) 625–2730 at least 24 hours prior Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Director, Division of Trade Adjustment to the start of the session. The Adjustment Assistance. Assistance. notification should contain the [FR Doc. E7–9474 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] requestor’s name, corporate designation, BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27852 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

APPENDIX—TAA PETITIONS INSTITUTED BETWEEN 4/30/07 AND 5/4/07

Subject firm Date of Date of TA–W (petitioners) Location institution petition

61393 ...... Best Artex, LLC (Wkrs) ...... Highland, IL ...... 04/30/07 04/26/07 61394 ...... Aavid Thermalloy LLC (Wkrs) ...... Laconia, NH ...... 04/30/07 04/24/07 61395 ...... Federal Mogul (USW) ...... Exton, PA ...... 04/30/07 04/27/07 61396 ...... Rayolite (Comp) ...... Newark, OH ...... 04/30/07 04/18/07 61397 ...... Hamlin Tool & Machine Co., Inc. (Wkrs) ...... Rochester, MI ...... 04/30/07 04/16/07 61398 ...... Commercial Vehicle Group (Comp) ...... Statesville, NC ...... 04/30/07 04/27/07 61399 ...... Wehadkee Yarn Mills (Comp) ...... Talladega, AL ...... 04/30/07 04/27/07 61400 ...... Smart Papers/West Chicago IDC Converting (State) ...... Hamilton, OH ...... 04/30/07 04/26/07 61401 ...... Victor Plastics Inc., Kalona Division (Comp) ...... Kalona, IA ...... 04/30/07 04/26/07 61402 ...... Advanced Decorative Systems, Inc. (Wkrs) ...... Millington, MI ...... 04/30/07 04/26/07 61403 ...... WestPoint Home, Opelika Finishing Plant (Comp) ...... Opelika, AL ...... 04/30/07 04/24/07 61404 ...... Air System Comonents, Inc. (Comp) ...... El Paso, TX ...... 04/30/07 04/20/07 61405 ...... Jarden Consumer Solutions (Wkrs) ...... Milford, MA ...... 04/30/07 04/26/07 61406 ...... Texas Instruments Kilby Fab (Wkrs) ...... Dallas, TX ...... 05/01/07 04/30/07 61407 ...... General Electric Consumer & Industrial (State) ...... Bridgeport, CT ...... 05/01/07 04/30/07 61408 ...... Toro Company (Wkrs) ...... El Paso, TX ...... 05/01/07 04/23/07 61409 ...... Delphi Rochester New York (Union) ...... Rochester, NY ...... 05/01/07 04/24/07 61410 ...... CGI Circuits, Inc. (Comp) ...... Taunton, MA ...... 05/01/07 04/20/07 61411 ...... Surprise Technologies (Wkrs) ...... Marion, OH ...... 05/01/07 04/24/07 61412 ...... Carlisle Finishing International Textile Group (Wkrs) ...... Carlisle, SC ...... 05/01/07 04/27/07 61413 ...... Nautel Maine Inc. (Wkrs) ...... Bangor, ME ...... 05/02/07 04/05/07 61414 ...... Mercury Marine (Union) ...... Fond du Lac, WI ...... 05/02/07 04/23/07 61415 ...... Robinson Anton Textile Company Dye Operatrion (Comp) .... Bloomsburg, PA ...... 05/02/07 04/23/07 61416 ...... Golden Manufacturing Company, Inc. (Comp) ...... Marietta, MS ...... 05/02/07 04/05/07 61417 ...... Edenton Dyeing & Finishing LLC (Comp) ...... Edenton, NC ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61418 ...... Temco Metal Products (State) ...... Clackamas, OR ...... 05/02/07 04/27/07 61419 ...... Firestone Tube Co. (USW) ...... Russellville, AR ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61420 ...... Byer Manufacturing (Wkrs) ...... Orono, ME ...... 05/02/07 04/23/07 61421 ...... Filtrona Richmond, Inc. (Comp) ...... Richmond, VA ...... 05/02/07 04/20/07 61422 ...... WestPoint Home, Fairfax Manufacturing (Comp) ...... Valley, AL ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61423 ...... Lane Furniture Industries, Inc. (Comp) ...... Tupelo, MS ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61424 ...... Hewlett Packard (Wkrs) ...... Corvaillis, OR ...... 05/02/07 04/27/07 61425 ...... The Oak Mine, Inc. (Wkrs) ...... Grant Pass, OR ...... 05/02/07 04/23/07 61426 ...... Badger (Wkrs) ...... Wausau, WI ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61427 ...... Iron Age Corporation (Wkrs) ...... Westborough, MA ...... 05/02/07 05/01/07 61428 ...... Dana Corporation (Comp) ...... Statesville, NC ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61429 ...... Burns Best, Inc. (Wkrs) ...... Spooner, WI ...... 05/02/07 04/09/07 61430 ...... Thomasville Furniture Plant 4 (Comp) ...... Troutman, NC ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61431 ...... Thomasville Furniture Industrial Plant C (Comp) ...... Thomasville, NC ...... 05/02/07 04/30/07 61432 ...... Deluxe Media Services, LLC (Wkrs) ...... Pleasant Prairie, WI ...... 05/03/07 05/02/07 61433 ...... Nacom Corporation (Wkrs) ...... Griffin, GA ...... 05/03/07 04/11/07 61434 ...... Judith Lieber (Wkrs) ...... New York, NY ...... 05/03/07 04/18/07 61435 ...... Sanmina-SCI, USA (Comp) ...... Phoenix, AZ ...... 05/03/07 05/01/07 61436 ...... U.P. Plastics Inc. (Comp) ...... Baraga, MI ...... 05/03/07 05/01/07 61437 ...... Freightliner, LLC (Wkrs) ...... Cleveland, NC ...... 05/03/07 05/02/07 61438 ...... TMP Directional Marketing (Wkrs) ...... Fort Wayne, IN ...... 05/03/07 04/09/07 61439 ...... Rugg Manufacturing Company, Inc. (Comp) ...... Greenfield, MA ...... 05/03/07 05/01/07 61440 ...... Numatics (Comp) ...... Highland, MI ...... 05/03/07 05/02/07 61441 ...... Reither and Schefenacker USA LP (Wkrs) ...... Selmer, TN ...... 05/04/07 04/02/07 61442 ...... Connor Manufacturing Services (Comp) ...... Portland, OR ...... 05/04/07 05/03/07 61443 ...... Seagate Technology (State) ...... Shakopee, MN ...... 05/04/07 05/03/07 61444 ...... Bilt Best Products, Inc. (State) ...... Sainte Genevieve, MO ...... 05/04/07 05/03/07 61445 ...... United Airlines (Comp) ...... Elk Grove Village, IL ...... 05/04/07 05/03/07 61446 ...... Bosal Industries, Tennessee (Comp) ...... Columbia, TN ...... 05/04/07 04/24/07 61447 ...... Stretchline USA, Inc. (Comp) ...... Rocky Mount, NC ...... 05/04/07 04/07/07 61448 ...... CST Powertrain Components, Inc. (UAW) ...... Chesterfield, MI ...... 05/04/07 05/02/07 61449 ...... Delphi Corporation (Comp) ...... Wichita Falls, TX ...... 05/04/07 04/30/07

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27853

[FR Doc. E7–9475 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] that the subject firm ceased production facts which would justify BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P of transponders at the end of 2005, reconsideration of the Department of when all production of transponders Labor’s prior decision. Accordingly, the was shifted to Malaysia. application is denied. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR In its investigation, the Department Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of must conform to the Trade Act and May, 2007. Employment and Training associated regulations. Therefore, the Richard Church, Administration Department considers production and imports that occurred within a year Certifying Officer, Division of Trade [TA–W–61,083] Adjustment Assistance. prior to the date of the petition. Thus [FR Doc. E7–9477 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Intel Corporation, Optical Platform the events occurring in 2005 are outside Division, Newark, CA; Notice of of the relevant period as established by BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P Negative Determination Regarding the current petition date of February 28, 2007. Shift in production of Application for Reconsideration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR transponders and imports of By application dated April 20, 2007, transponders are irrelevant for this petitioners requested administrative Employment and Training investigation as Intel Corporation, Administration reconsideration of the Department’s Optical Platform Division, Newark, negative determination regarding California did not manufacture Notice of Determinations Regarding eligibility for workers and former transponders for sale in 2006 and Eligibility To Apply for Worker workers of the subject firm to apply for January through February of 2007. Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and The request for reconsideration also Trade Adjustment Assistance Alternative Trade Adjustment states that production of optical Assistance (ATAA). The denial notice modules for networking and In accordance with Section 223 of the was signed on April 6, 2007 and communication equipment was shifted Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 published in the Federal Register on to Thailand and that the subject firm has U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor April 24, 2007 (72 FR 20371). been progressively increasing imports of herein presents summaries of Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) optical modules from Thailand into the determinations regarding eligibility to reconsideration may be granted under United States. apply for trade adjustment assistance for the following circumstances: The review of the initial investigation workers (TA–W) number and alternative (1) If it appears on the basis of facts and further contact with the company trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) by not previously considered that the official did reveal that the subject firm (TA–W) number issued during the determination complained of was shifted production of optical modules to period of April 30 through May 4, 2007. erroneous; Thailand. However, Thailand is not a In order for an affirmative (2) If it appears that the determination country that is a party to a free trade determination to be made for workers of complained of was based on a mistake agreement with the United States or is a primary firm and a certification issued in the determination of facts not a beneficiary country under the Andean regarding eligibility to apply for worker previously considered; or Trade Preference Act, African Growth adjustment assistance, each of the group (3) If in the opinion of the Certifying and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean eligibility requirements of Section Officer, a misinterpretation of facts or of Basin Economic Recovery Act. The 222(a) of the Act must be met. the law justified reconsideration of the company official stated that modules, I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following decision. which are manufactured in Thailand are must be satisfied: The TAA petition, filed on behalf of not sold directly to customers, with the A. A significant number or proportion workers at Intel Corporation, Optical exception of one customer in Japan. All of the workers in such workers’ firm, or Platform Division, Newark, California modules are shipped from Thailand to an appropriate subdivision of the firm, engaged in production of optical Intel’s facility in Malaysia to be further have become totally or partially modules for networking and integrated into finished product, separated, or are threatened to become communication equipment was denied transponders. Transponders are further totally or partially separated; because the ‘‘contributed importantly’’ sold to customers, who might import B. The sales or production, or both, of group eligibility requirement of Section them into the United States. such firm or subdivision have decreased 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not In order to establish import impact, absolutely; and met. The investigation revealed that the Department must consider imports C. Increased imports of articles like or production of optical modules for that are like or directly competitive with directly competitive with articles networking and communication those produced at the subject firm. The produced by such firm or subdivision equipment was shifted to Thailand, company official verified that Intel have contributed importantly to such however, there were no imports of Corporation, Optical Platform Division, workers’ separation or threat of optical modules into the United States Newark, California did not import separation and to the decline in sales or in 2005 and 2006. optical modules for networking and production of such firm or subdivision; In the request for reconsideration, the communication equipment in 2006 and or petitioner stated that the subject firm January through February of 2007. Any II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the also manufactured transponders and imports of transponders are not like or following must be satisfied: that this production was shifted to directly competitive with optical A. A significant number or proportion Malaysia in 2003. The petitioner further modules as required by the Trade Act. of the workers in such workers’ firm, or stated that the subject firm has been an appropriate subdivision of the firm, importing transponders back into the Conclusion have become totally or partially United States. After review of the application and separated, or are threatened to become A contact with the company official investigative findings, I conclude that totally or partially separated; confirmed what was revealed during the there has been no error or B. There has been a shift in initial investigation. It was determined misinterpretation of the law or of the production by such workers’ firm or

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27854 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

subdivision to a foreign country of 2. Whether the workers in the TA–W–61,297; Melcor Corporation, articles like or directly competitive with workers’ firm possess skills that are not Thermal Division, dba Laird articles which are produced by such easily transferable. Technologies, Trenton, NJ: April 5, firm or subdivision; and 3. The competitive conditions within 2006 C. One of the following must be the workers’ industry (i.e., conditions TA–W–61,300; McKinney Products Co., satisfied: within the industry are adverse). Scranton, PA: April 12, 2006 TA–W–61,301; Lexington Furniture 1. The country to which the workers’ Affirmative Determinations for Worker Industries, Lexington Home Brands firm has shifted production of the Adjustment Assistance articles is a party to a free trade Division, Plant 15, Lexington, NC: agreement with the United States; The following certifications have been April 6, 2006 2. The country to which the workers’ issued. The date following the company TA–W–61,305; La-Z-Boy Manufacturing, firm has shifted production of the name and location of each Inc., Lincolnton, NC: April 10, 2006 articles to a beneficiary country under determination references the impact TA–W–61,310; Global Heating the Andean Trade Preference Act, date for all workers of such Solutions, Inc., dba Truheat, Inc., African Growth and Opportunity Act, or determination. dba Truheat SJB, dba Electro Heat, the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery The following certifications have been Inc., Allegan, MI: April 10, 2006 Act; or issued. The requirements of Section TA–W–61,332; Cooper Tire and Rubber 3. There has been or is likely to be an 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) of the Company, Texarkana, AR: April 17, increase in imports of articles that are Trade Act have been met. 2006 like or directly competitive with articles TA–W–61,215; Tool Dex, Inc., Warren, TA–W–61,335; Mr. Gasket, Inc., On-Site which are or were produced by such MI: March 29, 2006 Leased Workers of Express firm or subdivision. TA–W–61,247; Anderson Corporation, Personnel and Spherion Staffing, Carson City, NV: April 16, 2006 Also, in order for an affirmative Bayport Division, Bayport, MN: TA–W–60,945; Missbrenner Wet determination to be made for April 4, 2006 Printing, Inc., Clifton, NJ: February secondarily affected workers of a firm The following certifications have been 7, 2006 and a certification issued regarding issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) of the TA–W–61,017; Catawissa Lumber and eligibility to apply for worker Specialty Co., Plant #1, Catawissa, adjustment assistance, each of the group Trade Act have been met. TA–W–61,320; TK Holdings/Moses Lake PA: February 15, 2006 eligibility requirements of Section TA–W–61,017A; Catawissa Lumber & Inflator Operations, Airbag Inflator 222(b) of the Act must be met. Specialty Co., Plant #2, Paxinos, Workers, Moses Lake, WA: April 16, (1) Significant number or proportion PA: February 15, 2006 2006 of the workers in the workers’ firm or TA–W–61,096; Portac, Inc., Tacoma an appropriate subdivision of the firm The following certifications have been Division, Tacoma, WA: March 6, have become totally or partially issued. The requirements of Section 2006 separated, or are threatened to become 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers TA–W–61,130; Bauhaus USA, Inc., A totally or partially separated; are certified eligible to apply for TAA) Division of LA-Z-Boy, Inc., Iuka, (2) The workers’ firm (or subdivision) of the Trade Act have been met. MS: March 15, 2006 is a supplier or downstream producer to None. TA–W–61,183; Duro Textiles LLC, Duro a firm (or subdivision) that employed a The following certifications have been Finishing, Plant 2 and Duro Textile group of workers who received a issued. The requirements of Section Printers Division, Fall River, MA: certification of eligibility to apply for 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm April 2, 2007 trade adjustment assistance benefits and whose workers are certified eligible to TA–W–61,186; New London Textile, such supply or production is related to apply for TAA based on increased Inc., Newark, DE: March 20, 2006 the article that was the basis for such imports from or a shift in production to TA–W–61,194; Triana Industries, Inc., certification; and Mexico or Canada) of the Trade Act Leased Workers of Automotive (3) Either— have been met. Staffing Agency, Madison, AL: (A) The workers’ firm is a supplier None. March 26, 2006 and the component parts it supplied for TA–W–61,200; Neff Perkins Company, the firm (or subdivision) described in Affirmative Determinations for Worker Perry, OH: March 9, 2006 paragraph (2) accounted for at least 20 Adjustment Assistance and Alternative TA–W–61,353; Skip’s Cutting, Inc., On- percent of the production or sales of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Site Leased Workers of Gage workers’ firm; or The following certifications have been Personnel and JFC Temp, Ephrata, (B) A loss or business by the workers’ issued. The date following the company PA: April 30, 2006. firm with the firm (or subdivision) name and location of each The following certifications have been described in paragraph (2) contributed determination references the impact issued. The requirements of Section importantly to the workers’ separation date for all workers of such 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) and or threat of separation. determination. Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act In order for the Division of Trade The following certifications have been have been met. Adjustment Assistance to issued a issued. The requirements of Section TA–W–60,965; Eaton Aviation certification of eligibility to apply for 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) and Corporation, Aviation and Alternative Trade Adjustment Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act Aerospace Components, Aurora, Assistance (ATAA) for older workers, have been met. CO: February 13, 2006 the group eligibility requirements of TA–W–61,249; Cintas Corporation, TA–W–61,196; Avx Corporation, Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act Digitized Logo Worker Group, Raleigh, NC: March 26, 2006 must be met. Mason, OH: March 4, 2006 TA–W–61,257; Marathon Electronic Mfg. 1. Whether a significant number of TA–W–61,250; Thomasville Furniture Corp, A Subsidiary of Regal—Beloit workers in the workers’ firm are 50 Industries, Upholstery Plant #8, Corporation, Lima, OH: April 5, years of age or older. Hickory, NC: April 4, 2006 2006

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27855

TA–W–61,270; CNH American LLC, Mexico or Canada) and Section TA–W–60,950; Northern Hardwoods, Leased Workers From Armstrong’s 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have Hardwood Lumber and Logs CNH Meridian, FBG Service Corp., been met. Division, South Range, MI Belleville, PA: April 9, 2006 None. TA–W–60,965A; Eaton Aviation TA–W–61,278; ExxonMobil Chemical Corporation, Group Support Negative Determinations for Alternative Co., Films Division, Leased Workers Equipment, Aurora, CO Trade Adjustment Assistance From Express Personnel, Stratford, TA–W–61,146; Watson Laboratories, Inc, CT: April 9, 2006 In the following cases, it has been Phoenix, AZ TA–W–61,282; Amphenol Phoenix determined that the requirements of TA–W–61,160; Bruce Plastics, Inc., Interconnect, A Wholly Owned 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) have not been met for Pittsburgh, PA Subsidiary of Amphenol Corp., the reasons specified. Tustin, CA: April 10, 2006 The Department has determined that TA–W–61,213; Stark Ceramics, Inc., TA–W–61,286; Nevamar LLC, criterion (1) of Section 246 has not been East Canton, OH Subsidiary of Panolam Industries met. Workers at the firm are 50 years of TA–W–61,228; Form Tools, Inc., Int’l Inc., Tarboro, NC: April 2, 2006 age or older. Jackson, MI TA–W–61,289; The Siemon Company, TA–W–61,215; Tool Dex, Inc., Warren, TA–W–61,271; J.H. Baxter and Watertown, CT: April 10, 2006 MI Company, Eugene, OR TA–W–61,296; Valeo Engine Cooling, TA–W–61,320; TK Holdings/Moses Lake The investigation revealed that the Jamestown, NY: April 11, 2006 Inflator Operations, Airbag Inflator predominate cause of worker TA–W–61,307; Simply Asia Foods, Inc., Workers, Moses Lake, WA separations is unrelated to criteria Union City, CA: April 4, 2006 The Department has determined that (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and TA–W–61,321; Starkey Labs, Starkey— criterion (2) of Section 246 has not been (a)(2)(B)(II.C) (shift in production to a East Division, Mt. Laural, NJ: April met. Workers at the firm possess skills foreign country under a free trade 16, 2006 that are easily transferable. agreement or a beneficiary country TA–W–61,331; FiberTech Group, Inc., A TA–W–61,247; Anderson Corporation, under a preferential trade agreement, or Subsidiary of Polymer Group Bayport Division, Bayport, MN there has been or is likely to be an Incorporated, Rogers, AR: April 17, The Department has determined that increase in imports). 2006 criterion (3) of Section 246 has not been None. TA–W–61,333; Coats American, Inc., met. Competition conditions within the Cherokee Plant, Marble, NC: April workers’ industry are not adverse. The workers’ firm does not produce 16, 2006 None. an article as required for certification TA–W–61,343; Wentworth Corporation, under Section 222 of the Trade Act of dba Liberty Textiles, Eden, NC: Negative Determinations for Worker 1974. April 19, 2006 Adjustment Assistance And Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance TA–W–61,269; Auto Truck Transport TA–W–61,359; Bayer Clothing Group, Corp., Portland, OR Inc., MacClenny Products Facility, In the following cases, the MacClenny, FL: March 29, 2006 TA–W–61,298; American Manufacturing investigation revealed that the eligibility International, Inc., Patterson, NJ TA–W–61,398; Commercial Vehicle criteria for worker adjustment assistance Group, Statesville Operation have not been met for the reasons TA–W–61,345; Arvato Services, Inc., Division, Statesville, NC: April 27, specified. Melbourne, FL 2006 Because the workers of the firm are TA–W–61,384; Collezione Europa, USA, TA–W–61,295; Spang and Company, not eligible to apply for TAA, the Claremont, NC Magnetics Division, East Butler, PA: workers cannot be certified eligible for TA–W–61,304; Securitas, Working on April 10, 2006 ATAA. the Site at Bosch—Sumter Plant, TA–W–61,387; Yamaha Music The investigation revealed that Sumter, SC Manufacturing, Inc., On-Site Leased criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.A.) and (a)(2)(B)(II.A.) TA–W–61,366; Staples, Inc., Information Workers of Personnel Options, (employment decline) have not been Systems Division, Framingham, MA Thomaston, GA: April 11, 2006 met. TA–W–61,383; Kasle Steel Corporation, The following certifications have been TA–W–61,206; The Hershey Company, Corporate Office, Dearborn, MI issued. The requirements of Section Hershey Plant, Hershey, PA 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers TA–W–61,234; Penn Mould Industries, The investigation revealed that are certified eligible to apply for TAA) Inc., Washington, PA criteria of Section 222(b)(2) has not been and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade The investigation revealed that met. The workers’ firm (or subdivision) Act have been met. criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) (Sales or is not a supplier to or a downstream producer for a firm whose workers were TA–W–61,152; Precision Laser, Inc., production, or both, did not decline) certified eligible to apply for TAA. High Point, NC: March 19, 2006 and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production TA–W–61,399; Wehadkee Yarn Mills, to a foreign country) have not been met. None. Talladega Division, Talladega, AL: None. I hereby certify that the April 27, 2006 The investigation revealed that aforementioned determinations were TA–W–61,347; Wellman, Inc., criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased issued during the period of April 30 Administrative Offices, Fort Mill, imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in through May 4, 2007. Copies of these SC: April 11, 2006 production to a foreign country) have determinations are available for The following certifications have been not been met. inspection in Room C–5311, U.S. issued. The requirements of Section TA–W–60,825; Golden Ratio Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm Woodworks, Emigrant, MT Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210 whose workers are certified eligible to TA–W–60,849; C and D Technologies, during normal business hours or will be apply for TAA based on increased Power Electronics Division, mailed to persons who write to the imports from or a shift in production to Milwaukie, OR above address.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27856 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Dated: May 10, 2007. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND expiration date); passport information Ralph DiBattista, SPACE ADMINISTRATION (number, country, expiration date); Director, Division of Trade Adjustment employer/affiliation information (name [Notice (07–035)] Assistance. of institution, address, country, [FR Doc. E7–9476 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] NASA Advisory Council; Science telephone); title/position of attendee. To BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P Committee; Heliophysics expedite admittance, attendees with Subcommittee; Meeting U.S. citizenship can provide identifying information 5 working days in advance LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION AGENCY: National Aeronautics and by contacting Marian Norris via e-mail Space Administration. at [email protected] or by telephone at Sunshine Act Meeting of the Board of ACTION: Notice of meeting. (202) 358–4452. Directors Dated: May 10, 2007. SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and TIME AND DATE: The Board of Directors Space Administration (NASA) P. Diane Rausch, of the Legal Services Corporation will announces a meeting of the Advisory Committee Management Officer, meet on May 22, 2007 via conference Heliophysics Subcommittee of the National Aeronautics and Space call. The meeting will begin at 2 p.m. NASA Advisory Council (NAC). This Administration. (EST), and continue until conclusion of Subcommittee reports to the Science [FR Doc. E7–9447 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] the Board’s agenda. Committee of the NAC. The Meeting BILLING CODE 7510–13–P LOCATION: 3333 K Street, NW., will be held for the purpose of soliciting Washington, DC 20007, 3rd Floor from the scientific community and other NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Conference Center. persons scientific and technical SPACE ADMINISTRATION STATUS OF MEETING: Open. Directors will information relevant to program participate by telephone conference in planning. [Notice (07–036)] such a manner as to enable interested DATES: Wednesday, June 13, 2007, 8:30 NASA Advisory Council; Science members of the public to hear and a.m. to 5 p.m., Thursday, June 14, 2007, Committee; Planetary Science identify all persons participating in the 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Friday, June 15, Subcommittee; Meeting meeting. Members of the public wishing 2007, 8:30 a.m. to noon Eastern Daylight to observe the meeting may do so by Time. AGENCY: National Aeronautics and joining participating staff at the location ADDRESSES: NASA Headquarters, room Space Administration. indicated above. Members of the public 6H46, 300 E Street, SW., Washington, ACTION: Notice of meeting. wishing to listen to the meeting by DC 20546. telephone should call 1–888–795–2173 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and and enter 58581 on the key pad when Marian Norris, Science Mission Space Administration (NASA) prompted. To enhance the quality of Directorate, NASA Headquarters, announces a meeting of the Planetary your listening experience as well as that Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358–4452, Science Subcommittee of the NASA of others and to eliminate background fax (202) 358–4118, or Advisory Council (NAC). This noises that interfere with the audio [email protected]. Subcommittee reports to the Science recording of the proceeding, please Committee of the NAC. The Meeting mute your telephone during the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The will be held for the purpose of soliciting meeting. meeting will be open to the public up from the scientific community and other to the capacity of the room. The agenda Matters To Be Considered persons scientific and technical for the meeting includes the following information relevant to program 1. Approval of the agenda. topics: planning. 2. Consider and act on Board of —Heliophysics Division Overview and Directors’ response to the Inspector DATES: Thursday, June 7, 2007, 8:30 a.m. Program Status General’s Semiannual Report to to 5 p.m. and Friday, June 8, 2007, 8:30 —New Heliophysics Data Policy a.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. Congress for the period of October 1, —Low Cost Access to Space Program 2006 through March 31, 2007. —Final review and approval of ADDRESSES: NASA Headquarters, room 3. Consider and act on other business. Heliophysics Science at the Moon 9H40, 300 E Street, SW., Washington, 4. Public comment. Report DC 20546. CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION: —Assessment of Heliophysics Fiscal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Patricia Batie, Manager of Board Year 2007 Science Accomplishments Marian Norris, Science Mission Operations, at (202) 295–1500. Directorate, NASA Headquarters, It is imperative that the meeting be SPECIAL NEEDS: Upon request, meeting Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358–4452, held on these dates to accommodate the notices will be made available in fax (202) 358–4118, or scheduling priorities of the key alternate formats to accommodate visual [email protected]. participants. Attendees will be and hearing impairments. Individuals requested to sign a register and to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The who have a disability and need an comply with NASA security meeting will be open to the public up accommodation to attend the meeting requirements, including the to the capacity of the room. The agenda may notify Patricia Batie at (202) 295– presentation of a valid picture ID, before for the meeting includes the following 1500. receiving an access badge. Foreign topics: Dated: May 15, 2007. nationals attending this meeting will be —Reports from Analysis Groups Victor M. Fortuno, required to provide the following —Review of Government Performance Vice President for Legal Affairs, General information no less than 5 working days and Results Act Metrics Counsel & Corporate Secretary. prior to the meeting: Full name; gender; —Planetary Science Division Overview [FR Doc. 07–2491 Filed 5–15–07; 3:20 pm] date/place of birth; citizenship; visa/ and Program Status BILLING CODE 7050–01–P green card information (number, type, —Mars Program Update

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27857

It is imperative that the meeting be application. 71 FR 15,220 (Mar. 27, Additionally, as provided in 10 CFR held on these dates to accommodate the 2006). Requests for hearings and 2.315(a), any ‘‘person who is not a scheduling priorities of the key petitions to intervene were filed on or party’’ to the proceeding may submit a participants. Attendees will be before May 26, 2006, by four entities: written limited appearance statement. requested to sign a register and to The Vermont Department of Public Limited appearance statements do not comply with NASA security Service (DPS), the Attorney General of constitute evidence, but they are placed requirements, including the the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in the docket for the hearing and presentation of a valid picture ID, before the Town of Marlboro, Vermont, and the provide members of the public with an receiving an access badge. Foreign New England Coalition (NEC). On June opportunity to make the Board and/or nationals attending this meeting will be 14, 2006, this Atomic Safety and the parties aware of their concerns about required to provide the following Licensing Board was established to matters at issue in the proceeding. A information no less than 5 working days conduct this adjudication. 71 FR 34,397 written limited appearance statement prior to the meeting: Full name; gender; (June 14, 2006). can be submitted at any time and should date/place of birth; citizenship; visa/ On August 1 and 2, 2006, the Board be sent to the Office of the Secretary green card information (number, type, heard oral argument from the using one of the following methods: (1) expiration date); passport information petitioners, Entergy, and the NRC Staff Mail to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. (number, country, expiration date); in Brattleboro, Vermont, relating to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, employer/affiliation information (name admissibility of the proposed Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: of institution, address, country, contentions. The standing of the Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, telephone); title/position of attendee. To petitioners to intervene was with a copy to the Chairman of this expedite admittance, attendees with uncontested. On September 22, 2006, Licensing Board at Mail Stop T–3F23, U.S. citizenship can provide identifying the Board issued a Memorandum and Atomic Safety and Licensing Board information 5 working days in advance Order admitting contentions submitted Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory by contacting Marian Norris via e-mail by DPS and NEC, thereby granting two Commission, Washington, DC 20555– at [email protected] or by telephone at of the requests for a hearing and 0001; (2) e-mail to the Office of the (202) 358–4452. admitting DPS and NEC as parties to the Secretary at [email protected], Dated: May 10, 2007. proceeding. LBP–06–20, 64 NRC 131, with a copy to the Board Chairman P. Diane Rausch, 143 (2006). At the same time, the Board (c/o Marcia Carpentier, [email protected]); Advisory Committee Management Officer, also granted these two organizations’ or (3) fax to the Office of the Secretary National Aeronautics and Space requests to adopt one another’s at 301–415–1101 (facsimile verification Administration. contentions under 10 CFR 2.309(f)(3). number: 301–415–1966), with a copy to [FR Doc. E7–9448 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] On November 17, 2006, the Board the Board Chairman at 301–415–5599 BILLING CODE 7510–13–P granted the request by the State of New (facsimile verification number: 301– Hampshire to participate in this 415–7550). proceeding as an interested state under At a later date, the Board may, at its NUCLEAR REGULATORY 10 CFR 2.315(c). discretion, hear oral limited appearance COMMISSION In light of the foregoing, please take statements at a location in the vicinity of the Vermont Yankee facility. Notice [ Docket No. 50–271–LR; ASLBP No. 06– notice that an evidentiary hearing will 849–03–LR] be conducted in this proceeding. of any oral limited appearance sessions Subject to a Board determination will be published in the Federal Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In regarding any request to employ formal Register and/or made available to the the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Vermont hearing procedures under 10 CFR part 2, public at the NRC PDR and on the NRC Yankee, L.L.C., and Entergy Nuclear subpart G or expedited hearing Web site, http://www.nrc.gov. Operations, Inc. (Vermont Yankee procedures under 10 CFR part 2, subpart The deadline for this Board’s receipt Nuclear Power Station); Notice of N, see 10 CFR 2.310, the evidentiary of limited appearance statements Hearing (Application for License hearing on all admitted contentions will (written or oral) will be the day Renewal) be governed by the informal hearing preceding the commencement of the procedures set forth in 10 CFR part 2, evidentiary hearing. The evidentiary May 11, 2007. subpart L, 10 CFR 2.1200—2.1213. hearing will occur after the NRC Staff Before Administrative Judges: Alex S. During the course of the proceeding, the issues its final environmental report and Karlin, Chairman, Dr. Richard E. Board may also hear oral arguments as final safety evaluation report on this Wardwell, Dr. Thomas S. Elleman. provided in 10 CFR 2.331, may hold application. Thus, the evidentiary This proceeding concerns the January various prehearing conferences hearing has not yet been specifically 25, 2006, application of Entergy Nuclear pursuant to 10 CFR 2.329, and may scheduled, but will probably commence Vermont Yankee, L.L.C., and Entergy conduct evidentiary hearings in in early 2008. Nuclear Operations, Inc. (collectively, accordance with 10 CFR 2.1206–2.1208. Documents relating to this proceeding Entergy), to renew the operating license These may be held via teleconference, are available for public inspection at the for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power video-conference, and/or in person. The Commission’s PDR or electronically Station in Windham County, Vermont public may attend any oral argument, from the publicly available records (Operating License No. DPR–28). prehearing conference, or evidentiary component of NRC’s document system Entergy seeks to extend this license for hearing. Notices of these sessions will (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from an additional twenty years beyond the be published in the Federal Register the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ current expiration date of March 21, and/or made available to the public at reading-rm/adams.html (the Public 2012. On March 27, 2006, the the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), Electronic Reading Room). Persons who Commission published a notice of located at One White Flint North, 11555 do not have access to ADAMS, or who acceptance for docketing of the Entergy Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, encounter problems in accessing the renewal application and a notice of Maryland, and through the NRC Web documents located in ADAMS, should opportunity to request a hearing on the site, http://www.nrc.gov. contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27858 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

telephone at 1–800–397–4209 or 301– (EA) in support of this proposed action determined that only routine 415–4737, or by e-mail at [email protected]. in accordance with the requirements of decontamination activities, in It is so ordered. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations accordance with their radiation safety Dated: May 11, 2007. (CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based procedures, were required. The Licensee was not required to submit a For the Atomic Safety and Licensing on the EA, the NRC has concluded that Board.1 a Finding of No Significant Impact decommissioning plan to the NRC. The Licensee conducted surveys of the East Alex S. Karlin, (FONSI) is appropriate with respect to the proposed action. The amendment Room of Building 7 and provided Chairman, Administrative Judge, Rockville, information to the NRC to demonstrate Maryland. will be issued to the Licensee following the publication of this FONSI and EA in that it meets the criteria in Subpart E of [FR Doc. E7–9524 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] the Federal Register. 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P II. Environmental Assessment Need for the Proposed Action Identification of Proposed Action The Licensee has ceased conducting NUCLEAR REGULATORY licensed activities in Building 7 of the COMMISSION The proposed action would approve Facility and seeks the unrestricted use the Licensee’s June 8, 2006, license [Docket No. 030–19324] of Building 7. amendment request, resulting in the Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Notice of Availability of Environmental release of Building 7 of the Facility for Action Assessment and Finding of No unrestricted use. License No. 25–19852– Significant Impact for License 01 was issued on June 24, 1988, The historical review of licensed Amendment to Byproduct Materials pursuant to 10 CFR Part 30, and has activities conducted at Building 7 of the License No. 25–19852–01 For been amended periodically since that Facility shows that such activities Unrestricted Release Of Building 7 of time. This license authorizes the involved use of the following the Glaxosmithkline Biologicals- Licensee to possess and use small radionuclides with half-lives greater Hamilton Facility in Hamilton, MT quantities of byproduct material, in both than 120 days: hydrogen-3, carbon-14, sealed and unsealed form, for laboratory and calcium-45. Prior to performing the AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory research in immunological and final status survey, the Licensee Commission. biochemical studies. Additionally, the conducted decontamination activities, ACTION: Issuance of environmental license authorizes the Licensee to as necessary, in the areas of Building 7 assessment and finding of no significant possess and use a self-shielded affected by these radionuclides. impact for license amendment. irradiator device and to possess and use The Licensee conducted a final status sealed sources for the purposes of survey during May-June 2006. This FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: performing instrument calibration. survey covered the East Room of Janine F. Katanic, Ph.D., Health The Facility is situated on 35 acres Building 7. The final status survey Physicist, Nuclear Materials Inspection (14 hectares) and consists of a main report was attached to the Licensee’s Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials building comprised of office space and amendment request dated June 8, 2006. Safety, Region IV, U.S. Nuclear laboratories as well as several smaller NRC regulation 10 CFR 20.1402, Regulatory Commission, 611 Ryan Plaza buildings used for various purposes. Radiological Criteria for Unrestricted Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas The Facility is located in a mixed Use, states in part that a site will be 76011; telephone: (817) 860–8151; fax residential/commercial area. The considered acceptable for unrestricted number: (817) 860–8188; or by e-mail: Licensee’s June 8, 2006, license use if the residual radioactivity that is [email protected]. amendment request specifically distinguishable from background addressed the release of Building 7 of radiation results in a total effective dose SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the Facility for unrestricted use. equivalent not to exceed 25 millirems I. Introduction Building 7 was constructed of filled per year (0.25 milliSeiverts per year) to an average member of the critical group The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory concrete block walls set on a concrete (the group of individuals reasonably Commission (NRC) is considering the floor, and its dimensions were 30 feet expected to receive the greatest issuance of a license amendment to (9.1 meters) long by 15 feet (4.6 meters) exposure to residual radioactivity for Byproduct Materials License No. 25– wide and 8 feet (2.4 meters) in height. any applicable set of circumstances). 19852–01. The license is held by The building had a filled concrete block The Licensee elected to demonstrate GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals-Hamilton wall down the center which separated compliance with the radiological (the Licensee), for its Hamilton facility the building into an East Room and a criteria for unrestricted release as (the Facility), located at 553 Old West Room. Each room had a separate specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by Corvallis Road in Hamilton, Montana. entry door on the south side of the referencing Regulatory Guide 1.86, Issuance of the amendment would building. Within Building 7, licensed Table 1, Acceptable Surface authorize release of Building 7 of the materials were confined to the East Contamination Levels, and NUREG– Facility for unrestricted use. The Room. The East Room was an area of 1556, Volume 11, Table S.5, Acceptable Licensee requested this action in a letter approximately 15 feet (4.6 meters) by 13 Surface Contamination Levels. Both dated June 8, 2006. The NRC has feet (4 meters) and had been used by the tables provide a maximum prepared an Environmental Assessment Licensee for the storage of licensed materials. contamination limit for uncontrolled 1 Copies of this order were sent this date by On May 30, 2006, the Licensee ceased release of facilities. Because these Internet e-mail transmission to counsel for (1) licensed activities in Building 7 and values were not dose-based calculations licensees Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, L.L.C., initiated a survey and decontamination as required by the license termination and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; (2) of the East Room of Building 7. Based rule in 10 CFR Part 20, they were intervenors Vermont Department of Public Service and New England Coalition of Brattleboro, on the Licensee’s historical knowledge compared to the screening values Vermont; (3) the Staff and (4) the State of New of the site and the conditions of the East documented in NUREG–1757, Volume Hampshire. Room of Building 7, the Licensee 1, Revision 1, Consolidated NMSS

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27859

Decommissioning Guidance, Table B.1. environmental impacts of the proposed 1. Federal Register Notice, Volume NUREG–1757 provides screening values action and the no-action alternative are 65, No. 114, page 37186, dated Tuesday, for building surface contamination therefore similar, and the no-action June 13, 2000, ‘‘Use of Screening Values which are equivalent to 25 millirem per alternative is accordingly not further to Demonstrate Compliance With The year. The surface contamination levels considered. Federal Rule on Radiological Criteria for as submitted by the Licensee are License Termination;’’ Conclusion significantly lower than the acceptable 2. NRC, ‘‘Generic Environmental screening values as documented in The NRC staff has concluded that the Impact Statement in Support of NUREG–1757. Accordingly, the proposed action is consistent with the Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for Licensee’s final status survey results NRC’s unrestricted release criteria License Termination of NRC-Licensed were thus acceptable. specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because Nuclear Facilities,’’ NUREG–1496, July The NRC staff conducted a the proposed action will not 1997 (ML042310492, ML042320379, confirmatory survey on August 3, 2006. significantly impact the quality of the and ML042330385); As documented in the inspection report, human environment, the NRC staff 3. NRC, ‘‘Consolidated NMSS none of the confirmatory survey results concludes that the proposed action is Decommissioning Guidance,’’ NUREG– revealed any radiation distinguishable the preferred alternative. 1757, Volume 1, Revision 1, September from accepted background radiation Agencies and Persons Consulted 2003 (ML053260027); levels. 4. Title 10 Code of Federal Based on its review, the staff has NRC provided a draft of this EA to the Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, determined that the affected State of Montana Department of Public ‘‘Radiological Criteria for License environment and any environmental Health and Human Services for review Termination;’’ impacts associated with the proposed on October 23, 2006. On January 8, action are bounded by the impacts 5. Title 10, Code of Federal 2007, the State of Montana Department Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental evaluated by the ‘‘Generic of Public Health and Human Services Environmental Impact Statement in Protection Regulations for Domestic responded by telephone and had no Licensing and Related Regulatory Support of Rulemaking on Radiological comments on the draft EA. Criteria for License Termination of NRC- Functions;’’ Licensed Nuclear Facilities’’ (NUREG– The NRC staff has determined that the 6. Poletti, Brian, GlaxoSmithKline 1496) Volumes 1–3 (ML042310492, proposed action is of a procedural Biologicals—Hamilton, License ML042320379, and ML042330385). nature and will not affect listed species Amendment Request, June 8, 2005 Further, no incidents were recorded or critical habitat. Therefore, no (ML062920087); involving spills or releases of consultation is required under Section 7 7. Whitten, Jack E., Acknowledgment radioactive material in Building 7 of the of the Endangered Species Act. The of Receipt of Final Status Survey, July Facility. Accordingly, there were no NRC staff has also determined that the 14, 2006 (ML061950672); significant environmental impacts from proposed action is not the type of 8. NRC Inspection Report 030–19324/ the use of radioactive material at the activity that has the potential to cause 06–001, August 25, 2006 Facility. effects on historic properties. Therefore, (ML062370479); The NRC staff finds that the proposed no consultation is required under 9. NRC, Telephone Conversation release of the portion of the Facility Section 106 of the National Historic Record with State of Montana described above for unrestricted use is Preservation Act. Department of Public Health and in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. III. Finding of No Significant Impact Human Services, January 8, 2007 The NRC has found no other activities (ML071130330); and, in the area that could result in The NRC staff has prepared this EA in 10. E-mail correspondence between cumulative environmental impacts. support of the proposed action. On the Katanic, Janine F. and Poletti, Brian, Based on its review, the staff considered basis of this EA, the NRC finds that Questions Regarding June 8, 2006 the impact of the residual radioactivity there are no significant environmental Amendment Request, April 24–25, 2007 at Building 7 of the Facility and impacts from the proposed action, and (ML071160054). concluded that the proposed action will that preparation of an environmental If you do not have access to ADAMS, not have a significant effect on the impact statement is not warranted. or if there are problems in accessing the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined documents located in ADAMS, contact that a Finding of No Significant Impact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Environmental Impacts of the is appropriate. Alternatives to the Proposed Action Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– IV. Further Information 415–4737, or by e-mail to [email protected]. Due to the largely administrative These documents may also be viewed nature of the proposed action, its Documents related to this action, electronically on the public computers environmental impacts are small. including the application for license located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One Therefore, the only alternative the staff amendment and supporting White Flint North, 11555 Rockville considered is the no-action alternative, documentation, are available Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR under which the staff would simply electronically at the NRC’s Electronic reproduction contractor will copy deny the amendment request. This no- Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/ documents for a fee. action alternative is not feasible because reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, it conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d), you can access the NRC’s Agencywide Dated at Arlington, Texas this 8th day of requiring that decommissioning of Document Access and Management May 2007. byproduct material facilities be System (ADAMS), which provides text For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. completed and approved by the NRC and image files of NRC’s public C. L. Cain, after licensed activities cease. documents. The documents related to Senior Management Analyst, Division of Additionally, this denial of the this action are listed below, along with Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV. application would result in no change their ADAMS accession numbers, if [FR Doc. E7–9522 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] in current environmental impacts. The applicable. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27860 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

NUCLEAR REGULATORY receiving this Commission meeting serves as an investment adviser, COMMISSION schedule electronically, please send an manager, principal underwriter, sponsor electronic message to [email protected]. or administrator for the purpose of Sunshine Federal Register Notice Dated: May 14, 2007. providing seed capital (collectively, the ‘‘Manager’’); and (4) any insurance R. Michelle Schroll, DATE: Week of May 28, 2007. company general account that is PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference Office of the Secretary. permitted to hold shares of an Insurance Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, [FR Doc. 07–2467 Filed 5–15–07; 12:27 pm] Fund consistent with the requirements Maryland. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P of Treasury Regulation 1.817–5 STATUS: Public and Closed. (‘‘General Account’’) under the ADDITIONAL ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED: circumstances described in the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE application. Week of May 28, 2007—Tentative COMMISSION DATES: Filing Date: The application was Wednesday, May 30, 2007 [Release No. IC–27821; File No. 812–13287] filed on May 1, 2006, and amended on 9:25 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public May 11, 2007. Meeting) (Tentative): Lincoln Variable Insurance Products HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An a. USEC Inc. (American Centrifuge Trust, et al.; Notice of Application order granting the application will be issued unless the Commission orders a Plant), LBP–07–06 (Initial Decision May 11, 2007. Authorizing License), Geoffrey Sea hearing. Interested persons may request AGENCY: The Securities and Exchange a hearing by writing to the Secretary of Letter ‘‘in preparation of late-filed Commission (‘‘Commission’’). contentions’’ (Tentative). the Commission and serving Applicants ACTION: b. Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corp. Notice of application for an with a copy of the request, personally or (Licensing Amendment Request for exemption pursuant to Section 6(c) of by mail. Hearing requests should be Decommissioning of the Newfield, New the Investment Company Act of 1940, as received by the Commission by 5:30 Jersey Facility), Docket No. 40–7102– amended (the ‘‘1940 Act’’) from the p.m. on June 1, 2007, and should be MLA, Appeal of Loretta Williams from provisions of Sections 9(a), 13(a), 15(a) accompanied by proof of service on LBP–07–05 (Tentative). and 15(b) of the 1940 Act and Rules 6e– Applicants, in the form of an affidavit This meeting will be webcast live at 2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) thereunder. or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. Hearing requests should state the nature APPLICANTS: Lincoln Variable Insurance of the writer’s interest, the reason for the * * * * * Products Trust (the ‘‘Trust’’), the request, and the issues contested. • The schedule for Commission Lincoln National Life Insurance Persons may request notification of a meetings is subject to change on short Company (‘‘Lincoln Life’’) and Lincoln hearing by writing to the Secretary of notice. To verify the status of meetings Investment Advisors Corporation the Commission. call (recording)—(301) 415–1292. (‘‘LIAC’’) (collectively, ‘‘Applicants’’). ADDRESSES: Contact person for more information: Secretary, Securities and SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants Michelle Schroll, (301) 415–1662. Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, seek an order pursuant to Section 6(c) NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. * * * * * of the 1940 Act, granting exemptions Applicants, c/o Colleen E. Tonn, The NRC Commission Meeting from the provisions of Sections 9(a), Lincoln National Life Insurance Schedule can be found on the Internet 13(a), 15(a), and 15(b) of the 1940 Act Company, 1300 South Clinton Street, at: http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/ and Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and 6e– Fort Wayne, IN 46802; copies to Keith policy-making/schedule.html. 3(T)(b)(15) thereunder (including any T. Robinson, Dechert LLP, 1775 I Street, * * * * * comparable provisions of a permanent NW., Washington, DC 20006. The NRC provides reasonable rule that replaces Rule 6e–3(T)), to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: accommodation to individuals with extent necessary to permit shares of the Ellen J. Sazzman, Senior Counsel, at disabilities where appropriate. If you Trust and shares of any other existing or (202) 551–6762, or Harry Eisenstein, need a reasonable accommodation to future investment company (‘‘Other Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6795, Office participate in these public meetings, or Investment Companies’’) that is of Insurance Products, Division of need this meeting notice or the designed to fund insurance products Investment Management. transcript or other information from the and for which Lincoln Life, or any of its SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The public meetings in another format (e.g. affiliates, may serve as administrator, following is a summary of the Braille, large print), please notify the investment manager, principal Application. The complete Application NRC’s Disability Program Coordinator, underwriter or sponsor (the Trust and is available for a fee from the SEC’s Deborah Chan, at 301–415–7041, TDD: Other Investment Companies being Public Reference Branch, 100 F Street, 301–415–2100, or by e-mail at hereinafter referred to, collectively, as NE., Washington, DC 20549 ((202) 551– [email protected]. Determinations on ‘‘Insurance Investment Companies’’), or 8090). requests for reasonable accommodation shares of any current or future series of will be made on a case-by-case basis. any Insurance Investment Company Applicants’ Representations * * * * * (‘‘Insurance Fund’’), to be sold to and 1. The Trust is organized as a This notice is distributed by mail to held by: (1) Separate accounts funding Delaware statutory trust and is several hundred subscribers; if you no variable annuity and variable life registered with the Commission as an longer wish to receive it, or would like insurance contracts issued by both open-end management investment to be added to the distribution, please affiliated and unaffiliated life insurance company under the 1940 Act. The Trust contact the Office of the Secretary, companies; (2) trustees of qualified currently consists of, and offers shares Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969). group pension and group retirement of beneficial interest in, thirty-one In addition, distribution of this meeting plans outside of the separate account investment portfolios that are sold only notice over the Internet system is context (‘‘Qualified Plans’’ or ‘‘Plans’’); to separate accounts of insurance available. If you are interested in (3) LIAC and any affiliate of LIAC that companies in conjunction with variable

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27861

life and variable annuity contracts, or to as ‘‘variable contracts’’ or ‘‘contracts’’). inter alia, the return on shares held by other registered investment companies Insurance companies whose Separate the Manager is computed in the same that sell their shares only to such Account(s) may now or in the future manner as for shares held by the separate accounts as part of a ‘‘fund-of- own shares of the Insurance Funds are Separate Accounts, and the Manager funds’’ arrangement. LIAC, a Tennessee referred to herein as ‘‘Participating does not intend to sell to the public corporation and a wholly-owned Insurance Companies.’’ shares of the Insurance Investment subsidiary of Lincoln National 5. The Participating Insurance Company that it holds. Applicants Corporation, is registered with the Companies established or will establish represent that sales in reliance on these Commission as an investment adviser their own Separate Accounts and provisions of the Treasury Regulation under the Investment Advisers Act of designed or will design their own will be made to a Manager consistent 1940, as amended, and serves as variable contracts. Each Participating with these two conditions and for the investment adviser to the Trust. The Insurance Company has or will have the purpose of providing seed capital. Any Trust may offer one or more additional legal obligation to satisfy all applicable shares of an Insurance Fund purchased investment portfolios or classes of requirements under both state and by the Manager will automatically be shares in the future. federal law. Participating Insurance redeemed if and when the Manager’s 2. The Trust sells its shares directly or Companies may rely on Rule 6e–2 or investment advisory agreement indirectly to Lincoln Life and its Rule 6e–3(T) under the 1940 Act in terminates. affiliate, Lincoln Life & Annuity connection with the establishment and 9. Applicants propose that the Company of New York, each of which maintenance of variable life insurance Insurance Funds also be permitted to holds the shares in its separate accounts Separate Accounts, although some offer and/or sell shares to General to support variable annuity and variable Participating Insurance Companies, in Accounts. Treasury Regulation 1.817– life insurance contracts. Lincoln Life is connection with variable life insurance 5(f)(3) permits sales to general accounts an Indiana insurance company that contracts, may rely on individual of insurance companies and their serves as administrator and sponsor of exemptive orders as well. corporate affiliates as long as the return the Trust. Lincoln Life is licensed to do 6. Each Participating Insurance on shares held by such persons is business in all states (except New York) Company will enter into a participation computed in the same manner as for and the District of Columbia, Guam, and agreement with the applicable Insurance shares held by a Separate Account, such the Virgin Islands. Lincoln Life is a Investment Company on behalf of the persons do not intend to sell to the wholly owned subsidiary of Lincoln Insurance Funds in which the public shares of the Insurance Fund that National Corporation, a publicly held Participating Insurance Company they hold, and a segregated asset insurance holding company invests. The role of the Insurance Funds account of the life insurance company incorporated under the laws of the State under this arrangement, insofar as whose general account holds those of Indiana. federal securities laws are applicable, shares also holds or will hold a 3. Shares of the Trust are not offered will consist of offering their shares to beneficial interest in the Insurance directly to the public, but currently are the Separate Accounts and fulfilling any Fund. Applicants represent that sales to sold directly or indirectly only to the conditions that the Commission may General Accounts will be made separate accounts of Lincoln Life and impose upon granting the order consistent with these provisions. Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of requested herein. New York (collectively, the ‘‘Life 7. The Insurance Investment Applicants’ Legal Analysis Companies’’) to fund benefits under Companies propose to offer shares of the 1. In connection with the funding of flexible premium variable life insurance Insurance Funds directly to Qualified scheduled premium variable life policies or variable annuity contracts. Plans outside of the separate account insurance contracts issued through a Each Life Company is an affiliated context. Qualified Plans may choose any separate account organized as a unit person of the other Life Company. The of the Insurance Funds that are offered investment trust (‘‘Trust Account’’), separate accounts of the Life Companies as the sole investment under the Plan or Rule 6e–2(b)(15) provides partial include both separate accounts that are as one of several investments. Plan exemptions from Sections 9(a), 13(a), registered as investment companies participants may or may not be given an 15(a), and 15(b) of the 1940 Act. Section under the 1940 Act and separate investment choice depending on the 9(a)(2) of the 1940 Act makes it accounts that are not registered as terms of the Plan itself. Shares of any of unlawful for any company to serve as a investment companies under the 1940 the Insurance Funds sold to such depositor or principal underwriter of Act in reliance on an exclusion from the Qualified Plans would be held or any Trust Account (among other things), definition of ‘‘investment company’’ deemed to be held by the trustee(s) of if an affiliated person of that company provided by Section 3 of the 1940 Act. said Plans. Certain Qualified Plans, is subject to disqualification enumerated 4. The Insurance Investment including Section 403(b)(7) Plans and in Section 9(a)(1) or (2) of the 1940 Act. Companies propose to also offer shares Section 408(a) Plans, may vest voting Sections 13(a), 15(a), and 15(b) of the of the Insurance Funds to registered and rights in Plan participants instead of 1940 Act have been deemed by the unregistered separate accounts of Plan trustees. Exercise of voting rights Commission to require ‘‘pass-through’’ unaffiliated insurance companies by participants in any such Qualified voting with respect to an underlying (collectively with separate accounts of Plans, as opposed to the trustees of such investment company’s shares. affiliated insurance companies, Plans, cannot be mandated by the 2. The exemptions granted to an ‘‘Separate Accounts’’) in order to fund Applicants. Each Plan must be insurance company by Rule 6e–2(b)(15) various types of insurance products. administered in accordance with the are available only where each registered These products may include, but are not terms of the Plan and as determined by management investment company limited to, variable annuity contracts, its trustee or trustees. underlying the Trust Account scheduled premium variable life 8. Shares of each Insurance (‘‘underlying fund’’) offers its shares insurance contracts, single premium Investment Company also may be ‘‘exclusively to variable life insurance variable life insurance contracts, and offered to a Manager and to General separate accounts of the life insurer or flexible premium variable life insurance Accounts. Treasury Regulation 1.817– of any affiliated life insurance company contracts (collectively referred to herein 5(f)(3)(ii) permits such sales as long as, ***.’’ Therefore, the relief granted by

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27862 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Rule 6e–2(b)(15) is not available with deemed by the Commission to require the Participating Insurance Companies, respect to a scheduled premium variable ‘‘pass-through’’ voting with respect to Qualified Plans and the Manager must life insurance separate account that an underlying fund’s shares. The take whatever steps are necessary to owns shares of an underlying fund that exemptions granted to a separate remedy or eliminate the conflict, also offers its shares to a variable account by Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15) are including eliminating the Insurance annuity separate account of the same available only where all of the assets of Funds as eligible investment options. company or of any affiliated life the separate account consist of the Applicants submit that investment by insurance company. The use of a shares of one or more underlying funds the Manager or the inclusion of common underlying fund as the which offer their shares ‘‘exclusively to Qualified Plans or General Accounts as underlying investment medium for both separate accounts of the life insurer, or eligible shareholders should not variable annuity and variable life of any affiliated life insurance company, increase the risk of material insurance separate accounts of the same offering either scheduled contracts or irreconcilable conflicts among life insurance company or of any flexible contracts, or both; or which also shareholders. Applicants further affiliated life insurance company is offer their shares to variable annuity maintain that even if a material referred to herein as ‘‘mixed funding.’’ separate accounts of the life insurer or irreconcilable conflict involving the 3. In addition, the relief granted by of an affiliated life insurance company.’’ Qualified Plans, Manager or General Rule 6e–2(b)(15) is not available with Therefore, Rule 6e–3(T) permits mixed Accounts arose, the Qualified Plans, respect to a scheduled premium variable funding with respect to a flexible Manager or General Accounts, unlike life insurance separate account that premium variable life insurance the Separate Accounts, can simply owns shares of an underlying fund that separate account, subject to certain redeem their shares and make also offers its shares to separate conditions. However, Rule 6e–3(T) does alternative investments. By contrast, accounts funding variable contracts of not permit shared funding because the insurance companies cannot simply one or more unaffiliated life insurance relief granted by Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15) is redeem their separate accounts out of companies. The use of a common not available with respect to a flexible one fund and invest in another. Time underlying fund as the underlying premium variable life insurance consuming, complex transactions must investment medium for variable life separate account that owns shares of an be undertaken to accomplish such insurance separate accounts of one underlying fund that also offers its redemptions and transfers. Applicants insurance company and separate shares to separate accounts (including submit that allowing the Manager, accounts funding variable contracts of variable annuity and flexible premium Qualified Plans or General Accounts to one or more unaffiliated life insurance and scheduled premium variable life invest directly in the Insurance companies is referred to herein as insurance separate accounts) of Investment Companies should not ‘‘shared funding.’’ unaffiliated life insurance companies. increase the opportunity for conflicts of 4. Because the relief under Rule 6e– 6. The relief provided by Rule 6e–3(T) interest. 2(b)(15) is available only where shares is not relevant to the purchase of shares 9. Applicants state that paragraph (3) are offered exclusively to variable life of the Insurance Investment Companies of Section 9(a) provides, among other insurance separate accounts, additional by Qualified Plans, the Manager or things, that it is unlawful for any exemptive relief may be necessary if the General Accounts. However, because company to serve as investment adviser shares of the Insurance Investment the relief granted by Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15) to or principal underwriter for any Companies are also to be sold to a is available only where shares of the registered open-end investment General Account, a Qualified Plan, or underlying fund are offered exclusively company if an affiliated person of that the Manager under the circumstances to separate accounts, or to life insurers company is subject to a disqualification described in the Application. in connection with the operation of a enumerated in Sections 9(a)(1) or (a)(2). Applicants note that if shares of the separate account, additional exemptive Rule 6e–2(b)(15)(i) and (ii) under the Insurance Funds are sold only to relief may be necessary if the shares of 1940 Act and Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(i) and variable annuity separate accounts, a the Insurance Investment Companies are (ii) under the 1940 Act provide Qualified Plan, the Manager, and a also to be sold to Qualified Plans, the exemptions from Section 9(a) under General Account, exemptive relief Manager, or General Accounts. certain circumstances, subject to the under Rule 6e–2 would not be 7. Applicants maintain that none of limitations discussed above on mixed necessary. The relief provided for under the relief provided for in Rules 6e– and shared funding. These exemptions this section does not relate to such 2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) relates to limit the application of the eligibility proposed purchasers or to a registered Qualified Plans, the Manager or General restrictions to affiliated individuals or investment company’s ability to sell its Accounts, or to an underlying fund’s companies that directly participate in shares to such proposed purchasers. The ability to sell its shares to such the management or administration of use of a common management purchasers. It is only because some of the underlying fund. investment company as the underlying the Separate Accounts that may invest 10. Applicants submit that the relief investment vehicle for variable annuity in the Insurance Investment Companies provided by Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(i) and and variable life separate accounts of may themselves be investment 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(i) under the 1940 Act affiliated and unaffiliated insurance companies that rely upon the relief permits a person disqualified under companies, a Qualified Plan, the provided by Rules 6e–2 and 6e–3(T) and Section 9(a) to serve as an officer, Manager, and a General Account, is wish to continue to rely upon that relief director, or employee of the life insurer, referred to herein as ‘‘extended mixed provided in those Rules, that the or any of its affiliates, so long as that and shared funding.’’ Applicants are applying for the person does not participate directly in 5. In connection with the funding of requested relief. the management or administration of flexible premium variable life insurance 8. Applicants represent that if and the underlying fund. The relief provided contracts issued through a Trust when a material irreconcilable conflict by Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(ii) and 6e– Account, Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15) provides arises between the Separate Accounts or 3(T)(b)(15)(ii) under the 1940 Act partial exemptions from Sections 9(a), between Separate Accounts on the one permits the life insurer to serve as the 13(a), 15(a) and 15(b) of the 1940 Act to hand and Qualified Plans, the Manager underlying fund’s investment adviser or the extent that those sections have been or General Accounts on the other hand, principal underwriter, provided that

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27863

none of the insurer’s personnel who are Because Qualified Plans, the Manager general account to cover costs imposed ineligible, pursuant to Section 9(a), are and General Accounts are not upon the insurer by a change approved participating in the management or investment companies and will not be by contract owners over the insurer’s administration of the underlying fund. deemed to be affiliated with the objection. The Commission therefore The partial relief granted in Rules 6e– Insurance Investment Companies solely deemed such exemptions necessary ‘‘to 2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) under the by virtue of their shareholdings, no assure the solvency of the life insurer 1940 Act from the requirements of additional relief is necessary. and performance of its contractual Section 9 of the 1940 Act limits, in 12. Sections 13(a), 15(a), and 15(b) of obligations by enabling an insurance effect, the amount of monitoring of an the 1940 Act have been deemed by the regulatory authority or the life insurer to insurer’s personnel, which would Commission to require ‘‘pass-through’’ act when certain proposals reasonably otherwise be necessary to ensure voting with respect to underlying fund could be expected to increase the risks compliance with Section 9, to that shares held by a separate account. undertaken by the life insurer.’’ In this which is appropriate in light of the Applicants maintain that Rules 6e– respect, flexible premium variable life policy and purposes of Section 9. Those 2(b)(15)(iii) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(iii) under insurance contracts are identical to rules recognize that it is not necessary the 1940 Act provide partial exemptions scheduled premium variable life for the protection of investors or the from those sections to permit the insurance contracts; therefore, Rule 6e– purposes fairly intended by the policy insurance company to disregard the 3(T)’s corresponding provisions and provisions of the 1940 Act to apply voting instructions of its contract presumably were adopted in recognition the provisions of Section 9(a) to the owners in certain limited of the same factors. many individuals in an insurance circumstances. Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(iii)(A) 14. Applicants submit that the company complex, most of whom and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(iii)(A)(1) under the Insurance Investment Companies’ sale typically will have no involvement in 1940 Act provide that the insurance of shares to Qualified Plans, the matters pertaining to investment company may disregard the voting Manager or General Accounts under the companies in that organization. instructions of its contract owners in circumstances described in the Applicants assert that it is also connection with the voting of shares of Application will not have any impact on unnecessary to apply Section 9(a) of the an underlying fund if such instructions the relief requested in this regard. 1940 Act to the many individuals would require such shares to be voted Shares of the Insurance Investment employed by Participating Insurance to cause such underlying funds to make Companies sold to Qualified Plans Companies (or affiliated companies of (or refrain from making) certain would be held by the trustees of such Participating Insurance Companies) who investments that would result in Plans. The exercise of voting rights by do not directly participate in the changes in the subclassification or Qualified Plans, whether by the trustees, administration or management of the investment objectives of such by participants, by beneficiaries, or by Insurance Investment Companies. underlying funds or to approve or investment managers engaged by the disapprove any contract between an Plans, does not present the type of 11. Applicants submit that there is no underlying fund and its investment issues respecting the disregard of voting regulatory purpose in extending the manager, when required to do so by an rights that are presented by variable life monitoring requirements to embrace a insurance regulatory authority (subject separate accounts. With respect to the full application of Section 9(a)’s to the provisions of paragraphs (b)(5)(i) Qualified Plans, which are not eligibility restrictions because of mixed and (b)(7)(ii)(A) of such Rules). Rules registered as investment companies funding or shared funding. Many of the 6e–2(b)(15)(iii)(B) and 6e– under the 1940 Act, there is no Participating Insurance Companies are 3(T)(b)(15)(iii)(A)(2) under the 1940 Act requirement to pass through voting not expected to play any role in the provide that the insurance company rights to Plan participants. Similarly, management or administration of the may disregard contract owners’ voting the Manager and General Accounts are Insurance Investment Companies. Those instructions if the contract owners not subject to any pass-through voting individuals who participate in the initiate any change in such underlying requirements. Accordingly, unlike the management or administration of the fund’s investment policies, principal case with Separate Accounts, the issue Insurance Investment Companies will underwriter, or any investment manager of the resolution of material remain the same regardless of which (provided that disregarding such voting irreconcilable conflicts with respect to separate accounts, or insurance instructions is reasonable and subject to voting is not present with Qualified companies use the Insurance Investment the other provisions of paragraphs Plans, the Manager or General Accounts. Companies. Therefore, applying the (b)(5)(ii) and (b)(7)(ii)(B) and (C) of 15. Applicants assert that shared monitoring requirements of Section 9(a) Rules 6e–2 and 6e–3(T)). funding by unaffiliated insurance to the thousands of individuals 13. Applicants maintain Rule 6e–2 companies does not present any issues employed by the Participating Insurance recognizes that a variable life insurance that do not already exist where a single Companies would not serve any contract is an insurance contract; it has insurance company is licensed to do regulatory purpose. Furthermore, the important elements unique to insurance business in several or all states. A increased monitoring costs would contracts; and it is subject to extensive particular state insurance regulatory reduce the net rates of return realized by state regulation of insurance. In body could require action that is contract owners and Plan participants. adopting Rule 6e–2(b)(15)(iii), the inconsistent with the requirements of Applicants submit the relief requested Commission expressly recognized that other states in which the insurance should not be affected by the sale of state insurance regulators have company offers its policies. The fact that shares of the Insurance Investment authority, pursuant to state insurance different insurers may be domiciled in Companies to Qualified Plans, the laws or regulations, to disapprove or different states does not create a Manager or General Accounts under the require changes in investment policies, significantly different or enlarged circumstances described in the investment advisers, or principal problem. application. The insulation of the underwriters. The Commission also 16. Applicants assert that shared Insurance Investment Companies from expressly recognized that state funding by unaffiliated Participating those individuals who are disqualified insurance regulators have authority to Insurance Companies, is, in this respect, under the 1940 Act remains in place. require an insurer to draw from its no different than the use of the same

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27864 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

investment company as the funding separate account’s investment in that Participating Insurance Company to vehicle for affiliated Participating Insurance Investment Company and no seek optimal investment performance. Insurance Companies, which Rules 6e– charge or penalty would be imposed as 20. Furthermore, Applicants assert 2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) permit under a result of such withdrawal. that no one investment strategy can be various circumstances. Affiliated 18. With respect to voting rights, identified as appropriate to a particular Participating Insurance Companies may Applicants submit that it is possible to insurance product. Each pool of variable be domiciled in different states and be provide an equitable means of giving annuity and variable life insurance subject to differing state law such voting rights to contract owners contract owners is composed of requirements. Affiliation does not and to Qualified Plans, the Manager or individuals of diverse financial status, reduce the potential, if any exists, for General Accounts. The transfer agent(s) age, insurance needs, and investment differences in state regulatory for the Insurance Investment Companies goals. An Insurance Fund supporting requirements. In any event, the will inform each shareholder, including even one type of insurance product conditions discussed below are each separate account, each Qualified must accommodate these diverse factors designed to safeguard against, and Plan, the Manager and each General in order to attract and retain purchasers. provide procedures for resolving, any Account, of its share ownership, in an Permitting mixed and shared funding adverse effects that differences among Insurance Investment Company. Each will provide economic justification for state regulatory requirements may Participating Insurance Company will the growth of the Insurance Investment produce. then solicit voting instructions in Company. In addition, permitting mixed accordance with the ‘‘pass-through’’ and shared funding will broaden the 17. Applicants assert that Rules 6e– voting requirement. Investment by base of contract owners, which will 2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) give the Qualified Plans or General Accounts in facilitate the establishment of additional insurance company the right to any Insurance Investment Company will Insurance Funds serving diverse goals. disregard the voting instructions of the similarly present no conflict. The The broader base of contract owners and contract owners. Applicants assert that likelihood that voting instructions of shareholders can also be expected to the right under Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and insurance company contract owners provide economic justification for the 6e–3(T)(b)(15) of an insurance company will ever be disregarded or the possible creation of additional series of each to disregard contract owners’ voting withdrawal referred to above is Insurance Investment Company with a instructions does not raise any issues extremely remote and this possibility greater variety of investment objectives different from those raised by the will be known, through prospectus and policies. authority of state insurance disclosure, to any Qualified Plan or 21. Applicants note that Section administrators over separate accounts. General Account choosing to invest in 817(h) is the only section in the Code Under Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and 6e– an Insurance Fund. Moreover, even if a where separate accounts are discussed. 3(T)(b)(15), an insurer can disregard material irreconcilable conflict Section 817(h) imposes certain contract owner voting instructions only involving Qualified Plans or General diversification standards on the with respect to certain specified items Accounts arises, the Qualified Plans or underlying assets of variable annuity and under certain specified conditions. General Accounts may simply redeem contracts and variable life contracts held Affiliation does not eliminate the their shares and make alternative in the portfolios of management potential, if any exists, for divergent investments. investment companies. Applicants judgments as to the advisability or 19. Applicants assert that there is no submit that Treasury Regulation 1.817– legality of a change in investment reason that the investment policies of an 5, which establishes the diversification policies, principal underwriter, or Insurance Fund would or should be requirements for such portfolios, investment adviser initiated by contract materially different from what they specifically permits, in paragraph (f)(3), owners. The potential for disagreement would or should be if such Insurance among other things, ‘‘qualified pension is limited by the requirements in Rules Fund funded only variable annuity or retirement plans,’’ ‘‘the general 6e–2 and 6e–3(T) that the insurance contracts or variable life insurance account of a life insurance company,’’ company’s disregard of voting policies, whether flexible premium or ‘‘the manager * * * of an investment instructions be reasonable and based on scheduled premium policies. Each type company’’ and separate accounts to specific good-faith determinations. of insurance product is designed as a share the same underlying management However, a particular Participating long-term investment program. investment company. The Applicants, Insurance Company’s disregard of Similarly, the investment strategy of therefore, have concluded that neither voting instructions, nevertheless, could Qualified Plans and General Accounts the Code nor the Treasury Regulations conflict with the majority of contract (i.e., long-term investment) coincides nor Revenue Rulings thereunder present owner voting instructions. The with that of variable contracts and any inherent conflicts of interest if Participating Insurance Company’s should not increase the potential for Qualified Plans, Separate Accounts, the action could arguably be different than conflicts. Each of the Insurance Funds Manager and General Accounts all the determination of all or some of the will be managed to attempt to achieve invest in the same underlying fund. other Participating Insurance its investment objective, and not to 22. Applicants assert that the ability Companies (including affiliated favor or disfavor any particular of the Insurance Investment Companies insurers) that the contract owners’ Participating Insurance Company or to sell their shares directly to Qualified voting instructions should prevail, and type of insurance product or other Plans, the Manager or General Accounts could either preclude a majority vote investor. There is no reason to believe does not create a ‘‘senior security’’ as approving the change or could represent that different features of various types of such term is defined under Section 18(g) a minority view. If the Participating contracts will lead to different of the 1940 Act with respect to any Insurance Company’s judgment investment policies for different types of variable contract, Qualified Plan, represents a minority position or would variable contracts. The sale and ultimate Manager or General Account. Regardless preclude a majority vote, the success of all variable insurance of the rights and benefits of contract Participating Insurance Company may products depends, at least in part, on owners or Qualified Plan participants, be required, at an Insurance Investment satisfactory investment performance, the Separate Accounts, Qualified Plans, Company’s election, to withdraw its which provides an incentive for the the Manager, and the General Accounts

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27865

have rights only with respect to their investment flexibility afforded by a large Qualified Plans, the Manager or General respective shares of the Insurance pool of funds. Therefore, making the Accounts investing in that Insurance Investment Companies. They can only Insurance Investment Companies Investment Company, and determine redeem such shares at net asset value. available for mixed and shared funding what action, if any, should be taken in No shareholder of any of the Insurance and permitting the purchase of response to such conflicts. A material Investment Companies has any Insurance Investment Company shares irreconcilable conflict may arise for a preference over any other shareholder by Qualified Plans and General variety of reasons, including: (i) An with respect to distribution of assets or Accounts may encourage more action by any state insurance regulatory payment of dividends. insurance companies to offer variable authority; (ii) a change in applicable 23. Applicants assert that permitting contracts, and this should result in federal or state insurance, tax, or an Insurance Investment Company to increased competition with respect to securities laws or regulations, or a sell its shares to the Manager in both variable contract design and public ruling, private letter ruling, no- compliance with Treasury Regulation pricing, which can be expected to result action or interpretative letter, or any 1.817–5 will enhance Insurance in more product variation and lower similar action by insurance, tax, or Investment Company management charges. Mixed and shared funding also securities regulatory authorities; (iii) an without raising significant concerns may benefit variable contract owners by administrative or judicial decision in regarding material irreconcilable eliminating a significant portion of the any relevant proceeding; (iv) the manner conflicts. costs of establishing and administering in which the investments of any 24. Given the conditions of Treasury separate funds. Furthermore, granting Insurance Fund are being managed; (v) Regulation 1.817–5(f)(3) under the Code the requested relief should result in an a difference in voting instructions given and the harmony of interest between an increased amount of assets available for by variable annuity contract owners, Insurance Investment Company, on the investment by the Insurance Investment variable life insurance contract owners, one hand, and its Manager(s) or a Companies. This may benefit variable and trustees of the Qualified Plans; (vi) Participating Insurance Company, on contract owners by promoting a decision by a Participating Insurance the other, Applicants assert that little economies of scale, by reducing risk Company to disregard the voting incentive for overreaching exists. through greater diversification due to instructions of contract owners; or (vii) Applicants assert that such investments increased money in the Insurance if applicable, a decision by a Qualified should not implicate the concerns Investment Companies, or by making Plan to disregard the voting instructions discussed regarding the creation of the addition of new Insurance Funds of Plan participants. material irreconcilable conflicts. more feasible. Applicants assert that permitting 3. Participating Insurance Companies investment by the Manager or General Applicants’ Conditions (on their own behalf, as well as by Accounts will encourage the orderly Applicants and the Manager agree virtue of any investment of General and efficient creation and operation of that the order granting the requested Account assets in all Insurance the Insurance Investment Companies, relief shall be subject to the following Investment Companies), a Manager, and and reduce the expense and uncertainty conditions, which shall apply to the any trustee on behalf of any Qualified of using outside parties at the early Trust as well as any future Insurance Plan that executes a fund participation stages of Insurance Investment Investment Company that relies on the agreement upon becoming an owner of Company operations. order: 10% or more of the assets of an 25. Applicants assert that various 1. A majority of the Board of Trustees Insurance Investment Company factors have limited the number of or Board of Directors (‘‘Board’’) of each (‘‘Participating Qualified Plan’’) insurance companies that offer variable Insurance Investment Company shall (collectively, ‘‘Participants’’) will report contracts. These factors include the consist of persons who are not any potential or existing conflicts to the costs of organizing and operating a ‘‘interested persons’’ of the Insurance Board. Participants will be responsible funding medium, the lack of expertise Investment Company, as defined by for assisting the Board in carrying out with respect to investment management Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act and the the Board’s responsibilities under these (principally with respect to stock and rules thereunder and as modified by any conditions by providing the Board with money market investments) and the lack applicable orders of the Commission all information reasonably necessary for of name recognition by the public of (‘‘Independent Board Members’’), except the Board to consider any issues raised. certain Participating Insurance that if this condition is not met by This responsibility includes, but is not Companies as investment experts. In reason of the death, disqualification, or limited to, an obligation by each particular, some smaller life insurance bona fide resignation of any trustee or Participating Insurance Company to companies may not find it economically director, then the operation of this inform the Board whenever contract feasible, or within their investment or condition shall be suspended: (i) For a owner voting instructions are administrative expertise, to enter the period of 90 days if the vacancy or disregarded and, if pass-through voting variable contract business on their own. vacancies may be filled by the Board; is applicable, an obligation by each Use of the Insurance Investment (ii) for a period of 150 days if a vote of trustee for a Qualified Plan that is a Companies as a common investment shareholders is required to fill the Participant to inform the Board medium for variable contracts, Qualified vacancy or vacancies; or (iii) for such whenever it has determined to disregard Plans and General Accounts would help longer period as the Commission may Plan participant voting instructions. The alleviate these concerns, because prescribe by order upon application or responsibility to report such Participating Insurance Companies, by future rule. information and conflicts and to assist Qualified Plans and General Accounts 2. The Board of each Insurance the Board will be a contractual will benefit not only from the Investment Company will monitor the obligation of all Participating Insurance administrative expertise of Lincoln Life Insurance Investment Company for the Companies under their agreements and its affiliates, as well as the existence of any material irreconcilable governing participation in the Insurance investment expertise of any investment conflict among and between the Investment Company, and such manager to an Insurance Fund, but also interests of the contract owners of all responsibilities will be carried out with from the cost efficiencies and Separate Accounts, participants of a view only to the interests of the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27866 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

contract owners. The responsibility to applicable, and that decision represents manner consistent with voting report such information and conflicts a minority position or would preclude instructions timely received from such and to assist the Board also will be a majority vote, the Qualified Plan may contract owners. Participating Insurance contractual obligations of all be required, at the election of the Companies shall be responsible for Participating Qualified Plans under Insurance Investment Company, to assuring that each of their Separate their agreements governing participation withdraw its investment in the Accounts investing in an Insurance in the Insurance Investment Company, Insurance Investment Company, and no Investment Company calculates voting and such agreements will provide that charge or penalty will be imposed as a privileges in a manner consistent with these responsibilities will be carried out result of such withdrawal. The all other Participating Insurance with a view only to the interests of responsibility to take remedial action in Companies. Qualified Plan participants. the event of a Board determination of a The obligation to calculate voting 4. If it is determined by a majority of material irreconcilable conflict and to privileges as provided in the application the Board of an Insurance Investment bear the cost of such remedial action shall be a contractual obligation of all Company, or a majority of its shall be a contractual obligation of all Participating Insurance Companies Independent Board Members, that a Participants under their agreements under their agreements governing material irreconcilable conflict exists, governing participation in the Insurance participation in the Insurance the relevant Participant shall, at its Investment Company, and these Investment Company. Each expense and to the extent reasonably responsibilities will be carried out with Participating Insurance Company will vote shares for which it has not received practicable (as determined by a majority a view only to the interests of the timely voting instructions, as well as of the Independent Board Members), contract owners or Plan participants. For the purposes of this Condition (4), shares held in its General Account or take whatever steps are necessary to a majority of the Independent Board otherwise attributed to it, in the same remedy or eliminate the material Members shall determine whether or proportion as it votes those shares for irreconcilable conflict, up to and not any proposed action adequately which it has received voting including: (i) Withdrawing the assets remedies any material irreconcilable instructions. Each Plan will vote as allocable to some or all of the Separate conflict, but in no event will the required by applicable law and Accounts from the relevant Insurance Insurance Investment Company or its governing Plan documents. Investment Company or any series Manager be required to establish a new 7. As long as the 1940 Act requires therein and reinvesting such assets in a funding medium for any variable pass-through voting privileges to be different investment medium (including contract. No Participating Insurance provided to variable contract owners, a another Insurance Fund, if any); (ii) in Company shall be required by this Manager and any General Account will the case of Participating Insurance Condition (4) to establish a new funding vote their respective shares in the same Companies, submitting the question of medium for any variable contract if an proportion as all variable contract whether such segregation should be offer to do so has been declined by vote owners having voting rights with implemented to a vote of all affected of a majority of contract owners respect to that Insurance Investment contract owners and, as appropriate, materially and adversely affected by the Company or Insurance Fund, as the case segregating the assets of any appropriate material irreconcilable conflict. No may be; provided, however, that a group (i.e., variable annuity contract Qualified Plan shall be required by this Manager or any General Account shall owners or variable life insurance Condition (4) to establish a new funding vote its shares in such other manner as contract owners of one or more medium for such Qualified Plan if (i) a may be required by the Commission or Participating Insurance Companies) that majority of Qualified Plan participants its staff. votes in favor of such segregation, or materially and adversely affected by the 8. An Insurance Fund will make its offering to the affected contract owners material irreconcilable conflict vote to shares available to a Separate Account the option of making such a change; (iii) decline such offer or (ii) pursuant to and/or Qualified Plans at or about the withdrawing the assets allocable to governing Qualified Plan documents same time it accepts any seed capital some or all of the Qualified Plans from and applicable law, the Qualified Plan from any Manager or any General the affected Insurance Investment makes such decision without Qualified Account of a Participating Insurance Company or any Insurance Fund and Plan participant vote. Company. reinvesting those assets in a different 5. The Board’s determination of the 9. An Insurance Investment Company investment medium; and (iv) existence of a material irreconcilable will notify all Participants that establishing a new registered conflict and its implications shall be disclosure regarding potential risks of management investment company or made known promptly in writing to all mixed and shared funding may be managed separate account. If a material Participants. appropriate in prospectuses for any of irreconcilable conflict arises because of 6. Participating Insurance Companies the Separate Accounts and in Plan a Participating Insurance Company’s will provide pass-through voting disclosure documents. Each Insurance decision to disregard contract owner privileges to all variable contract owners Investment Company will disclose in its voting instructions and that decision whose contracts are funded through a prospectus that: (i) Shares of the represents a minority position or would registered Separate Account as required Insurance Investment Company may be preclude a majority vote, the by the 1940 Act as interpreted by the offered to insurance company Separate Participating Insurance Company may Commission. However, as to variable Accounts that fund both variable be required, at the Insurance Investment contracts issued by unregistered annuity and variable life insurance Company’s election, to withdraw its Separate Accounts, pass-through voting contracts, and to Qualified Plans; (ii) Separate Account’s investment in the privileges will be extended to contract due to differences of tax treatment or Insurance Investment Company, and no owners to the extent granted by the other considerations, the interests of charge or penalty will be imposed as a issuing insurance company. various contract owners participating in result of such withdrawal. If a material Accordingly, such Participating the Insurance Investment Company and irreconcilable conflict arises because of Insurance Companies, where applicable, the interests of Qualified Plans or a Qualified Plan’s decision to disregard will vote shares of each Insurance Fund General Accounts investing in the Plan participant voting instructions, if held in their Separate Accounts in a Insurance Investment Company might at

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27867

some time be in conflict; and (iii) the fully carry out the obligations imposed Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’), the Chicago Board will monitor events in order to upon it by the conditions contained in Board Options Exchange, Incorporated identify the existence of any material the application. Such reports, materials (‘‘CBOE’’), the International Securities irreconcilable conflicts and to determine and data shall be submitted more Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’), the NYSE Arca, what action, if any, should be taken in frequently, if deemed appropriate, by Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’), and the response to any such conflict. the Board. The obligations of the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. 10. All reports received by the Board Participants to provide these reports, (‘‘Phlx’’) (collectively, ‘‘Participants’’), of potential or existing conflicts, and all materials and data to the Board of the respectively, filed with the Securities Board action with regard to determining Insurance Investment Company when it and Exchange Commission the existence of a conflict, notifying so reasonably requests, shall be a (‘‘Commission’’) pursuant to Section Participants of a conflict, and contractual obligation of the 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of determining whether any proposed Participants under their agreements 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 608 action adequately remedies a conflict, governing participation in each thereunder 2 an amendment (‘‘Joint will be properly recorded in the minutes Insurance Investment Company. Amendment No. 22’’) to the Plan for the of the Board or other appropriate 14. Each Insurance Investment Purpose of Creating and Operating an records, and such minutes or other Company will not accept a purchase Intermarket Option Linkage (‘‘Linkage records shall be made available to the order from a Qualified Plan if such Plan’’).3 In Joint Amendment No. 22, the Commission upon request. purchase would make the Qualified Participants propose to reduce (i) the 11. If and to the extent Rule 6e–2 and Plan an owner of 10% or more of the amount of time a member must wait Rule 6e–3(T) under the 1940 Act are assets of the Insurance Investment after sending a Linkage Order 4 to a amended, or Rule 6e–3 is adopted, to Company unless the trustee for such market before the member 5 can trade provide exemptive relief from any Plan executes a participation agreement through that market and (ii) the provision of the 1940 Act or the rules with such Insurance Investment timeframe within which a Participant thereunder with respect to mixed or Company which includes the conditions must respond to a Linkage Order after shared funding on terms and conditions set forth herein to the extent applicable. receipt of that Order. On March 8, 2007, materially different from any A trustee for a Qualified Plan will the Commission summarily put into exemptions granted in the order execute an application containing an effect Joint Amendment No. 22 on a requested in the application, then each acknowledgment of this condition at the temporary basis not to exceed 120 days Insurance Investment Company and/or time of such Plan’s initial purchase of and solicited comment on Joint the Participating Insurance Companies, the shares of any Insurance Investment Amendment No. 22 from interested as appropriate, shall take such steps as Company or Insurance Fund. persons.6 The Commission received no may be necessary to comply with Rule Conclusion comments on Joint Amendment No. 22. 6e–2 and Rule 6e–3(T), as amended, and This order approves Joint Amendment Rule 6e–3, as adopted, to the extent Applicants submit, for the reasons No. 22. such rules are applicable. stated above, that the requested 12. Each Insurance Investment exemptions are appropriate in the II. Description of the Proposed Company will comply with all public interest and consistent with the Amendment provisions of the 1940 Act requiring protection of investors and the purposes In Joint Amendment No. 22, the voting by shareholders (which, for these fairly intended by the policy and Participants proposed to reduce the purposes, shall be the persons having a provisions of the 1940 Act. amount of time a member must wait voting interest in the shares of that For the Commission, by the Division of after sending a Linkage Order to a Insurance Investment Company or Investment Management, pursuant to market before the member can trade Insurance Fund, as the case may be), delegated authority. through that market. The Participants and in particular each Insurance Nancy M. Morris, proposed to decrease this time period Investment Company will either provide Secretary. 1 for annual meetings (except insofar as [FR Doc. E7–9478 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. the Commission may interpret Section 2 17 CFR 242.608. BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 16 of the 1940 Act not to require such 3 On July 28, 2000, the Commission approved a national market system plan for the purpose of meetings) or comply with Section 16(c) creating and operating an intermarket options of the 1940 Act (although each SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE market linkage (‘‘Linkage’’) proposed by Amex, Insurance Investment Company is not, COMMISSION CBOE, and ISE. See Securities Exchange Act or will not be, one of the trusts Release No. 43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 described in Section 16(c) of the 1940 [Release No. 34–55744; File No. 4–429] (August 4, 2000). Subsequently, Phlx, Pacific Exchange, Inc. (n/k/a NYSE Arca), and BSE joined Act) as well as with Section 16(a) of the Joint Industry Plan; Order Approving the Linkage Plan. See Securities Exchange Act 1940 Act and, if and when applicable, Release Nos. 43573 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR Joint Amendment No. 22 to the Plan Section 16(b) of the 1940 Act. Further, 70851 (November 28, 2000); 43574 (November 16, for the Purpose of Creating and each Insurance Investment Company 2000), 65 FR 70850 (November 28, 2000); and 49198 Operating an Intermarket Option (February 5, 2004), 69 FR 7029 (February 12, 2004). will act in accordance with the Linkage Relating to Response Time for 4 See Section 2(16) of the Linkage Plan. For the Commission’s interpretation of the Certain Orders Sent Through the purposes of this Joint Amendment No. 22 only, requirements of Section 16(a) of the references to ‘‘Linkage Orders’’ herein pertain to P/ Linkage 1940 Act with respect to periodic A Orders and Principal Orders. For definitions of ‘‘P/A Order’’ and ‘‘Principal Order,’’ see Section elections of directors (or trustees) and May 11, 2007. 2(16)(a) and (b) of the Linkage Plan, respectively. with whatever rules the Commission 5 I. Introduction The term ‘‘member,’’ as used herein, includes may promulgate with respect thereto. NYSE Arca OTP Holders and OTP Firms and 13. Each Participant shall at least On February 2, 2007, February 15, Boston Options Exchange (‘‘BOX’’) Options annually submit to the Board of an 2007, February 5, 2007, February 7, Participants. See NYSE Arca Rules 1.1(q) and 1.1(r) and Chapter I, Sec. 1(a)(40) of BOX Rules, Insurance Investment Company such 2007, January 30, 2007, and February respectively. reports, materials or data as the Board 13, 2007, the American Stock Exchange 6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55436, may reasonably request so that it may LLC (‘‘Amex’’), the Boston Stock 72 FR 12639 (March 16, 2007).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27868 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

from 20 seconds to 5 seconds. The SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Participants also proposed to reduce the COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and time frame in which a Participant must Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule respond to a Linkage Order from 15 to [Release No. 34–55752; File No. SR–CBOE– Change 2007–44] 5 seconds after receipt of that Order. 1. Purpose III. Discussion and Commission Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Exchange is proposing to trade Findings Chicago Board Options Exchange, the Shares on CBSX pursuant to UTP. Incorporated; Notice of Filing and The Shares represent fractional, The Commission previously Order Granting Accelerated Approval undivided beneficial ownership determined, pursuant to Rule 608 under of Proposed Rule Change to Trade the interests in the streetTRACKS Gold 7 the Act, to put into effect summarily on streetTRACKS Gold Shares Fund Trust (‘‘Trust’’). The Trust is an a temporary basis not to exceed 120 Pursuant to Unlisted Trading investment trust, the sole assets of days, the changes to the Linkage Plan Privileges which are gold bullion, and from time detailed above in Joint Amendment No. 3 May 11, 2007. to time, cash. The Commission 22.8 After careful consideration of Joint previously approved the original listing Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Amendment No. 22, the Commission and trading of the Shares on the New Securities Exchange Act of 1934 finds that approving Joint Amendment York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’).4 The (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 No. 22 is consistent with the Exchange deems the Shares to be equity notice is hereby given that on May 8, requirements of the Act and the rules securities, thus rendering trading in the 2007, the Chicago Board Options and regulations thereunder. Shares subject to the Exchange’s Exchange, Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ existing rules governing the trading of Specifically, the Commission finds that or ‘‘CBOE’’), filed with the Securities equity securities. The trading hours for Joint Amendment No. 22 is consistent and Exchange Commission 9 the Shares on the Exchange would be with Section 11A of the Act and Rule (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 10 from 8:15 a.m. until 3:15 p.m. (Central 608 thereunder in that it is change as described in Items I and II Time). appropriate in the public interest, for below, which Items have been The last-sale price for the Shares is the protection of investors and the substantially prepared by the Exchange. disseminated over the Consolidated maintenance of fair and orderly markets. This notice and order provides notice of Tape. Gold pricing information based on The Commission believes that reducing the proposed rule change and approves the spot price for a troy ounce of gold the time required by a Participant to the proposal on an accelerated basis. respond to a Linkage Order and the from various financial information I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s service providers, such as Reuters and amount of time a member sending a Statement of the Terms of Substance of Bloomberg, is available on a 24-hour Linkage Order must wait before trading the Proposed Rule Change basis. Complete real-time data for gold through a nonresponsive Participant futures and options prices traded on the should facilitate the more timely The Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated proposes to: (1) trade on its COMEX (a division of the NYMEX) is execution of orders across the options available by subscription from Reuters exchanges. stock trading facility, CBOE Stock Exchange (‘‘CBSX’’), the streetTRACKS and Bloomberg. The NYMEX also IV. Conclusion Gold Shares (‘‘GLD’’ or ‘‘Shares’’) provides delayed futures and options pursuant to unlisted trading privileges information on current and past trading It is therefore ordered, pursuant to (‘‘UTP’’), and (2) adopt Exchange Rule sessions and market news free of charge 11 Section 11A of the Act and Rule 608 54.8, which governs the trading of on its Web site. CBOE, via a link from 12 thereunder, that Joint Amendment No. commodity-based trust shares. The text its own public Web site (http:// 22 is approved. of the proposed rule change is available www.cboe.com) to the Trust Web site (http:// For the Commission, by the Division of on the Exchange’s Web site (http:// www.streettracksgoldshares.com), will Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated www.cboe.org/Legal), at the Exchange’s provide at no charge continuously authority.13 principal office, and at the Commission’s Public Reference Room. updated bids and offers indicative of the Jill M. Peterson, spot price of gold.5 Assistant Secretary. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The Trust Web site also will provide [FR Doc. E7–9437 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Statement of the Purpose of, and a calculation of the estimated NAV (also BILLING CODE 8010–01–P Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule known as the Intraday Indicative Value Change or IIV) of a Share as calculated by In its filing with the Commission, the multiplying the indicative spot price of Exchange included statements gold by the quantity of gold backing concerning the purpose of, and basis for, 3 Additional information regarding the the proposed rule change and discussed streetTRACKS Gold Shares is at http:// any comments it received on the www.streettracksgoldshares.com. proposed rule change. The text of these 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50603 statements may be examined at the (October 28, 2004), 69 FR 64614 (November 5, 2004) places specified in Item III below. The (SR–NYSE–2004–22). 5 The gold spot price at the Trust’s Web site will 7 17 CFR 242.608. Exchange has prepared summaries, set be provided by The Bullion Desk (http:// 8 See supra note 6. forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of www.thebulliondesk.com). The Trust’s Web site 9 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. the most significant aspects of such will indicate that there are other sources for 10 17 CFR 242.608. statements. obtaining the gold spot price. If the Trust’s Web site should cease to provide this indicative spot price 11 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. from an unaffiliated source (and the intraday 12 17 CFR 242.608. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). indicative value) of the Shares, CBOE would cease 13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(29). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. to trade the Shares.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27869

each Share. Comparing the IIV with the on the Exchange, and will incorporate is designed to promote just and last sale price of the Shares helps an and rely upon existing Exchange equitable principles of trade, remove investor to determine whether, and to surveillance procedures governing impediments to and perfect the what extent, Shares may be selling at a equities. In addition, for intermarket mechanism of a free and open market premium or a discount to the NAV. surveillance purposes, the Exchange has and a national market system, and Although provided free of charge, the entered into a reciprocal Memorandum protect investors and the public interest. indicative spot price and IIV per Share of Understanding with NYMEX for the In addition, CBOE believes that the will be provided on an essentially real- sharing of information related to any proposal is consistent with Rule 12f–5 time basis.6 The Trust Web site provides financial instrument based, in whole or under the Act 12 because it deems the the NAV of the Trust as calculated each in part, upon an interest in or Shares to be equity securities, thus business day by the Sponsor. In performance of gold. rendering trading in the Shares subject addition, the Trust Web site contains Further, proposed CBOE Rule 54.8 to the Exchange’s existing rules the following information, on a per- would impose certain obligations on governing the trading of equity Share basis, for the Trust: (a) The IIV as Market-Makers that would apply in securities. of the close of the prior business day connection with trading the Shares. and the midpoint of the bid/ask price 7 CBOE Rule 54.8(e) would require that a B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s in relation to such IIV (‘‘Bid/Ask Market-Maker in the Shares provide the Statement on Burden on Competition Price’’), and a calculation of the Exchange with information related to its CBOE does not believe that the premium or discount of such price trading in physical gold, gold futures proposed rule change will impose any against such IIV; and (b) data in chart contracts, options on gold futures, or burden on competition not necessary or format displaying the frequency any other gold derivatives. CBOE Rule appropriate in furtherance of the distribution of discounts and premiums 54.8(g) would prohibit a Market-Maker purposes of the Act. of the Bid/Ask Price against the IIV, in the Shares from using any material C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s within appropriate ranges, for each of non-public information received from Statement on Comments on the the four previous calendar quarters. The any person associated with the Market- Proposed Rule Change Received From Trust Web site also provides the Trust’s Maker or employee of such person Members, Participants or Others prospectus, as well as the two most regarding trading by such person or recent reports to stockholders. The Trust employee in physical gold, gold futures The Exchange neither solicited nor Web site provides the last sale price of contracts, options on gold futures, or received comments on the proposal. the Shares as traded in the U.S. market, any other gold derivatives. In addition, III. Solicitation of Comments subject to a 20-minute delay.8 CBOE Rule 54.8(d) would prohibit a In connection with the trading of the Market-Maker in the Shares from being Interested persons are invited to Shares, CBOE would inform its affiliated with a market maker in submit written data, views, and members in an Information Circular of physical gold, gold futures contracts, arguments concerning the foregoing, the special characteristics and risks options on gold futures, or any other including whether the proposed rule associated with trading the Shares, such gold derivatives unless the specified change is consistent with the Act. as loss, damage, or theft of the Trust’s information barriers are in place. Comments may be submitted by any of gold, and unanticipated problems With respect to trading halts, the the following methods: related to the mechanisms and Exchange may consider all relevant Electronic Comments procedures that were specifically factors in exercising its discretion to • developed for this relatively new halt or suspend trading in the Shares. Use the Commission’s Internet securities product. CBOE also would Trading may be halted because of comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ require its members to deliver a market conditions or for reasons that, in rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an e-mail to rule- prospectus or product description to the view of the Exchange, make trading [email protected]. Please include File investors purchasing Shares prior to or in the Shares inadvisable. In addition, Number SR–CBOE–2007–44 on the concurrently with a transaction in trading in the Shares would be subject subject line. Shares. In addition, CBOE Rule 53.6 to trading halts caused by extraordinary requires member organizations to have a market volatility pursuant to the Paper Comments reasonable basis for recommending the 9 Exchange’s ‘‘circuit breaker’’ rule. • Send paper comments in triplicate Shares when recommending a Moreover, the Exchange represents to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, transaction in the Shares. that it would cease trading the Shares if Securities and Exchange Commission, CBOE believes that its surveillance the listing market stops trading the 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC procedures are adequate to address any Shares because of a regulatory halt 20549–1090. concerns about the trading of the Shares similar to a halt based on CBOE Rule on the Exchange because those 6.3. UTP trading in the Shares is also All submissions should refer to File procedures will be comparable to those governed by the trading halts provisions Number SR–CBOE–2007–44. This file used for exchange-traded funds and of CBOE Rule 52.3 relating to temporary number should be included on the trust-issued receipts currently trading interruptions in the calculation or wide subject line if e-mail is used. To help the dissemination of the IIV. Commission process and review your 6 The Trust’s Web site, to which the CBOE Web comments more efficiently, please use site will link, will disseminate an indicative spot 2. Statutory Basis only one method. The Commission will price of gold and the IIV, and indicate that these values are subject to an average delay of five to ten CBOE believes that the proposal is post all comments on the Commission’s seconds. consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 10 Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 7 The bid/ask price is determined using the in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the highest bid and lowest offer on the Consolidated Act 11 in particular, in that the proposal submission, all subsequent Tape as of the time of calculation of the closing day amendments, all written statements IIV. 8 The last sale price of the Shares in the secondary 9 CBOE Rule 6.3B. with respect to the proposed rule market is available on a real-time basis for a fee 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). from regular data vendors. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5). 12 17 CFR 240.12f–5.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27870 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

change that are filed with the listing and trading of the Shares on the have authority to trade the Shares Commission, and all written NYSE.17 The Commission also finds that pursuant to this order. communications relating to the the proposal is consistent with Rule In support of this proposal, the proposed rule change between the 12f–5 under the Act,18 which provides Exchange has made the following Commission and any person, other than that an exchange shall not extend UTP representations: those that may be withheld from the to a security unless the exchange has in 1. The Exchange’s surveillance public in accordance with the effect a rule or rules providing for procedures are adequate to properly provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be transactions in the class or type of monitor Exchange trading of the Shares available for inspection and copying in security to which the exchange extends and to deter and detect violations of the Commission’s Public Reference UTP. The Exchange has represented that Exchange rules. Among other things, the Room. Copies of such filing also will be it meets this requirement because it Exchange entered into a reciprocal available for inspection and copying at deems the Shares to be equity securities, Memorandum of Understanding with the principal office of the Exchange. All thus rendering trading in the Shares NYMEX for the sharing of information comments received will be posted subject to the Exchange’s existing rules related to any financial instrument without change; the Commission does governing the trading of equity based, in whole or in part, upon an not edit personal identifying securities. interest in or performance of gold. information from submissions. You The Commission further believes that 2. Prior to the commencement of should submit only information that the proposal is consistent with Section trading, the Exchange would inform its you wish to make available publicly. All 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act,19 which sets members and member organizations in submissions should refer to File forth Congress’ finding that it is in the an Information Circular of the special Number SR–CBOE–2007–44 and should public interest and appropriate for the characteristics and risks associated with be submitted on or before June 7, 2007. protection of investors and the trading the Shares. 3. The Information Circular would maintenance of fair and orderly markets IV. Commission’s Findings and Order include the requirement that members to assure the availability to brokers, Granting Accelerated Approval of the and member firms deliver a prospectus dealers, and investors of information Proposed Rule Change to investors purchasing newly issued with respect to quotations for and Shares prior to or concurrently with the After careful review, the Commission transactions in securities. Quotations for finds that the proposed rule change is confirmation of a transaction. and last-sale information regarding the This approval order is conditioned on consistent with the requirements of the Shares are disseminated through the Act and the rules and regulations the Exchange’s adherence to these facilities of the CTA and the thereunder applicable to a national representations. Consolidated Quotation System. securities exchange.13 In particular, the Finally, the Commission believes that Furthermore, as noted by the Exchange, Commission finds that the proposed proposed CBOE Rule 54.8, which various means exist for investors to rule change is consistent with Section imposes information barriers and obtain reliable gold price information 6(b)(5) of the Act,14 which requires that trading restrictions on a member acting and thereby to monitor the underlying an exchange have rules designed, among as a registered market maker in the spot market in gold relative to the NAV other things, to promote just and Shares, is consistent with the Act. The of their Shares. In addition, the IIV of equitable principles of trade, to remove Commission notes that CBOE Rule 54.8 each Fund is disseminated every 15 impediments to and perfect the is substantially similar to rules of other mechanism of a free and open market seconds throughout the trading day by exchanges that previously have been and a national market system, and in the national securities exchange on approved by the Commission.21 general to protect investors and the which the Fund is listed or by other The Commission finds good cause for public interest. The Commission information providers or market data approving this proposal before the believes that this proposal should vendors. thirtieth day after the publication of benefit investors by increasing Furthermore, the Commission notice thereof in the Federal Register. competition among markets that trade believes that the proposal is reasonably As noted previously, the Commission the Shares. designed to preclude trading of the previously found that the listing and In addition, the Commission finds Shares when transparency is impaired. trading of the Shares on the NYSE is that the proposal is consistent with CBOE Rule 52.3 sets forth trading halt consistent with the Act. The Section 12(f) of the Act,15 which permits procedures when CBOE trades an ETF Commission presently is not aware of an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, pursuant to UTP. Under this rule, if the any regulatory issue that should cause it a security that is listed and registered on listing market halts trading when the IIV to revisit that finding or would preclude another exchange.16 The Commission is not being calculated or disseminated, the trading of the Shares on the notes that it previously approved the CBOE also would halt trading in the Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore, Shares. This rule is substantially similar accelerating approval of this proposal 13 In approving this rule change, the Commission to those recently adopted by other should benefit investors by creating, notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact exchanges and found by the without undue delay, additional on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. Commission to be consistent with the competition in the market for the See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). Act.20 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Shares. The Commission notes that, if the 15 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). V. Conclusion 16 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), Shares should be delisted by the listing generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a market, the Exchange would no longer It is therefore ordered, pursuant to security on a national securities exchange unless Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,22 that the the security is registered on that exchange pursuant 17 proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2007– to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act See supra note 4. excludes from this restriction trading in any 18 17 CFR 240.12f–5. security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ 19 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 21 See, e.g., Nasdaq Rule 4630; Securities When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it 20 See e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34; Exchange Act Release No. 54765 (November 16, allows its members to trade the security as if it were Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54997 2006), 71 FR 67668 (November 22, 2006) (approving listed and registered on the exchange even though (December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78501 (December 29, SR–Nasdaq–2006–009). it is not so listed and registered. 2006). 22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27871

44) be and it hereby is, approved on an II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s • iShares S&P Europe 350 Index Fund accelerated basis. Statement of the Purpose of, and The following funds are listed on the 3 For the Commission, by the Division of Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule New York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’): Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Change • iShares MSCI EAFE Index Fund • authority.23 In its filing with the Commission, the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index J. Lynn Taylor, Exchange included statements Fund • iShares MSCI Pacific ex-Japan Index Assistant Secretary. concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed Fund [FR Doc. E7–9464 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] • any comments it received on the iShares MSCI South Africa Index BILLING CODE 8010–01–P proposed rule change. The text of these Fund statements may be examined at the In addition to being listed on the 4 places specified in Item III below. The Amex or NYSE, the Shares are traded SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Exchange has prepared summaries, set on those and other securities exchanges COMMISSION 5 forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of and in the over-the-counter market. the most significant aspects of such The information below is intended to [Release No. 34–55736; File No. SR–CBOE– statements. provide a description of how the Shares 2007–37] were created and are traded.6 A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The Shares are issued by iShares, Inc., Self-Regulatory Organizations; Statement of the Purpose of, and except for iShares MSCI EAFE and S&P Chicago Board Options Exchange, Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Europe 350, which are issued by iShares Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Change Trust. iShares, Inc. and iShares Trust Order Granting Accelerated Approval 1. Purpose are open-ended management investment of Proposed Rule Change as Modified companies. Each Fund seeks investment by Amendment No. 1 to Trade the The purpose of the proposed rule results that correspond generally to the iShares MSCI Index Funds and the change is to trade on CBSX shares of 15 price and yield performance, before fees S&P Europe 350 Index Fund Pursuant international ETFs (the ‘‘Shares’’) and expenses, of the applicable pursuant to UTP. These Funds are: to UTP • iShares MSCI Australia Index Fund 3 Effective February 16, 2007, the iShares MSCI May 10, 2007. • iShares MSCI Brazil Index Fund Index Funds for EAFE, Emerging Markets, Pacific • iShares MSCI EAFE Index Fund ex-Japan, and South Africa transferred their primary Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the listing to the NYSE and are no longer listed on • iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Amex. See Supplement dated February 16, 2007 to Fund the Prospectus dated January 1, 2007 for the iShares (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 • iShares MSCI Germany Index Fund MSCI Series, and Supplement dated February 16, notice is hereby given that on April 20, • 2007 to the Prospectus dated December 1, 2006 for iShares MSCI Hong Kong Index Fund the iShares Goldman Sachs Series and the iShares 2007, the Chicago Board Options • iShares MSCI Malaysia Index Fund Exchange, Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ MSCI EAFE Series. • iShares MSCI Mexico Index Fund 4 The Funds (with the exception of the MSCI or ‘‘CBOE’’), filed with the Securities • iShares MSCI Pacific ex-Japan Index EAFE and S&P Europe 350 Funds) were formerly and Exchange Commission Fund known as World Equity Benchmark Shares or WEBS. An initial series of WEBS, including the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule • iShares MSCI Singapore Index Fund change as described in Items I and II iShares MSCI Australia, Germany, Hong Kong, • iShares MSCI South Africa Index Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, and United Kingdom below, which Items have been Fund Index Funds were initially approved for listing and substantially prepared by the Exchange. • iShares MSCI South Korea Index trading on Amex in 1996. See Securities Exchange On May 7, 2007, the Exchange filed Act Release No. 36947 (March 8, 1996), 61 FR Fund 10606 (March 14, 1996) (SR–Amex–95–43). Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule • iShares MSCI Taiwan Index Fund Additional WEBS series were approved for listing change. This notice and order provides • iShares MSCI United Kingdom Index and trading in 2000, including iShares MSCI Brazil, notice of the proposed rule change, as Fund iShares MSCI Taiwan, iShares MSCI South Africa amended, and approves the proposal on • and iShares MSCI South Korea. See Securities iShares S&P Europe 350 Index Fund Exchange Act Release No. 42748 (May 2, 2000), 65 an accelerated basis. The Exchange deems the Shares to be FR 30155 (May 10, 2000) (SR–Amex–98–49). equity securities, thus rendering trading iShares MSCI EAFE and iShares S&P Europe 350, I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s issued by iShares Trust, were approved for Amex Statement of the Terms of Substance of in the Shares subject to existing CBSX listing and trading in, respectively, in 2001. See the Proposed Rule Change rules governing the trading of equity Securities Exchange Release No. 44700 (August 14, securities. 2001), 66 FR 43927 (August 21, 2001) (SR–Amex– The Chicago Board Options Exchange, 2001–34); Securities Exchange Act Release No. a. Description of the Funds 42786 (May 15, 2000), 65 FR 33586 (May 24, 2000) Incorporated proposes to trade on its (SR–Amex–99–49) (collectively, ‘‘Listing Approval subsidiary, the CBOE Stock Exchange The following funds are listed on the Orders’’). (‘‘CBSX’’), shares of 15 international American Stock Exchange (‘‘Amex’’): 5 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. exchange-traded funds (‘‘ETFs’’ or • iShares MSCI Australia Index Fund 50142 (August 3, 2004), 69 FR 48539 (August 10, 2004) (SR–NYSE–2004–27) (approving trading of ‘‘Funds’’) pursuant to unlisted trading • iShares MSCI Brazil Index Fund • the Shares pursuant to UTP). privileges (‘‘UTP’’). The text of the iShares MSCI Germany Index Fund 6 Much of the information in this filing was taken proposed rule change is available on the • iShares MSCI Hong Kong Index Fund from the Prospectuses and Statements of Additional Exchange’s Web site (http:// • iShares MSCI Malaysia Index Fund Information of iShares, Inc. dated January 1, 2007, www.cboe.org/Legal), at the Exchange’s • iShares MSCI Mexico Index Fund the Prospectus of iShares S&P Europe 350, dated • August 1, 2006, the Prospectus of iShares Trust principal office, and at the iShares MSCI Singapore Index Fund MSCI EAFE, dated December 1, 2006, and the Web Commission’s Public Reference Room. • iShares MSCI South Korea Index sites of Amex (http://www.amex.com), the NYSE Fund (http://www.nyse.com), and iShares (http:// • www.ishares.com). Fund information relating to net 23 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). iShares MSCI Taiwan Index Fund • asset value (‘‘NAV’’), returns, dividends, 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). iShares MSCI United Kingdom Index component stock holdings, and the like is updated 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Fund on a daily basis on the Web sites.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27872 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

underlying index. The Funds utilize providers and are available through characteristics of certain Funds, as representative sampling to invest in a major financial information vendors. discussed below. The circular will representative sample of securities in The intraday indicative value (‘‘IIV’’) discuss the special characteristics and the applicable underlying index. of each Fund will be disseminated every risks of trading this type of security. Barclays Global Fund Advisors 15 seconds throughout the trading day Specifically, the circular, among other (‘‘BGFA’’), a subsidiary of Barclays by the national securities exchange on things, will discuss what the Funds are, Global Investors, N.A. (‘‘BGI’’), is the which the Fund is listed or by other how they are created and redeemed, the investment advisor for each Fund. BGI information providers or market data requirement that members and member is a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of vendors. The IIV likely will not reflect firms deliver a prospectus or Product Barclays Bank PLC of the United the value of all securities included in Description to investors purchasing Kingdom. BGFA and its affiliates are not the applicable indexes. In addition, the Shares prior to or concurrently with the affiliated with the index providers IIV will not necessarily reflect the confirmation of a transaction, applicable (MSCI and Standard & Poor’s). Investors precise composition of the current Exchange rules, dissemination Bank and Trust Company serves as portfolio of securities held by the Funds information, trading information, and administrator, custodian, and transfer at a particular moment. The IIV the applicability of suitability rules.7 agent for the Funds, and SEI disseminated throughout the trading In addition, the circular will note Investments Distribution Co. is day should not be viewed as a real-time Exchange responsibilities, including distributor for the Funds. The update of the NAV of the Funds, which that before an Exchange member, distributor is not affiliated with BGFA. is calculated only once a day. It is member organization, or employee expected, however, that during the b. MSCI and S&P Indexes thereof recommends a transaction in the trading day the IIV will closely Shares, a determination must be made The MSCI Indexes are calculated by approximate the value per share of the that the recommendation is in MSCI for each trading day in the portfolio of securities for the Funds, compliance with all applicable applicable foreign exchange markets except under unusual circumstances. Exchange and federal rules and based on official closing prices in such For the iShares MSCI Australia, Hong regulations. The circular will also exchange markets. For each trading day, Kong, Malaysia, Pacific ex-Japan, discuss exemptive, no-action, and MSCI publicly disseminates the MSCI Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan interpretive relief granted by the Index values for the previous day’s Funds, there is no overlap in trading Commission from Section 11(d)(1) and close. The S&P Europe 350 Index is hours between the foreign and U.S. certain rules under the Act, including calculated by Standard & Poor’s markets. Therefore, for each of these Rule 10a–1, Rule 10b–10, Rule 14e–5, (‘‘S&P’’), and is publicly disseminated Funds, the IIV calculator utilizes closing Rule 10b–17, Rule 11d1–2, Rules 15c1– by S&P for the previous day’s close. The prices (denominated in the applicable 5 and 15c1–6, and Rules 101 and 102 of indexes are reported periodically in foreign currency) in the principal Regulation M under the Act. major financial publications, and the foreign market for securities in the The NAV for the iShares MSCI intra-day values of the Indexes, applicable Fund’s portfolio and converts Malaysia, South Korea, and Taiwan disseminated every 15 seconds the price to U.S. dollars. This IIV is Index Funds will be calculated every throughout the trading day, are available updated every 15 seconds, during the day that the listing exchange is open for through vendors of financial trading hours of the national securities trading, normally as of 10 a.m. Central information as further described in the exchange on which the Fund is listed, Time. This is in contrast to the other Listing Approval Orders. to reflect changes in currency exchange Funds, for which the NAV is normally rates between the U.S. dollar and the calculated at 3 p.m. Central Time. c. Tracking Error applicable foreign currency. The IIV The Funds have chosen to pursue a also includes the estimated cash f. Other Issues representative sampling strategy that, by component for each Fund. i. Surveillance Procedures its very nature, entails some risk of For the iShares MSCI Brazil, EAFE, tracking error. (It should also be noted Germany, Mexico, South Africa, and The Exchange intends to utilize its that Fund expenses, the timing of cash United Kingdom Funds, and the S&P existing surveillance procedures flows, and other factors all contribute to Europe 350 Fund, there is an overlap in applicable to equity securities to tracking error.) The Web site for the trading hours between the foreign and monitor trading in the Shares. The Funds, http://www.iShares.com, U.S. markets. Therefore, the IIV Exchange represents that these contains detailed information on the calculator updates the applicable IIV procedures are adequate to monitor performance and tracking error for each every 15 seconds to reflect price Exchange trading of the Shares. Fund. changes in the applicable foreign market ii. Trading Hours or markets and converts such prices into The trading hours for the Shares on d. Availability of Information Regarding U.S. dollars based on the currency CBSX will be 8:15 a.m. until 3:15 p.m. Funds exchange rate. When a relevant foreign Central Time (unless the value of a The Web site for the Funds (http:// market is closed but the U.S. markets Fund is not being calculated and widely www.iShares.com) contains the prior are open, the IIV is updated every 15 disseminated before 8:30 a.m., in which business day’s NAV and the reported seconds to reflect changes in currency case trading in that Fund will begin at closing price, and a calculation of the exchange rates after the foreign market 8:30 a.m.; and unless the original listing premium or discount of such price closes. The IIV also includes the against NAV; and data in chart format applicable cash component for each 7 The Commission issued an order (‘‘Order’’) displaying the frequency distribution of Fund. granting the Funds an exemption from Section discounts and premiums of the daily 24(d) of the Investment Company Act of 1940. See, closing price against the NAV. e. Information Circular e.g., Investment Company Act Release No. 25623 The intra-day values of the indexes In connection with the trading of the (June 25, 2002). Any Product Description used in reliance on the Section 24(d) exemptive order will will be disseminated every 15 seconds Shares, the Exchange will inform comply with all representations made and all throughout the trading day by members and member organizations in conditions contained in the Application for the organizations authorized by the index an Information Circular of certain Order.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27873

exchange closes trading of a Fund at 3 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s IV. Commission’s Findings and Order p.m., in which case trading in that Fund Statement on Comments on the Granting Accelerated Approval of the will end at 3 p.m.). Proposed Rule Change Received From Proposed Rule Change Members, Participants or Others iii. Trading Halts After careful review, the Commission The Exchange proposes to modify its The Exchange neither solicited nor finds that the proposed rule change, as Rule 52.3 to provide that (i) From 8:15 received comments on the proposal. amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules to 8:30 Central Time, if a security III. Solicitation of Comments described in Rules 54.1, 54.2, and 54.3 and regulations thereunder applicable to 11 (an ‘‘ETF’’) (the Shares are among the Interested persons are invited to a national securities exchange. In securities covered by this provision) submit written data, views, and particular, the Commission finds that begins trading on CBSX and arguments concerning the foregoing, the proposed rule change is consistent 12 subsequently a temporary interruption including whether the proposed rule with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which occurs in the calculation or wide change is consistent with the Act. requires that an exchange have rules dissemination of the IIV or the value of Comments may be submitted by any of designed, among other things, to the underlying index, as applicable, to the following methods: promote just and equitable principles of such ETF, by a major market data trade, to remove impediments to and Electronic Comments vendor, CBSX may continue to trade the perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market ETF for the remainder of the 8:15 to 8:30 • Use the Commission’s Internet system, and in general to protect session; and, (ii) during normal market comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ investors and the public interest. The hours, if a temporary interruption rules/sro.shtml); or occurs in the calculation or wide Commission believes that this proposal • Send an e-mail to rule- dissemination of the applicable IIV or should benefit investors by increasing [email protected]. Please include File value of the underlying index by a major competition among markets that trade Number SR–CBOE–2007–37 on the market data vendor and the listing the Shares. subject line. market halts trading in the ETF, CBSX, In addition, the Commission finds upon notification by the listing market Paper Comments that the proposal is consistent with of such halt due to such temporary Section 12(f) of the Act,13 which permits • interruption, also shall immediately halt Send paper comments in triplicate an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, trading in the ETF on CBSX. to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, a security that is listed and registered on Securities and Exchange Commission, another exchange.14 The Commission 2. Statutory Basis 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC notes that it previously approved the CBOE believes that the proposed rule 20549–1090. listing and trading of each of the Shares change is consistent with the Act and All submissions should refer to File on either Amex or the NYSE.15 The the rules and regulations thereunder Number SR–CBOE–2007–37. This file Commission also finds that the proposal applicable to a national securities number should be included on the is consistent with Rule 12f–5 under the exchange. Specifically, the Exchange subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Act,16 which provides that an exchange believes the proposed rule change is Commission process and review your shall not extend UTP to a security consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 8 comments more efficiently, please use unless the exchange has in effect a rule requirements that an exchange have only one method. The Commission will or rules providing for transactions in the rules that are designed to promote just post all comments on the Commission’s class or type of security to which the and equitable principles of trade, to Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ exchange extends UTP. The Exchange remove impediments to and perfect the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the has represented that it meets this mechanism of a free and open market submission, all subsequent requirement because it deems the and a national market system, and to amendments, all written statements Shares to be equity securities, thus protect investors and the public interest. with respect to the proposed rule rendering trading in the Shares subject In addition, CBOE believes that the change that are filed with the to the Exchange’s existing rules proposal is consistent with Rule 12f–5 Commission, and all written governing the trading of equity under the Act 9 because it deems each communications relating to the securities. Share to be an equity security, thus proposed rule change between the The Commission further believes that rendering trading in each Fund subject Commission and any person, other than the proposal is consistent with Section to the Exchange’s existing rules those that may be withheld from the governing the trading of equity public in accordance with the 11 In approving this rule change, the Commission 10 securities. provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact available for inspection and copying in on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). Statement on Burden on Competition the Commission’s Public Reference 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Room. Copies of such filing also will be 13 CBOE does not believe that the 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). available for inspection and copying at 14 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), proposed rule change will impose any the principal office of the Exchange. All generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a burden on competition not necessary or comments received will be posted security on a national securities exchange unless appropriate in furtherance of the without change; the Commission does the security is registered on that exchange pursuant purposes of the Act. to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act not edit personal identifying excludes from this restriction trading in any information from submissions. You security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ 8 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5). should submit only information that When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it 9 17 CFR 240.12f–5. you wish to make available publicly. All allows its members to trade the security as if it were 10 See e-mail dated May 8, 2007 from Brian Jung, listed and registered on the exchange even though Law Clerk, CBOE, to Geoffrey Pemble, Special submissions should refer to File it is not so listed and registered. Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Number SR–CBOE–2007–37 and should 15 See supra notes 3–5. Commission. be submitted on or before June 7, 2007. 16 17 CFR 240.12f–5.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27874 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act,17 which sets The Commission finds good cause for change and approves the proposal on an forth Congress’s finding that it is in the approving this proposal before the accelerated basis. public interest and appropriate for the thirtieth day after the publication of I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s protection of investors and the notice thereof in the Federal Register. Statement of the Terms of Substance of As noted previously, the Commission maintenance of fair and orderly markets the Proposed Rule Change to assure the availability to brokers, previously found that the listing and dealers, and investors of information trading of the Shares on either Amex or The Exchange proposes to trade, on with respect to quotations for and the NYSE is consistent with the Act. the CBOE Stock Exchange (‘‘CBSX’’), transactions in securities. Quotations for The Commission presently is not aware shares (‘‘Shares’’) of iShares MSCI and last-sale information regarding the of any regulatory issue that should Canada Index Fund (‘‘Fund’’) pursuant Shares are disseminated through the cause it to revisit that finding or would to unlisted trading privileges (‘‘UTP’’). facilities of the CTA and the preclude the trading of the Shares on The text of the proposed rule change is Consolidated Quotation System. In the Exchange pursuant to UTP. available on the Exchange’s Web site addition, the IIV of each Fund is Therefore, accelerating approval of this (http://www.cboe.org/Legal), at the disseminated every 15 seconds proposal should benefit investors by Exchange’s principal office, and at the throughout the trading day by the creating, without undue delay, Commission’s Public Reference Room. national securities exchange on which additional competition in the market for II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Fund is listed or by other the Shares. Statement of the Purpose of, and information providers or market data V. Conclusion Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule vendors. Change Furthermore, the Commission It is therefore ordered, pursuant to In its filing with the Commission, the believes that the proposal is reasonably Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,19 that the Exchange included statements designed to preclude trading of the proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2007– concerning the purpose of, and basis for, Shares when transparency is impaired. 37), as modified by Amendment No. 1 the proposed rule change and discussed New CBOE Rule 52.3 sets forth trading thereto, be and it hereby is, approved on any comments it received on the halt procedures when CBOE trades an an accelerated basis. proposed rule change. The text of these ETF pursuant to UTP. Under this rule, For the Commission, by the Division of statements may be examined at the if the listing market halts trading when Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated places specified in Item III below. The the IIV is not being calculated or authority.20 Exchange has prepared summaries, set disseminated, CBOE also would halt J. Lynn Taylor, forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of trading in the Shares. This rule is Assistant Secretary. the most significant aspects of such substantially similar to those recently statements. adopted by other exchanges and found [FR Doc. E7–9465 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] by the Commission to be consistent with BILLING CODE 8010–01–P A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Act.18 Statement of the Purpose of, and The Commission notes that, if the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Shares should be delisted by the listing Change COMMISSION market, the Exchange would no longer 1. Purpose have authority to trade the Shares pursuant to this order. [Release No. 34–55747; File No. SR–CBOE– The Exchange is proposing to trade In support of this proposal, the 2007–48] Shares of the Fund pursuant to UTP. The Fund seeks to provide investment Exchange has made the following Self-Regulatory Organizations; representations: results that correspond generally to the Chicago Board Options Exchange, price and yield performance, before fees 1. The Exchange’s surveillance Incorporated; Notice of Filing and procedures are adequate to properly and expenses, of publicly traded Order Granting Accelerated Approval securities in the Canadian market, as monitor Exchange trading of the Shares of Proposed Rule Change to Trade the and to deter and detect violations of measured by the MSCI Canada Index iShares MSCI Canada Index Fund (‘‘Index’’). Exchange rules. Pursuant to UTP 2. Prior to the commencement of The Commission previously approved trading, the Exchange would inform its May 10, 2007. the original listing and trading of the members and member organizations in Shares on the American Stock Exchange Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the (‘‘Amex’’).3 Subsequently, the an Information Circular of the special Securities Exchange Act of 1934 characteristics and risks associated with Commission approved the listing and (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 trading of the Shares on the Pacific trading the Shares. notice is hereby given that on May 10, 3. The Information Circular would Exchange, which is now known as 2007, the Chicago Board Options 4 include the requirement that members NYSE Arca (‘‘NYSE Arca’’). Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘Exchange’’ or The Exchange deems the Shares to be and member firms deliver a prospectus ‘‘CBOE’’), filed with the Securities and to investors purchasing newly issued equity securities, thus rendering trading Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) in the Shares subject to the Exchange’s Shares prior to or concurrently with the the proposed rule change as described confirmation of a transaction. existing rules governing the trading of in Items I and II below, which Items equity securities. The trading hours for This approval order is conditioned on have been substantially prepared by the the Exchange’s adherence to these Exchange. This notice and order 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36947 representations. provides notice of the proposed rule (March 8, 1996), 61 FR 10606 (March 14, 1996). 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53230 17 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). (February 6, 2006), 71 FR 7594 (February 13, 2006) 19 18 See e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34; 19 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). (approving SR–PCX–2005–116, which permitted Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54997 20 20 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). the listing and trading on the Pacific Exchange of (December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78501 (December 29, 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). the Shares, as well as shares of other iShares MSCI 2006). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. international index funds).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27875

the Shares on CBSX will be 8:15 a.m. market are present. In addition, trading arguments concerning the foregoing, until 3:15 p.m. Central Time (‘‘CT’’), in the Shares would be subject to including whether the proposed rule unless the intraday indicative value trading halts caused by extraordinary change is consistent with the Act. (‘‘IIV’’) of the Fund is not being market volatility pursuant to the Comments may be submitted by any of calculated and widely disseminated Exchange’s ‘‘circuit breaker’’ rule.5 the following methods: before 8:30 a.m. CT, in which case Moreover, the Exchange represents trading will begin at 8:30 a.m. CT; and that it would cease trading the Shares if Electronic Comments unless Amex closes trading at 3 p.m. the listing market stops trading the • Use the Commission’s Internet CT, in which case trading will end at 3 Shares because of a regulatory halt comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ p.m. CT. similar to a halt based on CBOE Rule Quotations for and last sale 6.3. UTP trading in the Shares is also rules/sro.shtml); or information regarding the Shares are governed by the trading halts provisions • Send an e-mail to rule- disseminated through the Consolidated of CBOE Rule 52.3 relating to temporary [email protected]. Please include File Quotation System. The value of the interruptions in the calculation or wide Number SR–CBOE–2007–48 on the Index is updated intra-day on a real- dissemination of the IIV or the value of subject line. time basis as individual component the underlying index. securities of the Index change in price. The Exchange intends to utilize its Paper Comments existing surveillance procedures The intraday value of the Index is • Send paper comments in triplicate disseminated every 15 seconds applicable to equity security products to to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, throughout the trading day. In addition, monitor trading in the Shares. The Securities and Exchange Commission, a value for the Index is disseminated Exchange represents that these once each trading day, based on closing procedures are adequate to monitor 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC prices in the relevant exchange markets. Exchange trading of the Shares. 20549–1090. To provide updated information 2. Statutory Basis All submissions should refer to File relating to the Shares for use by Number SR–CBOE–2007–48. This file investors, professionals, and persons CBOE believes that the proposed rule number should be included on the change is consistent with the Act and wishing to create or redeem them, Amex subject line if e-mail is used. To help the the rules and regulations thereunder disseminates through the facilities of the Commission process and review your Consolidated Tape Association the IIV applicable to a national securities exchange. comments more efficiently, please use for the Fund as calculated by a only one method. The Commission will securities information provider. The IIV Specifically, the Exchange believes post all comments on the Commission’s is disseminated on a per-share basis that the proposed rule change is 6 Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ every 15 seconds during regular trading consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) hours. CBOE Rule 52.3 provides that, if requirements that an exchange have rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the the IIV ceases to be widely available, rules that are designed to promote just submission, all subsequent CBSX would cease trading the Shares. and equitable principles of trade, to amendments, all written statements In connection with the trading of the remove impediments to and perfect the with respect to the proposed rule Shares, the Exchange would inform mechanism of a free and open market change that are filed with the members and member organizations in and a national market system, and to Commission, and all written an Information Circular of the special protect investors and the public interest. communications relating to the characteristics and risks associated with In addition, CBOE believes that the proposed rule change between the trading the Shares, including how they proposal is consistent with Rule 12f–5 Commission and any person, other than are created and redeemed, the under the Act 7 because it deems Shares those that may be withheld from the prospectus or product description to be equity securities, thus rendering public in accordance with the delivery requirements applicable to the trading in the Shares subject to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Shares, applicable Exchange rules, how Exchange’s existing rules governing the available for inspection and copying in information about the value of the trading of equity securities. the Commission’s Public Reference underlying Index is disseminated, and B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Room. Copies of such filing also will be trading information. In addition, before Statement on Burden on Competition available for inspection and copying at a member recommends a transaction in the principal office of the Exchange. All the Shares, the member must determine CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any comments received will be posted that the Shares are suitable for the without change; the Commission does customer as required by CBOE Rule burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the not edit personal identifying 53.6. information from submissions. You With respect to trading halts, the purposes of the Act. should submit only information that Exchange may consider all relevant C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s you wish to make available publicly. All factors in exercising its discretion to Statement on Comments on the submissions should refer to File halt or suspend trading in the Shares. Proposed Rule Change Received From Number SR–CBOE–2007–48 and should Trading may be halted because of Members, Participants or Others market conditions or for reasons that, in be submitted on or before June 7, 2007. The Exchange neither solicited nor the view of the Exchange, make trading received comments on the proposal. IV. Commission’s Findings and Order in the Shares inadvisable. These may Granting Accelerated Approval of the include: (1) The extent to which trading III. Solicitation of Comments Proposed Rule Change is not occurring in the securities Interested persons are invited to comprising the underlying index and/or submit written data, views, and After careful review, the Commission financial instruments of the Fund, or (2) finds that the proposed rule change is whether other unusual conditions or 5 CBOE Rule 6.3B. consistent with the requirements of the circumstances detrimental to the 6 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5). Act and the rules and regulations maintenance of a fair and orderly 7 17 CFR 240.12f–5. thereunder applicable to a national

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27876 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

securities exchange.8 In particular, the and last-sale information regarding the to revisit that finding or would preclude Commission finds that the proposed Shares are disseminated through the the trading of the Shares on the rule change is consistent with Section facilities of the CTA and the Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore, 6(b)(5) of the Act,9 which requires that Consolidated Quotation System. In accelerating approval of this proposal an exchange have rules designed, among addition, the IIV of the Fund is should benefit investors by creating, other things, to promote just and disseminated every 15 seconds without undue delay, additional equitable principles of trade, to remove throughout the trading day by the competition in the market for the impediments to and perfect the national securities exchange on which Shares. mechanism of a free and open market the Fund is listed or by other V. Conclusion and a national market system, and in information providers or market data general to protect investors and the vendors. It is therefore ordered, pursuant to public interest. The Commission Furthermore, the Commission Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,16 that the believes that this proposal should believes that the proposal is reasonably proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2007– benefit investors by increasing designed to preclude trading of the 48) be and it hereby is, approved on an competition among markets that trade Shares when transparency is impaired. accelerated basis. the Shares. CBOE Rule 52.3 sets forth trading halt For the Commission, by the Division of In addition, the Commission finds procedures when CBOE trades the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated that the proposal is consistent with Shares pursuant to UTP. Under this authority.17 Section 12(f) of the Act,10 which permits rule, if the listing market halts trading J. Lynn Taylor, an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, when the IIV is not being calculated or Assistant Secretary. a security that is listed and registered on widely disseminated, CBOE also would [FR Doc. E7–9468 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] another exchange.11 The Commission halt trading in the Shares. This rule is BILLING CODE 8010–01–P notes that it previously approved the substantially similar to those recently listing and trading of the Shares on adopted by other exchanges and found Amex and NYSE Arca.12 The by the Commission to be consistent with SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Commission also finds that the proposal the Act.15 COMMISSION is consistent with Rule 12f–5 under the The Commission notes that, if the Act,13 which provides that an exchange [Release No. 34–55750; File No. SR–CBOE– Shares should be delisted by the listing 2007–46] shall not extend UTP to a security market, the Exchange would no longer unless the exchange has in effect a rule have authority to trade the Shares Self-Regulatory Organizations; or rules providing for transactions in the pursuant to this order. Chicago Board Options Exchange, class or type of security to which the In support of this proposal, the Incorporated; Notice of Filing and exchange extends UTP. The Exchange Exchange has made the following Order Granting Accelerated Approval has represented that it meets this representations: of Proposed Rule Change To Trade the requirement because it deems the 1. The Exchange’s surveillance SPDR DJ Global Titans ETF Pursuant Shares to be equity securities, thus procedures are adequate to properly to UTP rendering trading in the Shares subject monitor Exchange trading of the Shares to the Exchange’s existing rules and to deter and detect violations of May 11, 2007. governing the trading of equity Exchange rules. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the securities. 2. Prior to the commencement of Securities Exchange Act of 1934 The Commission further believes that trading, the Exchange would inform its (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 the proposal is consistent with Section members and member organizations in notice is hereby given that on May 9, 14 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act, which sets an Information Circular of the special 2007, the Chicago Board Options forth Congress’ finding that it is in the characteristics and risks associated with Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘Exchange’’ or public interest and appropriate for the trading the Shares. ‘‘CBOE’’), filed with the Securities and protection of investors and the 3. The Information Circular would Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) maintenance of fair and orderly markets include the requirement that members the proposed rule change as described to assure the availability to brokers, and member firms deliver a prospectus in Items I and II below, which Items dealers, and investors of information to investors purchasing newly issued have been substantially prepared by the with respect to quotations for and Shares prior to or concurrently with the Exchange. This notice and order transactions in securities. Quotations for confirmation of a transaction. provides notice of the proposed rule This approval order is conditioned on change and approves the proposal on an 8 In approving this rule change, the Commission accelerated basis. notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact the Exchange’s adherence to these on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. representations. I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). The Commission finds good cause for Statement of the Terms of Substance of 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). approving this proposal before the the Proposed Rule Change 10 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). thirtieth day after the publication of 11 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), notice thereof in the Federal Register. The Chicago Board Options Exchange, generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a Incorporated (‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘CBOE’’) security on a national securities exchange unless As noted previously, the Commission the security is registered on that exchange pursuant previously found the listing and trading proposes to trade shares (‘‘Shares’’) of to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act of the Shares on Amex and NYSE Arca the SPDR DJ Global Titans ETF excludes from this restriction trading in any to be consistent with the Act. The (‘‘Fund’’) pursuant to unlisted trading security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ privileges (‘‘UTP’’). The text of the When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it Commission presently is not aware of allows its members to trade the security as if it were any regulatory issue that should cause it proposed rule change is available on the listed and registered on the exchange even though 16 it is not so listed and registered. 15 See, e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34; 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 12 See supra notes 3 and 4. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54997 17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 13 17 CFR 240.12f–5. (December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78501 (December 29, 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 14 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 2006). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27877

Exchange’s Web site (http:// To provide updated information procedures are adequate to monitor www.cboe.org/Legal), at the Exchange’s relating to the Shares for use by Exchange trading of the Shares. principal office, and at the investors, professionals, and persons 2. Statutory Basis Commission’s Public Reference Room. wishing to create or redeem them, Amex disseminates through the facilities of the CBOE believes that the proposed rule II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Consolidated Tape Association the IIV change is consistent with the Act and Statement of the Purpose of, and for the Fund as calculated by a the rules and regulations thereunder Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule securities information provider. The IIV applicable to a national securities Change is disseminated on a per-share basis exchange. Specifically, the Exchange In its filing with the Commission, the every 15 seconds during regular trading believes the proposed rule change is Exchange included statements hours. CBOE Rule 52.3 provides that, if consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 5 concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the IIV ceases to be widely available, requirements that an exchange have the proposed rule change and discussed CBSX would cease trading the Shares. rules that are designed to promote just any comments it received on the In connection with the trading of the and equitable principles of trade, to proposed rule change. The text of these Shares, the Exchange would inform remove impediments to and perfect the statements may be examined at the members and member organizations in mechanism of a free and open market places specified in Item III below. The an Information Circular of the special and a national market system, and to Exchange has prepared summaries, set characteristics and risks associated with protect investors and the public interest. forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of trading the Shares, including how they In addition, CBOE believes that the the most significant aspects of such are created and redeemed, the proposal is consistent with Rule 12f–5 statements. prospectus or product description under the Act 6 because it deems each A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s delivery requirements applicable to the Share to be an equity security, thus Statement of the Purpose of, and Shares, applicable Exchange rules, how rendering trading in each Fund subject Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule information about the value of the to the Exchange’s existing rules Change underlying Index is disseminated, and governing the trading of equity trading information. In addition, before securities. 1. Purpose a member recommends a transaction in B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The Exchange is proposing to trade the Shares, the member must determine Statement on Burden on Competition Shares of the Fund pursuant to UTP. that the Shares are suitable for the The Fund’s investment objective is to customer as required by CBOE Rule CBOE does not believe that the replicate as closely as possible, before 53.6. proposed rule change will impose any expenses, the performance of the Dow With respect to trading halts, the burden on competition not necessary or Jones Global Titans Index (‘‘Index’’), Exchange may consider all relevant appropriate in furtherance of the using an indexing investment approach. factors in exercising its discretion to purposes of the Act. The Commission previously approved halt or suspend trading in the Shares. the original listing and trading of the Trading may be halted because of C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Shares on the American Stock Exchange market conditions or for reasons that, in Statement on Comments on the (‘‘Amex’’).3 The Exchange deems the the view of the Exchange, make trading Proposed Rule Change Received From Shares to be equity securities, thus in the Fund inadvisable. These may Members, Participants or Others rendering trading in the Shares subject include: (1) The extent to which trading The Exchange neither solicited nor to the Exchange’s existing rules is not occurring in the securities received comments on the proposal. governing the trading of equity comprising the underlying index and/or III. Solicitation of Comments securities. The trading hours for the financial instrument of the Fund, or (2) Shares on CBSX will be 8:15 a.m. until whether other unusual conditions or Interested persons are invited to 3:15 p.m. Central Time, unless the circumstances detrimental to the submit written data, views, and intraday indicative value (‘‘IIV’’) of the maintenance of a fair and orderly arguments concerning the foregoing, Fund is not being calculated and widely market are present. In addition, trading including whether the proposed rule disseminated before 8:30 a.m., in which in the Shares would be subject to change is consistent with the Act. case trading will begin at 8:30 a.m.; and trading halts caused by extraordinary Comments may be submitted by any of unless the Amex closes trading at 3 market volatility pursuant to the the following methods: Exchange’s ‘‘circuit breaker’’ rule.4 p.m., in which case trading will end at Electronic Comments 3 p.m. Moreover, the Exchange represents Quotations for and last sale that it would cease trading the Shares if • Use the Commission’s Internet information regarding the Shares are the listing market stops trading the comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ disseminated through the Consolidated Shares because of a regulatory halt rules/sro.shtml); or Quotation System. The value of the similar to a halt based on CBOE Rule • Send an e-mail to rule- Index is updated intra-day on a real- 6.3. UTP trading in the Shares is also [email protected]. Please include File time basis as individual component governed by the trading halts provisions Number SR–CBOE–2007–46 on the securities of the Index change in price. of CBOE Rule 52.3 relating to temporary subject line. interruptions in the calculation or wide The intraday value of the Index is Paper Comments disseminated every 15 seconds dissemination of the IIV or the value of • throughout the trading day. In addition, the underlying index. Send paper comments in triplicate a value for the Index is disseminated The Exchange intends to utilize its to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, once each trading day, based on closing existing surveillance procedures Securities and Exchange Commission, prices in the relevant exchange markets. applicable to equity security products to 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC monitor trading in the Shares. The 20549–1090. 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43338 Exchange represents that these (September 25, 2000), 65 FR 59235 (October 4, 5 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5). 2000) (SR–Amex–00–53). 4 CBOE Rule 6.3B. 6 17 CFR 240.12f–5.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27878 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

All submissions should refer to File an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, Commission to be consistent with the Number SR–CBOE–2007–46. This file a security that is listed and registered on Act.14 number should be included on the another exchange.10 The Commission The Commission notes that, if the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the notes that it previously approved the Shares should be delisted by the listing Commission process and review your listing and trading of each of the Shares market, the Exchange would no longer comments more efficiently, please use on Amex.11 The Commission also finds have authority to trade the Shares only one method. The Commission will that the proposal is consistent with Rule pursuant to this order. post all comments on the Commission’s 12f-5 under the Act,12 which provides In support of this proposal, the Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ that an exchange shall not extend UTP Exchange has made the following rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the to a security unless the exchange has in representations: submission, all subsequent effect a rule or rules providing for 1. The Exchange’s surveillance amendments, all written statements transactions in the class or type of procedures are adequate to properly with respect to the proposed rule security to which the exchange extends monitor Exchange trading of the Shares change that are filed with the UTP. The Exchange has represented that and to deter and detect violations of Commission, and all written it meets this requirement because it Exchange rules. communications relating to the deems the Shares to be equity securities, 2. Prior to the commencement of proposed rule change between the thus rendering trading in the Shares trading, the Exchange would inform its Commission and any person, other than subject to the Exchange’s existing rules members and member organizations in those that may be withheld from the governing the trading of equity an Information Circular of the special public in accordance with the securities. characteristics and risks associated with provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be trading the Shares. The Commission further believes that 3. The Information Circular would available for inspection and copying in the proposal is consistent with Section the Commission’s Public Reference 13 include the requirement that members 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act, which sets and member firms deliver a prospectus Room. Copies of such filing also will be forth Congress’s finding that it is in the available for inspection and copying at to investors purchasing newly issued public interest and appropriate for the Shares prior to or concurrently with the the principal office of the Exchange. All protection of investors and the comments received will be posted confirmation of a transaction. maintenance of fair and orderly markets without change; the Commission does to assure the availability to brokers, This approval order is conditioned on not edit personal identifying dealers, and investors of information the Exchange’s adherence to these information from submissions. You with respect to quotations for and representations. should submit only information that The Commission finds good cause for transactions in securities. Quotations for you wish to make available publicly. All approving this proposal before the and last-sale information regarding the submissions should refer to File thirtieth day after the publication of Shares are disseminated through the Number SR–CBOE–2007–46 and should notice thereof in the Federal Register. facilities of the CTA and the be submitted on or before June 7, 2007. As noted previously, the Commission Consolidated Quotation System. In previously found that the listing and IV. Commission’s Findings and Order addition, the IIV of each Fund is trading of the Shares on Amex is Granting Accelerated Approval of the disseminated every 15 seconds consistent with the Act. The Proposed Rule Change throughout the trading day by the Commission presently is not aware of national securities exchange on which After careful review, the Commission any regulatory issue that should cause it the Fund is listed or by other finds that the proposed rule change is to revisit that finding or would preclude information providers or market data consistent with the requirements of the the trading of the Shares on the vendors. Act and the rules and regulations Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore, thereunder applicable to a national Furthermore, the Commission accelerating approval of this proposal 7 securities exchange. In particular, the believes that the proposal is reasonably should benefit investors by creating, Commission finds that the proposed designed to preclude trading of the without undue delay, additional rule change is consistent with Section Shares when transparency is impaired. competition in the market for the 8 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires that CBOE Rule 52.3 sets forth trading halt Shares. an exchange have rules designed, among procedures when CBOE trades an ETF other things, to promote just and pursuant to UTP. Under this rule, if the V. Conclusion equitable principles of trade, to remove listing market halts trading when the IIV It is therefore ordered, pursuant to impediments to and perfect the is not being calculated or disseminated, Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,15 that the mechanism of a free and open market CBOE also would halt trading in the proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2007– and a national market system, and in Shares. This rule is substantially similar 46) be and it hereby is, approved on an general to protect investors and the to those recently adopted by other accelerated basis. public interest. The Commission exchanges and found by the believes that this proposal should For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated benefit investors by increasing 10 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), authority.16 competition among markets that trade generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a J. Lynn Taylor, the Shares. security on a national securities exchange unless In addition, the Commission finds the security is registered on that exchange pursuant Assistant Secretary. to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act [FR Doc. E7–9469 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] that the proposal is consistent with excludes from this restriction trading in any 9 Section 12(f) of the Act, which permits security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ BILLING CODE 8010–01–P When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it 7 In approving this rule change, the Commission allows its members to trade the security as if it were 14 See e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34; notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact listed and registered on the exchange even though Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54997 on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. it is not so listed and registered. (December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78501 (December 29, See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 11 See supra note 3. 2006). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 12 17 CFR 240.12f–5. 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 9 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). 13 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27879

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s securities of each Index change in price. COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and The intraday value of each Index is Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule disseminated every 15 seconds [Release No. 34–55746; File No. SR–CBOE– Change throughout the trading day. In addition, 2007–49] a value for each Index is disseminated 1. Purpose once each trading day, based on closing Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Exchange is proposing to trade prices in the relevant exchange markets. Chicago Board Options Exchange, Shares of the following Funds pursuant To provide updated information Incorporated; Notice of Filing and to UTP: relating to the Shares for use by • investors, professionals, and persons Order Granting Accelerated Approval iShares MSCI Belgium (Symbol: EWK) • wishing to create or redeem them, Amex of Proposed Rule Change To Trade iShares MSCI France (EWQ) • disseminates through the facilities of the Certain iShares MSCI International iShares MSCI Italy (EWI) • iShares MSCI Japan (EWJ) Consolidated Tape Association the IIV Index Funds Pursuant to UTP • iShares MSCI Netherlands (EWN) for each Fund as calculated by a • May 11, 2007 iShares MSCI Spain (EWP) securities information provider. The IIV • iShares MSCI Sweden (EWD) for each Fund is disseminated on a per- Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the • iShares MSCI Switzerland (EWL) share basis every 15 seconds during Securities Exchange Act of 1934 The Funds seek to provide investment regular trading hours. CBOE Rule 52.3 1 2 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, results that correspond generally to the provides that, if the IIV ceases to be notice is hereby given that on May 10, price and yield performance, before fees widely available, CBSX would cease 2007, the Chicago Board Options and expenses, of publicly traded trading the Shares. Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘Exchange’’ or securities in the aggregate in the In connection with the trading of the ‘‘CBOE’’), filed with the Securities and respective country’s markets, as Shares, the Exchange would inform Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) measured by the applicable MSCI Index members and member organizations in the proposed rule change as described (each, an ‘‘Index’’). an Information Circular of the special in Items I and II below, which Items The Commission previously approved characteristics and risks associated with have been substantially prepared by the the original listing and trading of the trading the Shares, including how they Exchange. This notice and order Shares on the American Stock Exchange are created and redeemed, the prospectus or product description provides notice of the proposed rule (‘‘Amex’’).3 The Commission delivery requirements applicable to the change and approves the proposal on an subsequently approved listing of the Shares, applicable Exchange rules, how accelerated basis. Shares on the New York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’).4 Consequently, Shares of information about the value of the underlying Index is disseminated, and I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s each Fund are listed on both Amex and trading information. In addition, before Statement of the Terms of Substance of NYSE. a member recommends a transaction in the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange deems the Shares to be the Shares, the member must determine equity securities, thus rendering trading that the Shares are suitable for the The Exchange proposes to trade, on in the Shares subject to the Exchange’s customer as required by CBOE Rule the CBOE Stock Exchange (‘‘CBSX’’), existing rules governing the trading of 53.6. shares (‘‘Shares’’) of eight iShares MSCI equity securities. The trading hours for international index funds (‘‘Funds’’) With respect to trading halts, the the Shares on CBSX will be 8:15 a.m. Exchange may consider all relevant pursuant to unlisted trading privileges until 3:15 p.m. Central Time (‘‘CT’’), (‘‘UTP’’). The text of the proposed rule factors in exercising its discretion to unless the intraday indicative value halt or suspend trading in the Shares. change is available on the Exchange’s (‘‘IIV’’) of a Fund is not being calculated Web site (http://www.cboe.org/Legal), at Trading may be halted because of and widely disseminated before 8:30 market conditions or for reasons that, in the Exchange’s principal office, and at a.m. CT, in which case trading will the view of the Exchange, make trading the Commission’s Public Reference begin at 8:30 a.m. CT; and unless the in the Shares inadvisable. These may Room. Amex closes trading at 3 p.m. CT, in include: (1) The extent to which trading which case trading will end at 3 p.m. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s is not occurring in the securities CT. Statement of the Purpose of, and comprising the underlying index and/or Quotations for and last-sale financial instruments of the Funds, or Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule information regarding the Shares are Change (2) whether other unusual conditions or disseminated through the Consolidated circumstances detrimental to the In its filing with the Commission, the Quotation System. The value of each maintenance of a fair and orderly Exchange included statements Index is updated intra-day on a real- market are present. In addition, trading time basis as individual component concerning the purpose of, and basis for, in the Shares would be subject to the proposed rule change and discussed trading halts caused by extraordinary 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36947 any comments it received on the (March 8, 1996), 61 FR 10606 (March 14, 1996) (SR– market volatility pursuant to the 5 proposed rule change. The text of these Amex–95–43). The Shares were formerly known as Exchange’s ‘‘circuit breaker’’ rule. statements may be examined at the World Equity Benchmark Shares or WEBS. Moreover, the Exchange represents 4 See Exchange Act Release No. 52816 (November that it would cease trading the Shares if places specified in Item III below. The 21, 2005), 70 FR 71574 (November 29, 2005) (SR– Exchange has prepared summaries, set the listing market stops trading the NYSE–2005–70) (approving the listing and trading Shares because of a regulatory halt forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of on NYSE of the shares of iShares MSCI Index Funds similar to a halt based on CBOE Rule the most significant aspects of such for Belgium, France, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland). See also Securities 6.3. UTP trading in the Shares is also statements. Exchange Act Release No. 52761 (November 10, governed by the trading halts provisions 2005), 70 FR 70010 (November 18, 2005) (SR– NYSE–2005–76) (approving the listing and trading of CBOE Rule 52.3 relating to temporary 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). on NYSE of the shares of iShares MSCI Japan Index 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Fund, among other index funds). 5 CBOE Rule 6.3B.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27880 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

interruptions in the calculation or wide Paper Comments benefit investors by increasing dissemination of the IIV or the value of • Send paper comments in triplicate competition among markets that trade the underlying index. to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, the Shares. The Exchange intends to utilize its Securities and Exchange Commission, In addition, the Commission finds existing surveillance procedures that the proposal is consistent with 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 10 applicable to equity security products to 20549–1090. Section 12(f) of the Act, which permits an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, monitor trading in the Shares. The All submissions should refer to File a security that is listed and registered on Exchange represents that these Number SR–CBOE–2007–49. This file another exchange.11 The Commission procedures are adequate to monitor number should be included on the notes that it previously approved the Exchange trading of the Shares. subject line if e-mail is used. To help the listing and trading of the Shares on Commission process and review your 2. Statutory Basis Amex and NYSE.12 The Commission comments more efficiently, please use CBOE believes that the proposed rule also finds that the proposal is consistent only one method. The Commission will change is consistent with the Act and with Rule 12f–5 under the Act,13 which post all comments on the Commission’s the rules and regulations thereunder provides that an exchange shall not Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ applicable to a national securities extend UTP to a security unless the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the exchange has in effect a rule or rules exchange. Specifically, the Exchange submission, all subsequent providing for transactions in the class or believes that the proposed rule change amendments, all written statements 6 type of security to which the exchange is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) with respect to the proposed rule extends UTP. The Exchange has requirements that an exchange have change that are filed with the rules that are designed to promote just Commission, and all written represented that it meets this and equitable principles of trade, to communications relating to the requirement because it deems the remove impediments to and perfect the proposed rule change between the Shares to be equity securities, thus mechanism of a free and open market Commission and any person, other than rendering trading in the Shares subject and a national market system, and to those that may be withheld from the to the Exchange’s existing rules protect investors and the public interest. public in accordance with the governing the trading of equity In addition, CBOE believes that the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be securities. The Commission further believes that proposal is consistent with Rule 12f–5 available for inspection and copying in under the Act 7 because it deems Shares the proposal is consistent with Section the Commission’s Public Reference 14 to be equity securities, thus rendering Room. Copies of such filing also will be 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act, which sets trading in the Shares subject to the available for inspection and copying at forth Congress’ finding that it is in the Exchange’s existing rules governing the the principal office of the Exchange. All public interest and appropriate for the trading of equity securities. comments received will be posted protection of investors and the without change; the Commission does maintenance of fair and orderly markets B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s to assure the availability to brokers, Statement on Burden on Competition not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You dealers, and investors of information CBOE does not believe that the should submit only information that with respect to quotations for and proposed rule change will impose any you wish to make available publicly. All transactions in securities. Quotations for burden on competition not necessary or submissions should refer to File and last-sale information regarding the appropriate in furtherance of the Number SR–CBOE–2007–49 and should Shares are disseminated through the purposes of the Act. be submitted on or before June 7, 2007. facilities of the CTA and the Consolidated Quotation System. In C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s IV. Commission’s Findings and Order addition, the IIV of each Fund is Statement on Comments on the Granting Accelerated Approval of the disseminated every 15 seconds Proposed Rule Change Received From Proposed Rule Change throughout the trading day by the Members, Participants or Others After careful review, the Commission national securities exchange on which The Exchange neither solicited nor finds that the proposed rule change is the Fund is listed or by other received comments on the proposal. consistent with the requirements of the information providers or market data III. Solicitation of Comments Act and the rules and regulations vendors. thereunder applicable to a national Furthermore, the Commission Interested persons are invited to securities exchange.8 In particular, the believes that the proposal is reasonably submit written data, views, and Commission finds that the proposed designed to preclude trading of the arguments concerning the foregoing, rule change is consistent with Section Shares when transparency is impaired. including whether the proposed rule 6(b)(5) of the Act,9 which requires that CBOE Rule 52.3 sets forth trading halt change is consistent with the Act. an exchange have rules designed, among procedures when CBOE trades the Comments may be submitted by any of other things, to promote just and the following methods: 10 equitable principles of trade, to remove 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). 11 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), Electronic Comments impediments to and perfect the generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a • Use the Commission’s Internet mechanism of a free and open market security on a national securities exchange unless comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ and a national market system, and in the security is registered on that exchange pursuant general to protect investors and the to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act rules/sro.shtml); or excludes from this restriction trading in any • Send an e-mail to rule- public interest. The Commission security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ [email protected]. Please include File believes that this proposal should When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it Number SR–CBOE–2007–49 on the allows its members to trade the security as if it were 8 In approving this rule change, the Commission listed and registered on the exchange even though subject line. notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact it is not so listed and registered. on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 12 See supra notes 3 and 4. 6 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5). See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 13 17 CFR 240.12f–5. 7 17 CFR 240.12f–5. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 14 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27881

Shares pursuant to UTP. Under this For the Commission, by the Division of II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s rule, if the listing market halts trading Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Statement of the Purpose of, and when the IIV is not being calculated or authority.17 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule widely disseminated, CBOE also would J. Lynn Taylor, Change halt trading in the Shares. This rule is Deputy Secretary. In its filing with the Commission, the substantially similar to those recently [FR Doc. E7–9470 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Exchange included statements adopted by other exchanges and found BILLING CODE 8010–01–P concerning the purpose of, and basis for, by the Commission to be consistent with the proposed rule change and discussed 15 the Act. any comments it received on the The Commission notes that, if the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE proposed rule change. The text of these Shares should be delisted by the listing COMMISSION statements may be examined at the market, the Exchange would no longer places specified in Item IV below. The have authority to trade the Shares Exchange has prepared summaries, set pursuant to this order. [Release No. 34–55741; File No. SR–CME– 2007–01] forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of In support of this proposal, the the most significant aspects or such Exchange has made the following Self-Regulatory Organization; Chicago statements. representations: Mercantile Exchange; Notice of Filing 1. The Exchange’s surveillance A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and Immediate Effectiveness of a Statement of the Purpose of, and the procedures are adequate to properly Proposed Rule Change Relating to monitor Exchange trading of the Shares Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Listing Standards for Security Futures Change and to deter and detect violations of Products Exchange rules. 1. Purpose 2. Prior to the commencement of May 10, 2007. The Exchange proposes to enact a trading, the Exchange would inform its Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the technical amendment with respect to members and member organizations in Securities Exchange Act of 1934 the identification of the subject of a an Information Circular of the special (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–7 under the contract. Specifically, futures on characteristics and risks associated with Act,2 notice is hereby given that on Nasdaq-100 Tracking StockSM trading the Shares. April 19, 2007, Chicago Mercantile (‘‘QQQQ’’) shall henceforth be known as 3. The Information Circular would Exchange (‘‘CME’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed PowerShares QQQTM (‘‘QQQQ’’). The include the requirement that members with the Securities and Exchange name change is occasioned by the fact and member firms deliver a prospectus Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the that PowerShares Capital Management to investors purchasing newly issued proposed rule change described in Items LLC assumed sponsorship of the Shares prior to or concurrently with the I, II, and III below, which Items have NASDAQ–100 Trust, which tracks the confirmation of a transaction. been substantially prepared by the NASDAQ–100 Index commencing This approval order is conditioned on Exchange. The Commission is April 12, 2007. Note further that the the Exchange’s adherence to these publishing this notice to solicit CUSIP number associated with the ETF representations. comments on the proposed rule change is amended to ‘‘73935A 104.’’ The Commission finds good cause for from interested persons. CME also has 2. Statutory Basis approving this proposal before the certified the proposed rule change with thirtieth day after the publication of the Commodity Futures Trading The Exchange believes that the notice thereof in the Federal Register. Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) under Section proposed rule change is consistent with 4 As noted previously, the Commission 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act Section 6 of the Act and, in particular, previously found the listing and trading (‘‘CEA’’) 3 on April 19, 2006. furthers the objectives of Section of the Shares on Amex and NYSE to be 6(b)(5) 5 of the Act insofar as it is consistent with the Act. The I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s designed to prevent fraudulent and Commission presently is not aware of Statement of the Terms of Substance of manipulative acts and to promote just any regulatory issue that should cause it the Proposed Rule Change and equitable principles of trade. The Exchange further believe that the to revisit that finding or would preclude The Exchange proposes to enact a the trading of the Shares on the proposed rule change is consistent with technical amendment with respect to 6 Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore, Section 6(h)(3) of the Act which the identification of the subject of a accelerating approval of this proposal contains detailed requirements for contract. Specifically, futures on should benefit investors by creating, listing standards and conditions for Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock SM without undue delay, additional trading applicable to security futures (‘‘QQQQ’’) shall henceforth be known as competition in the market for the products. The information below is PowerShares QQQ TM (‘‘QQQQ’’). The Shares. offered in support of these statements. name change is occasioned by the fact Section 6(h)(3) of the Act 7 contains V. Conclusion that PowerShares Capital Management detailed requirements for listing It is therefore ordered, pursuant to LLC assumed sponsorship of the standards and conditions for trading 16 NASDAQ–100 Trust, which tracks the applicable to security futures products. Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the  proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2007– NASDAQ–100 Index commencing Set forth below is a summary of each 49) be and it hereby is, approved on an April 12, 2007. Note further that the such requirement or condition, followed accelerated basis. CUSIP number associated with the ETF by a brief explanation of how CME will is amended to ‘‘73935A 104.’’ comply with it, whether by particular 15 See, e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54997 17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 4 15 U.S.C. 78f. (December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78501 (December 29, 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 2006). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–7. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3). 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 3 7 U.S.C. 7a–2(c). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27882 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

provisions in the CME Listing Standards the CFTC jointly determine are 123 requires Exchange members to or otherwise. appropriate. This requirement is comply with all applicable ‘‘provisions Clause (A) of Section 6(h)(3)8 requires addressed by Rules 70001.1, 70002.1, of the Commodity Exchange Act and that any security underlying a security 70003.2, and 70004.2. regulations duly issued pursuant thereto future be registered pursuant to Section Clause (E) of Section 6(h)(3) 14 by the CFTC.’’ 12 of the Act.9 This requirement is requires that each security futures Note that the prohibition of dual addressed by CME Rules 70001.2, product be cleared by a clearing agency trading in security futures products per 70002.1.a., 70003.2.b., and 70004.2.a. that has in place provisions for linked Regulation § 41.27 21 adopted pursuant Clause (B) of Section 6(h)(3) 10 and coordinated clearing with other to Section 4j(a) of the CEA,22 generally, requires that a market on which a clearing agencies that clear security applies to a contract market operating physically settled security futures futures products, which permits the an electronic trading system if such product is traded have arrangements in security futures product to be purchased market provides floor brokers executing place with a registered clearing agency on one market and offset on another customer orders through open outcry a for the payment and delivery of the market that trades such product. CME contemporaneous placement of orders securities underlying the security intends to clear security futures on behalf of specified accounts on an futures product. CME has reached an products traded through Exchange electronic trading platform and a time or agreement with a member of DTC, a facilities through the CME Clearing place advantage or the ability to registered clearing agency, to facilitate House Division. The Clearing House override a predetermined matching the delivery-versus-payment Division will have in place all algorithm. The Exchange offers security transactions which result from an provisions for linked and coordinated futures products exclusively on its CME agreement to make or take delivery of clearing as mandated by law and statute Globex electronic trading platform. the underlying security by the market as of the effective date of such laws and Thus, the conditions cited above are participant. This DTC member will statutes. CME will facilitate deliveries inapplicable in this context and the provide CME with a dedicated DTC with a registered clearing agency to CME Rulebook contains no specific rule account. This account will be a sub- facilitate the payment and delivery of relating to dual trading in an electronic account of the DTC member’s main securities underlying security futures forum. account and will be utilized solely for products, through the facilities of a third Clause (H) of Section 6(h)(3) 23 CME activity with respect to the party agent. provides that trading in a security delivery of, and payment for, securities Clause (F) of Section 6(h)(3) 15 futures product must not be readily delivered against CME security futures requires that only a broker or dealer susceptible to manipulation of the price products. CME will act as a contra party subject to suitability rules comparable to of such security futures product, nor to to each delivery transaction. CME’s those of a national securities association causing or being used in the Clearing House will submit delivery registered pursuant to Section 15A(a) of manipulation of the price of any instructions to DTC through the DTC the Act 16 effect transactions in a underlying security, option on such member. Market participants will be security futures product. security, or option on a group or index required to provide proof to CME CME clearing members, and their including such securities. CME Listing outlining their operational and legal correspondents, are bound by the Standards are designed to ensure that ability to make or take delivery of the applicable sales practice rules of the CME products and the underlying underlying. These agreements and National Futures Association (‘‘NFA’’), securities will not be readily susceptible relevant procedures will be fully which is a national securities to price manipulation. Exchange Rule operational prior to any possible association. As such, the sales practice 432 defines activity ‘‘to manipulate delivery event associated with such rules of NFA are, perforce, comparable prices or to attempt to manipulate security futures products. to those of a national securities prices’’ as a ‘‘major offense,’’ Clause (C) of Section 6(h)(3) 11 association registered pursuant to punishable, per Exchange Rule 430, by provides that listing standards for Section 15A(a) of the Act.17 The ‘‘expulsion, suspension, and/or a fine of security futures products must be no application of NFA sales practice rules not more than $1,000,000 plus the less restrictive than comparable listing is extended beyond the CME clearing monetary value of any benefit received standards for options traded on a membership to the extent that NFA By- as a result of the violative action.’’ national securities exchange or national Law 1101 provides that ‘‘[n]o member Clause (I) of Section 6(h)(3) 24 requires securities association registered may carry an account, accept an order that procedures be in place for pursuant to Section 15A(a) of the Act.12 or handle a transaction in commodity coordinated surveillance amongst the For the reasons discussed above, futures contracts for or on behalf of any market on which a security futures notwithstanding specified differences non-Member of NFA.’’ product is traded, any market on which between the Sample Listing Standards Clause (G) of Section 6(h)(3) 18 any security underlying the security and the CME Listing Standards, CME requires that each security futures futures product is traded, and other believes that the latter are no less product be subject to the prohibition markets on which any related security is restrictive than comparable listing against dual trading in Section 4j of the traded to detect manipulation and standards for exchange-traded options. CEA 19 and the rules and regulations insider trading. Clause (D) of Section 6(h)(3) 13 thereunder or the provisions of Section The Exchange has surveillance requires that each security future be 11(a) of the Act 20 and the rules and procedures in place to detect based on common stock or such other regulations thereunder. Exchange Rule manipulation on a coordinated basis equity securities as the Commission and with other markets. In particular, CME 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(E). is an affiliate member of the Intermarket 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(A). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(F). Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’) and is party 9 15 U.S.C. 78l. 16 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(a). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(B). 17 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(a). 21 17 CFR 41.27. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(C). 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(G). 22 7 U.S.C. 6j(a). 12 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(a). 19 7 U.S.C. 6j. 23 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(H). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(D). 20 15 U.S.C. 78k(a). 24 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(I).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27883

to an affiliate agreement and an transactions, large positions, and instrument and contract month, price, agreement to share market surveillance statistical information on trading quantity, account type, account and regulatory information with the entities. designation, user code, and clearing other ISG members. Further, CME is The Market Surveillance area is firm. This information may be recorded party to a supplemental agreement with dedicated to the detection and manually on timestamped order tickets, the other ISG members to address the prevention of market manipulation and electronically in a clearing firms system, concerns expressed by the Commission other similar forms of market or by entering the orders with the with respect to affiliate ISG disruption. As part of these required information into Globex membership.25 responsibilities, the group enforces the immediately upon receipt. A complete Note that CME Rule 424, as shown in Exchange’s position limit rules, Globex electronic audit trail is archived the Appendix below, permits CME to administers the hedge approval process and maintained by CME for at least a enter into agreements for the exchange and maintains the Exchange’s RPS five year period. Clearing firms must of information and other forms of system. also maintain any written or electronic mutual assistance with domestic or The foundation of the Exchange’s order records for a period of five years. foreign self-regulatory organizations, Market Surveillance program is the deep Clause (K) of Section 6(h)(3) 27 associations, boards of trade and their knowledge of its staff about the major requires that a market on which a respective regulators. users, brokers, and clearing firms, along security futures product is traded have 26 Clause (J) of Section 6(h)(3) requires with its relationship with other in place procedures to coordinate that a market on which a security regulators. Day-to-day monitoring of trading halts between such market and futures product is traded have in place market positions is handled by a any market on which any security audit trails necessary or appropriate to dedicated group of surveillance analysts underlying the security futures product facilitate the coordinated surveillance assigned to specific market(s). Each is traded and other markets on which referred to in the preceding paragraph. analyst develops in-depth expertise of any related security is traded. The Exchange relies upon its Market the factors that influence the market in The Exchange filed with the Regulation Department and its large, question. The Exchange estimates that Commission, pursuant to Rule 19b–7 highly trained staff to actively monitor perhaps 90% of the market users at any under the Act,28 rules establishing a market participants and their trading single time are known to the Exchange. generalized framework for the trade of practices; and to enforce compliance Daily surveillance staff activities security futures products.29 Specifically, with Exchange Rules. Market Regulation include: Department staff is organized into the • Monitoring positions for size based these rules establish a framework for the Compliance and the Market on percentage of open interest and trade of Physically Delivered Single Surveillance Groups. In performing its historic user participation in each Security Futures. functions the Market Regulation contract. In particular, Rule 71001.F. provides, Department routinely works closely • Aggregation of positions across in accordance with Regulation with the Audit Department, the Clearing clearing members, with the use of CME § 41.25(a)(2) of CEA,30 that ‘‘[t]rading of House, the Legal Department, the trade reporting systems, to account for Physically Delivered Single Security Globex Control Center, and the all positions held by any single Futures shall be halted at all times that Information Technology Department. participant. This daily review permits a regulatory halt, as defined per SEC The Compliance area is responsible the surveillance analyst promptly to Rule 6h–1(a)(3) and CFTC Regulation for enforcing the trading practice rules identify unusual market activity. § 41.1(l), has been instituted for the of the Exchange through detection, • As a contract approaches maturity, underlying security.’’ investigation, and prosecution of those large positions are scrutinized to Clause (L) of Section 6(h)(3) 31 who may attempt to violate those rules. determine whether such activity is requires that the margin requirements Further, the area is responsible for consistent with prior experience, for a security futures product comply handling customer complaints, ensuring allowing prompt regulatory intervention with the regulations prescribed the integrity of the Exchange’s audit if necessary. pursuant to Section 7(c)(2)(B) of the trail and administering an arbitration • Analysts closely monitor market Act.32 CME submitted margin program for the resolution of disputes. news through on-line and print media. requirement rules 33 to the Commission • The area employs investigators, Staff conducts on-site visits to large per Rule 19b–4 under the Act.34 Thus, attorneys, trading floor investigators, market participants periodically. CME believes that its rules regarding data analysts and a computer Market Regulation staff investigates customer margin are consistent with the programming and regulatory systems possible misconduct and, when requirements of the Act. design staff. appropriate, initiates disciplinary For the reasons described above, CME The Market Regulation Department action. Exchange Rule 430 empowers believes that the rules submitted has created some of the most the Exchange’s disciplinary committees herewith, satisfy the requirements set sophisticated tools in the world to assist to discipline, limit, suspend, or forth in Section 6(h)(3) of the Act.35 with the detection of possible rule terminate a member’s activities for cause, amongst other sanctions. Note violations and monitoring of the market. 27 further that the Exchange requires, per 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(K). Among the systems it uses are The 28 17 CFR 240.19b–7. Regulatory Trade Browser (‘‘RTB’’), the Rule 123, that members shall be 29 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51957 Virtual Detection System (‘‘VDS’’), The responsible for ‘‘the filing of reports, (June 30, 2005), 70 FR 39820 (July 11, 2005) (SR– Reportable Position System (‘‘RPS’’), maintenance of books and records, and CME–2005–03). 30 and the RegWeb Profile System permitting inspection and visitation’’ in 17 CFR 41.25(a)(2). order to facilitate such investigations by 31 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(L). (‘‘RegWeb’’). These systems include 32 Exchange staff. 15 U.S.C. 78g(c)(2)(B). information on all Globex users, all 33 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46637 CME Rule 536 requires that certain (October 10, 2002), 67 FR 64672 (October 21, 2002) 25 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45956 information be recorded with respect to (SR–CME–2002–01). (May 17, 2002), 67 FR 36740 (May 24, 2002). each order which includes: time 34 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 26 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3)(J). entered, terms of the order, order type, 35 15 U.S.C. 78f(h)(3).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27884 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s with respect to the proposed rule I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Burden on Competition change that are filed with the Statement of the Terms of Substance of CME does not believe that this Commission, and all written the Proposed Rule Change amendment will have an impact on communications relating to the The Exchange proposes to amend competition, because it represents a proposed rule change between the certain ISE rules to conform them to the technical change in reference to the Commission and any person, other than rules of the National Association of security underlying the futures contract. those that may be withheld from the Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’) for public in accordance with the purposes of the Plan for the Allocation C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be of Regulatory Responsibilities Pursuant Statement on Comments on the available for inspection and copying in to Rule 17d–23 under the Act entered Proposed Rule Change Received from the Commission’s Public Reference into between the parties (‘‘17d–2 Members, Participants or Others Room. Copies of such filing also will be Agreement’’).4 The text of the proposed Comments on the proposed rule available for inspection and copying at rule change is available on the change have not been solicited. the principal office of CME. All Exchange’s Web site (http:// comments received will be posted www.iseoptions.com), at the Exchange, III. Date of Effectiveness of the without change; the Commission does Proposed Rule Change and Timing for and at the Commission’s Public not edit personal identifying Reference Room. Commission Action information from submissions. You The foregoing proposed rule change should submit only information that II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s has become effective pursuant to you wish to make available publicly. All Statement of the Purpose of, and Section 19(b)(7) of the Act.36 Within 60 submissions should refer to File No. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule days of the date of effectiveness of the SR–CME–2007–01 and should be Change proposed rule change, the Commission, submitted on or before June 7, 2007. In its filing with the Commission, the after consultation with the CFTC, may For the Commission, by the Division of Exchange included statements summarily abrogate the proposed rule Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated concerning the purpose of, and basis for, change and require that the proposed authority.38 the proposed rule change and discussed rule change be refiled in accordance Jill M. Peterson, any comments it received on the with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) Assistant Secretary. proposed rule change. The text of these of the Act.37 [FR Doc. E7–9501 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The IV. Solicitation of Comments BILLING CODE 8010–01–P Exchange has prepared summaries, set Interested persons are invited to forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of submit written data, views, and SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE the most significant aspects of such arguments concerning the foregoing, statements. including whether the proposed rule COMMISSION change is consistent with the Act. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Comments may be submitted by any of [Release No. 34–55751; File No. SR–ISE– Statement of the Purpose of, and the following methods: 2007–29] Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change Electronic Comments Self-Regulatory Organizations; 1. Purpose • Use the Commission’s Internet International Securities Exchange, comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate The Exchange proposes to amend rules/sro.shtml); or Effectiveness of Proposed Rule certain ISE rules to conform them to the • Send an e-mail to rule- Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto rules of the NASD for purposes of the [email protected]. Please include File Relating to Conforming Certain Rules 17d–2 Agreement between the parties No. SR–CME–2007–01 on the subject With Comparable NASD Rules and the related certification by the line. Exchange which states that the May 11, 2007. requirements contained in certain ISE Paper Comments Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the rules are identical to, or substantially • Send paper comments in triplicate Securities Exchange Act of 1934 similar to, certain NASD rules that have to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 been identified as comparable.5 Securities and Exchange Commission, notice is hereby given that on May 1, Specifically, the Exchange proposes to 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 2007, the International Securities amend Rules 604, 624, 626, and 1407. 20549–1090. Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’), The Exchange proposes to amend ISE All submissions should refer to File No. filed with the Securities and Exchange Rule 604, ‘‘Continuing Education for SR–CME–2007–01. This file number Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the Registered Persons,’’ to remove the should be included on the subject line proposed rule change as described in provision that exempts certain if e-mail is used. To help the Items I and II below, which Items have registered persons from the continuing Commission process and review your been substantially prepared by the ISE. education requirements if they have comments more efficiently, please use On May 8, 2007, the Exchange filed been continuously registered for ten (10) only one method. The Commission will Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule years as of July 1, 1998 and have not post all comments on the Commission’s change. The Commission is publishing been the subject of a disciplinary action Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ this notice to solicit comments on the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the proposed rule change, as amended, from 3 17 CFR 240.17d–2. submission, all subsequent interested persons. 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55367 (February 27, 2007), 72 FR 9983 (March 6, 2007) amendments, all written statements (approving and declaring effective the 17d–2 38 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Agreement between ISE and NASD) (‘‘17d–2 36 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Order’’). 37 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 5 See 17d–2 Order, supra note 4.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27885

during the last ten (10) years so that it protection of investors or the public Paper Comments is consistent with NASD Rule 1120, interest; (2) does not impose any • Send paper comments in triplicate ‘‘Continuing Education Requirements.’’ significant burden on competition; and to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, The Exchange proposes to amend ISE (3) does not become operative for 30 Securities and Exchange Commission, Rule 624, ‘‘Brokers’ Blanket Bonds,’’ by days after the date of the filing, or such Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., changing the number of days to make shorter time as the Commission may Washington, DC 20549–1090. necessary adjustments to the minimum designate if consistent with the All submissions should refer to File coverage from thirty (30) days to sixty protection of investors and the public Number SR–ISE–2007–29. This file (60) days following the anniversary to interest, the proposed rule change has number should be included on the mirror the requirements in NASD Rule become effective pursuant to Section subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 7 3020, ‘‘Fidelity Bonds.’’ 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b– Commission process and review your The Exchange proposes to amend ISE 8 4(f)(6) thereunder. comments more efficiently, please use Rule 626, ‘‘Telephone Solicitation,’’ by The Exchange has asked the only one method. The Commission will changing the number of months from Commission to waive the 30-day post all comments on the Commission’s twelve (12) to eighteen (18) that an operative delay and allow the proposed Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ associated person must be servicing an rule change to become operative rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the account to establish such account as a immediately. The Commission hereby submission, all subsequent ‘‘customer account’’ for the purpose of 9 grants that request. The Commission amendments, all written statements being exempt from the call restrictions believes that it is consistent with the with respect to the proposed rule set forth in the rule. This amendment protection of investors and the public change that are filed with the will mirror the requirements set forth in interest to waive the 30-day operative Commission, and all written NASD Rule 2212, ‘‘Telemarketing.’’ delay so that the ISE may immediately communications relating to the The Exchange proposes to amend ISE conform its rules to the NASD’s rules to proposed rule change between the Rule 1407, ‘‘Short Sales in Nasdaq facilitate the effectiveness of the 17d–2 Commission and any person, other than National Market Securities,’’ to change Agreement recently approved by the those that may be withheld from the the cross-reference in the rule from Commission. public in accordance with the NASD 3350 to NASD Rule 5100 to provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be reflect the recent numbering change. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the available for inspection and copying in 2. Statutory Basis Commission may summarily abrogate the Commission’s Public Reference The basis under the Act for this such rule change if it appears to the Room. Copies of such filing also will be proposed rule change is found in Commission that such action is available for inspection and copying at Section 6(b)(5).6 Specifically, the necessary or appropriate in the public the principal office of the ISE. All Exchange believes the proposed rule interest, for the protection of investors, comments received will be posted change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) or otherwise in furtherance of the without change; the Commission does 10 requirements that the rules of an purposes of the Act. not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You exchange be designed to promote just IV. Solicitation of Comments and equitable principles of trade, serve should submit only information that to remove impediments to and perfect Interested persons are invited to you wish to make available publicly. All the mechanism for a free and open submit written data, views, and submissions should refer to File market and a national market system, arguments concerning the foregoing, Number SR–ISE–2007–29 and should be and, in general, to protect investors and including whether the proposed rule submitted on or before June 7, 2007. the public interest. change is consistent with the Act. For the Commission, by the Division of Comments may be submitted by any of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the following methods: authority.11 Statement on Burden on Competition Jill M. Peterson, Electronic Comments The proposed rule change does not Assistant Secretary. impose any burden on competition that • Use the Commission’s Internet [FR Doc. E7–9500 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] is not necessary or appropriate in comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ BILLING CODE 8010–01–P furtherance of the purposes of the Act. rules/sro.shtml); or • C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Send an e-mail to rule- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement on Comments on the [email protected]. Please include File COMMISSION Proposed Rule Change Received From Number SR–ISE–2007–29 on the subject Members, Participants, or Others line. [Release No. 34–55739; File No. SR– NASDAQ–2007–049] The Exchange has not solicited, and 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). does not intend to solicit, comments on 8 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). As required by Rule Self-Regulatory Organizations; The this proposed rule change. The 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act, the Exchange also NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Exchange has not received any provided with the Commission with written notice Filing and Order Granting Accelerated unsolicited written comments from of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed Approval of Proposed Rule Change To members or other interested parties. rule change, at least five business days prior to the Trade Shares of the PowerShares DB III. Date of Effectiveness of the date of the proposed rule change. G10 Currency Harvest Fund Pursuant 9 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day to Unlisted Trading Privileges Proposed Rule Change and Timing for operative delay, the Commission has considered the Commission Action proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, May 10, 2007. Because the proposed rule change: (1) and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 10 For purposes of calculating the 60-day Does not significantly affect the abrogation period, the Commission considers the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 proposed rule change to have been filed on May 8, 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 2007, the date the ISE filed Amendment No. 1. 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27886 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 existing rules governing the trading of the Index is re-weighted.7 The Index notice is hereby given that on May 7, equity securities, including Nasdaq Rule closing level reflects an arithmetic 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC 4630. The trading hours for the Shares weighted average of the change in the (‘‘Nasdaq’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the on Nasdaq will be 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. futures positions on the Index Securities and Exchange Commission Eastern Time (‘‘ET’’). Currencies’ exchange rates against the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule The Shares represent beneficial U.S. dollar since March 12, 1993. On change as described in Items I and II ownership interests in the Fund’s net such date, the Index closing level was below, which Items have been assets, consisting solely of the common $100. The sponsor of the Index is substantially prepared by the Exchange. Deutsche Bank AG London (‘‘DB units of beneficial interests of the DB This notice and order provides notice of London’’ or the ‘‘Index Sponsor’’). G10 Currency Harvest Master Fund (the the proposed rule change and approves Issuances of Shares are made only in ‘‘Master Fund’’). The Master Fund is a the proposal on an accelerated basis. one or more blocks of 200,000 Shares statutory trust created under Delaware (‘‘Basket Aggregation’’ or ‘‘Basket’’) or I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s law whose investment portfolio consists multiples thereof. The Fund issues and Statement of the Terms of Substance of primarily of futures contracts on the redeems the Shares on a continuous the Proposed Rule Change currencies comprising the Deutsche basis, by or through participants that Nasdaq proposes to trade, pursuant to Bank G10 Currency Future Harvest have entered into participant TM unlisted trading privileged (‘‘UTP’’), Index (the ‘‘DBCHI’’ or ‘‘Index’’) and agreements (each, an ‘‘Authorized shares (‘‘Shares’’) of the PowerShares includes cash and U.S. Treasury Participant’’) 8 with the Managing DB G10 Currency Harvest Fund (the securities for margin purposes, and Owner. ‘‘Trust’’ or ‘‘Fund’’). other high-credit-quality short-term A Basket will be issued in exchange The text of the proposed rule change fixed income securities. Both the Fund for an amount of cash equal to the is available from Nasdaq’s Web site at and the Master Fund are commodity Fund’s net asset value (‘‘NAV’’) per nasdaq.complinet.com, at Nasdaq’s pools operated by DB Commodity Share times 200,000 Shares (‘‘Basket principal office, and at the Services LLC (the ‘‘Managing Owner’’).5 Amount’’). The Basket Amount will be Commission’s Public Reference Room. The investment objective of the Fund determined on each business day by II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and the Master Fund is to reflect the The Bank of New York Statement of the Purpose of, and performance of the Index, over time, (‘‘Administrator’’).9 An Authorized Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule less the expenses of the operation of the Participant that wishes to purchase a Change Fund and the Master Fund. The Fund Basket must transfer the Basket Amount pursues its investment objective by to the Administrator (the ‘‘Cash Deposit In its filing with the Commission, the Amount’’). A Basket is then separable Exchange included statements investing substantially all of its assets in upon issuance into the Shares that can concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the Master Fund. Each Share correlates be traded on Nasdaq on a UTP basis. the proposed rule change and discussed with a Master Fund share issued by the Master Fund and held by the Fund. The The Shares are not individually any comments it received on the redeemable may be redeemed only in proposed rule change. The text of these Master Fund pursues its investment objective by taking futures positions in Baskets. To redeem, an Authorized statements may be examined at the Participant is required to accumulate places specified in Item III below. The currencies represented in the Index and adjusts its holdings quarterly as the enough Shares to constitute a Basket Exchange has prepared summaries, set (i.e., 200,000 shares). An Authorized forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of Index is adjusted. The Master Fund also Participant that wishes to redeem a the most significant aspects of such holds cash and U.S. Treasury securities Basket will receive cash in exchange for statements. for deposit with futures commission merchants as margin, and other high- each Basket surrendered in an amount A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s credit-quality short-term fixed income equal to the NAV per Basket (the ‘‘Cash Statement of the Purpose of, and securities. The Fund is not managed on Redemption Amount’’). Upon the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule a discretionary basis but instead seeks to surrender of the Shares and payment of Change track the Index pursuant to established applicable redemption transaction fee, taxes, or charges, the Administrator will 1. Purpose rules and procedures.

Nasdaq is proposing to trade the The Index, at any time, is comprised 7 The Index Sponsor reviews and re-weights the Shares on a UTP basis. The Shares are of six currencies from The Group of Ten Index on a quarterly basis. currently trading on Nasdaq on a three- (‘‘G10’’) countries,6 futures contracts on 8 An ‘‘Authorized Participant’’ is a person, who month pilot basis.3 Approval of this which are traded on the Chicago at the time of submitting to the trustee an order to Mercantile Exchange (‘‘CME’’). The create or redeem one or more Baskets: (i) Is a filing will allow the Shares to continue registered broker-dealer; (ii) is a Depository Trust to trade after the expiration of the pilot. notional amounts of each currency Company Participant; and (iii) has in effect a valid The Commission previously approved included in the Index (‘‘Index Participant Agreement. the listing and trading of the Shares on Currency’’) are based on the Index 9 At or about 4 p.m. ET each business day, the the American Stock Exchange closing level as of the period in which Administrator determines the Basket Amount for orders placed by Authorized Participants received 4 (‘‘Amex’’). Nasdaq deems the Shares to before 1 p.m. ET that day. Thus, although be equity securities, thus rendering 5 The Managing Owner is registered as a Authorized Participants place orders to purchase trading in the Shares subject to Nasdaq’s commodity pool operator (‘‘CPO’’) and commodity Shares throughout the trading day until 1 p.m. ET, trading advisor (‘‘CTA’’) with the Commodity the actual Basket Amount is determined at 4 p.m. Futures Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) and is a ET or thereafter. On each business day, the 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). member of the National Futures Association Administrator makes available, immediately prior 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. (‘‘NFA’’). The Managing Owner serves as the CPO to 9:30 a.m. ET, the most recent Basket Amount for 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55386 and CTA of the Fund and the Master Fund. the creation of a Basket. According to the Amex (March 2, 2007), 72 FR 10801 (March 9, 2007) (SR– 6 The G10 currencies are the U.S. Dollar, the Euro, Order, Amex disseminates every 15 seconds NASDAQ–2007–016) (the ‘‘Pilot Order’’). the Japanese Yen, the Canadian Dollar, the Swiss throughout the trading day, via the facilities of the 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54450 Franc, the British Pound, the Australian Dollar, the Consolidated Tape (‘‘CT’’), an amount representing, (September 14, 2006), 71 FR 55230 (September 21, New Zealand Dollar, the Norwegian Krone, and the on a per-Share basis, the current value of the Basket 2006) (the ‘‘Amex Order’’). Swedish Krona (the ‘‘Eligible Index Currencies’’). Amount.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27887

deliver to the redeeming Authorized London and the Fund on their has issued an Information Circular to Participant the Cash Redemption respective Web sites. inform its members of the special Amount. The daily settlement prices for the characteristics and risks associated with After 4 p.m. ET each business day, the foreign currency futures contracts trading the Shares. Administrator determines the NAV 10 comprising the Index and held by the for the Fund, utilizing the current Master Fund are publicly available on 2. Statutory Basis settlement value of exchange-traded the Internet Web sites of the futures The Exchange believes that the futures contracts on the Index exchanges trading the particular proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) Currencies, and the Administrator, contracts, as well as automated of the Act 14 in general and Section Amex, and Managing Owner will quotation systems, published or other 6(b)(5) of the Act 15 in particular, in that disseminate the NAV for the Shares and public sources, or on-line information it is designed to prevent fraudulent and the Basket Amount (for orders placed services such as Bloomberg or Reuters. manipulative acts and practices, to during the day). The Basket Amount All of the foreign currency futures promote just and equitable principles of and the NAV are communicated by the contracts in which the Master Fund trade, remove impediments to a free and Administrator to all Authorized currently expects to invest are traded on open market and a national market Participants via facsimile or e-mail.11 the CME, although currency futures system, and, in general, to protect Nasdaq will provide a hyperlink to the contracts on the eligible Index investors and the public interest. In Fund’s Web site at http:// Currencies also trade on other futures addition, Nasdaq believes that the www.dbfunds.db.com from its Web site exchanges and the Master Fund may proposal is consistent with Rule 12f–5 at http://www.nasdaq.com. The Web invest in such contracts.12 under the Act 16 because it deems the site for the Fund contains quantitative Nasdaq will halt trading in the Shares Shares to be an equity securities, thus information about the Fund and the under the conditions specified in rendering trading in the Shares subject Fund’s prospectus. Quotations for and Nasdaq Rules 4120 and 4121. The to Nasdaq’s existing rules governing the last sale information regarding the conditions for a halt include a trading of equity securities. Shares are disseminated via the CT and regulatory halt by the listing market. the Consolidated Quotation Service. UTP trading in the Shares will also be B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s To provide updated information governed by provisions of Nasdaq Rule Statement on Burden on Competition relating to the Fund for use by investors, 4120 relating to temporary interruptions The Exchange does not believe that professionals, and persons wishing to in the calculation or wide dissemination the proposed rule change will impose create or redeem the Shares, Amex of the IFV or the value of the Index. any burden on competition that is not disseminates through the facilities of the Additionally, Nasdaq may cease trading necessary or appropriate in furtherance CT an updated Indicative Fund Value the Shares if other unusual conditions of the purposes of the Act. (‘‘IFV’’). The IFV is disseminated on a or circumstances exist which, in the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s per-Share basis every 15 seconds from opinion of Nasdaq, make further Statement on Comments on the 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. ET. The IFV is dealings on Nasdaq detrimental to the Proposed Rule Change Received From calculated based on the cash required maintenance of a fair and orderly Members, Participants or Others for creations and redemptions (i.e., NAV market. Nasdaq will also follow any × 200,000) adjusted to reflect the price procedures with respect to trading halts Written comments on the proposed changes of the Index Currencies through as set forth in Nasdaq Rule 4120(c). rule change were neither solicited nor investments held by the Master Fund Finally, Nasdaq will stop trading the received. (i.e., futures contracts and options on Shares if the listing market delists them. III. Solicitation of Comments futures and/or forwards). Nasdaq believes that its surveillance DB London, as the Index Sponsor, procedures are adequate to address any Interested persons are invited to publishes the value of the Index at least concerns about the trading of the Shares submit written data, views, and once every 15 seconds throughout each on Nasdaq. Trading of the Shares arguments concerning the foregoing, trading day on the CT, Bloomberg, and through Nasdaq facilities is currently including whether the proposed rule Reuters, and on its Web site at http:// subject to NASD’s surveillance change is consistent with the Act. index.db.com and the Fund’s Web site procedures for equity securities in Comments may be submitted by any of at http://www.dbfunds.db.com. The general and ETFs in particular.13 the following methods: closing Index level is similarly provided Nasdaq is able to obtain information Electronic Comments by DB London and the Fund. In regarding trading in the Shares and the • addition, any adjustments or changes to underlying currency futures through its Use the Commission’s Internet the Index also are provided by DB members in connection with the comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ proprietary or customer trades that such rules/sro.shtml); or 10 • The NAV for the Fund is the total assets of the members effect on any relevant market. Send an e-mail to rule- Master Fund less total liabilities of the Master [email protected]. Please include File Fund. The NAV is calculated by including any In addition, Nasdaq may obtain trading unrealized profit or loss on futures contracts and information via the Intermarket Number SR–NASDAQ–2007–049 on the any other credit or debit accruing to the Master Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’) from other subject line. Fund but unpaid or not received by the Master exchanges who are members or affiliates Paper Comments Fund. The NAV is then used to compute all fees of the ISG, including the CME. Nasdaq (including the management and administrative fees) • Send paper comments in triplicate that are calculated from the value of Master Fund assets. The Administrator calculates the NAV per 12 Such other futures exchanges would be to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Share by dividing the NAV by the number of Shares required to be members of the Intermarket Securities and Exchange Commission, outstanding. Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’) or to have 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 11 According to the Amex Order, Amex has comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements 20549–1090. represented that the NAV for the Fund will be made with Nasdaq. available to all market participants at the same time. 13 NASD surveils trading pursuant to a regulatory If the NAV is not disseminated to all market services agreement. Nasdaq is responsible for 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). participants at the same time, Amex will halt NASD’s performance under this regulatory services 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). trading in the Shares. agreement. 16 17 CFR 240.12f–5.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27888 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

All submissions should refer to File Section 12(f) of the Act,19 which permits longer have authority to trade the Shares Number SR–NASDAQ–2007–049. This an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, pursuant to this order. file number should be included on the a security that is listed and registered on In support of this proposal, the 20 subject line if e-mail is used. To help the another exchange. The Commission Exchange has represented that its notes that it previously approved the Commission process and review your surveillance procedures are adequate to comments more efficiently, please use listing and trading of the Shares on properly monitor Exchange trading of only one method. The Commission will Amex and the trading of the Shares on the Shares. This approval order is post all comments on the Commission’s NYSE Arca pursuant to UTP.21 The Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Commission also finds that the proposal conditioned on the Exchange’s rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the is consistent with Rule 12f–5 under the adherence to this representation. submission, all subsequent Act,22 which provides that an exchange In addition, the Commission recently amendments, all written statements shall not extend UTP to a security approved the trading of the Shares on with respect to the proposed rule unless the exchange has in effect a rule the Exchange pursuant to UTP for a change that are filed with the or rules providing for transactions in the pilot period of three months.24 In the Commission, and all written class or type of security to which the Pilot Order, the Commission noted that communications relating to the exchange extends UTP. The Exchange exchanges that trade commodity-related proposed rule change between the has represented that it meets this securities generally have in place Commission and any person, other than requirement because it deems the surveillance arrangements with markets those that may be withheld from the Shares to be equity securities, thus that trade the underlying securities. In rendering trading in the Shares subject public in accordance with the its proposal to trade the Shares for a to the Exchange’s existing rules provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be pilot period, the Exchange represented governing the trading of equity available for inspection and copying in that it was in the process of completing the Commission’s Public Reference securities. The Commission further believes that these surveillance arrangements and Room. Copies of such filing also will be expected to do so ‘‘in the near future.’’ available for inspection and copying at the proposal is consistent with Section 23 The Exchange recently provided the the principal office of the Exchange. All 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act, which sets Commission with evidence that it has comments received will be posted forth Congress’s finding that it is in the without change; the Commission does public interest and appropriate for the completed these surveillance not edit personal identifying protection of investors and the arrangements. information from submissions. You maintenance of fair and orderly markets The Commission finds good cause for should submit only information that to assure the availability to brokers, approving this proposal before the you wish to make available publicly. All dealers, and investors of information thirtieth day after the publication of submissions should refer to File with respect to quotations for and notice thereof in the Federal Register. transactions in securities. Quotations for Number SR–NASDAQ–2007–049 and As noted previously, the Commission and last sale information regarding the should be submitted on or before June previously found that the listing and 7, 2007. Shares are disseminated through the facilities of the CTA and the trading of the Shares on Amex and the IV. Commission’s Findings and Order Consolidated Quotation System. trading of the Shares on NYSE Arca Granting Accelerated Approval of the Furthermore, the IFV, updated to reflect pursuant to UTP are consistent with the Proposed Rule Change changes in currency exchange rates, is Act. The Commission presently is not aware of any regulatory issue that After careful review, the Commission calculated by Amex and published via should cause it to revisit those findings finds that the proposed rule change is the facilities of the Consolidated Tape or would preclude the continued consistent with the requirements of the Association on a 15-second delayed trading of the Shares on the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations basis throughout the trading hours for thereunder applicable to a national the Shares. In addition, if the listing pursuant to UTP. Therefore, accelerating securities exchange.17 In particular, the market halts trading when the IFV is not approval of this proposal should benefit Commission finds that the proposed being calculated or disseminated, the investors by continuing the additional rule change is consistent with Section Exchange would halt trading in the competition in the market for the 6(b)(5) of the Act,18 which requires that Shares. Shares. The Commission notes that, if the an exchange have rules designed, among Shares should be delisted by the listing V. Conclusion other things, to promote just and exchange, the Exchange would no equitable principles of trade, to remove It is therefore ordered, pursuant to impediments to and perfect the Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,25 that the 19 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). mechanism of a free and open market 20 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), proposed rule change (SR–NASDAQ– and a national market system, and in generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a 2007–049) be, and it hereby is, approved general to protect investors and the security on a national securities exchange unless on an accelerated basis. public interest. The Commission the security is registered on that exchange pursuant to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act For the Commission, by the Division of believes that this proposal should excludes from this restriction trading in any benefit investors by increasing Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ authority.26 competition among markets that trade When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it the Shares. allows its members to trade the security as if it were J. Lynn Taylor, listed and registered on the exchange even though Assistant Secretary. In addition, the Commission finds it is not so listed and registered. that the proposal is consistent with 21 See supra note 4 (approving listing and trading [FR Doc. E7–9466 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] of Shares on Amex). See also Securities Exchange BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 17 In approving this rule change, the Commission Act Release No. 54569 (October 4, 2006) 71 FR 60594 (October 13, 2006) (approving UTP trading of notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact 24 See supra note 3. on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. Shares on NYSE Arca). 25 See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 22 17 CFR 240.12f–5. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 23 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 26 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27889

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s trading day), an Indicative Intraday COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and Value (‘‘IIV’’) representing the estimated Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule underlying value per share of both the [Release No. 34–55740; File No. SR– NASDAQ–2007–048] Change Up-MACRO Tradeable Shares and the Down-MACRO Tradeable Shares. Amex 1. Purpose Self-Regulatory Organizations; The also publishes these values on its Web NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Nasdaq proposes to trade the MACRO site. To enable this calculation, Amex Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Tradeable Shares pursuant to UTP. The receives real-time price data from the Approval of Proposed Rule Change To MACRO Tradeable Shares are issued by NYMEX for the light sweet crude oil Trade Claymore MACROshares Oil Up and represent an undivided beneficial futures contract that trades on the Tradeable Shares and Claymore interest in (1) the Claymore NYMEX from two major market data MACROshares Oil Down Tradeable MACROshares Oil Up Tradeable Trust vendors, from the opening of trading of Shares Pursuant to Unlisted Trading (the ‘‘Up-MACRO Tradeable Trust’’) and the light sweet crude oil futures contract (2) the Claymore MACROshares Oil Privileges on NYMEX at 10 a.m. to the close of Down Tradeable Trust (the ‘‘Down- trading of the MACRO Tradeable Shares May 10, 2007. MACRO Tradeable Trust’’), respectively. on Amex at 4:15 p.m. ET. In addition, Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the The assets of these trusts (collectively, the closing price of the MACRO Securities Exchange Act of 1934 the ‘‘MACRO Tradeable Trusts’’) each Tradeable Shares on Nasdaq will be (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 consists exclusively of a majority of the available through the Exchange’s Web notice is hereby given that on May 3, Claymore MACROshares Oil Up site. 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC Holding Shares (‘‘Up-MACRO Holding Because the NYMEX market for the (‘‘Nasdaq’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Shares’’) issued by the Claymore light sweet crude oil futures contract is Securities and Exchange Commission MACROshares Oil Up Holding Trust closed for portions of the period from (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule (‘‘Up-MACRO Holding Trust’’) and the 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. ET, the IIV change as described in Items I and II Claymore MACROshares Oil Down calculated values are fixed during these below, which Items have been Holding Shares (‘‘Down-MACRO closures. From 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. substantially prepared by the Exchange. Holding Shares’’) issued by the ET, however, if trading in the NYMEX This notice and order provides notice of Claymore MACROshares Oil Down light sweet crude oil futures contract is the proposed rule change and approves Holding Trust (‘‘Down-MACRO Holding occurring on the CME Globex electronic the proposal on an accelerated basis. Trust’’).3 The Commission previously trading platform, those trades would be approved the listing and trading of the used to update IIV values. I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s MACRO Tradeable Shares on the The administrative agent for the Statement of the Terms of Substance of American Stock Exchange (‘‘Amex’’).4 MACRO Tradeable Shares, Claymore the Proposed Rule Change As described in greater detail in the Securities, maintains a Web site Nasdaq proposes to trade, pursuant to Amex Order, the value of the (http:// unlisted trading privileged (‘‘UTP’’), (1) MACROShares Tradeable Shares is www.ClaymoreMacroShares.com) that is Claymore MACROshares Oil Up dependent upon the settlement price of publicly accessible at no charge and Tradeable Shares (the ‘‘Up-MACRO the light sweet crude oil futures contract contains the following information Tradeable Shares’’) and (2) Claymore traded on the New York Mercantile posted on each NYMEX trading day: the MACROshares Oil Down Tradeable Exchange (‘‘NYMEX’’). daily price level percentage change of Shares (the ‘‘Down-MACRO Tradeable Nasdaq deems the MACRO Tradeable the applicable reference price of crude Shares’’ and together with the Up- Shares to be equity securities, thus oil; the daily underlying value of the MACRO Tradeable Shares, the ‘‘MACRO rendering trading in the MACRO Up-MACRO Holding Trust and the per- Tradeable Shares’’). Tradeable Shares subject to its existing share underlying value of the Up- The text of the proposed rule change rules governing the trading of equity MACRO Holding Shares and the Up- is available from Nasdaq’s Web site at securities, including Nasdaq Rule 4630, MACRO Tradeable Shares; and the daily nasdaq.complinet.com, at Nasdaq’s which governs trading of Commodity- underlying value of the Down-MACRO principal office, and at the Related Securities. The MACRO Holding Trust and the per-share Commission’s Public Reference Room. Tradeable Shares will trade on Nasdaq underlying value of the Down-MACRO from 9:30 a.m. until 4:15 p.m. Eastern Holding Shares and the Down-MACRO II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Time (‘‘ET’’). Tradeable Shares. Statement of the Purpose of, and Quotations for and last sale Pricing and other information for Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule information regarding the MACRO NYMEX light sweet crude oil futures Change Tradeable Shares are disseminated contracts is available through major In its filing with the Commission, the through the Consolidated Quotation market data vendors such as Reuters Exchange included statements System. During each trading day, Amex, and Bloomberg. Nasdaq has issued an concerning the purpose of, and basis for, acting as the calculation agent, Information Circular to inform its the proposed rule change and discussed publishes to the Consolidated Quotation members of the special characteristics any comments it received on the System, at least every 15 seconds during and risks associated with trading the proposed rule change. The text of these the entire time that the MACRO MACRO Tradeable Shares. statements may be examined at the Tradeable Shares trade on Amex Nasdaq would halt trading in the places specified in Item III below. The (normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. ET each MACRO Tradeable Shares under the Exchange has prepared summaries, set conditions specified in Nasdaq Rules forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of 3 The Up-MACRO Holding Shares and Down- 4120 and 4121. The conditions for a halt the most significant aspects of such MACRO Holding Shares (collectively, the ‘‘MACRO include a regulatory halt by the listing Holding Shares’’) will not be listed or traded on market. UTP trading in the MACRO statements. Nasdaq. 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54839 Tradeable Shares also would be 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). (November 29, 2006), 71 FR 70804 (December 6, governed by provisions of Nasdaq Rule 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 2006) (SR–Amex–2006–82) (the ‘‘Amex Order’’). 4120 relating to temporary interruptions

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27890 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

in the calculation or wide dissemination B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s not edit personal identifying of the IIV or the value of the applicable Statement on Burden on Competition information from submissions. You NYMEX light sweet crude oil futures The Exchange does not believe that should submit only information that contract. Additionally, Nasdaq may the proposed rule change will impose you wish to make available publicly. All cease trading the MACRO Tradeable any burden on competition that is not submissions should refer to File Number SR–NASDAQ–2007–048 and Shares if other unusual conditions or necessary or appropriate in furtherance should be submitted on or before June circumstances exist which, in the of the purposes of the Act. opinion of Nasdaq, make further 7, 2007. C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s dealings on Nasdaq detrimental to the IV. Commission’s Findings and Order Statement on Comments on the maintenance of a fair and orderly Granting Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change Received From market. Nasdaq also would follow any Proposed Rule Change procedures with respect to trading halts Members, Participants or Others After careful review, the Commission as set forth in Nasdaq Rule 4120(c). Written comments on the proposed Finally, Nasdaq would stop trading the finds that the proposed rule change is rule change were neither solicited nor consistent with the requirements of the MACRO Tradeable Shares if the listing received. market delists them. Act and the rules and regulations III. Solicitation of Comments thereunder applicable to a national Nasdaq believes that its surveillance securities exchange.9 In particular, the Interested persons are invited to procedures are adequate to address any Commission finds that the proposed concerns about the trading of the submit written data, views, and rule change is consistent with Section MACRO Tradeable Shares on Nasdaq. arguments concerning the foregoing, 6(b)(5) of the Act,10 which requires that Trading of the MACRO Tradeable including whether the proposed rule an exchange have rules designed, among Shares is currently subject to NASD’s change is consistent with the Act. other things, to promote just and surveillance procedures for equity Comments may be submitted by any of equitable principles of trade, to remove securities in general and ETFs in the following methods: impediments to and perfect the 5 particular. Electronic Comments mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and in Nasdaq is able to obtain information • Use the Commission’s Internet general to protect investors and the regarding trading in the MACRO comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ public interest. The Commission Tradeable Shares and NYMEX oil rules/sro.shtml); or futures contracts through its members in • believes that this proposal should Send an e-mail to rule- benefit investors by increasing connection with the proprietary or [email protected]. Please include File customer trades that such members competition among markets that trade Number SR–NASDAQ–2007–048 on the the MACRO Tradeable Shares. effect on any relevant market. In subject line. addition, Nasdaq is party to an In addition, the Commission finds Information Sharing Agreement with Paper Comments that the proposal is consistent with 11 NYMEX for the purpose of providing • Section 12(f) of the Act, which permits Send paper comments in triplicate an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, information in connection with trading to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, in or related to oil futures contracts a security that is listed and registered on Securities and Exchange Commission, 12 traded on that market. another exchange. The Commission 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC notes that it previously approved the 2. Statutory Basis 20549–1090. listing and trading of the MACRO All submissions should refer to File Tradeable Shares on Amex and the The Exchange believes that the Number SR–NASDAQ–2007–048. This trading of the MACRO Tradeable Shares proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) file number should be included on the on NYSE Arca pursuant to UTP.13 The 6 of the Act in general and Section subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission also finds that the proposal 7 6(b)(5) of the Act in particular, in that Commission process and review your is consistent with Rule 12f–5 under the in that it is designed to prevent comments more efficiently, please use Act,14 which provides that an exchange fraudulent and manipulative acts and only one method. The Commission will shall not extend UTP to a security practices, to promote just and equitable post all comments on the Commission’s unless the exchange has in effect a rule principles of trade, to remove Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ or rules providing for transactions in the impediments to a free and open market rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the and a national market system, and, in submission, all subsequent 9 In approving this rule change, the Commission general, to protect investors and the amendments, all written statements notes that it has considered the proposal’s impact public interest. In addition, Nasdaq with respect to the proposed rule on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. believes that the proposal is consistent See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). change that are filed with the 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 8 with Rule 12f–5 under the Act because Commission, and all written 11 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). it deems the MACRO Tradeable Shares communications relating to the 12 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), to be an equity securities, thus proposed rule change between the generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a rendering trading in the Macro security on a national securities exchange unless Commission and any person, other than the security is registered on that exchange pursuant Tradeable Shares subject to Nasdaq’s those that may be withheld from the to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act existing rules governing the trading of public in accordance with the excludes from this restriction trading in any equity securities. provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be security to which an exchange ‘‘extends UTP.’’ When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it available for inspection and copying in allows its members to trade the security as if it were 5 NASD surveils trading pursuant to a regulatory the Commission’s Public Reference listed and registered on the exchange even though services agreement. Nasdaq is responsible for Room. Copies of such filing also will be it is not so listed and registered. NASD’s performance under this regulatory services 13 available for inspection and copying at See supra note 4. See also Securities Exchange agreement. Act Release No. 55033 (December 29, 2006) 72 FR 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). the principal office of the Exchange. All 1253 (January 11, 2007) (approving UTP trading of 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). comments received will be posted MACRO Tradeable Shares on NYSE Arca). 8 17 CFR 240.12f–5. without change; the Commission does 14 17 CFR 240.12f–5.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27891

class or type of security to which the arrangements and expected to do so ‘‘in proposed rule change as described in exchange extends UTP. The Exchange the near future.’’ The Exchange recently Items I, II, and III below, which Items has represented that it meets this provided the Commission with evidence have been substantially prepared by requirement because it deems the that it has completed these surveillance NASD. NASD has designated the MACRO Tradeable Shares to be equity arrangements. proposed rule change as ‘‘constituting a securities, thus rendering trading in the The Commission finds good cause for stated policy, practice, or interpretation MACRO Tradeable Shares subject to the approving this proposal before the with respect to the meaning, Exchange’s existing rules governing the thirtieth day after the publication of administration, or enforcement of an trading of equity securities. notice thereof in the Federal Register. existing rule’’ under Section The Commission further believes that As noted previously, the Commission 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act3 and Rule 19b– the proposal is consistent with Section previously found that the listing and 4(f)(1) thereunder,4 which renders the 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act,15 which sets trading of the MACRO Tradeable Shares proposal effective upon receipt of this forth Congress’ finding that it is in the on Amex and the trading of the MACRO filing by the Commission. The public interest and appropriate for the Tradeable Shares on NYSE Arca Commission is publishing this notice to protection of investors and the pursuant to UTP are consistent with the solicit comments on the proposed rule maintenance of fair and orderly markets Act. The Commission presently is not change from interested persons. to assure the availability to brokers, aware of any regulatory issue that dealers, and investors of information should cause it to revisit those findings I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s with respect to quotations for and or would preclude the continued Statement of the Terms of Substance of transactions in securities. Quotations for trading of the MACRO Tradeable Shares the Proposed Rule Change and last sale information regarding the on the Exchange pursuant to UTP. NASD is proposing to adopt a new MACRO Tradeable Shares are Therefore, accelerating approval of this paragraph (g) to Rule 6620 to codify a disseminated through the facilities of proposal should benefit investors by member’s trade reporting obligations the CTA and the Consolidated continuing the additional competition with respect to transactions in foreign Quotation System. Furthermore, the IIV, in the market for the MACRO Tradeable equity securities. Below is the text of the updated to reflect changes in currency Shares. proposed rule change. Proposed new language is in italics; proposed exchange rates, is calculated by Amex V. Conclusion and published via the facilities of the deletions are in brackets. Consolidated Tape Association on a 15- It is therefore ordered, pursuant to * * * * * second delayed basis throughout the Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,17 that the trading hours for the MACRO Tradeable proposed rule change (SR–NASDAQ– 6600. OVER–THE–COUNTER EQUITY Shares. In addition, if the listing market 2007–048), be and it hereby is, approved SECURITIES halts trading when the IIV is not being on an accelerated basis. * * * * * calculated or disseminated, the For the Commission, by the Division of 6620. Transaction Reporting Exchange would halt trading in the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated MACRO Tradeable Shares. authority.18 (a) through (f) No change. The Commission notes that, if the J. Lynn Taylor, (g) Transactions in Foreign Equity MACRO Tradeable Shares should be Assistant Secretary. Securities delisted by the listing exchange, the [FR Doc. E7–9467 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] (1) For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘‘foreign equity security’’ means Exchange would no longer have BILLING CODE 8010–01–P authority to trade the MACRO Tradeable any OTC Equity Security that is issued Shares pursuant to this order. by a corporation or other entity In support of this proposal, the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE incorporated or organized under the Exchange has represented that its COMMISSION laws of any foreign country. surveillance procedures are adequate to (2) Transactions in foreign equity [Release No. 34–55745; File No. SR–NASD– securities shall be reported to the OTC properly monitor Exchange trading of 2007–030] the MACRO Tradeable Shares. This Reporting Facility unless: (A) The transaction is executed on approval order is conditioned on the Self-Regulatory Organizations; and reported to a foreign securities Exchange’s adherence to this National Association of Securities exchange; or representation. Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and In addition, the Commission recently (B) the transaction is executed over Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed the counter in a foreign country and is approved the trading of the MACRO Rule Change Relating to Trade Tradeable Shares on the Exchange reported to the regulator of securities Reporting Obligations for Transactions markets for that country. pursuant to UTP for a pilot period of in Foreign Equity Securities three months.16 In the Pilot Order, the * * * * * May 11, 2007. Commission noted that exchanges that II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the trade commodity-related securities Statement of the Purpose of, and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 generally have in place surveillance Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule (‘‘Act’’)1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 arrangements with markets that trade Change the underlying securities. In its proposal notice is hereby given that on April 20, to trade the MACRO Tradeable Shares 2007, the National Association of In its filing with the Commission, for a pilot period, the Exchange Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’) filed NASD included statements concerning represented that it was in the process of with the Securities and Exchange the purpose of and basis for the completing these surveillance Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed 15 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). rule change. The text of these statements 16 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55386 18 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). (March 2, 2007), 72 FR 10801 (March 9, 2007) (SR– 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). NASDAQ–2007–016) (the ‘‘Pilot Order’’). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(1).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27892 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

may be examined at the places specified Although many members are aware of III. Date of Effectiveness of the in Item IV below. NASD has prepared and continue to rely on this guidance, Proposed Rule Change and Timing for summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, NASD recently has received a number of Commission Action and C below, of the most significant inquiries relating to foreign equity trade The foregoing rule change has become aspects of such statements. reporting requirements. To ensure that effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s all members are aware of their trade of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule Statement of the Purpose of, and reporting obligations regarding foreign 19b–4 thereunder11 because the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule equity securities, NASD is proposing to proposed rule change constitutes a Change codify this guidance so that, going stated policy, practice, or interpretation forward, the rules themselves with respect to the meaning, 1. Purpose specifically address foreign equity administration, or enforcement of an The purpose of the proposed rule securities.9 existing rule of NASD. At any time change is to codify existing NASD NASD has filed the proposed rule within 60 days of the filing of the guidance regarding an NASD member’s change for immediate effectiveness. The proposed rule change, the Commission trade reporting obligations in effective date and the implementation may summarily abrogate such rule transactions involving foreign equity change if it appears to the Commission date will be the date of filing, April 20, securities. that such action is necessary or 2007. NASD Rule 6620 requires members to appropriate in the public interest, for transmit to the OTC Reporting Facility 2. Statutory Basis the protection of investors, or otherwise last sale reports of transactions in OTC in furtherance of the purposes of the Equity Securities. For purposes of a NASD believes that the proposed rule Act. member’s trade reporting obligations change is consistent with the provisions IV. Solicitation of Comments under Rule 6620, an OTC Equity of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,10 which Security is ‘‘any non-exchange-listed requires, among other things, that NASD Interested persons are invited to security and certain exchange-listed rules must be designed to prevent submit written data, views and securities that do not otherwise qualify fraudulent and manipulative acts and arguments concerning the foregoing, for real-time trade reporting.’’5 This practices, to promote just and equitable including whether the proposed rule broad definition of OTC Equity Security, principles of trade, and, in general, to change is consistent with the Act. by its terms, would include foreign protect investors and the public interest. Comments may be submitted by any of equity securities that are not listed on a NASD believes that the proposed rule the following methods: U.S. securities exchange and that trade change provides needed clarification to Electronic Comments exclusively in foreign markets. NASD members regarding their trade • Use the Commission’s Internet The proposed rule filing would codify reporting obligations with respect to comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ the long-held interpretive position taken foreign equity securities. by NASD that transactions in foreign rules/sro.shtml); or equity securities6 are not subject to the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s • Send an e-mail to rule- trade reporting requirements if (1) the Statement on Burden on Competition [email protected]. Please include File transaction is executed on and reported Number SR–NASD–2007–030 on the to a foreign securities exchange or (2) NASD does not believe that the subject line. proposed rule change will result in any the transaction is executed over the Paper Comments counter in a foreign country and is burden on competition that is not • reported to the regulator of securities necessary or appropriate in furtherance Send paper comments in triplicate markets for that country.7 Transactions of the purposes of the Act. to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, in foreign equity securities that are not C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s reported to a foreign securities exchange 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC Statement on Comments on the or, if executed over the counter in a 20549–1090. Proposed Rule Change Received From foreign country, to a foreign securities All submissions should refer to File Members, Participants, or Others regulator, must be reported to NASD.8 Number SR–NASD–2007–030. This file Written comments were neither number should be included on the 5 See NASD Rule 6610(d). solicited nor received. subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 6 The proposed rule change defines ‘‘foreign Commission process and review your equity security’’ as any OTC Equity Security that is comments more efficiently, please use issued by a corporation or other entity incorporated between the member and the customer) would have or organized under the laws of any foreign country. to be reported to NASD on a non-tape basis. only one method. The Commission will 7 This position was originally taken with respect 9 NASD also notes that trades reported in the U.S. post all comments on the Commission’s to the end-of-day reporting requirements of non- must be reported in U.S. dollars, regardless of the Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Nasdaq, over-the-counter securities under former currency in which the trade occurred. The rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Schedule H to NASD’s By-Laws. See NASD Notice methodology employed by the member for currency to Members 90–58 (September 1990). It was conversion is left to the NASD member; however, submission, all subsequent reaffirmed when end-of-day reporting was changed the member should document its practice and amendments, all written statements to 90-second transaction reporting. See OTC employ the same method consistently. See OTC with respect to the proposed rule Bulletin Board Update (December 1993). Bulletin Board Update (December 1993) and Notice change that are filed with the 8 It is important to note, however, that separate to Members 90–58 (September 1990). See also Commission, and all written legs of a riskless principal transaction may be Notice to Members 06–70, at note 5 (December subject to different reporting requirements. For 2006) (noting that, for purposes of reporting to the communications relating to the example, if a member executes a transaction in a Order Audit Trail System, members are ‘‘permitted proposed rule change between the foreign equity security for a customer on a foreign to use reasonable business practices for the Commission and any person, other than exchange on a riskless principal basis, with the [currency] conversion; however, members should those that may be withheld from the initial leg reported by the foreign exchange, the document their practice regarding currency member would not be required to report that leg of conversion and should be consistent in their public in accordance with the the riskless principal transaction to NASD. methodology’’). However, the second leg (i.e., the transaction 10 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 11 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27893

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be notice of and solicits comment on the that Act but not listed on a national available for inspection and copying in proposed rule change as modified by securities exchange is appropriate and the Commission’s Public Reference Amendment No. 1 and approves the does not constitute an inequitable or Room. Copies of the filing also will be proposal on an accelerated basis. unfairly discriminatory allocation of available for inspection and copying at fees. The Exchange anticipates that most II. Description of the Proposal the principal office of NASD. All companies taking advantage of this comments received will be posted The Exchange proposes to amend waiver will be formerly-listed without change; the Commission does Section 902.02 of its Listed Company companies that were delisted as a result not edit personal identifying Manual (the ‘‘Manual’’) to provide that of a failure to timely file annual reports information from submissions. You there shall be no initial listing fee with the Commission.5 The Exchange should submit only information that applicable to (i) Any company listing notes that these companies usually seek you wish to make available publicly. All upon emergence from bankruptcy, or (ii) to re-list on the Exchange as soon as submissions should refer to File any company listing its primary class of their filings are up to date.6 According Number SR–NASD–2007–030 and common stock that is not listed on a to the Exchange, because such should be submitted on or before June national securities exchange but is companies had previously paid initial 7, 2007. registered under the Act. listing fees to the Exchange or to another The Exchange also proposes a For the Commission, by the Division of national securities exchange, the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated temporary cap on fees payable by Exchange believes that to make them authority.12 companies listing upon emergence from pay these fees again would further J. Lynn Taylor, bankruptcy. Annual fees for such penalize them unnecessarily. issuers will be billed at a rate of one- Assistant Secretary. The Exchange has represented that fourth of the applicable annual fee rate the proposed rule change would not [FR Doc. E7–9471 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] for the fiscal quarter the issuer lists and affect its commitment of resources to its BILLING CODE 8010–01–P for each of the succeeding 12 full fiscal regulatory oversight of the listing quarters. Further, the total fees process or its regulatory programs. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE (including initial listing fees and annual Companies that benefit from one of the COMMISSION fees) that may be billed to such an issuer proposed waivers would be reviewed during this period would be subject to for compliance with Exchange listing [Release No. 34–55742; File No. SR–NYSE– a $25,000 cap in the fiscal quarter in standards in the same manner as any 2007–19] which the issuer lists and in each of the other company that applies to be listed succeeding 12 full fiscal quarters. The on the Exchange. The Exchange would Self-Regulatory Organizations; New exclusions applicable to the standard York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of conduct a full and independent review fee cap, set forth in Section 902.02 Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order of each issuer’s compliance with the under the heading ‘‘Total Maximum Fee Granting Accelerated Approval to a Exchange’s listing standards. Payable in a Calendar Year,’’ would also The Exchange also has represented Proposed Rule Change as Modified by apply to issuers listing upon emergence that it does not expect the financial Amendment No. 1 Relating to the from bankruptcy. impact of this proposed rule change to Waiver of Certain Listing Fees The Exchange believes that the initial be material, either in terms of increased May 10, 2007. listing fee waiver and fee cap for levels of annual fees from transferring companies listing upon emergence from issuers or in terms of diminished initial I. Introduction bankruptcy are justified by the unique listing fee revenues. A limited number On February 22, 2007, the New York circumstances of those issuers, which, of companies are qualified and seek to Stock Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’ or according to the NYSE, among other list on the Exchange that are either ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities things, tend to be more sensitive to the emerging from bankruptcy or have a and Exchange Commission initial and continued costs associated registered class of common stock but are (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section with listing because of the desire in not currently listed on another market. 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act bankruptcy proceedings to ensure Accordingly, the proposed rule change of 1934 (‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and creditors are paid as much as possible. will not impact the Exchange’s resource Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposal to According to the Exchange, because commitment to its regulatory oversight waive certain listing fees. The proposal bankrupt companies face unique was published for comment in the challenges in the listing process, the 5 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange stated that Federal Register on March 14, 2007.3 number of companies that will benefit there may occasionally be an initial listing on the Exchange of a company which is trading in the The Commission received no comments from the fee waiver and lower fee cap over-the-counter market immediately prior to listing on the proposal. The Exchange filed applicable to bankrupt companies will and which was not previously delisted as a result Amendment No. 1 with the Commission be very limited, and the fee cap will of a failure to timely file annual reports with the on April 27, 2007.4 This order provides apply only during a three-year Commission. However, in the Exchange’s experience, very few such companies meet the transitional period, the Exchange does Exchange’s listing requirements and, therefore, the 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). not believe that the treatment this Exchange expects the number of such listings and 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). proposal would afford to bankrupt the related loss of fee revenue to be immaterial. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. companies constitutes an inequitable or 6 In its filing, the Exchange stated that typically, 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55421 unfairly discriminatory allocation of such companies are otherwise in good standing (March 14, 2007), 72 FR 1350 (the ‘‘Notice’’). with the Exchange or with another national 4 Amendment No. 1 (i) Proposed a clarifying fees. securities exchange, but fell behind on their change to the proposed rule text and (ii) added In addition, the Exchange believes reporting obligations under the Act because their language to the purpose section to clarify the effect that waiving initial listing fees for a auditors or the Commission required restatements of the waiver of listing fees for a company listing company listing its primary class of of their financial statements. The Commission notes its primary class of common stock that is not listed that the timely filing of accurate financial reports on a national securities exchange but is registered common stock which is registered under under the Act is critical to investors and our under the Act. The text of Amendment No. 1 is national market and assures that investors receive available on the Exchange’s Web site (http:// Secretary, and at the Commission’s Public up to date financial information about listed www.nyse.com), at the Exchange’s Office of the Reference Room. companies.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27894 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

of the listing process or its regulatory acknowledges that some companies with the Act. Comments may be programs. other than those returning to good submitted by any of the following Following their approval, the standing after recent delisting—e.g., a methods: Exchange would apply the amendments company trading on the over-the- contained in the proposal retroactively counter market—may seek to take Electronic Comments to February 22, 2007, the date of filing advantage of the waiver of listing fees • Use the Commission’s Internet of the proposed rule change.7 for companies not listed on a national comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ securities exchange but registered under III. Discussion rules/sro.shtml); or the Act. However, the Exchange expects After careful review, the Commission the number of such companies eligible • Send an e-mail to rule- finds that the proposed rule change, as for the waiver to be very small, since [email protected]. Please include File amended, is consistent with the very few of these companies would Number SR–NYSE–2007–19 on the requirements of the Act and the rules meet the Exchange’s quantitative listing subject line. and regulations thereunder applicable to requirements. a national securities exchange.8 In The Commission also notes that the Paper Comments particular, the Commission finds that Exchange has represented that the • Send paper comments in triplicate the proposal is consistent with Section waiver of listing fees and the cap on to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, 6(b)(4) of the Act,9 which requires that annual fees should not have a material Securities and Exchange Commission, an exchange have rules that provide for financial impact on the exchange, or Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., the equitable allocation of reasonable impact the Exchange’s resource dues, fees, and other charges among its commitment to its regulatory oversight Washington, DC 20549–1090. members and other persons using its of the listing process or its regulatory All submissions should refer to File facilities. The Commission also finds programs. Number SR–NYSE–2007–19. This file that the proposal is consistent with Further, the proposal does not have number should be included on the Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,10 which any impact on whether a company is subject line if e-mail is used. To help the requires, inter alia, that the rules of a actually eligible to list on the Exchange. Commission process and review your national securities exchange be The Commission expects, and the designed to remove impediments to and comments more efficiently, please use Exchange has represented, that a full only one method. The Commission will perfect the mechanism of a free and and independent review of compliance post all comments on the Commission’s open market and a national market with listing standards will be conducted Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ system and not designed to permit for any company seeking to take rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the unfair discrimination between issuers. advantage of either of the fee waivers, The Commission has not received any just as for any company that applies for submission, all subsequent comments on the proposal. This order listing on the Exchange. amendments, all written statements approves the proposed rule change, as In light of these arguments, the with respect to the proposed rule modified by Amendment No 1. Commission agrees that the proposed change that are filed with the The Commission notes that waiver and fee cap, which are Commission, and all written companies who re-list upon emerging retroactively effective to February 22, communications relating to the from bankruptcy or who re-list upon a 2007, the date of the filing of the proposed rule change between the return to good standing following proposed rule change,11 do not Commission and any person, other than delisting have usually paid listing fees constitute an inequitable allocation of those that may be withheld from the to either the Exchange or to another reasonable dues, fees, and other charges, public in accordance with the national securities exchange at the time do not permit unfair discrimination provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be of their initial listing. In addition, with between issuers, and are generally available for inspection and copying in respect to the cap on annual fees for consistent with the Act. the Commission’s Public Reference companies listing upon emergence from Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Room. Copies of such filing also will be bankruptcy, the Commission notes that Act,12 the Commission finds good cause the fee cap is a temporary one, designed available for inspection and copying at for approving the proposal prior to the the principal office of the Exchange. All to enable recently bankrupt companies thirtieth day after the publication of the to manage the costs associated with comments received will be posted proposal, as modified by Amendment without change; the Commission does listing, consistent with the desire in No. 1, in the Federal Register. The not edit personal identifying bankruptcy proceeding to ensure that revisions to the proposed rule change information from submissions. You creditors are paid as much as possible. made by Amendment No. 1 do not raise should submit only information that For these reasons, the Exchange argues, any novel or substantive regulatory the waiver of listing fees and the cap on issues, and clarify the proposal. you wish to make available publicly. All annual fees are equitable. Therefore, the Commission finds good submissions should refer to File The Commission recognizes that, as cause for approving the amended Number SR–NYSE–2007–19 and should drafted, the initial fee waiver would proposal on an accelerated basis. be submitted on or before June 7, 2007. extend to companies that have never listed on a national securities exchange, IV. Solicitation of Comments V. Conclusion Concerning Amendment No. 1 which thus have never paid listing fees. It is therefore ordered, pursuant to In this regard, the Exchange Interested persons are invited to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,13 that the submit written data, views, and proposed rule change (File No. SR– 7 See supra note 3 arguments concerning the proposed rule NYSE–2007–19), as modified by 8 In approving this proposed rule change, the change as modified by Amendment No. Commission has considered the proposed rule’s Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 1, including whether it is consistent approved on an accelerated basis. formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f) 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) 11 See supra note 3 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2) 13 Id.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27895

For the Commission, by the Division of Exchange does not believe that the impact of this proposed rule change to Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated treatment this proposal would afford to be material, either in terms of increased authority.14 bankrupt companies constitutes an levels of annual fees from transferring Jill M. Peterson, inequitable or unfairly discriminatory issuers or in terms of diminished initial Assistant Secretary. allocation of fees. listing fee revenues. A limited number [FR Doc. E7–9438 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] In addition, the Exchange believes of companies are qualified and seek to BILLING CODE 8010–01–P that waiving initial listing fees for a list on the Exchange that are either company listing its primary class of emerging from bankruptcy or have a common stock which is registered under registered class of common stock but are SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE that Act but not listed on a national not currently listed on another market. COMMISSION securities exchange is appropriate and Accordingly, the proposed rule change [Release No. 34–55743; File No. SR– does not constitute an inequitable or will not impact the Exchange’s resource NYSEArca–2007–24] unfairly discriminatory allocation of commitment to its regulatory oversight fees. The Exchange anticipates that most of the listing process or its regulatory Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE companies taking advantage of this programs. Arca Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed waiver will be formerly-listed Following their approval, the Rule Change to Waive Certain Listing companies that were delisted as a result Exchange would apply the amendments Fees of a failure to timely file annual reports contained in the proposal retroactively with the Commission. These companies to February 28, 2007, the date of filing May 10, 2007 usually seek to re-list on the Exchange of the proposed rule change.5 as soon as their filings are up to date.4 I. Introduction III. Discussion According to the Exchange, because On February 28, 2007, NYSE Arca, such companies had previously paid After careful review, the Commission Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’), initial listing fees to the Exchange or to finds that the proposed rule change, as through its wholly owned subsidiary, another national securities exchange, amended, is consistent with the NYSE Arca Equities, Inc., filed with the the Exchange believes that to make them requirements of the Act and the rules Securities and Exchange Commission pay these fees again would further and regulations thereunder applicable to (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section 6 penalize them unnecessarily. a national securities exchange. In 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act The Exchange stated that other particular, the Commission finds that of 1934 (‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and the proposal is consistent with Section 2 companies trading in the over-the- Rule 19b–4 thereunder, a proposal to counter market that have not previously 6(b)(4) of the Act,7 which requires that waive certain listing fees. The proposal been listed on a national securities an exchange have rules that provide for was published for comment in the the equitable allocation of reasonable 3 exchange may seek to qualify for the Federal Register on March 16, 2007. waiver of initial listing fees. However, dues, fees, and other charges among its The Commission received no comments the Exchange believes that not many of members and other persons using its on the proposal. This order approves the these companies will be able to meet its facilities. The Commission also finds proposed rule change. quantitative initial listing standards, that the proposal is consistent with II. Description of the Proposal and thus does not believe that waiving Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,8 which requires, inter alia, that the rules of a The Exchange proposes to amend its initial listing fees for such companies national securities exchange be listing fee schedule to provide that there will have a meaningful effect on the designed to remove impediments to and shall be no initial listing fee applicable Exchange’s revenue or constitute an perfect the mechanism of a free and to (i) any company listing following inequitable or unfairly discriminatory open market and a national market emergence from bankruptcy, or (ii) any allocation of fees. The Exchange has represented that system and not designed to permit company listing its primary class of the proposed rule change will not affect unfair discrimination between issuers. common stock that is not listed on a the Exchange’s commitment of The Commission has not received any national securities exchange but is resources to its regulatory oversight of comments on the proposal. This order registered under the Act. The Exchange believes that the initial the listing process or its regulatory approves the proposed rule change. The Commission notes that listing fee waiver for companies listing programs. Companies that benefit from companies who re-list upon emerging upon emergence from bankruptcy is one of the proposed waivers will be from bankruptcy or who re-list upon a justified the unique circumstances of reviewed for compliance with Exchange return to good standing following those issuers, which, according to the listing standards in the same manner as delisting have usually paid listing fees NYSE, among other things, tend to be any other company that applies to be to either the Exchange or to another more sensitive to the initial and listed on the Exchange. The Exchange national securities exchange at the time continued costs associated with listing will conduct a full and independent of their initial listing. For this reason, because of the desire in bankruptcy review of each issuer’s compliance with the Exchange argues, the waiver of proceedings to ensure creditors are paid the Exchange’s listing standards. The Exchange also has represented listing fees constitutes an equitable as much as possible. According to the that it does not expect the financial allocation of reasonable fees. Exchange, because bankrupt companies The Commission recognizes that, as face unique challenges in the listing 4 In its filing, the Exchange stated that typically, drafted, the initial fee waiver would process, and because the number of such companies are otherwise in good standing extend to companies that have never companies that will benefit from the fee with a national securities exchange, but fell behind on their reporting obligations under the Act because waiver will be very limited, the 5 their auditors or the Commission required See supra note 3. restatements of their financial statements. The 6 In approving this proposed rule change, the 14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) Commission notes that the timely filing of accurate Commission has considered the proposed rule’s 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). financial reports under the Act is critical to impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. investors and our national market and assures that formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55430 investors receive up to date financial information 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). (March 8, 2007), 72 FR 12651 (the ‘‘Notice’’). about listed companies. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27896 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

listed on a national securities exchange, SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Effective Date: 04/30/2007. which thus have never paid listing fees. Physical Loan Application Deadline [Disaster Declaration #10859] In this regard, the Exchange Date: 06/25/2007. acknowledges that some companies Maine Disaster Number ME–00007 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan other than those returning to good applications to: U.S. Small Business standing after recent delisting—e.g., a AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And company trading on the over-the- Administration. Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport counter market—may seek to take ACTION: Amendment 2. Road Fort, Worth, TX 76155. advantage of the waiver of listing fees SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. for companies not listed on a national Presidential declaration of a major Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, securities exchange but registered under disaster for Public Assistance Only for U.S. Small Business Administration, the Act. However, the Exchange expects the State of Maine (FEMA–1693–DR), 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, the number of such companies eligible dated 04/25/2007. Washington, DC 20416. for the waiver to be very small, since not Incident: Severe Storms and Inland SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice many of these companies would meet and Coastal Flooding. of the President’s major disaster the Exchange’s quantitative listing Incident Period: 04/15/2007 through declaration for Private Non-Profit requirements. 04/23/2007. organizations in the State of Maine, The Commission also notes that the Effective Date: 05/04/2007. dated 04/25/2007, is hereby amended to Exchange has represented that the Physical Loan Application Deadline include the following areas as adversely waiver of listing fees should not have a Date: 06/25/2007. affected by the disaster. material financial impact on the ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan Primary Counties: Franklin, Hancock, exchange, or impact the Exchange’s applications to: U.S. Small Business Lincoln, Sagadahoc, Somerset, and resource commitment to its regulatory Administration, Processing And Waldo. oversight of the listing process or its Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport All other information in the original regulatory programs. Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. declaration remains unchanged. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Further, the proposal does not have (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance any impact on whether a company is Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, Number 59008) actually eligible to list on the Exchange. U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Herbert L. Mitchell, The Commission expects, and the Washington, DC 20416. Associate Administrator for Disaster Exchange has represented, that a full Assistance. and independent review of compliance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice [FR Doc. E7–9488 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] with listing standards will be conducted of the President’s major disaster for any company seeking to take declaration for Private Non-Profit BILLING CODE 8025–01–P advantage of either of the fee waivers, organizations in the State of Maine, dated 04/25/2007, is hereby amended to just as for any company that applies for SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION listing on the Exchange. establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 04/15/2007 and [Disaster Declaration #10871 and #10872] In light of these arguments, the continuing through 04/23/2007. Commission agrees that the proposed All other information in the original Maine Disaster #ME–00008 waivers, which are retroactively declaration remains unchanged. effective to February 28, 2007, the date (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance AGENCY: U.S. Small Business of the filing of the proposed rule Number 59008) Administration. 9 change, do not constitute an ACTION: Notice. inequitable allocation of reasonable Herbert L. Mitchell, dues, fees, and other charges, do not Associate Administrator for Disaster SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the permit unfair discrimination between Assistance. Presidential declaration of a major issuers, and are generally consistent [FR Doc. E7–9486 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] disaster for the State of Maine ( FEMA– with the Act. BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 1693–DR), dated 05/09/2007. Incident: Severe Storms and Inland IV. Conclusion and Coastal Flooding. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Incident Period: 04/15/2007 through 04/23/2007. Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,10 that the [Disaster Declaration #10859] Effective Date: 05/09/2007. proposed rule change (File No. SR– Maine Disaster Number ME–00007 Physical Loan Application Deadline NYSEArca–2007–24) be, and it hereby Date: 07/09/2007. is, approved. AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan For the Commission, by the Division of Administration. Application Deadline Date: 02/11/2008. ACTION: Amendment 1. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan authority.11 SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the applications to : U.S. Small Business Jill M. Peterson, Presidential declaration of a major Administration, Processing And Assistant Secretary. disaster for Public Assistance Only for Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport [FR Doc. E7–9439 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] the State of Maine (FEMA–1693–DR), Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. BILLING CODE 8010–01–P dated 04/25/2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Incident: Severe Storms and Inland Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, 9 See supra note 3. and Coastal Flooding. U.S. Small Business Administration, 10 Id. Incident Period: 04/15/2007 and 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). continuing. Washington, DC 20416.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27897

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Incident Period: 04/14/2007 through Representatives, and the Office of hereby given that as a result of the 04/18/2007. Information and Regulatory Affairs, President’s major disaster declaration on Effective Date: 05/09/2007. Office of Management and Budget 05/09/2007, applications for disaster Physical Loan Application Deadline (OMB). The matching program will be loans may be filed at the address listed Date: 06/25/2007. effective as indicated below. above or other locally announced EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: ADDRESSES: Interested parties may locations. 01/24/2008. comment on this notice by either telefax The following areas have been ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan to (410) 965–8582 or writing to the determined to be adversely affected by applications to: U.S. Small Business Associate Commissioner, Office of the disaster: Administration, Processing And Income Security Programs, 252 Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Altmeyer Building, 6401 Security Economic Injury Loans): Road For, Worth, TX 76155. Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235–6401. Cumberland, and York. All comments received will be available FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. for public inspection at this address. Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, Loans Only): U.S. Small Business Administration, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Maine: Androscoggin, Oxford, and 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Associate Commissioner for Income Sagadahoc. Washington, DC 20416. Security Programs as shown above. New Hampshire: Carroll, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Rockingham, and Strafford. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration A. General The Interest Rates are: for the State of New York , dated 04/24/ The Computer Matching and Privacy 2007 is hereby amended to include the Percent Protection Act of 1988 (Public Law following areas as adversely affected by (Pub. L.) 100–503), amended the Privacy the disaster: For Physical Damage: Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) by describing the Homeowners with Credit Avail- Primary Counties: Ulster. manner in which computer matching able Elsewhere ...... 5.750 Contiguous Counties: New York, and involving Federal agencies could be Homeowners without Credit Delaware. Available Elsewhere ...... 2.875 performed and adding certain Businesses with Credit Avail- All other information in the original protections for individuals applying for, able Elsewhere ...... 8.000 declaration remains unchanged. and receiving, Federal benefits. Section Other (Including Non-Profit Or- 7201 of the Omnibus Budget ganizations) with Credit (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101– Numbers 59002 and 59008) Available Elsewhere ...... 5.250 508) further amended the Privacy Act Businesses and Non-Profit Or- Herbert L. Mitchell, regarding protections for such ganizations without Credit individuals. Available Elsewhere ...... 4.000 Associate Administrator for Disaster For Economic Injury: Assistance. The Privacy Act, as amended, Businesses & Small Agricul- [FR Doc. E7–9489 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] regulates the use of computer matching tural Cooperatives without BILLING CODE 8025–01–P by Federal agencies when records in a Credit Available Elsewhere .. 4.000 system of records are matched with other Federal, State, or local government records. It requires Federal agencies The number assigned to this disaster SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION for physical damage is 108716 and for involved in computer matching economic injury is 108720. [Docket No. SSA 2007–3400] programs to: (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (1) Negotiate written agreements with Numbers 59002 and 59008) Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended; the other agency or agencies Computer Matching Program (SSA/ participating in the matching programs; Herbert L. Mitchell, States, SVES Files)—Match 6005, 6006, (2) Obtain the Data Integrity Boards’ Associate Administrator for Disaster 6007, and 6008 approval of the match agreements; Assistance. (3) Publish notice of the computer [FR Doc. E7–9490 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Social Security Administration matching program in the Federal (SSA) . BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Register; ACTION: Notice of a renewal of an (4) Furnish detailed reports about existing computer matching program matching programs to Congress and SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION which is scheduled to expire on June OMB; 30, 2007. [Disaster Declaration #10852 and #10853] (5) Notify applicants and beneficiaries that their records are subject to SUMMARY: In accordance with the New York Disaster Number NY–00045 matching; and provisions of the Privacy Act, as (6) Verify match findings before AGENCY: U.S. Small Business amended, this notice announces a reducing, suspending, terminating, or Administration. renewal of an existing computer denying an individual’s benefits or ACTION: Amendment 2. matching program that SSA is currently payments. conducting with the States. B. SSA Computer Matches Subject to SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the DATES: SSA will file a report of the Presidential declaration of a major subject matching program with the the Privacy Act disaster for the State of New York Committee on Homeland Security and We have taken action to ensure that (FEMA–1692–DR), dated 04/24/2007. Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the all of SSA’s computer matching Incident: Severe Storms and Inland Committee on Oversight and programs comply with the requirements and Coastal Flooding. Government Reform of the House of of the Privacy Act, as amended.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27898 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

Dated: May 8, 2007. E. Inclusive Dates of the Matching • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on Manuel J. Vaz, Program the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Acting Deputy Commissioner for Disability The matching program will become 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, and Income Security Programs. effective no sooner than 40 days after DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday Notice of Computer Matching Program, notice of the matching program is sent through Friday, except Federal holidays. Social Security Administration (SSA) to Congress and OMB, or 30 days after Docket: For access to the docket to With the States publication of this notice in the Federal read background documents or Register, whichever date is later. The comments received, go to http:// A. Participating Agencies matching program will continue for 18 dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL– SSA and the States months from the effective date and may 401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., B. Purpose of the Matching Program be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if certain conditions are met. Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 The purpose of this matching program Individual State matching agreements p.m., Monday through Friday, except is to establish the conditions, under the matching program will Federal holidays. safeguards, and procedures under which become effective upon the effective date FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the States may obtain SSN verification of this matching program or the signing Tyneka Thomas (202) 267–7626 or and certain SSA information relating to of the agreements by the parties to the Frances Shaver (202) 267–9681, Office the eligibility for, and payment of, individual agreements, whichever is of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Social Security, Supplemental Security later. The duration of individual State Administration, 800 Independence Income, and Special Veterans Benefits, matching agreements will be subject to Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. quarters of coverage, prisoner, and death the timeframes and limitations This notice is published pursuant to information. This information is contained in this matching program. 14 CFR 11.85. available from various SSA systems of records. [FR Doc. E7–9443 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2007. Individual agreements with the States BILLING CODE 4191–02–P Pamela Hamilton-Powell, will describe the information to be Director, Office of Rulemaking. disclosed and the conditions under Petitions for Exemption which SSA agrees to disclose such DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION information. Docket No.: FAA–2006–26253. Federal Aviation Administration Petitioner: Ogdensburg Bridge & Port C. Authority for Conducting the Authority. [Summary Notice No. PE–2006–17] Matching Program Section of 14 CFR Affected: 139.319. This matching program is carried out Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Description of Relief Sought: To allow under the authority of the Privacy Act Petitions Received Ogdensburg Bridge & Port Authority to of 1974, as amended; sections operate without meeting the 202(x)(3)(B)(iv), 205(r)(3), and 1106 of AGENCY: Federal Aviation requirement for aircraft rescue and fire the Social Security Act; sections 402, Administration (FAA), DOT. fighting equipment manned and ready 412, 421 and 435 of Public Law 104– ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption to respond for each scheduled landing 193; Public Law 108–458; section received. of a plane with 9 or more passengers. 6301(l)(7) of Title 26 of the Internal SUMMARY: This notice contains a [FR Doc. E7–9463 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] Revenue Code and SSA’s Privacy Act summary of a certain petition seeking BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Regulations (20 CFR 401.150) and by the relief from specified requirements of 14 routine use exception to the Privacy Act CFR. The purpose of this notice is to (5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3)). improve the public’s awareness of, and DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY D. Categories of Records and participation in, this aspect of FAA’s Individuals Covered by the Matching regulatory activities. Neither publication Submission for OMB Review; Program of this notice nor the inclusion or Comment Request States will provide SSA with names omission of information in the summary May 11, 2007. and other identifying information of is intended to affect the legal status of appropriate benefit applicants or any petition or its final disposition. The Department of Treasury has recipients. Specific information from DATES: Comments on petitions received submitted the following public participating States will be matched, as must identify the petition docket information collection requirement(s) to provided in the agreement for the number involved and must be received OMB for review and clearance under the specific programs, with the following on or before June 6, 2007. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. Copies of the systems of records maintained by SSA. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 1. SVES—SSR/SVB, SSA/ODSSIS identified by DOT DMS Docket Number submission(s) may be obtained by (60–0103); MBR, SSA/ORSIS (60–0090); FAA–2007–26253 by any of the calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance and the Master Files of SSN Holders and following methods: Officer listed. Comments regarding this SSN Applications, SSA/OEEAS (60– • Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. information collection should be 0058); Follow the instructions for submitting addressed to the OMB reviewer listed 2. Quarters of Coverage Query—the comments on the DOT electronic docket and to the Treasury Department Earnings Recording and Self- site. Clearance Officer, Department of the Employment Income System, SSA/ • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. Treasury, Room 11000, 1750 OEEAS (60–0059) and the Master Files • Mail: Docket Management Facility; Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., of SSN Holders and SSN Applications, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Washington, DC 20220. SSA/OEEAS (60–0058); Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, DATES: Written comments should be 3. Prisoner Query—PUPS, SSA/ Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– received on or before June 18, 2007 to OEEAS (60–0269). 0001. be assured of consideration.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27899

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Reporting on the Sale of a Principal Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, OMB Number: 1545–0959. Residence. Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. Type of Review: Extension. Description: The revenue procedure 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is Title: LR–213–76 (Final) Estate and applies only to the sale of a principal soliciting comments concerning Gift Taxes; Qualified Disclaimers of residence for $250,000 or less ($500,000 Revenue Procedure 2006–XX, Rotable Property. or less if the seller is married). The Spare Parts Safe Harbor Method. Description: Section 2518 allows a revenue procedure provides the written DATES: Written comments should be person to disclaim an interest in assurances that are acceptable to the received on or before July 16, 2007 to be property received by gift or inheritance. Service for exempting a real estate assured of consideration. The interest is treated as if the reporting person from information ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments disclaimant never received or reporting requirements for the sale of a to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue transferred such interest for Federal gift principal residence. Service, room 6411, 1111 Constitution tax purposes. A qualified disclaimer Respondents: Individuals or Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. households. must be in writing and delivered to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: transferor or trustee. Estimated Total Burden Hours: 420,500 hours. Requests for additional information or Respondents: Individuals or copies of revenue procedures should be OMB Number: 1545–1212. households. directed to Larnice Mack at Internal Type of Review: Extension. Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,000 Revenue Service, room 6512, 1111 hours. Title: U.S. Estate Tax Return for Qualified Domestic Trusts. Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, OMB Number: 1545–0181. DC 20224, or at (202)622–3179, or Type of Review: Revision. Form: 706–QDT. Description: Form 706–QDT is used through the Internet at Title: Application for Extension of by the trustee or the designated filer to ([email protected]). Time to File a Return and/or Pay U.S. compute and report the Federal estate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Estate (and Generation-Skipping tax imposed on qualified domestic Title: Rotable Spare Parts Safe Harbor Transfer) Taxes. Method. Form: 4768. trusts by C section 2056A. IRS uses the OMB Number: 1545–2070. Description: Form 4768 is used by information to enforce this tax and to Revenue Procedure Number: Rev. estates to request an extension of time verify that the tax has been properly Proc. 2006–XX. to file an estate (and GST) tax return computed. Respondents: Individuals or Abstract: The information for which and/or to pay the estate (and GST) taxes the agency is requesting to collect will and to explain why the extension households. Estimated Total Burden Hours: 357 support a taxpayer’s claim for eligibility should be granted. IRS uses the hours. to use the safe harbor method of information to decide whether the Clearance Officer: Glenn P. Kirkland, accounting for rotable spare parts extension should be granted. (202) 622–3428, Internal Revenue provided in the proposed revenue Respondents: Businesses and other Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution procedures. The information will be for-profit institutions. Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. submitted as a supporting schedule for Estimated Total Burden Hours: 30,710 OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, the Form 3115, Application for Change hours. (202) 395–7316, Office of Management in Accounting Method. OMB Number: 1545–1668. and Budget, Room 10235, New Current Actions: There are no changes Type of Review: Revision. Executive Office Building, Washington, being made to the revenue procedures at Title: Return of U.S. Persons With DC 20503. this time. Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships. Type of Review: Extension of a Form: 8865. Robert Dahl, currently approved collection. Description: The Taxpayer Relief Act Treasury PRA Clearance Officer. Affected Public: Business or other for- of 1997 significantly modified the [FR Doc. E7–9514 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] profit organizations. information reporting requirements with BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Estimated Number of Respondents: respect to foreign partnerships. The Act 300. made the following three changes (1) Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 expanded section 6038B to require U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY minutes. persons transferring property to foreign Estimated Total Annual Burden partnerships in certain transactions to Internal Revenue Service Hours: 75. report those transfers; (2) expanded The following paragraph applies to all Proposed Collection; Comment section 6038 to require certain U.S. of the collections of information covered Request for Revenue Procedure 2006– Partners of controlled foreign by this notice: An agency may not XX partnerships to report information about conduct or sponsor, and a person is not the partnerships; and (3) modified the AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), required to respond to, a collection of reporting required under section 6046A Treasury. information unless the collection of with respect to acquisitions and ACTION: Notice and request for information displays a valid OMB dispositions of foreign partnership comments. control number. Books or records interests. relating to a collection of information Respondents: Businesses or other for- SUMMARY: The Department of the must be retained as long as their profit institutions. Treasury, as part of its continuing effort contents may become material in the Estimated Total Burden Hours: to reduce paperwork and respondent administration of any internal revenue 296,124 hours. burden, invites the general public and law. Generally, tax returns and tax OMB Number: 1545–1592. other Federal agencies to take this return information are confidential, as Type of Review: Extension. opportunity to comment on proposed required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Title: Revenue Procedure 98–20, and/or continuing information Request for Comments: Comments Certification for No Information collections, as required by the submitted in response to this notice will

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27900 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices

be summarized and/or included in the Saturday, June 2, 2007, from 9 a.m. to ACTION: Notice. request for OMB approval. All 12 Noon ET. comments will become a matter of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Joint public record. Comments are invited on: Audrey Y. Jenkins at 1–888–912–1227 Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy (a) Whether the collection of (toll-free), or 718–488–2085 (non toll- Panel will be conducted via information is necessary for the proper free). teleconference. The Taxpayer Advocacy performance of the functions of the Panel is soliciting public comment, agency, including whether the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is ideas, and suggestions on improving information shall have practical utility; hereby given pursuant to Section customer service at the Internal Revenue (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Service. of the burden of the collection of Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) information; (c) ways to enhance the that an open meeting of the Earned DATES: The meeting will be held quality, utility, and clarity of the Income Tax Credit Committee of the Wednesday, June 6, 2007, at 1 p.m., information to be collected; (d) ways to Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Eastern Time. minimize the burden of the collection of Friday, June 1, 2007, 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information on respondents, including and Saturday, June 2, 2007, from 9 a.m. Barbara Toy at 1–888–912–1227, or through the use of automated collection to 12 p.m. ET, at 1750 Pennsylvania techniques or other forms of information Avenue, Washington, DC 20006. The (414) 231–2360. technology; and (e) estimates of capital public is invited to make oral SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is or start-up costs and costs of operation, comments. Individual comments will be hereby given pursuant to Section maintenance, and purchase of services limited to 5 minutes. For information 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory to provide information. contact Audrey Y. Jenkins as noted Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) Approved: May 3, 2007. above. Notification of intent to that an open meeting of the Joint Joseph R. Durbala, participate in the meeting must be made Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy IRS Reports Clearance Officer. with Ms. Jenkins. If you would like a Panel (TAP) will be held Wednesday, [FR Doc. E7–9532 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] written statement to be considered, send June 6, 2007, at 1 p.m. Eastern Time via written comments to Ms. Audrey Y. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P a telephone conference call. If you Jenkins, TAP Office, 10 MetroTech would like to have the Joint Committee Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY of TAP consider a written statement, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 11201 or post your comments to the please call 1–888–912–1227 or (414) Web site: http://www.improveirs.org. 231–2360, or write Barbara Toy, TAP Internal Revenue Service The agenda will include the Office, MS–1006–MIL, PO Box 3205, following: Various issues pertaining to Open Meeting of the Earned Income Milwaukee, WI 53201–2105, or FAX to the IRS administration of the Earned Tax Credit Committee of the Taxpayer (414) 231–2363, or you can contact us Income Tax Credit. Advocacy Panel at http://www.improveirs.org. Due to Dated: May 10, 2007. limited conference lines, notification of AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), John Fay, intent to participate in the telephone Treasury. Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. conference call meeting must be made ACTION: Amended notice. [FR Doc. E7–9531 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] with Barbara Toy. SUMMARY: An open meeting of the BILLING CODE 4830–01–P The agenda will include the Earned Income Tax Credit Committee of following: Discussion of issues and the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be responses brought to the Joint conducted at the Internal Revenue DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Committee, office report, and discussion Service, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, Internal Revenue Service of next meeting. Washington, DC 20006. The Committee Dated: May 10, 2007. will be discussing issues pertaining to Open Meeting of the Joint Committee John Fay, the IRS administration of the Earned of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Income Tax Credit. Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. DATES: The meeting will be held Friday, AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), [FR Doc. E7–9537 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] June 1, 2007, 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Treasury. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:15 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 27901

Corrections Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 95

Thursday, May 17, 2007

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Monday, April 30, 2007, make the contains editorial corrections of previously following correction: published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, Federal Motor Carrier Safety On page 21316, in the third column, and Notice documents. These corrections are Administration under the heading DATES, in the last prepared by the Office of the Federal line, ‘‘June 1, 2009’’ should read ‘‘April Register. Agency prepared corrections are [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2006–26600] issued as signed documents and appear in 30, 2009’’. the appropriate document categories Qualification of Drivers; Exemption [FR Doc. Z7–8178 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] elsewhere in the issue. Applications; Diabetes BILLING CODE 1505–01–D Correction In notice document E7–8178 beginning on page 21316 in the issue of

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:31 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4734 Sfmt 4734 E:\FR\FM\17MYCX.SGM 17MYCX pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES2 Thursday, May 17, 2007

Part II

Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration

20 CFR Part 656 Labor Certification for the Permanent Employment of Aliens in the United States; Reducing the Incentives and Opportunities for Fraud and Abuse and Enhancing Program Integrity; Final Rule

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27904 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR permanent labor certification program. Secretary of Homeland Security and the This rule also clarifies the Department’s Secretary of State that: Employment and Training ‘‘no modifications’’ policy for (a) There are not sufficient U.S. Administration applications filed on or after March 28, workers who are able, willing, qualified, 2005, under the new, streamlined PERM and available at the time of the 20 CFR Part 656 process. application for a visa and admission RIN 1205–AB42 DATES: This Final Rule is effective July into the United States and at the place 16, 2007. where the alien is to perform the work; and Labor Certification for the Permanent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (b) The employment of the alien will Employment of Aliens in the United William L. Carlson, Administrator, States; Reducing the Incentives and not adversely affect the wages and Office of Foreign Labor Certification, working conditions of similarly Opportunities for Fraud and Abuse and Employment and Training Enhancing Program Integrity employed U.S. workers. Administration, U.S. Department of If the Secretary of Labor, through the AGENCY: Employment and Training Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor. Room C–4312, Washington, DC 20210. Administration (ETA), is satisfied in his ACTION: Final Rule. Telephone: (202) 693–3010 (this is not or her review of a sponsoring a toll-free number). employer’s application for certification SUMMARY: The Department of Labor Individuals with hearing or speech that these two requirements have been (DOL or Department) is amending its impairments may access the telephone met, he or she so certifies by granting a regulations to enhance program integrity number above via TTY by calling the permanent labor certification. If DOL and reduce the incentives and toll-free Federal Information Relay cannot make both of the above findings, opportunities for fraud and abuse Service at (800) 877–8339 (this is a toll- the application for permanent labor related to the permanent employment of free number). certification is denied. The Department aliens in the United States. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of Labor’s regulation at 20 CFR part 656 This Final Rule includes several I. Background governs the labor certification process major provisions. It prohibits the for the permanent employment of substitution of alien beneficiaries on The purpose of this Final Rule is to immigrant aliens and sets forth the permanent labor certification impose clear limitations on the responsibilities of employers who wish applications and resulting certifications. acquisition and use of permanent labor to employ immigrant aliens The Final Rule provides a 180-day certification applications and permanently in the United States. validity period for approved labor permanent labor certifications in order The INA does not specifically address certifications; employers will have 180 to reduce incentives and opportunities substitution of aliens in the permanent calendar days within which to file an for fraud and abuse in the permanent labor certification process. Similarly, approved permanent labor certification labor certification program. It also the Department of Labor’s regulations in support of a Form I–140 Immigrant promulgates key measures to enhance are silent on the question of Petition for Alien Worker (Form I–140 the integrity of the permanent labor substitution. hereafter) with the Department of certification program. This Final Rule On May 6, 2002, the Department Homeland Security (DHS). The rule continues efforts the Department published a Notice of Proposed prohibits the sale, barter or purchase of initiated several years ago to construct Rulemaking (NPRM) to streamline the permanent labor certifications and a deliberate, coordinated fraud permanent labor certification program. applications. In addition, this rule reduction and prevention framework 67 FR 30466 (May 6, 2002). A Final Rule requires employers to pay the costs of within the permanent labor certification implementing the streamlined preparing, filing and obtaining program. The Department laid the permanent labor certification program certification. An employer’s transfer to groundwork for greater integrity and through revisions to 20 CFR part 656 the alien beneficiary of the employer’s security during the planning and was published on December 27, 2004, costs incurred in the labor certification promulgation of the 2004 Final Rule to and took effect on March 28, 2005. 69 or application process is strictly implement the re-engineered PERM FR 77326 (Dec. 27, 2004). The prior 20 prohibited. The rule makes clear an system. While fraud prevention has CFR part 656 (2004) governs processing alien may pay his or her own legitimate always been a goal of the Department’s of permanent labor certification costs in the permanent labor labor certification programs, our applications filed prior to March 28, certification process, including continuing program experience and that 2005, except where certain provisions of attorneys’ fees for representation of the of other Federal agencies has this Final Rule will impact such alien. The rule also reinforces existing demonstrated the need to focus on the applications. Previously filed law pertaining to the submission of specific opportunities for fraud and applications may be refiled under the fraudulent or false information and abuse addressed in this rule. new PERM rule. clarifies current DOL procedures for responding to incidents of possible A. Statutory Standard and Current B. General Immigration Process fraud. Finally, the rule establishes Department of Labor Regulations Involving Permanent Labor procedures for debarment from the Under section 212(a)(5)(A) of the Certifications permanent labor certification program. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA To obtain permanent alien workers, Consistent with the proposed rule, the or Act) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)), before U.S. employers generally must engage in provisions in this Final Rule apply to the Department of Homeland Security a multi-step process that involves DOL permanent labor certification (DHS) may approve petition requests and DHS and, in some instances, DOS. applications and approved certifications and the Department of State (DOS) may The INA classifies employment-based filed under both the Program Electronic issue visas and admit certain immigrant (EB) immigrant workers into categories, Review Management (PERM) program aliens to work permanently in the e.g., EB–2 and EB–3, based on the regulation effective March 28, 2005, and United States (U.S.), the Secretary of general job requirements and the prior regulations implementing the Labor (Secretary) must certify to the perceived benefit to American society.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27905

U.S. employers must demonstrate that the permanent labor certification during which a certification may be the requested job requirements, and in application is pending at DOL or—by marketed. In many of these applications, some cases the alien, fit into one of DOL’s delegation to DHS—while a Form the job offer was fictitious. In others, the these classifications. The first step in I–140 petition, filed with an approved job in question existed but was never the process for the EB–2 and EB–3 labor certification, is pending with DHS. truly open to U.S. workers. Rather, the classifications, further described below, Historically, this substitution practice job was steered to a specific alien in generally begins with the U.S. employer was permitted as an accommodation to return for a substantial fee or filing a labor certification application U.S. employers due to the length of time ‘‘kickback.’’ The Federal Government with DOL in accordance with 20 CFR it took to obtain a permanent labor has prosecuted a number of cases part 656. The U.S. employer must certification or receive approval of the resulting from employers, agents, or demonstrate to DOL, through a test of Form I–140 petition. attorneys seeking to fraudulently profit the labor market, that there are no U.S. Currently, the regulations do not set from the substitution of aliens on workers able, willing, qualified, and any validity period on a permanent approved labor certifications and available at the time of the application labor certification and, thus, permanent applications. One attorney filed for a visa and admission to the United labor certifications are valid approximately 2,700 fraudulent States and at the place where the alien indefinitely. Also, DOL regulations do applications with DOL for fees of up to is to perform the work. The employer not address payments related to the $20,000 per application. Many of these must also demonstrate that the permanent labor certification program applications were filed for the sole employment of the alien will not or debarment authority. In this Final purpose of later being sold to aliens who adversely affect the wages and working Rule, the Department addresses would be substituted for named conditions of similarly employed U.S. problems that have arisen related to beneficiaries on the approved labor workers. Following review of the substitution, lack of a validity period for certifications. See U.S. v. Kooritzky, No. permanent labor certification certifications, and financial transactions 02–502–A (E.D. Va. 2003). Additional application, DOL will either certify or related to the permanent labor prosecutions have also involved the sale deny the application. certification program. of fraudulent applications or The Immigrant Petition for Alien D. Issues Arising From Current Practices certifications. See, e.g., U.S. v. Worker (Form I–140) is a petition filed Ivanchukov, et al., No. 04–421 (E.D. Va. with the United States Citizenship and For more than 15 years, the 2005); U.S. v. Mir, No. 8:03–CR–00156– Immigration Services (USCIS), within Department has expressed concern that AW–ALL (D. Md. 2003); U.S. v. DHS, by a U.S. employer for a various immigration practices, Fredman, et al., No. WMN–05–198 (D. prospective permanent alien employee. including substitution, were subject to a Md.); U.S. v. Lee, No. 03–947–M (E.D. Most Form I–140 petitions filed under high degree of fraud and abuse. See, e.g., Va.); U.S. v. Mederos, No. 04–314–A section 203(b)(2) and (3) of the Act, the Interim Final Rule, 56 FR 54920 (E.D. Va.); U.S. v. Yum (E.D. Va. 2006); EB–2 and EB–3 classifications, must be (October 23, 1991).1 This concern was U.S. v. Mandalapa, No. 205–NJ–03117– accompanied by an approved labor heightened by a number of recent PS (D. N.J. 2006); U.S. v. Heguman, No. certification issued by DOL. DHS has criminal prosecutions by the CR 04–1635(A)–RSWL (C.D. Cal. 2007). established procedures for filing Form Department of Justice (DOJ) as well as Our program experience confirms that I–140 petitions under 8 CFR 204.5. recommendations from the Department such fraudulent activity adds to the cost DHS reviews the approved labor of Justice and the Department of Labor’s of foreign labor certification programs— certification in conjunction with the Office of Inspector General (OIG), and for example, resources spent processing Form I–140 petition and other public comments concerning fraud fraudulent applications, anticipating supporting documents to evaluate received in response to the May 6, 2002, and combating unscrupulous conduct, whether the position being offered to NPRM on PERM. See, e.g., 69 FR at and assisting debarments or the alien named in the petition is the 77328, 77329, 77363, and 77364 (Dec. prosecutions after the fact. same as the position specified on the 27, 2004). The Final Rule implementing the labor certification and whether the The Department’s review of recent streamlined permanent labor employment qualifies for the immigrant prosecutions by DOJ, in particular, certification program also discussed classification requested by the revealed that the ability to substitute DOL’s and others’ concerns about fraud employer. In addition, DHS evaluates alien beneficiaries has turned labor in the program and the steps the the alien’s education, training, and work certifications into commodities which Department would be taking to experience to determine whether the can be sold by unscrupulous employers, minimize the filing of fraudulent or particular alien meets the job attorneys, or agents to those seeking a non-meritorious applications. 69 FR at requirements specified on the labor ‘‘green card.’’ Similarly, the ability to 77328, 77329, and 77363 (Dec. 27, certification. The approved labor sell labor certifications has been greatly 2004). As implemented, the basic labor certification is also used to establish the enhanced by their current open-ended certification process under the new priority date for which an immigrant validity, providing a lengthy period PERM system incorporates fraud visa will be made available to the alien, detection measures targeting areas that based on the date the labor certification 1 The 1991 Interim Final Rule included a have historically shown vulnerability. provision prohibiting substitution. That provision application was originally filed. was overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the These measures include system and manual checks in key areas, as well as C. Current ETA Practices Involving D.C. Circuit on Administrative Procedure Act procedural grounds. Kooritzky v. Reich, 17 F.3d the use of auditing triggers and Permanent Labor Certifications 1509 (D.C. Cir. 1994). DOL addressed the court’s techniques, both targeted and random, Although not mentioned in 20 CFR concern through publication of the NPRM for notice and comment on February 13, 2006, consideration which can be adjusted as appropriate to part 656, ETA has for years informally of comments received and development of this maintain security and integrity in the allowed employers to substitute an alien Final Rule. 71 FR 7656 (Feb. 13, 2006). It is of no process. named on a pending or approved labor small significance that the plaintiff in that suit, an Personal Identification Numbers attorney, was later convicted for the criminal sale certification with another prospective of fraudulent labor certifications used for (PINs) and passwords for registration alien employee. Labor certification substitution. U.S. v. Kooritzky, No. 02–502–A (E.D. into the automated filing system are substitution has occurred either while Va. 2003). assigned to accounts issued to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:52 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27906 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

sponsoring employers, who may then involvement by aliens in the labor Labor’s determination, required under create sub-accounts for attorneys or certification process, and strengthens the statute, of the availability of or agents who represent the employer. The the enforceability of the bona fide job adverse impact to U.S. workers. The initial stages of registration and opportunity requirement. labor market test forms the basis for application include system checks to Accordingly, on February 13, 2006, notice to U.S. workers of the job verify the employer-applicant is a bona the Department published in the vacancy, for the recruitment process fide business entity. Once DOL’s initial Federal Register a Notice of Proposed through which U.S. workers have the review of a filed application shows it to Rulemaking to amend its regulations opportunity to apply and be considered be technically acceptable for processing, governing the permanent labor for each job, and for employer the application transfers to a substantive certification process to curb fraud and attestations related to key terms and review queue, where it may be selected abuse and strengthen program integrity. conditions of employment. While we for audit either randomly or based on 71 FR 7656. As proposed, the rule remain sensitive to concerns raised by specific criteria that tie closely to prohibited substitution of aliens not employers and others over the impact of program requirements. Staff at ETA’s originally named on applications for these changes, we nonetheless have National Processing Centers, where permanent labor certification; limited concluded, after careful review of PERM applications are processed, also the period of validity of a permanent comments on each proposal, that the confirm information directly with labor certification to 45 calendar days; identification and deterrence of fraud employers, for example, to ensure each prohibited certain financial transactions and the broader integrity of the program employer is aware an application has or activities related to permanent labor require a strong, comprehensive been filed on its behalf and is, in fact, certifications; and took other steps to approach to which these regulatory sponsoring the alien named on the enhance program integrity and reduce reforms are critical. Accordingly, in this application. or avert fraud. Final Rule the Department amends part While these measures are targeted This Final Rule builds on the 656 to add fraud prevention and based on our program experience, they foundation laid in the 2004 Final Rule redressive measures in the key areas focus largely on discrete activities implementing the streamlined identified in the proposed rule, as (employer verification, sponsorship, permanent program and follows through follows. etc.) or on program requirements as on the strong commitment reflected in Substitution—Consistent with the reflected in questions throughout the the NPRM for this rulemaking, proposed rule, this Final Rule adds a application, and do not address broader culminating a multi-year effort to labor certification policies historically enhance integrity and fraud prevention new § 656.11 to prohibit the substitution of concern to the Department. For mechanisms in the permanent labor of alien beneficiaries as of the effective example, in the Final Rule to implement certification program. date of the Final Rule. This prohibition the PERM program, the Department To assist compliance and enforcement will apply to all pending permanent noted the practice of allowing the under this rule, the Department is labor certification applications and to substitution of alien beneficiaries may reviewing available resources to approved permanent labor provide an incentive for fraudulent determine its ability to establish a new certifications, whether the application applications to be filed. 69 FR at 77363 toll-free telephone number, or to was filed under the provisions of 20 (Dec. 27, 2004). The Department also develop other means, to receive reports CFR part 656 in effect before March 28, concluded in that Final Rule that the of potential violations. Calls would be 2005, or on or after March 28, 2005. emerging ‘‘black market’’ for purchase screened by DOL staff, who would refer Additionally, as proposed, the Final and sale of approved labor certifications calls or inquiries to appropriate agencies Rule revises § 656.30(c) to provide that is not consistent with the purpose of the within or outside the Department. a certification resulting from an application filed under 20 CFR part 656 labor certification statute at section II. Overview of the Regulation 212(a)(5)(A) of the INA. While DOL was in effect before March 28, 2005, or on not able to address many of these fraud In order to protect the integrity of the or after March 28, 2005, is only valid for issues in the PERM Final Rule because permanent labor certification program, the alien named on the original they arguably went beyond the scope of reduce the incentives for fraud and permanent labor certification the proposals contained in the PERM abuse, and comply with the application. These regulatory changes NPRM, the Department clearly indicated Department’s statutory obligation to do not affect substitutions approved by it would be exploring regulatory protect the wages and working the Department or DHS under either solutions to address these issues. 69 FR conditions of U.S. workers, the regulation prior to this Final Rule’s at 77328, 77329, and 77363 (Dec. 27, Department proposed in the NPRM a effective date. They also do not affect 2004). number of regulatory changes. As stated substitution requests in progress as of Similarly, the Department determined in the NPRM, the revisions were this rule’s effective date. Due to the that additional regulatory action was proposed in part in response to considerable evidence of past and required to reinforce and clarify core concerns raised historically by continuing fraud in the permanent labor program components, both to strengthen stakeholder agencies and individual certification process, DOL through this fraud prevention and enhance program program users. They also responded to Final Rule, among other measures, is integrity. For example, a prohibition on the numerous substantive comments eliminating the practice of substitution. modifications to applications was an received to the May 6, 2002 NPRM. At The Department will work with the original assumption of the PERM its essence, each change was motivated Departments of Justice and Homeland program and having such a clear, by our program experience and desire Security to explore appropriate enforceable prohibition is critical to its and responsibility under the authorizing circumstances under which substitution long-term efficiency and effectiveness. statute to restore and maintain the could be reinstated. We anticipate that A prohibition against the transfer of integrity of the labor market test. The there may come a time when all affected labor certification costs from sponsoring Department’s regulations at 20 CFR part agencies are satisfied that there are employers to alien beneficiaries keeps 656 establish the fact-finding process sufficient anti-fraud protections to legitimate business costs with the designed to develop information alleviate the concerns motivating this employer, minimizes improper financial sufficient to support the Secretary of rule.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27907

Modifications to applications—This clarify procedures and address deter fraud in the permanent labor Final Rule finalizes with minor changes comments received in response to the certification program. Several the provision in the proposed rule NPRM. On or after the effective date of commenters suggested alternatives for prohibiting modifications to permanent this Final Rule, the Department may improving the fraud rule, while some labor certification applications once debar an employer, attorney or agent suggested abandonment of the proposed such applications are filed with the based upon certain enumerated actions rule entirely. Department. The Department has such as fraud, willful provision of false A. Prohibition of Substitution or Change implemented technological changes in statements, or a pattern or practice of to the Identity of Alien Beneficiaries on the PERM program to alert applicants to noncompliance with PERM Permanent Labor Certifications and technical grounds for deniability, thus requirements, regardless of whether the Applications eliminating the need for many labor certification application involved modifications. Section 656.11(b) was filed under the prior or current The proposed rule prohibited the clarifies that requests for modifications regulation. In addition, other provisions substitution of alien beneficiaries on to an application, where the application related to all applications filed under 20 pending applications for permanent was filed after this Final Rule’s effective CFR part 656 in effect before March 28, labor certification and on approved date, will not be accepted. To comport 2005, or on or after March 28, 2005, labor certifications. The comments we with this clarification while ensuring highlight existing law pertaining to received on the prohibition of due process, the Final Rule revises submission of fraudulent or false substitution raised concerns in a § 656.24(g) to more precisely define information and clarify our procedures number of key areas: the Department’s what evidence may be submitted with for responding to possible fraud. authority to make the rule change; the an employer’s request for As proposed, this Final Rule extends nexus between the proposed ban and reconsideration. from 90 to 180 days the period during the incidence and types of fraud that Validity period—Although the which the Department may suspend have occurred; the Department’s Department had originally proposed processing of applications under premise that substitution is no longer permanent labor certifications be filed criminal investigation. In addition, in needed, both because the new, with DHS within 45 calendar days, this response to comments requesting a automated system has significantly Final Rule extends that period to 180 materiality standard for the various reduced processing time and because calendar days. Accordingly, all debarment provisions, the Final Rule the backlog of permanent labor permanent labor certifications approved adds an intent requirement (‘‘willful’’) certification applications filed prior to on or after the effective date of this Final to the false information section; to be March 28, 2005, will be eliminated by Rule will expire 180 calendar days after actionable, the employer must willfully September 30, 2007; the application of certification, whether the original provide false or inaccurate information the ban to all pending applications and application was filed under 20 CFR part to the Department. The Final Rule also approved certifications; and the 656 in effect prior to or after March 28, raises the standard for debarment based hardships that employers would suffer 2005, unless filed prior to expiration in on failure to comply with the terms of and costs they would incur as a result support of a Form I–140 petition with Forms ETA 9089 or 750, failure to of such a ban. DHS. Likewise, all certifications comply with the permanent labor We address the comments bearing on approved prior to this Final Rule’s certification program’s audit process, or each of these issues below. However, effective date will expire 180 calendar failure to comply with the program’s after thoughtfully reviewing and days after the Final Rule’s effective date supervised recruitment requirements, to deliberating over the concerns raised, unless filed in support of a Form I–140 require there must be a pattern or we continue to find that the public petition with DHS prior to the practice of noncompliance in each case. benefit of eliminating substitution on expiration date. These changes in the standard for permanent labor certifications and Ban on sale, barter, purchase, and debarment at § 656.31(f) work in tandem applications outweighs any potential certain payments—This Final Rule with the revision to § 656.26(a)(1). The disadvantages to individual program prohibits the sale, barter, and purchase new § ´656.26(a)(1) expands the existing users. Consequently, as originally of applications and approved labor provision for a right to review the proposed in the NPRM, the Final Rule certifications, as well as certain Department’s denial of an application or includes a new § 656.11 providing that, payments to employers in compensation revocation of a certification, to as of the effective date of the Final Rule, or reimbursement for the employer’s encompass a right to review of a substitution of alien beneficiaries will costs incurred to obtain labor debarment action. The request for be prohibited: (1) On all pending certification. This ban will apply to all review would be made to, and in permanent labor certification such transactions on or after the appropriate cases a concomitant hearing applications; and (2) on certifications, effective date of This Final Rule would be held by, the Board of Alien regardless of whether the application regardless of whether the labor Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA). was filed under 20 CFR part 656 in certification application involved was effect before or on or after March 28, filed under 20 CFR part 656 in effect III. Discussion of Comments on 2005. Likewise, once this Final Rule before March 28, 2005, or on or after Proposed Rule takes effect, the revised § 656.30(c) March 28, 2005. In consideration of The Department received a total of makes a certification valid only for the comments, the Final Rule more 489 comments from attorneys, alien named on the original application. precisely describes the payments being educational institutions, trade As explained in the NPRM, this prohibited. Proposed § 656.12(b), now associations, individuals, and regulatory change has no retroactive § 656.12(b) and (c), has been revised to businesses. Many of the comments were effect on substitutions approved by the reflect this approach and definitions duplicative in nature and have been Department or DHS prior to this Final have been added to § 656.3. grouped together for discussion Rule’s effective date. As made implicit Debarment and program integrity— purposes. Although most of the by the new § 656.11(a), this Final Rule Finally, the Final Rule institutes several commenters were critical of one or more also has no retroactive effect on enforcement mechanisms as described of the proposed changes, they also substitution requests in progress in the proposed rule, with revisions to supported the Department’s efforts to (submitted) prior to this rule taking

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27908 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

effect. These and the other regulatory to the employer. In fact, this commenter The Department’s regulations changes promulgated in this Final Rule stated that given the automated, largely authorize it to closely review the modify the statement in the preamble to attestation-based nature of PERM, DOL information provided on the application the December 27, 2004, PERM Final is clearly unprepared and lacking in with respect to the named alien. Our Rule that applications filed before that resources to evaluate evidence bearing authority to examine the stated Final Rule’s effective date would on whether the alien is qualified for the qualifications of the alien named on the continue to be processed and governed job. application also extends to our by the then-current regulation. 69 FR The Department’s authority to determination of whether an employer 77326 (Dec. 27, 2004). regulate and ban the substitution of has accurately stated the minimum qualifications necessary to perform the 1. Statutory Authority aliens on labor certifications and applications is clear. The INA treats job, or has inflated or misstated job Several commenters questioned the each alien individually and, for requirements. 56 FR 54920 (Oct. 23, Department’s authority under the INA to employment-based immigration 1991); see 20 CFR 656.17(i). eliminate substitution of aliens on requiring labor certification, makes Nevertheless, the Department does certifications and applications. every alien inadmissible, absent the not undertake in this Final Rule to Statutory authority relative to Secretary of Labor’s determination on determine the visa eligibility of qualifications and identity of alien— U.S. worker availability and adverse individual aliens. This rule governs the Many commenters opposed the ban on impact. The trigger for such a processing of labor certification substitution as being overbroad and determination has always been, at its applications, the validity of approved overreaching. Commenters referred to core, the existence of a vacancy that an certifications, and other Department of the plain language of the authorizing employer wishes to fill with an alien, Labor activities implementing relevant statute and opposed the elimination of and the burden of proof is always upon INA provisions and 20 CFR part 656; it substitution on grounds that DOL’s the petitioning employer to overcome does not speak to activities by the jurisdiction, based on 8 U.S.C. the presumption of the inadmissibility Departments of Homeland Security or 1182(a)(5), stops with determining of an individual intended immigrant State conducted under their respective worker unavailability and adverse authorities and jurisdiction. Further, the impact and does not extend to activities employee through a test of the labor market. Department’s focus is not on the related to worker identity or identity of the individual alien but on The statute itself could not be clearer qualifications. Commenters stated that the employer’s failure to conduct a that the labor certification process is the authority to scrutinize the second labor market test for available alien specific. In defining the qualifications of the alien named on the U.S. workers when the original alien Department’s role in the admission of an petition rests solely with USCIS. beneficiary becomes unavailable and, alien for employment-based permanent More specifically, commenters subsequently, when an employer seeks residence, INA section 212(a)(5)(i) ties questioned the Department’s authority substitution. As stated in the NPRM, if to join the labor certification application the required certification to ‘‘the place the original alien beneficiary is no to a specific alien, asserting labor where the (emphasis added) alien is to longer available, then the employer certifications are related to the job perform such skilled or unskilled must use some means to fill that job opportunity, not the employee. They labor[,]’’ and the necessity of certifying opportunity. Clearly, the employer used argued that the identity of the specific that ‘‘the employment of such (emphasis some recruitment tool to find the new alien employee, whether the original added) alien will not adversely affect foreign worker for that newly opened beneficiary or a substituted beneficiary, the wages * * *.’’ The plain language of job opportunity. Prohibiting substitution is not relevant to a good faith labor these provisions (i.e., the use of terms will ensure the employer again makes market test. One commenter stated that such as ‘‘the alien’’ and ‘‘such alien’’) is the reopened employment opportunity the elimination of substitution, meant to focus not on the process but available to U.S. workers. In the event requiring a second labor market test for solely on its use to admit one, specific another alien is again the only qualified the position, contravenes what it alien. person available, then it is consistent believes is the legislative intent that the It is this Department’s responsibility with this program’s purpose and the labor certification process require only a to judge how and under what statute’s plain language to require that single labor market test. circumstances a labor market the employer file a new application With respect to the statutory determination should be made, and reflecting the new recruitment requirement that U.S. workers be what constitutes the employer’s actual undertaken. unavailable, one commenter stated that minimum requirements for performance The Medellin decision—A number of the identity of the alien is not relevant of the job. It is appropriate and commenters cited the decision in to the labor market test, as long as he or consistent with the broader statutory Medellin v. Bustos, 854 F.2d 795 (5th she qualified for the job opportunity and programmatic intent to apply these Cir. 1988) in support of the argument when the labor certification application requirements any time a position that is that the Department lacks authority to was filed. With respect to the the subject of a labor certification prohibit substitution. The commenters requirement of no adverse impact, the application is or becomes vacant, argue that in Medellin, the Fifth Circuit commenter stated that the alien’s regardless of whether the application held that the Department’s identity is also not relevant as long as covering it was previously in process administrative decision (based on the qualified alien is offered the and for how long. The labor market operational guidance to program staff) to appropriate wages and working changes rapidly, and it is consistent revoke a permanent labor certification conditions. The commenter raised with the Department’s obligation to based on the employer’s substitution of concern that this rule would refocus protect the jobs, wages and working another alien in place of the named labor certification from the job conditions of U.S. workers to require alien more than six months after the opportunity to the identity of the that there be another labor market test certification was granted was not in sponsored alien, and would do so when the job opportunity effectively accordance with applicable law. The without statutory change, evidence of changes through the unavailability of commenters further argued that limiting fraud, or analysis of the increased costs the original alien worker. a labor certification to ‘‘the alien for

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27909

whom the certification was granted’’ ran Department determines there is no able, (USCIS) at the Department of Homeland contrary to both the INA provisions willing, and qualified domestic worker Security. Pursuant to that 1996 MOU, (now at INA section 212(a)(5)) stating available to fill the position for which when substitution is requested, DHS the Secretary of Labor’s authority to the foreign worker’s admission is requires employers to submit a new determine worker availability and sought. Judicial interpretation of the (employer-completed but not processed) adverse impact, and the Department of word ‘‘willing’’ led to the creation of the DOL permanent labor certification Labor’s own regulations, which process that has been in place since application form with the name of the provided that a labor certification was 1978, whereby the certification approval substituted alien, along with the valid indefinitely, hence disconnecting is predicated on an employer’s approved labor certification in the name validity and any time limitations. demonstrated unsuccessful efforts to of the original alien beneficiary. See We carefully considered the Fifth recruit a domestic worker. See USCIS Adjudicator’s Field Manual, Sec. Circuit’s opinion in Medellin prior to Production Tool Corporation v. 22.2(b)(6) (Sept. 12, 2006). This Final the issuance of the NPRM and Employment and Training Rule alters the current practice by concluded that the dictum relied upon Administration, 688 F. 2d 1161 (7th Cir. providing that labor certifications, once by commenters in the decision was not 1982). The position that the job approved, are valid only for the alien so compelling as to overcome the strong opportunity for which certification is named in the original application and argument, based on the Department’s being sought must be a job that a that substitution of alien names on the authority and experience, that supports domestic worker can actually fill has certification is prohibited. DOL and the elimination of substitution. We have been affirmed by two appellate courts DHS have agreed that DOL will rescind reviewed that matter again as a result of subsequent to the Medellin decision. the delegation of authority contained in comments and reach the same Bulk Farms v. Martin, 963 F. 2d 1286 the 1996 MOU consistent with the terms conclusion for a number of reasons. (9th Cir. 1992); Hall v. McLaughlin, 864 of this Final Rule and effective on the First, the ultimate basis for the F. 2d 868 (D.C. Cir. 1989). same date as this Final Rule. Because Medellin decision was an administrative Given these considerations, it is substitution of aliens on labor law issue not relevant to this perfectly reasonable for the Department certifications has occurred pursuant to rulemaking. Medellin involved a to require the employer to conduct a DOL authority, regulatory action by challenge to provisions in an ETA new test of the labor market, and file a DHS is not necessary to implement a Technical Assistance Guide (TAG) that new labor certification application, termination of its delegated authority permitted the substitution of an alien on every time the job opportunity becomes with respect to DOL permanent labor an approved labor certification only for vacant. The Medellin litigation simply certifications. the first six months after issuance. As did not take place in a context that the Medellin court correctly noted, the allowed the Department’s concerns Thus, following the effective date of TAG was not published using notice regarding the new test of the labor this rule, employers will face a and comment rulemaking procedures. market to be adequately addressed. consistent approach to labor Further, the six-month limitation was Relationship to DHS regulations—One certifications: Substitution of the alien inconsistent with the then regulation at commenter supported the ban on beneficiary on a permanent labor 20 CFR 656.30(a) that made labor substitution but expressed concern that certification application or on the certifications valid indefinitely. This the impact of the change may be quite resulting certification is prohibited. As rulemaking directly addresses the limited until DHS adopts corresponding reflected throughout this Final Rule, the administrative law problem identified regulations to prohibit the substitution Department has determined that this in Medellin by clarifying, after notice- of aliens. Another commenter argued prohibition on substitution is consistent and-public comment rulemaking, that a that the public should not be placed in with its statutory responsibilities and is labor certification is valid only for the the position of dealing with competing necessary to achieve important alien who was the beneficiary of the and possibly inconsistent regulations objectives. DOL is responsible for original application and only for a issued by different agencies and administering the labor certification limited time, 180 days. suggested that DOL should withdraw its process and is authorized and The discussion in the Medellin proposal until DHS signals its accountable for improvements to the decision about the relative equivalent concern. program, independent of employment- responsibilities of DOL and INS in the DOL disagrees that there is a based immigration programs overseen labor certification process is dictum and likelihood of competing or inconsistent by other Federal agencies. Therefore, clearly is not the legal grounds for the regulations between DOL and DHS. No although we have closely coordinated court’s decision. Further, the reasoning DHS regulations address or authorize with DHS, DOL OIG, DOJ, and other in that dictum is not compelling and substitution of alien beneficiaries on appropriate agencies in this rulemaking reflects an overly narrow view of the labor certifications. Rather, at present, and other fraud prevention efforts, DOL Department’s role in the immigration DHS permits substitution on permanent has determined, in light of the evidence process. Under the INA, the Department labor certifications through a delegation of fraud and the continued concerns is responsible for requiring a labor of authority from DOL. See March 7, about fraud and program integrity raised market test that is the statutory 1996 Memorandum of Understanding by many sources, and the Department’s prerequisite to the granting of a labor between the Immigration and statutory responsibility to U.S. workers, certification. Banning substitution Naturalization Service (INS) and that it is appropriate to issue this enhances protections for U.S. workers Employment and Training regulation governing the part of the by offering U.S. workers another chance Administration (signed by Louis D. employment-based immigration process when a job that was the subject of a Crocetti, Jr., Associate Commissioner, for which we are responsible. The labor certification once again becomes Examinations, and Raymond Uhalde, Department has authority to administer, available through the departure of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for enforce, and reform programs under its alien employee. Employment and Training). INS (the jurisdiction, including to regulate the Section 212(a)(5) of the INA makes a portion of that agency that provided meaning and nature of a permanent foreign worker inadmissible unless, as immigration benefits) later became U.S. labor certification issued under 20 CFR one condition precedent, the Citizenship and Immigration Services part 656. Nothing in this Final Rule in

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27910 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

any fashion interferes with DHS’ ‘‘black market’’ in labor certifications, and shared by other Federal agencies. authority or its ability to address fraud and the significant number of The Department disagrees that issues through a rulemaking process of prosecutions for fraudulent activity eliminating substitution contributes its own. related to the program, we conclude the only a ‘‘minor’’ achievement to Entitlement to substitution—Many benefits to elimination outweigh the addressing the realm of abuses over commenters asserted that since the potential disadvantages. As stated which the Department has control. The practice of substitution has been previously, the Department will fraud cases prosecuted even within the permitted by DOL for several decades, continue to work with other Federal recent past indicate a significant the statute and regulations provide agencies with an interest in the number of instances where substitution entitlement to substitution. One employment-based immigration system played a role in fraudulent activity in commenter asserted that the to explore, under appropriate obtaining an immigrant benefit. See, Department, under its current circumstances, potential alternatives to e.g., U.S. v. Yum (E.D. Va. 2006); U.S. regulations at 20 CFR 656.30(c)(2), the current practice. v. Mandalapa, No. 205–NJ–03117–PS effectively provides that the labor (D.N.J. 2006). certification application can be valid for 2. Evidence of Fraud The Department continues to believe, any qualified worker, which the Several commenters mentioned that based on the activity in these and other commenter interpreted to include a the Department has not provided cases, that fraudulent substitution is a substituted worker. 20 CFR 656.30(c)(2). evidence of or statistics on widespread core contributor to the marketability of Another commenter opined that the labor certification fraud or abuse and labor certifications because it is only if absence of statutory entitlement to needs to consider the benefits of one can substitute that one can benefit substitution is irrelevant to the clear substitution against relatively few from a certified application naming value of substitution, which in its view abuses. One commenter opined that another individual. This marketability far outweighs the perceived or potential elimination is appropriate only when a results in the use of labor certifications benefits from reducing incentives for policy is commonly or largely misused. for fraudulent purposes—by aliens and fraud. It stated the burden is on the employers with no intent to have a The Department disagrees with these Department to show the connection legitimate employment relationship. comments. While substitution has been between fraud and substitution, and to We agree there are numerous sources a long-standing practice at the establish that its elimination will not of fraud in employment-based Department and by delegation to DHS, impede legitimate business practices. immigration programs government- the statutory framework to allow the Some commenters questioned the wide, and individuals intent on permanent admission of foreign effectiveness of eliminating substitution; committing fraud and abusing the nationals to perform work was they were concerned the rule does not system may still find a way to do so. deliberately protective of U.S. workers target the most common sources of However, the existence of other types of and contains nothing approaching an abuse or deter persons with intent to fraud, separate from that generated by entitlement to substitution. It is defraud. One commenter suggested that the practice of substitution, does not consistent with the statute’s persons intending to engage in these obviate the need to address the presumption of alien inadmissibility abuses will find the substitution documented fraud related to alien that admissibility must be demonstrated prohibition does not provide a substitution. As described earlier, the by each employer for each alien and that significant obstacle to their endeavors. It Department has instituted specific the statute does not provide for stated such persons will remain free to checks and balances in the PERM substitution of individual aliens on file fraudulent applications naming the process to address and prevent the filing labor certifications or applications. This intended beneficiary and that of applications without the employer’s regulatory action is also consistent with substitution elimination will only knowledge. For example, the National the Congressional intent to grant the succeed in moving the initiation of the Processing Centers contact the employer Secretary of Labor broad discretion in fraudulent transaction with the foreign directly to confirm it is aware of the implementation of the permanent labor national back to a point in time before application and is sponsoring the alien, certification program. Nor is it the filing of the application. The and the ETA Form 9089 requires surprising that the practice of commenter asserted it is highly distinct contact information for the substitution has not been authorized or questionable whether such a minor employer and the attorney or agent addressed in DOL’s regulations. achievement justifies the harm done to filing the application. The substitution Substitution has been permitted simply legitimate employers by the prohibition prohibition enhances and supplements as a procedural accommodation to of substitution. Some commenters existing anti-fraud and program employer-applicants. The Department claimed the substitution prohibition integrity measures. recognizes that this accommodation has will do little to eliminate the filing of Alternatives to a regulatory ban on had a distinct benefit to employers and applications without the knowledge of substitution, including limiting or applicants in allowing them to retain an the employer, and the filing of tailoring the option to substitute—One earlier priority date and apply the applications by employers who are paid commenter asserted the elimination of results of a completed labor market test. to engage in a fraudulent scheme and substitution in no way facilitates the However, as discussed later in this who have no intention of filling the job identification of fraudulent labor Preamble, the equities do not support opportunity described in the certification applications, and this rule retention of the earlier priority date. application. Citing U.S. v. Kooritzky, instead takes a ‘‘shotgun’’ approach at Accordingly, in light of the evidence No. 02–502–A (E.D. Va. 2003), they the expense of legitimate program users. that substitution is an important observed those who are determined to The comment stated the goal of reduced contributor to fraud in the labor commit fraud will find a way to commit fraud is better achieved by heightened certification program and of DOL’s fraud. enforcement measures, which it states statutory interest in protecting U.S. The NPRM detailed the reasons for the Department has already put in place workers by reestablishing worker our proposal to eliminate the practice of in the PERM program. The commenter unavailability whenever a position once substitution. Our experience with the also pointed to traditional law again becomes vacant, the demonstrated failures of this practice is longstanding enforcement measures, like the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27911

discernment of patterns in groups of redress unlawful conduct. By removing For example, one commenter stated it applications filed by a given employer the opportunity to engage in the has 1,100 pending, unadjudicated labor or attorney, to ferret out fraud and fraudulent activity, this rule permits certification applications and that, in abuse. One commenter argued existing existing investigative and prosecutorial many cases, because of the multi-year regulations provide a sufficient basis to resources to be better focused, and frees adjudication times for these prosecute employers, employees, and resources across government agencies applications, the original alien attorneys alike who engage in for other pressing needs. beneficiary has already moved on to a fraudulent activity associated with the We have no programmatic evidence new position and the employee permanent labor certification process. that applications filed under section currently in the position has become the Others also suggested there is no need 245(i) are particular sources of fraud. In new intended beneficiary of the to ban substitution because of the addition, this suggested alternative application. Another commenter additional provisions prohibiting the would result in a one-time solution, referred to over 1,000 Reduction-in- sale, barter, or purchase of labor since the INA section 245(i) cases have Recruitment applications pending at the certifications at § 656.12; the safeguards already been filed and are being Department’s Backlog Processing already in place at the Backlog processed in the Department’s Backlog Centers, and stated about half of all of Processing Centers to confirm the bona Processing Centers. Further, such a its PERM applications still remain fide nature of applications; and the policy would establish unequal rules for pending for up to five months from date PERM program’s strict employer employers based upon the unsupported of submission. Both commenters registration requirements. Another assumption that applications filed suggested the Department should commenter stated it is concerned about under section 245(i) are the only ones in continue its efforts to eliminate the the elimination of substitution in small which substitution fraud occurs. Labor backlog and to speed up the PERM town or rural areas where employers certifications issued for 245(i) cases are process prior to considering changes to have great difficulty finding qualified indistinguishable from others and the practice of substitution. engineers, and requested the require the same steps of employers; The Department disagrees. The Department relax its requirements for absent a strong rationale, they should agency operating conditions under rural or small town situations. not be subject to different conditions or which alien substitution was initially One commenter suggested that in limitations than the limitations that permitted have noticeably changed. The order to limit occurrences of fraud, DOL attach to other labor certifications. Department acknowledged in the should limit the prohibition on We also do not agree that exceptions preamble of the proposed rule that the substitutions to filings made under for large corporations or for rural areas strongest historical argument in support section 245(i) of the INA. As an are warranted. Exceptions for certain of substitution has been the length of alternative, the commenter suggested categories of employers, as suggested by time it once took to obtain a permanent the establishment of an exception to the commenters, do not further the labor certification. 71 FR at 7656, 7659 rule for large corporations. The Department’s obligation to ensure a (February 13, 2006). However, the commenter also suggested the sufficient test of the labor market for the Department also noted the streamlined Department could establish appropriate admission of each alien each time a job process introduced by the PERM criteria to allow employers who, for opportunity opens. We also have regulation has significantly reduced the example, have a demonstrated record of determined that it is not wise to labor certification processing time for filing appropriate labor certification establish a list of pre-approved applications filed under the new applications to use substitutions. employers, in part because the types of system. Since the PERM program began The Department disagrees with these fraud we are targeting by this Final Rule accepting applications on March 28, comments. The heightened enforcement are in some cases committed by 2005, 68 percent of the certified measures in the PERM program are attorneys and agents without the applications have been processed in less designed to catch fraud ‘‘in process’’ knowledge of the employer named on than 60 days. And in FY 2006 alone, and do not address fraudulent activity the application. approximately 75 percent of the that transpires thereafter, as the new 3. Change in Conditions That Originally certified applications were approved in substitution policy will. Further, the Warranted Allowance of the Practice 60 days or less. In addition, the PERM prohibition on substitution is not system will continue to improve as we designed as a fraud detection Various organizations provided gather baseline information from which mechanism, but rather as one of several comments concerning current to implement process improvements. In protective measures to altogether processing times and the Department’s other words, we expect applications to prevent fraud related to this activity by remaining backlog of permanent labor be adjudicated at least as quickly in the preventing the commodification of labor certification applications in relation to future as the system builds upon its certifications. The prohibition will be the proposed ban on substitution. These knowledge base. more effective because it will cover commenters generally took issue with With respect to the pending applications filed under 20 CFR part the Department’s premise that applications at our Backlog Processing 656 in effect before and after March 28, substitutions are no longer needed to Centers, we have significantly reduced 2005. Further, while we agree that other accommodate application processing the number of backlogged applications fraud prevention and detection methods delays. Some commenters questioned from an estimated 365,000 to less than may be available, the effectiveness of the premise based on the number of half that number. This effort places us those other methods does not remove applications pending at the on target to meet our goal of eliminating the need for additional, targeted Department’s Backlog Processing the backlog by September 30, 2007. techniques like those instituted in this Centers and experiences to date with Thus, the argument in support of Final Rule. For example, we are well applications filed under the PERM allowing substitutions to continue aware of other laws, such as those system. They stated even if the Backlog because of long processing delays has governing perjury, that support Processing Centers meet what appears to been appropriately addressed by both detection and prosecution of fraud. be an unrealistic backlog elimination the new, streamlined PERM process and However, such statutes are not always goal, the premise is quite obviously the large reduction in backlogged sufficient to prevent, deter and/or false. applications. In light of these changes,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27912 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

we believe it is imprudent to wait to promulgate retroactive regulations. planned to use an application for a adopt this rule, as some commenters Several commenters referenced Health previous employee for a current suggest, until all backlogs are Ins. Assn. of America, Inc. v. Shalala, 23 employee. completely eliminated, thus giving F.3d 412, 423 (D.C. Cir. 1994) for the One commenter argued that due those who wish to fraudulently use proposition that, under the APA, rules process considerations of fair notice, substitutions additional time to do so. may only have future effect. The court reasonable reliance, and settled cited Justice Scalia’s concurrence in 4. Extending Regulation to Pending expectations, affirmed in Immigration Bowen v. Georgetown Univ. Hosp., 488 Applications for Permanent Labor and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr, U.S. 204, 216–23 (1988), which Certification and to Approved 533 U.S. 289 (2001), should compel the interpreted the APA to mean that a rule Certifications Department to strip from the rule any is a statement that has legal provision applying the ban on The Department received a number of consequences only for the future and substitution retroactively. This comments opposing the application of found that a rule that alters a future commenter asserted that, based on that the substitution ban to applications filed regulation in a manner that makes case law, the 1996 Memorandum of under 20 CFR part 656 in effect either worthless substantial past investment Understanding between the Department before March 28, 2005, or on or after incurred in reliance upon the prior rule and the Immigration and Naturalization March 28, 2005, and to certifications may for that reason be found ‘‘arbitrary’’ Service delegating to INS responsibility already granted. These commenters or ‘‘capricious.’’ One commenter for substituting a named beneficiary on urged the prohibition on substitution asserted the proposed provisions a labor certification, and longstanding should be limited to only those eliminating substitution would be agency practice, the Labor Department applications filed under the current illegal retroactive rulemaking because may not now retroactively divest USCIS streamlined regulation and should not employers have filed applications with and employers with pending labor encompass any applications filed under the expectation of substitution as a certification applications of the legal the 20 CFR part 656 in effect before potentially significant benefit should right to engage in the practice of March 28, 2005. the original beneficiary drop out, and substituting alien beneficiaries. This Commenters stated employers and this benefit is a form of a property right. employees across the country have commenter further stated that if a case One commenter argued the has not yet been adjudicated, it is made critical hiring and transfer application of the rule prohibiting decisions in reliance on the availability difficult to imagine any harm resulting substitution to backlogged applications from a legitimate employer substituting of substitution. They stated that by under the pre-PERM regulation was applying the rule change to all a new beneficiary on the pending retroactive in nature and could be read application. substitutions except those approved by as an attempt to force the time and Other commenters also pointed out the effective date of the Final Rule, the expense of the new application under the hardship that the ban on Department would be setting itself up the PERM process on employers who substitution would cause to certain for further challenges and pressures. already have an investment in The commenters cited Bowen v. applications in the backlog. The aliens. They stated prohibiting Georgetown Univ. Hospital, 488 U.S. commenter said this would amount to a substitution on applications pending 204 (1988), asserting it supported their taking of a business investment without prior to the effective date of the rule will contention that a Federal agency lacks just compensation. Similarly, another render countless beneficiaries who are the power to issue retroactive rules commenter asserted the elimination of subject to the American absent a statutory grant of authority. substitution constitutes a ‘‘taking Competitiveness in the Twenty-First They contended it is unfair, and most without compensation’’ of an Century Act (AC21), Public Law 106– likely unlawful, for the Department to employer’s significant investment in the 313 (October 17, 2000), stranded and change the rules midstream, and that preparation and filing of pending and unable to extend their current stays, any change in the rules governing approved labor certification since such extensions depend on the substitution should only be prospective applications. The commenter stated the existence of either a permanent labor in effect. prevention of an unknown and possibly certification application that has been Others commented that the insignificant level of fraud and abuse pending for 365 days or more or a Department’s proposed regulation does not justify this devaluation of a pending Form I–140 petition. constitutes a retroactive ban that raises company’s investment. The commenter As an alternative to the proposal, one legal questions. Some stated the went on to observe that eliminating commenter recommended that proposed rule improperly seeks to substitution would disproportionately substitution remain available for all retroactively invalidate approved labor impact large high-tech employers, cases currently pending at a Backlog certification applications, when such which file large numbers of Processing Center. The commenter also approval was obtained under the applications. Finally, this commenter recommended substitution remain current rule that such certifications are stated years of processing delays have available for all cases as long as the ‘‘valid indefinitely.’’ Others stated the spurred employers to build substitution employer can demonstrate it has proposed application is contrary to the into a business practice as part of their engaged in some additional recruitment prohibition on retroactive agency rules respective programs. and can document there are no qualified as found in the Administrative In a similar vein, other commenters U.S. workers available. One commenter Procedure Act (APA). They noted that, stated the prohibition of substitution is recommended the substituted under the APA, a rule is defined as the detrimental to parties who have relied beneficiary should be assigned the whole or part of an ‘‘agency statement on the current practice. Estoppel, they priority date of the date of substitution of general or particular applicability and said, warrants that a person who has or, in the event substitution is future [emphasis added] effect designed rightfully relied on a practice should get prohibited, that the prohibition start to implement, interpret, or prescribe law the benefit of that reliance. Employers with the effective date of the rule, and or policy.’’ Commenters stated the and beneficiaries have depended on the not be applied retroactively. One Department would need specific ability to substitute and have foregone commenter suggested a grace period authority from the Congress to filing new applications because they prior to the ban becoming effective.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27913

We have carefully reviewed these import the alien beneficiary of the the statute makes clear that an employer comments and find they do not present certification. That remains unchanged has no absolute right to a labor sufficient grounds to overcome the by this rule. certification, and certainly no property rationale reflected in the NPRM to The Department has provided ample interest in one. Employers, particularly prohibit the practice of substitution on notice of its intention to eliminate regular users of the system, have known all labor certifications issued after the substitution, sufficient for employers about the Department’s intent to end the effective date of this Final Rule. and their representatives to reduce or practice of substitution since the Assertions that the prospective ban on eliminate continued reliance on the publication of the PERM regulations in substitution of aliens is, instead, a practice. As early as 1991, we indicated 2004. No employer could after that date retrospective ban are misplaced. Past our intention to discontinue the have had any reasonable expectation substitution requests that already have practice. 59 FR at 54920, 54925–54926 that the practice would be indefinitely been approved are unaffected by this (Oct. 23, 1991). When the PERM Final available. Several commenters appear to rule. Current substitution requests Rule was published in 2004, its argue that once they have applied for or pending on the effective date of this rule preamble discussed at some length secured a labor certification for a will continue to be processed. Even questions relating to the practice of particular alien in a particular job, they though substitution will not be substitution, the Department’s findings have a right to bring in any alien they permitted with respect to labor of an emerging market for fraudulent choose for that job. The statutory certifications granted prior to this rule’s sale of labor certifications, and DOL’s scheme, with its focus on individual effective date and may upset intent to examine the practice and aliens and presumption of each alien’s expectations based on part 656 as it ‘‘explor[e] in the near future regulatory inadmissibility, belies that argument. previously read, that does not make the solutions to address this issue.’’ 69 FR Further, it is appropriate to apply the ban retrospective. at 77363 (Dec. 27, 2004). In the NPRM prohibition on substitution to the cases The question of whether a rulemaking to this Final Rule, the Department again in our Backlog Processing Centers to activity has a ‘‘retroactive’’ impact that announced its intent to eliminate ensure these needed fraud protections renders that rule invalid is more substitution. Thus, we are confident are applied throughout all permanent complex than the commenters suggest. public notice and comment has been labor certification cases, regardless of The United States Supreme Court has fair, open, and consistent with the where they reside in terms of ruled that ‘‘[a] statute does not operate Administrative Procedure Act. Any processing. Accordingly, the ‘retroactively’ merely because it is employer who has an application Department has determined that, applied in case arising from conduct pending but who is either unable or following the effective date of this Final antedating the statute’s enactment.’’ unwilling to continue to sponsor the Rule, the elimination of alien Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. original alien has had more than substitution will apply to all permanent 244, 269 (1994). The Court went on to sufficient opportunity to identify a new labor certification applications pending note that determining whether a statute alien and take advantage of the past with the Department and to all is improperly retroactive requires the procedures. permanent labor certifications issued application of ‘‘familiar considerations We have determined that employers under the current or prior regulation. of fair notice, reasonable reliance, and cannot demonstrate they reasonably This Final Rule does not nullify settled expectations. * * *’’ Id. at 270. relied on the prior practice. In filing an substitutions already made or in Application of the Landgraf principles application for permanent labor progress, whether by the Department or led the Court to reject a retroactivity certification, an employer is expressing DHS, but rather prohibits substitutions challenge to the application of the its intent to and expectation that it will in the future, substitutions which Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to hire the alien named on that document employers presumably do not anticipate wrongdoing that occurred prior to that if the application is approved. An and are not planned and, hence, to law’s enactment. Republic of Austria v. employer’s hypothetical need to which there is no right or reasonable Altman, 541 U.S. 677 (2004). These substitute, should the first alien no expectation. No labor certification may same principles recently led an en banc longer be available, is not tantamount to be the subject of a substitution request Sixth Circuit to uphold the application detrimental reliance on an ability to do submitted on or after the effective date of a change in Social Security so. Commenters offered no explanation of this rule. Administration disability regulations to of how an employer’s initial filing can This rule places no additional pending cases. Combs v. Commissioner be made in reliance on a future ability responsibilities on recipients of labor of Social Security, 459 F.3d 640 (6th Cir. to´substitute. The risk any employer certifications approved prior to the 2006). The Sixth Circuit followed the sponsoring an alien takes is that the effective date. At the time of same approach in finding that there was alien will not remain an employee certification a benefit was granted; none no impermissible retroactive effect in through the entire permanent residence was waived. The required wage rate applying certain amendments to the process, or at the end of that process, remains unchanged for employers. No INA relating to the discretionary and the option of simply inserting further recruitment for U.S. workers is removal of relatives to aliens in the U.S. another alien has never been an required of the employers under who sought to invoke the prior entitlement. The INA’s rule of approved labor certifications. Once the procedure. Patel v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d inadmissibility of immigrant workers certification is filed with DHS in 685 (6th Cir. 2005). After applying these without a test of the labor market for support of a visa petition, and if the principles to the current rulemaking, the available U.S. workers, the statute’s employer and alien comply with all Department has determined its proposal requirement that admissibility be other applicable provisions of the is appropriate. determined for each alien individually, immigration laws, the alien beneficiary An application for permanent alien and the statute’s overall protection of will be admitted as a permanent labor certification is filed at DOL with employment rights of U.S. workers, each resident. the employer-applicant’s expectation further supports the Department’s All that is changed is that the that it will satisfy the exclusionary position. employer now will be encouraged to provision in 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A), so With respect to the claim of employer retain its original alien beneficiary as to support a petition to DHS to expectations of an option to substitute, (perhaps to that alien’s benefit) or will

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27914 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

have to file a new application on behalf nonimmigrant H–1B visa holders in These commenters’ analysis of a new alien. An employer seeking to their sixth year of H–1B status who are incorrectly pairs portability with the substitute, in fact, always has had to named on permanent labor certification extension beyond the six-year H–1B engage in a limited test of the labor applications that have been pending for employment limit allowed by section market. When the original alien 365 days or more qualify—upon petition 106(a) of AC21. The Department finds beneficiary no longer is available for the to USCIS—for extension of their H–1B that analysis flawed. The INA dictates job opportunity, the employer has had status in one-year increments. AC21, that after six years, H–1B status must to recruit the substitute alien, either section 106(a). Currently, USCIS allows terminate. The specific exceptions to domestically among nonimmigrants, or visa holders in H–1B status who are that termination are linked by AC21 to abroad to import a new foreign worker. substituted into labor certification harm resulting from permanent This rule would make that labor market applications by the end of their fifth residence backlogs, including backlogs test include not just foreign workers, but year to extend their nonimmigrant in the permanent labor certification also U.S. workers, at prevailing wages status beyond the normal six-year program. The extension beyond six and working conditions. maximum. Commenters argued H–1B years is intended by the statute to The standards in 8 U.S.C. visa holders who are unable either to benefit an H–1B worker when 365 days 1182(a)(5)(A) ‘‘are quite broad. The have a permanent labor certification or more have elapsed since the filing of Secretary must decide whether there are application filed on their behalf or to be a permanent labor certification sufficient U.S. workers who are ‘able, substituted into an existing application application ‘‘on the alien’s behalf (if willing, qualified, and available,’ and by that time will lose the opportunity such certification is required for the whether the alien’s employment would for additional extensions of H–1B status. alien to obtain status under such [INA] ‘adversely affect the wages and working The Department understands section 203(b)) * * *.’’ Public Law 106– conditions’ of these workers. The statute concerns that, as a result of this rule, H– 313 section 106(a)(1). Clearly, the alien leaves to the Department a broad area 1B nonimmigrant aliens who, after five intended to be helped by this provision for the exercise of its discretion in years of employment in the United is the alien who may have been issuing labor certificates.’’ Industrial States, are not yet the beneficiary of a prejudiced by the backlog in processing Holographics, Inc. v. Donovan, 722 F.2d permanent labor certification labor certification applications under 1362, 1365–1366 (7th Cir 1983). In the application might not be permitted by DOL’s pre-PERM regulations. An H–1B exercise of her discretion to issue labor USCIS to further extend their H–1B worker seeking substitution may have certifications, the Secretary is within the status prior to obtaining U.S. permanent benefited by working in the U.S. for six extensive bounds created by the INA. Id. resident status. However, the or more years, but has not necessarily If the employer files a new application, Department finds that continuing been affected by the backlog at all. It is it will be considered fairly and on its substitution as an accommodation to not inconsistent with the statutory own merits. If approved, the new labor this small group of individuals, a group intent of AC21 to limit the ability of that certification will be for a more current whose numbers and participation in the alien to continue his or her wage rate and subject to a more current program are both speculative, is nonimmigrant status to a labor labor market test, to the benefit of the disproportionate to the adverse certification filed on his or her behalf new alien and/or U.S. workers similarly consequences of continuing the rather than on someone else’s behalf. employed. This is within the intent of substitution practice which creates both The Department recognizes that those the statute, and is an appropriate an incentive and opportunity for fraud, aliens who fall outside the five-year preventative measure given the and which deprives U.S. workers of job mark will potentially be unable to deleterious effect caused by substitution opportunities. extend beyond the sixth year of H–1B in the past. Given the Department’s Some commenters have suggested that status and otherwise might have been expressed concerns about fraud in the since AC21 increased the portability of able to do so through substitution. This labor certification process, particularly H–1B visas, allowing such small group of affected individuals, with respect to substitution, and the nonimmigrants to change employers, however, does not present sufficient emerging ‘‘black market’’ in status as a substitution by these foreign workers equities to persuade the Department to beneficiary of a labor certification, DOL should continue to be allowed. Public carve out an exception to the sees a compelling need to protect the Law 106–313, sec. 105. The Department prohibition on substitution, since program’s integrity regardless of the sees no reason, as a general matter, to employers in such situations have had processing status of a certification on permit one type of nonimmigrant to upwards of five years in which to the effective date of the final rule. The continue benefiting from the practice of initiate permanent resident status on Department’s duty also to protect job substitution over other nonimmigrants. their behalf. opportunities for U.S. workers, and the The portability provision seeks to Further, extension of an alien’s welfare of both U.S. and foreign increase flexibility for a specific group nonimmigrant visa status is the workers, makes it necessary to end the of nonimmigrants—H–1B aliens—under province of USCIS, not the Department process of substitution after the effective a specific set of circumstances; it of Labor. The Department’s mandate is date. See section I.D of this preamble, governs transfers between positions not to preserve the opportunity or above. which aliens fill on a temporary basis, further the potential opportunity in all Effect on aliens who are H–1Bs and and is triggered by the filing of a new circumstances for an employer to hire not entitled to benefit from substitution LCA and petition. It does not address, an immigrant worker, nor is it a process after the fifth year—The Department and does not extend to, substitution, driven by the interests of any or all also received comments regarding the which is a function of the permanent aliens who may wish to enter the U.S. effect of the substitution ban on residence process. The statutory through employment-based nonimmigrant aliens on whose behalf permission to move from one employer immigration. The Department’s viable labor certifications have not been to another as a procedural mandate, rather, is to design and filed by the end of their fifth year in H– accommodation does not in turn implement a secure framework within 1B status, and specifically on these mandate increased flexibility through which an employer with legitimate aliens’ ability to adjust their status to substitution in the permanent residence business needs may determine the that of immigrants. Under current law, process. availability of U.S. workers and, if such

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27915

workers are not found, bring in a foreign not unreasonable or inconsistent with substituted in, outweigh the harm to an worker. Moreover, because the Final the INA to require recruitment every individual employer and alien from the Rule prohibits only substitutions which time an employer seeks to bring in a loss of a priority date on a given have not yet been made, aliens who new foreign worker. Recruitment application. In addition, the reasoning have not otherwise begun the activities and the costs associated with that the employer suffers a hardship permanent residence process before the them are equally as appropriate for the from the inability to apply an earlier end of the fifth year of H–1B status would-be substituted foreign worker as priority date to a subsequent application presumably do not anticipate and they were for the originally named rests on an unsupported assumption therefore cannot claim a reasonable alien. Accordingly, while we are that another test of the labor market expectation of benefiting from sensitive to employers’ concerns, we would not yield a qualified and willing substitution. must nevertheless conclude that U.S. worker. We do not agree with this elimination of the current substitution reasoning and find it contrary to our 5. Effect of the Elimination of practice is amply justified statutory responsibility to protect U.S. Substitution on Employers notwithstanding. workers, as well as virtually impossible The Department received many In addition, the Department fully to legitimately accommodate in the comments addressing the perceived recognizes that substitution has become administration of the permanent labor hardships employers would suffer if a tool to address visa retrogression. certification program. substitution were prohibited. However, the Department is not Added cost and burden—Employers convinced it should retain a policy on B. Prohibition of Modifications to were concerned about loss of their substitution that gives rise to significant Applications investment in the first application; the fraud and may adversely affect U.S. The proposed rule sought to clarify loss of an important employee retention workers as a means to cope with the procedures for modifying applications and recruitment tool; added cost and visa cap issue, or to support any filed under the new permanent labor burden from a new application, unintended cost savings for employers certification regulation and, in including advertising and recruiting that may have resulted from this particular, to prohibit modifications to costs, staff time, legal fees; inherent practice. applications once filed with the delays to getting a new worker in place, Loss of priority date—Many Department. We received numerous and potential processing delays with the commenters expressed concern over the comments raising concern over this new Department or other agencies; loss of the visa priority date when a new provision. After careful consideration of additional costs from other parts of the application is required to hire a new these comments and for the reasons set petitioning and visa application process; alien. Our program experience indicates forth below, this Final Rule codifies the loss of place in the queue given visa that the priority date plays a defining new provision at § 656.11(b) with slight retrogression; and retardation of role in the commoditization of labor changes from the NPRM, clarifying that business growth and loss of certifications; substitution enhances the requests for modifications to an competitiveness from potential delays labor certification’s marketability. application submitted under the PERM in getting products to market. Some Commoditization stems from the ability regulation will not be accepted where pointed to the potential negative impact to substitute aliens on labor the application was filed after this Final on special groups, such as high-tech certifications, which are valid Rule’s effective date. In considering how employers, nonprofits, or businesses indefinitely, while maintaining the to implement the ‘‘no modification’’ located in rural areas. One commenter priority date of the original filing. provision, while ensuring due process stated that each set of costs should not Indeed, the priority date is often a prime to applicants for labor certification, we be viewed in isolation, but rather motivator for the marketability and have determined that it is advisable to multiplied by the number of added value of labor certifications. It is revise the language of § 656.24(g) to applications for each employer, and the also not necessarily true that the more precisely define what large number of employers that must availability of substitution is beneficial documentation may be submitted with a respond to labor mobility and to aliens as a class. As stated in the request for reconsideration. unforeseen business changes. NPRM, under the substitution process Codifying the ‘‘no amendments’’ Despite a lack of consistent currently in place, the new alien requirement through notice and information from commenters on the beneficiary is inserted into an in-process comment—As explained in the NPRM, additional costs associated with new application or certification initially filed the clarification made by this Final Rule filings, the Department is aware of and for a different alien and with a filing is consistent with the streamlined labor sensitive to the time and expense date that is often years earlier than the certification procedures governed by the employers absorb to recruit and retain a substituted alien would have received if regulation that went into effect March qualified workforce. However, the costs named in a newly filed application. 28, 2005. Nothing in the regulation associated with the employment-based We are aware of concerns that these contemplates permitting employers to immigration process, including the costs practices make substitution make changes to applications after incurred by employers requesting fundamentally unfair to other aliens filing. That practice was one the permanent labor certification, have been (and their petitioning employers) Department specifically sought to an accepted part of the labor seeking to immigrate to the U.S. who change through the Final Rule certification process for almost 30 years remain below the substituted worker in implementing the re-engineered PERM and are not unanticipated by the statute. the visa priority date queue, as well as program. The re-engineered program is The INA presumes inadmissibility of to U.S. workers. See 71 FR 7656 (Feb. designed to streamline the process, and each alien, and requires the 13, 2006) and 56 FR 54920 (Oct. 23, an open amendment process that either presumption be overcome for each 1991). The need for a new labor market freely allows changes on applications or foreign worker through, in part, the test and the Department’s interest in results in continual back and forth Secretary of Labor’s determination. A removing aspects of the current process exchange between the employer and the demonstration of worker unavailability creating incentives for fraud, combined Department regarding amendment is inherent to the process of filing a with the inequity to other aliens waiting requests is inconsistent with that goal. labor certification application, and it is in the visa queue who have not been Further, the re-engineered certification

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27916 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

process has eliminated the need for anything available previously to online may nonetheless be appropriate to changes. users, and it is continuing to reduce the consider information not previously in The Department has instituted type of automated denials that gave rise the Certifying Officer’s (CO’s) physical screening and guideposts for electronic to HealthAmerica. possession in order to provide permanent labor certification The majority of form preparation appropriate evaluation of the employer’s applications. The online application errors that have occurred to date will request for reconsideration. The system, especially in light of the now generate an automated prompt, Department has determined an technological enhancements described warning the filer that it may have approach that allows for submission below, allows the user to proofread, entered erroneous information that may with a motion to reconsider of revise, and save the application prior to cause a denial of the application. As documentation in existence at the time submission, and the Department expects described above, similar manual of filing and held by an employer as part users will do so. ETA has received mechanisms are in place to detect and of its compliance responsibilities under frequent, positive feedback from correct errors on mailed applications. the PERM recordkeeping requirements stakeholders on what they have found to The Department reiterates, however, the is appropriate. Accordingly, we have be the time and cost-saving nature of fundamental responsibility to submit an adopted a modified approach to that this review. application which does not contain proposed in the NPRM, continuing to Moreover, in signing the application, typographical or similar errors remains prohibit application modifications but the employer declares under penalty of with program users. recognizing the appropriateness of an perjury that it has read and reviewed the Under the system upgrades now in opportunity to present and consider application and the submitted place, applications containing errors in evidence that was generated to comply information is true and accurate to the contravention of system alerts are with record retention requirements of best of its knowledge. In the event of an denied. Consistent with the ‘‘no the PERM program. inadvertent error or any other need to modifications’’ policy codified by this Accordingly, the Department is refile, an employer can withdraw an rule and the evidentiary parameters of including as part of this Final Rule a application, make the corrections and the revised § 656.24(g) described below, revised § 656.24(g) setting the new file again immediately. Similarly, if an requests for reconsideration based on standard for applications filed on or employer receives a denial under the such denials will not be granted, where after the effective date of this Final Rule. new system, it can choose to correct the an application filed after this rule’s The new § 656.24(g) describes the application and file again immediately effective date is at issue. Requests for evidence that can be submitted with a if it does not seek reconsideration or reconsideration based on such denials motion to reconsider and clarifies the appeal. involving applications filed prior to this interplay with the no-modification Immediate feedback on deficiencies or rule’s effective date will be reviewed on provision of § 656.11(b). The revised deniability prior to submission of an a case-by-case basis; they will be placed § 656.24(g) limits evidence submitted at application—Prohibiting the in the appropriate queue and reviewed reconsideration to documentation that modification of applications will allow on a ‘‘first in, first out’’ basis and as the Department actually received from the Department to process employer workload permits. the employer in response to a request applications more quickly and support Evidence in support of requests for from the Certifying Officer to the greater uniformity and consistency in reconsideration and amendment of employer; or documentation that the their adjudication. However, as part of § 656.24(g)—We have made one change employer did not have an opportunity our continuing upgrades to PERM from the NPRM in this Final Rule based to present to the Certifying Officer, but processing capabilities, as well as in on the BALCA’s decision in that existed at the time the application response to comments on the NPRM and HealthAmerica. Among other issues, the was filed, and was maintained by the the suggestion by the BALCA in its Board addressed the meaning of the employer to support the application for decision in In the Matter of current § 656.24(g) governing requests permanent labor certification to meet HealthAmerica, No. 2006–PER–1 (July for reconsideration. That section the documentation requirements of 18, 2006), we have dramatically provides that reconsideration requests § 656.10(f). Revised § 656.24(g) also increased the nature and number of ‘‘may not include evidence not provides that the Department will not system ‘‘prompts’’ and warnings in an previously submitted.’’ The Board grant motions to reconsider where the effort to provide employers and others concluded that evidence ‘‘previously deficiency that caused denial resulted with additional opportunities for submitted’’ encompassed material in the from the applicant’s disregard of a correction prior to submission of an possession of the employer at the time system prompt or other direct application. of filing. That reasoning was the basis instruction. These changes together The Department has added system for the Board’s decision that allowed the adequately ensure that employers and capabilities in the form of ‘‘pop-up’’ edit employer to modify its application to others have sufficient opportunity to alerts to notify each applicant when a correct a mistake. To the extent the present evidence on salient points, even response to a question is technically in BALCA favored allowing the employer if denied that opportunity during the conflict with either the PERM regulation in HealthAmerica to present evidence application’s consideration, while or certain of the formal instructions for that effectively changed the response to enabling the PERM program to function completion of the form. The applicant is a question on the application, the in its intended streamlined manner. allowed to continue, but with full BALCA’s approach is inconsistent with warning of possible deniability. The the Department’s objective and the 1. Issues Raised by Public Comments system permits submission of the NPRM proposal that applications cannot Authority to limit modifications to an application, but the applicant assumes be changed or modified after Application for Permanent Employment the risk that the application will be submission. Certification—Many commenters denied based on the failure to fully However, the Department recognizes questioned the Department’s authority comply with the technical requirements that there will be situations where— to limit and prohibit an employer’s and alerts of the program. This although an employer will not be ability to modify a Form ETA 9089, electronic advisory system is much permitted to amend its response to a Application for Permanent Employment more detailed and more robust than question as it did in HealthAmerica—it Certification. We disagree. Federal

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27917

agencies have the authority, and simply to save the priority date. Thus, and does nothing to limit or undermine sometimes the necessity, to write strict the policy serves a number of purposes employer due process rights. procedural rules in order to manage not limited to fraud prevention. When filing the Application for their respective responsibilities. Need for modifications—Many Permanent Employment Certification, HealthAmerica, slip op. at 17. Our past commenters stated modifications to the employer certifies and declares practice and program experience led us applications were necessary because under penalty of perjury that it has read to make regulatory changes in the nature alleged errors made by the Department and reviewed the application, and the of the permanent labor certification in reviewing mailed-in applications led information provided therein is true and program, changes that were publicized to erroneous case denials. For example, accurate to the best of its knowledge. through extensive stakeholder outreach the Department issued denials for The Department understands that and during numerous public meetings failure to include the language that the human error occurs in limited across the country. The resulting employer would accept ‘‘any suitable circumstances, which is why we have efficiency and effectiveness measures combination of education, training, or elected to increase our system have contributed to overall program experience,’’ when, in fact, the language ‘‘prompts’’ to help avoid such errors. productivity increases and have was included in the application. These additions sufficiently address reinforced, among other factors, the Further, commenters stated other commenter concerns. Further, the critical need to discontinue what has applications have been denied because Department believes it is capable of historically been continual, unduly the Department allegedly stated the distinguishing between typographical or time-consuming communication alien did not possess the required inadvertent errors and willful false between ETA Certifying Officers and academic credentials when, in fact, he statements. employers or their representatives. or she did, and those credentials were Tailoring the ‘‘no modifications’’ The Department recognizes that the clearly noted in the application in the policy—One commenter suggested the accountability-based standard it put in appropriate place. current regulations governing PERM place in PERM was, at least for purposes Commenters suggested in the event of should permit a single opportunity to of the modifications issue, not made an inadvertent error, there are many the employer or agent to correct minor sufficiently clear in the text or preamble reasons why refiling is not usually a technical deficiencies. According to this to the original December 27, 2004 Final viable alternative, thus making commenter, applications should be Rule. The BALCA pointed out in its modifications necessary. For instance, decided based on their substantive HealthAmerica decision that a they stated that often an application merits instead of on non-material requirement for precise filing can be preparer is not aware an error has been technical errors. The Department agrees imposed with proper notice, citing made at the time the employer submits that applications should be adjudicated Glaser v. FCC, 20 F.3d 1184, 1186 (D.C. the electronic Form ETA 9089. Even if upon their respective merits. However, Cir. 1994); Salzer v. FCC, 778 F.2d 869, the mistake comes to light before the typographical or similar errors are not 875 (D.C. Cir. 1985); JEM Broadcasting Department issues a denial, it may be immaterial if they cause an application Co., Inc. v. FCC, 22 F.3d 320 (D.C. Cir. too late to re-file because the to be denied based on regulatory 1994); Florida Cellular Mobil recruitment may have become stale. requirements. The Department Communications Corp. v. FCC, 28 F.3d Further, certain post-filing, pre- encourages those who submit 191 (D.C. Cir. 1994). In these cases, the certification events, including but not applications to carefully review all D.C. Circuit found the FCC could limited to changes in corporate structure information for completeness and appropriately and legitimately write resulting in a change of employer name, accuracy and has modified the online regulations requiring certain license tax identification number, or address, application system to assist them to do applications be ‘‘letter-perfect’’ (i.e., may require the amendment of the so. Attentive filers will accrue the complete and sufficient) when application. One commenter suggested benefits of the new streamlined system, submitted because the requirement was the inability to modify inadvertent as ‘‘clean’’ applications are usually provided for in agency regulations that mistakes could have serious processed and adjudicated within 60 had been subject to notice and ramifications as such a mistake may days of filing. comment. The BALCA noted the result in an inability to refile the Many commenters suggested it is issuance of the NPRM as evidence that application, cause a denial of the highly unlikely that employers will such a ‘‘letter-perfect’’ requirement did application, or be construed as a false need more than one opportunity to not exist under the PERM regulations as statement. correct any minor technical deficiencies initially issued. This rulemaking The Department disagrees that these and the nature and number of technical satisfies public notice and comment comments require alteration of the no- errors is highly unlikely to have a objectives. modifications policy reflected in the significant detrimental impact on the Relationship to fraud—One NPRM. As outlined above, going overall efficiency of the PERM process. commenter suggested the Department is forward, electronic system prompts will Commenters suggested the new system insinuating that any request for most often alert the employer or its has, in fact, had a dramatic impact on modification is grounded in fraud. We agent to the grounds for deniability, so the processing of applications for disagree. As we have stated, the ‘‘no a filer will be able to learn prior to permanent labor certification through, amendments’’ clarification in this rule submitting the application if the system among other things, centralization and simply codifies a policy the Department would deny the application as currently implementation of new technology. assumed was part and parcel of the re- completed. Further, as always, an According to these commenters, engineered program, and which was an employer has the right to seek permitting a single opportunity to (albeit unstated) assumption of the reconsideration and beyond that, appeal amend an application to overcome a PERM Final Rule. The ‘‘no to the BALCA, when it believes a denial non-substantive technical error will modifications’’ policy furthers was unjustified, without loss of the neither require substantial Department administrative efficiency. In addition, it priority date which attached to the resources nor render the PERM system protects against certain program abuses, application. Hence, the ‘‘no ineffective or inefficient. such as the submission of a form with modifications’’ policy does not institute We disagree with the commenters’’ incomplete or inaccurate information a standard not previously envisioned, premise that permitting modifications

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27918 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

will not negatively impact the explaining the difference in treatment in program leaves no doubt that some labor processing and review of applications. the regulatory text. As proposed in the certifications are treated as commodities The processing of requests for NPRM, the ‘‘no modifications’’ policy in and sold at substantial gain by those reconsideration of denials poses a this Final Rule will apply only to the who wish to engage in the existing significant, costly resource drain on the PERM program since only the PERM secondary market. In one example from PERM case management system and regulation is amended in this Final 2005, a joint investigation with DHS’ staff. The opportunity cost and inequity Rule. In addition, this preamble Immigration and Customs Enforcement to other employers are also high, as describes more fully the process the (ICE), the Federal Bureau of resources must be transferred from Department will follow in its review of Investigation, the Department of State review of applications that do meet applications filed up to the effective OIG and the Internal Revenue Service technical requirements to those that date of the rule. This information resulted in several employers, agents may not. Moreover, as we have provides sufficient notice of the and attorneys being convicted of discussed above, the alerts and prompts expectations for employers and their numerous visa fraud schemes. See U.S. that we have built into the system will representatives regarding the treatment v. Ivanchukov et. al. (No. 04–421, E.D. provide employers the opportunity to of technical and other modifications Va. 2005); see also DOL OIG correct minor technical deficiencies going forward. Semiannual Report (October 1, 2005– before they ever submit their March 31, 2006) (available at http:// C. Prohibition on the Sale, Barter, or applications. This is a reasonable www.oig.dol.gov/public/semiannuals/ Purchase of Applications for Permanent balancing of available resources. 55.pdf). In the Ivanchukov case, labor Labor Certifications and of Approved Therefore, the Department is finalizing certifications were being sold for as Permanent Labor Certifications, and the standard noted in the NPRM of not much as $120,000.00. As a reminder of Prohibition on Related Payments allowing modifications to an how common this activity has become, application. The revisions to § 656.24(g) The proposed rule, at § 656.12, one commenter to the NPRM for this will enable employers to present prohibited the sale, barter, and purchase rulemaking provided the Department evidence in a request for of applications and approved labor with a website that advertises the sale reconsideration that will permit filers certifications, as well as other related of pre-approved labor certifications. The the opportunity, if necessary, to present payments. The Department received Department has reasonably concluded evidence outside the four corners of the numerous comments on this proposal. that there is a need to prohibit improper application. Commenters overwhelmingly opposed commerce in permanent labor Many commenters suggested it is § 656.12(b), which would prohibit certifications. reasonable to request that the employers from seeking or receiving Sale, barter or purchase—Two modification prohibition, if adopted, payment of any kind for any activity commenters indicated that prohibiting should only apply to applications filed related to obtaining a permanent labor sale, barter, and purchase was one of the after publication of the Final Rule. We certification. most effective amendments the have adopted this suggestion. The After carefully considering comments Department could promulgate to reduce changes to §§ 656.11 and 656.24 received, the Department has decided to fraud in the permanent labor contained in this rule apply only to move forward on all provisions, but in certification program, as it removes the applications filed after the effective date response to comments has clarified the economic incentive for unscrupulous of the rule; they do not impact the types of prohibited payments, as further behavior. Some commenters indicated processing of motions for described below. The prohibitions in the terms ‘‘sold,’’ ‘‘bartered,’’ and reconsideration filed with respect to this section will apply to all such ‘‘purchased’’ were impermissibly vague. applications filed prior to that date. transactions on or after the effective date Other commenters stated the proposed Concern prohibiting modifications of this Final Rule, regardless of whether ban on sale, barter, purchase, and will generate backlogs—One commenter the labor certification application related payments was overbroad and did suggested prohibiting modifications involved was filed under the prior or not take into account that both employer under proposed § 656.11(b) would be an current regulation implementing the and employee benefit when an open invitation to intractable increases permanent labor certification program. employee obtains permanent residence. in backlogged applications, rather than The Department acknowledges these 1. Improper Commerce the radical reduction in pending concerns by adding definitions of the applications and processing times The proposed rule provided, at terms sale, barter, and purchase to the contemplated by the PERM reforms. The § 656.12(a), that permanent labor definitions at § 656.3, and by specifying efficiencies created by the new system certification applications and and clarifying what constitutes the ban prompts, which are proving to be an certifications are not articles of on sale, barter, purchase, and related effective screen for program users commerce and they may not be sold, payments. A labor certification is a against system-generated denials for bartered, or purchased by individuals or certification from the Department that technical errors, as well as the ‘‘no entities. The majority of comments there are no able, willing, and qualified modifications’’ policy put in place by favored the proposal, and only a few U.S. workers available for the specific this rule, will allow us to significantly were in opposition. Some comments job opportunity stated on the employer’s reduce the pending queues of denied were ambiguous; it was not clear application. Converting this labor applications and, consequently, to whether the commenters were certification into a commodity is an process all other applications more commenting primarily on § 656.12(a), example of selling, bartering, or quickly and effectively. prohibiting commerce in labor purchasing. Distinguishing policies for backlog certification applications and Many commenters suggested that if and PERM—One commenter suggested certifications, or on § 656.12(b), which DOL wants to make selling labor the Department should clarify its prohibits several types of payments certifications illegal, it should make position on modifications under the related to labor certification such sales illegal and prosecute those new PERM streamlined system, relative applications and certifications. who break the law rather than to applications filed with the Backlog The Department’s extensive punishing everyone. We disagree that Processing Centers, by clearly experience in the administration of this the rule punishes everyone; this aspect

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27919

of the rule only impacts an individual According to the commenter, the labor certification. The Department’s or employer when there is an actual proposed rule is ambiguous with respect concern, which is shared by other sale. Further, our program experience to both of the above factual situations. Federal agencies, is that such a payment clearly indicates that not ‘‘everyone’’ The commenter requested the rule be undermines the labor certification uses the substitution accommodation or clarified to state that the prohibition process by potentially corrupting the wishes to sell labor certifications. against sale, barter or purchase of labor search for qualified U.S. workers and One commenter suggested we should certification applications and creating serious doubt as to whether the remove institutions of higher education certifications does not apply to transfers employer is offering a bona fide job from the prohibition on barter, sale and stemming from legitimate corporate opportunity and making it available for purchase, suggesting that the restructuring activities such as mergers U.S. workers. prohibition be tailored to industries acquisitions, or spin-offs. Accordingly, consistent with the where the prohibited activity has been The Department did not intend this proposed rule, the intent of this Final shown to occur. The Department’s provision to govern corporate Rule is to make it clear that employers rationale for prohibiting the sale of labor restructuring or internal corporate who submit applications for permanent certifications is based upon a broader accounting and finance practices which labor certification do so with the full policy concern than the commenter exist independently of the permanent understanding that the costs they incur implies. Any such activity is contrary to labor certification program. The for the preparation and filing of the the statutory purpose of the program. Department has determined that further application and obtaining permanent There is no basis upon which to exempt clarification on this question is not labor certification are to be exclusively one industry sector or type of employer. necessary. borne by the employer. Thus, the Final Further, as other commenters have Rule prohibits an employer from 2. Prohibition on Employers Seeking or stated, there is no legitimate reason for receiving payment of any kind as an Receiving Certain Payments, Including an employer to sell or barter permanent incentive or inducement to file, or in Payment of Attorneys’ Fees labor certifications. Further, if such reimbursement of the costs of activity is not occurring in a particular As proposed, the rule would have preparation or filing of, an application industry, then employers in that added a new § 656.12(b) to prohibit for labor certification, including industry will not be affected by the employers from seeking or receiving covering the costs of the employer’s prohibition. payment of any kind, from any source, attorneys’ fees, except as specifically Attorneys’ fees for preparing and for filing a Form ETA 750 or a Form provided for certain third-party filing labor certification applications— ETA 9089 or for other actions in payments. The Final Rule also prohibits Two commenters supported the connection with the permanent labor an employer filing an application for improper commerce provisions, certification process. The Department labor certification from reducing the contingent upon clarification that proposed to include in this prohibition wages, salary or benefits of an alien attorneys’ fees for preparing and filing a ban on payment or reimbursement, named on the application for any an application would not be prohibited directly or indirectly, of any employer- expense related to the preparation and or deemed a sale or purchase. It is not incurred attorneys’ fees and other costs filing of the application. This the Department’s intent to prohibit related to the preparing, filing, and prohibition includes the payment by the attorneys from charging fees for obtaining of a labor certification, alien of costs (for recruitment or other preparing and filing labor certification whether payment was by the alien or activities in furtherance of the labor applications for employers or to deem another individual or entity. The certification) as well as the employer’s such fees by themselves to be a sale or Department received numerous attorneys’ fees. purchase of the application or resulting comments in response to this proposal, In addition, this Final Rule prohibits certification. most in strong opposition to the employers engaged in the labor Corporate restructuring—One proposal. certification process from withholding commenter was troubled that the Following careful review of comments from an alien’s wages, either in proposed rule could be construed and weighing our growing program increments or in lump sum, any broadly to prohibit transfer of a labor experience with this issue, and for the payment in reimbursement to the certification that arises as the reasons explained in detail below, the employer for costs associated with that consequence of a merger, acquisition, Department finds the need for program process. spin-off or other type of corporate integrity outweighs any interest in the As first described in the NPRM, restructuring. The commenter went on ability of the employer to receive prohibited payments include, but are to say the proposed rule could be payment or reimbursement from the not limited to: Employer fees for hiring construed to contradict the intent of the alien or others in exchange for the filing the alien beneficiary; receipt of Congress in stating in AC21 that of a labor certification application, ‘‘kickbacks’’ of part of the alien corporate restructuring should not have especially when such payment or beneficiary’s pay, whether through a any adverse impact on the immigration reimbursement has led to abuse of the payroll deduction or otherwise; process. According to the commenter, in process or exploitation of individual reducing the alien beneficiary’s pay for cases where one company is acquired by aliens. The Department’s unique purposes of reimbursement or pre- another, the acquiring company often responsibility to reduce the incentive payment; goods and services or other compensates the acquired entity for the for fraud in the permanent labor wage or employment concessions; cost of pending labor certifications and certification program while kickbacks, bribes or tributes; or receipt other types of applications. In other simultaneously protecting the rights and of payment from aliens, attorneys, or cases, the employer filing the labor working conditions of U.S. workers agents for allowing a permanent labor certification application may spin off requires us to focus on the nature of the certification application to be filed on part of the company and wish to sell the payment that an employer would behalf of the employer. pending labor certification to the spun- receive from an alien or others for costs There are strong and ample grounds off entity so that it can be used to obtain or fees relating to the preparation and upon which to prohibit these payments a green card for the original beneficiary, filing of the labor certification or arrangements, including the payment who now works for that spun-off entity. application or obtaining permanent by the alien of the employer’s attorneys’

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27920 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

fees. Permanent labor certification is an requiring employers to bear their own including prohibiting practices that employer-driven process; employers, costs and expenses, including the require the alien beneficiary to cover all not aliens, must file permanent labor representation of the employer, the labor certification costs, requirements certification applications. To the extent Department is ensuring that the that an alien cover specific activity- the alien beneficiary who is the subject disincentive to pre-qualify the alien in related costs (all recruitment costs, all of the labor certification application the job opportunity—keeping the job in-house legal expenses), and wage and, later, the immigrant petition, is open and the recruitment real—remains deductions to the alien’s paycheck as financially involved in the application in the process. This enables the reimbursement for or in anticipation of process directly or indirectly, this Department to remain in its statutory such costs, regardless of the labor involvement casts suspicion on the role as the arbiter of the presence of certification activity they cover. As with integrity of the process and the otherwise-eligible U.S. workers in the modifications policy, this Final Rule existence of a bona fide job opportunity. relation to the admissibility of the alien. reinforces the PERM rule’s policy; it Payment by the alien of employer costs The complexities associated with also specifies in greater detail the allows him or her some level of control multiple-party financial involvement in specific activities the prohibition is over what must remain an employer- the labor certification process are not meant to cover. driven process. The degree of that new. The provisions in this section As stated in the NPRM, the control, at least at the labor certification work in concert with other parts of the Department recognizes the possibility stage, directly and unduly influences regulation and reflect the Department’s that legitimate employers may have a the legitimacy of the job opportunity determination to keep the recruitment practice of seeking reimbursement from and whether that opportunity has been process open, fair and available to U.S. the aliens they hire for the expenses and remains truly open to U.S. workers. workers. For example, as stated in the they incur in filing and obtaining the In other words, as stated in the NPRM, preamble to the final PERM regulation, permanent labor certification. The alien subsidization of employer- evidence that the employer, agent, or Department has determined that any incurred costs adversely affects the attorney required the alien to pay such reimbursement including, but not likelihood that a U.S. worker will be employer costs may be used under the limited to, attorneys’ fees to prepare an offered the job when, for example, the regulation at § 656.10(c)(8) to determine employer’s application, recruitment alien is paying for the recruitment effort. whether the job has been and clearly is expenses to determine whether The essence of this aspect of this open to U.S. workers. The rule domestic labor is available, or other Final Rule is that expenses that prohibiting the payment of an such employer expenses, is contrary to rightfully belong with an employer employer’s fees or costs by the alien and the purpose of the labor certification should not be transferred to an alien the rule requiring the presence of a bona program and such costs should be borne beneficiary or others. An alien is free to fide job offer, in turn, are consistent exclusively by the employer. An alien retain counsel to represent his or her with the prohibition on sale and barter employee who reimburses his employer interests in the labor certification in the Final Rule, as they support the is effectively being paid a lower wage process and also to assume Department’s desire to actively prevent than agreed to by the employer on the responsibility for those costs. This Final and prohibit activities that directly labor certification, which undermines Rule does not seek to regulate or control commoditize permanent labor the Secretary’s finding that the wages payments to, or the identity of, the certifications. and working conditions of the job will alien’s attorney. However, to the extent Under the authority of § 656.10(c)(8) not adversely affect U.S. workers and that any attorney is preparing or filing of the current regulation, Form ETA the Secretary’s duty to protect U.S. a labor certification application and 9089 2 already requires employers to workers. thus engaged by the employer as well as disclose and specify ‘‘payment[s] of any 3. Issues Raised by Comments on with the alien, the costs attributable to kind [emphasis added] for the Attorneys’ Fees work for the employer must be paid by submission of [the] application.’’ The The Department received a significant the employer. Costs for attorneys’ fees decision to seek this disclosure as part number of comments on the proposed outside the labor certification process of the information related specifically to prohibition on payment or are not part of this rulemaking. recruitment reflects the Department’s reimbursement of the employer’s The Department is aware of the concern that such payments may attorneys’ fees or other employer costs import of its position—the implications adversely impact the availability of the are at the center of the reasons we find related to preparing and filing a job opportunity to the U.S. workforce. the prohibition a necessity. We permanent labor certification The provisions added by this Final Rule recognize the vast majority of aliens for application and obtaining permanent are simply a logical extension and whom permanent labor certifications are labor certification. The overwhelming clarification of the type of information filed are already employed by the majority of the commenters were the Department considers relevant to employer. In initiating the permanent opposed to this proposal. this concern.3 residence process, the employer Relationship of this prohibition to This Final Rule clarifies the purpose of the rule—Commenters demonstrates a desire to retain the alien application of § 656.10(c)(8) to the issue on a more permanent basis than questioned the relationship between the of alien payment. It prohibits employer permitted by his or her nonimmigrant prohibition against aliens paying or practices that require an alien to pay status. The pre-existing relationship reimbursing the employer for expenses employer labor certification costs, provides the employer with significant related to the labor certification incentive to conduct the recruitment application, including attorneys’ fees, 2 Section ‘‘I. Recruitment Information,’’ process in a manner that favors the Subsection ‘‘e. General Information,’’ Question 3. and the Department’s efforts to limit the alien. The cost incurred in the labor 3 In the PERM regulation, the Department opportunities and incentives for fraud certification recruitment process by the reserved the right to request any information the in the labor certification program. They employer serves as an identifiable Certifying Officer deems relevant to a labor believed the Department’s statements in certification application. 20 CFR 656.20(d). The disincentive to that outcome. It serves at existence of a bona fide job opportunity and the the preamble to the NPRM were vague least to make the employer examine the disclosure of payments are always relevant to the and did not establish a logical value it places on retaining the alien. By application. relationship between illegal

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27921

merchandising of labor certifications attorneys’ fees, it would have done so improper allocation of costs and fees and such payments or reimbursements. explicitly and unambiguously as it has associated with labor certification. Commenters also questioned the in other contexts. They cited the Prohibiting the alien, directly or reasoning behind the Department’s authority in INA section 212(n) for the indirectly, from paying the employer’s statement in the NPRM at 71 FR at 7660, H–1B program as an example. Many attorneys’ fees and other costs is a that an alien’s payment of the commenters opined the proposed rule critical step toward ensuring employers employer’s costs might indicate there is would be restrictive of freedom to or others do not degrade the validity of not a bona fide position and wage contract. the labor market test. The fact that available to U.S. workers. In addition, many commenters section 212(n)(2)(C)(vi)(II) of the INA The Department stands by its expressed the belief the Department was prohibits an employer from accepting reasoning. An alien’s reimbursement or intruding into the licensing and reimbursement from an alien employee payment to an employer for filing a regulation of attorneys. They stated this for the fees for an H–1B nonimmigrant labor certification on his behalf turns issue has been left exclusively to the petition does not support the argument labor certifications into commodities, states, which prescribe the that the Department lacks authority to increases the likelihood that a qualifications for admission to practice prohibit the reimbursement of attorneys’ prejudicial arrangement exists which and the standards of professional fees and other costs associated with precludes any consideration of U.S. conduct and are responsible for attorney permanent labor certifications. To the workers, and undermines the integrity discipline. These commenters believed contrary, that specific prohibition in the of the labor market test required for the Department has neither statutory nor nonimmigrant context highlights certification under Section 212(a)(5)(A) other authority to regulate payments to Congress’ interest that the employer of the INA. An alien employee who the attorneys that parties to proceedings should bear the costs associated with reimburses his employer via deductions before the Department are entitled to hiring alien employees and not pass from his paycheck or a lump payment retain. They further stated any changes them onto the alien. is effectively being paid a lower wage to this complex relationship should be It is well settled that an agency is than agreed to by the employer on the left to the regulatory bodies that empowered to take all reasonable labor certification. A U.S. worker is non- traditionally make them—states and actions, even if not particularly competitive with the alien worker their bar associations. specified in the statute, to effect the unless he too accepts the actual lower The Department disagrees with those objective and policy of the statute. The wage. Therefore, the practice of aliens comments. This Final Rule’s prohibition Department is charged with ensuring reimbursing employers for expenses the on improper payments governs that an employer’s hiring of an alien employer incurred in the labor employers and aliens engaged in the employee does not displace U.S. certification process adversely affects labor certification process, not the workers or distort wages and working the compensation of U.S. workers. attorneys retained by the employer. The conditions in the U.S. labor market Because the INA mandates that the rule prohibits employers from receiving before approving permanent labor Department may only approve a labor financial incentives or reimbursement certifications, and this prohibition certification if there are not qualified for filing labor certification applications against the reimbursement of attorneys U.S. workers for the position, and if the and from withholding payments from fees and other costs directly furthers wages and working conditions of workers for that purpose (among other that mandate. The Final Rule in no way similarly employed U.S. workers are not things). These are activities that precludes an employer from hiring and adversely affected, the Department will undermine the legitimacy of the labor paying an attorney for the services not permit the practice of market test that is required to be provided to the employer or an alien reimbursement of attorneys or other fees conducted by the law before the from hiring and paying an attorney for or costs associated with obtaining a Department may approve a labor the services provided to the alien, or for labor certification. There is a direct certification. The Department’s focus is that matter an employer paying for an correlation between an alien’s financial not on attorneys’ fees, but rather on the attorney who exclusively represents the participation in the labor certification actual wage paid to the alien employee alien employee. The rule does not speak process and the likelihood that an and the effect that a lower wage or to the qualifications of an attorney or arrangement exists which precludes reimbursement of costs has on the the professional standards with which legitimate consideration of U.S. wages and opportunities available to the attorney practices. The rule simply workers, affecting the integrity of the U.S. workers. The transfer of the seeks to ensure the integrity of the labor labor market test required by INA responsibility for payment of attorneys’ certification process by removing an section 212(a)(5)(A). The statute charges fees or other costs associated with incentive to manipulate that process in the Department to ensure an adequate, preparing, filing and obtaining labor favor of an alien worker and against the good faith test of the labor market—that certification from employer to alien (or interests of U.S. workers. an alien will not be admitted for a job others) signals preselection in the hiring Right to counsel; attorney-client for which a qualified U.S. worker is decision, contrary to the requirement of relationship—Commenters also asserted available. It is, therefore, the an open recruitment process with full that because the labor certification Department’s role and statutory consideration of U.S. workers. The INA application is signed by both the responsibility to remove the potential broadly empowers the Secretary to employer and the alien, both are parties for this undue influence. ensure that there is a bona fide job to the proceeding and both are exposing Authority—Many of the commenters opportunity open to U.S. workers and themselves to sanctions under the law questioned the Department’s authority that there is no adverse effect on the for any misrepresentations made on the to dictate who should not pay attorneys’ wages and working conditions of U.S. application. They maintained that each fees and other costs. They asserted that workers before approving a labor is entitled to counsel of his or her there is no statutory authority for such certification. As part of its statutory choosing and the Department may not a rule and stated that had the Congress charge, the Department is responsible limit the choice and interfere in the intended to give DOL the authority to for eliminating factors which undermine attorney-client relationship by regulate the attorney-client relationship the legitimacy of the job opening and of regulating who may pay attorneys’ fees. and/or to set limits on the payment of the recruitment process, including the Some commenters included reasons as

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27922 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

to why the alien might want of commenters described agreements used in the labor certification process is independent counsel and other frequently used which require directly tied to the alien employee and commenters read the proposed rule to reimbursement if a foreign employee the alien should be able to contribute to mean the alien could not have resigns upon being granted permanent the payment of the employer’s costs. independent counsel. Some commenters residence or prior to a specified length Further, many permanent alien workers also interpreted the proposed rule as of time after obtaining permanent are first hired by employers under H–1B prohibiting dual representation of both residence status. They compared these or other nonimmigrant visas for which employer and alien by a single attorney. reimbursement arrangements to widely there is no requirement of a pre- These commenters misconstrued the used employer-employee agreements employment labor market test to NPRM. The Department is not seeking linking relocation costs or training and determine whether U.S. workers are to limit either party from choosing education costs incurred by an available. counsel. The act of seeking legal employer to an employee commitment We disagree with the commenters’ representation, the identity of legal to remain in a job for a specified period assumption that an alien’s interest in counsel, and similar activities are all of time or otherwise reimburse a portion labor certification warrants payment by outside the scope of this regulation. As or all of the costs. Other commenters the alien of the employer’s expenses. previously noted, the alien is free to stated that, under section 204(j) of the For purposes of employment-based retain counsel to represent his or her INA, since the alien beneficiary now has visas requiring labor certification, the interests in the labor certification area or the ability to move to another employer application to the Department of Labor any other area in which the alien desires even before attaining permanent and the Secretary of Labor’s counsel. Nothing in this regulation residence (as soon as 180 days after determination initiate a much broader, prohibits the alien from hiring the same filing an adjustment application), the multi-agency process whose function is attorney as the employer. This extent of the benefit realized has shifted to consider and complete a specified regulation simply prohibits an employer even more substantially to the employee alien’s entry into the United States for from transferring his legal and other and increases the employer’s need for the sole purpose of filling an employer’s costs associated with procuring a the agreement described above. job vacancy. First, the unreported permanent labor certification to the Several commenters claimed the DerKevorkian decision merely suggests alien employee. interest in the labor certification that an alien may have a private right of Vagueness—Several commenters application is weighted to the alien even action against an employer for failure to asserted the Department has not more strongly. To support this provided sufficient description of the argument, one commenter referenced properly proceed after agreeing to conduct that it would deem to be a DerKevorkian v. Lionbridge sponsor an alien for permanent violation of this proposed rule. Technologies, No. 04–cv–01160–LTB– residence. The court did not hold that Commenters specifically identified the CBS, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4191 (D. Colo. an alien has a legal interest against the language in § 656.12(b) stating, ‘‘An Jan. 26, 2006). In this unreported Department in the approval of a labor employer shall not seek or receive decision, the court held that an certification. Second, an alien does not payment of any kind for any activity employer’s promise to sponsor an alien apply to the Department for approval of related to obtaining a permanent labor employee for permanent residence a labor certification, the employer does. certification’’ as vague. created claims for promissory estoppel Finally, the purpose of the labor In response to this concern, the and breach of fiduciary duty by the certification is not to provide an alien Department has clarified the prohibited employee against the employer. Some with permanent residence, rather it is to behavior in this Final Rule. The rule commenters asserted that this decision certify that the alien’s admission into provides specific examples of supports the proposition that an the United States to work in a particular prohibited transactions, including employee has legal rights in the labor position will neither displace a U.S. kickbacks, improper wage withholdings, certification process, even when an worker nor distort the U.S. labor market. bribes, and lump sum reimbursements. application has yet to be filed with the The fact that aliens may leave It also prohibits non-monetary Department. The commenters further employment early or change employers transactions, such as free labor. Further, asserted this case could stand for the is a risk which is no different from the it exempts certain third-party payments proposition that an employer may limit risk of hiring any U.S. worker and from the prohibition, as discussed its legal liability by requiring an alien to which should be duly considered by below, allowing these payments to be retain his own attorney. Additionally, employers as they carefully consider made in connection with labor commenters referenced various whether to invest the resources they certifications. provisions for continued employment believe are required to pursue an To whom labor certification benefits rights for H–1B nonimmigrants which employment-based immigration accrue—Many commenters disagreed purport to recognize the alien’s rights solution to their workforce shortage. with the Department’s premise that and interests in the labor certification This rule does not seek to govern the because the employer files the labor process. large majority of employment certification application, the employer Others believed the alien should agreements between employers and should bear all of the costs. These rightfully participate in paying some or alien workers—those that may require commenters believed there is a benefit all of the costs related to the labor reimbursement to the employer for to both the employer and the alien from certification application because the travel, moving expenses, loans and the labor certification and since both are recruitment process and completion of other expenditures that apply equally to interested parties, these parties should the application is, in reality, an both U.S. and foreign workers and can be free to negotiate payment ‘‘artificial’’ recruitment being conducted be shown were made directly for the arrangements. Some commenters also solely to satisfy the Department’s benefit of that worker. The Department claimed that the permanent resident requirements. They maintained the must weigh the undeniable benefit to status is a benefit to the alien and only actual recruitment that was paid for by the employer and the alien of sharing benefits the employer if the employee the employer is the recruitment which certification costs against the interests of remains on the job beyond attaining produced the non-U.S. worker, and U.S. workers who must, under the permanent status. A significant number therefore, the need for the recruitment statute, be considered for that job

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27923

opportunity before it can be offered to program were cited as examples of commented on this issue, that there is the alien. Congressional intent. These commenters no statutory or regulatory requirement Payment by the employer of the costs believed the effect of the rule would be that an application for permanent labor associated with the preparation, filing to move the program to the exclusive certification be prepared by and/or and obtaining a labor certification keeps domain of highly profitable employers submitted by an attorney, nor is the the alien outside the process and in the United States. Department setting any standards for insulates the process from financial Commenters also stated disparate what such costs should be. relationships that would subvert the treatment of workers could result. They Third party situations—Commenters permanent labor certification process’ asserted if employers were to be have raised questions about payments goal of protecting U.S. workers. The required to pay the fees for labor by third parties and asserted that, by Department has decided its statutory certification, the end result would be deeming attorneys’ fees to be only the mandate is best served by removing this that the alien employees would receive employer’s expense, the Department incentive for a less-than-valid test of the a specific benefit and better treatment was forbidding the employer from labor market. Under the terms of the (i.e., payment of legal fees) than passing the expense to another party. labor certification program, the similarly situated U.S. workers. Other These commenters suggested the protection of U.S. workers outweighs commenters were concerned the rule as Department is also prohibiting third any employer interest in obtaining proposed would have a disparate impact party payments directly to the attorney, financial remuneration from alien on alien workers, some of whom would even though such payment is not a employees for the costs associated with be given access to employer funds for reimbursement of the employer’s labor certifications. legal costs and some of whom would expenses. As stated, the Department is not not, based on budgetary allocations, the Commenters also described seeking to prohibit, limit, or regulate type of benefit sought, or other factors. purportedly common situations that dual legal representation of alien and One commenter suggested that this involve the payment of attorneys’ fees employer in the permanent residence would have a disparate effect on by entities other than ‘‘the employer.’’ process. However, it is the Department’s professors and researchers in As an example, one commenter stated expectation that in such situations universities that, for various reasons, physicians frequently have split attorneys’ fees and costs associated with require their in-house or outside appointments between a Veterans the preparation, filing and obtaining of counsel to file labor certifications, Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) and an the labor certification are to be borne by resulting in a different outcome than affiliated institution of higher the employer. Various Federal, state and their colleagues who were considered education. In these cases, although there local laws regulate payment of wages, ‘‘outstanding’’ and thus able to bypass is one ‘‘employer of record’’ who files prohibit or restrict deductions from the labor certification process. the labor certification application, the wages, outlaw ‘‘kickbacks,’’ restrain The Department disagrees. The university reimburses the VAMC for the assignments, and otherwise govern the recruitment, legal, and other costs proportion of the fees commensurate frequency and manner of paying wages. associated with labor certification are with the proportion of the work week In accord with the restrictions transaction costs necessary for or, in the spent at the university. promulgated in this rule, any attempt by case of legal fees, desired by the The Department finds these an employer to recover labor employer to complete the labor market comments largely meritorious and has certification costs from an employee test, allow the Department of Labor to revised the regulation at § 656.12(b) to through deductions from wages, make its determination, and enable the recognize such situations. It is not our uncompensated additional work by the employer to move to the next step of the intent to look behind the employment employee, or otherwise, would be hiring process, a step it will complete that is the subject of the labor considered an attempt to circumvent the with DHS. The employer’s certification to ascertain the legitimacy rule and could result in the debarment responsibility to pay these costs exists of the employer vis-a´-vis other entities of the employer from the program as separate and apart from any benefit to with a legitimate interest in the alien. provided in the rule, as well as subject the alien from his or her eventual entry Where there is a legitimate third-party the employer to appropriate as an immigrant. Moreover, employers relationship in which the payment by enforcement actions for violations under may legitimately offer benefits to the third party of the fees and costs that other applicable authorities. employees on a selective basis in almost should be borne by the employer would Disparate treatment—Several all areas—educational benefits offered not contravene the intent of the commenters were concerned the to certain sectors of a workforce but not program, the payment does not proposed rule would result in disparate to others, relocation expenses offered to adversely affect the fairness of the labor treatment of nonprofit organizations, those at certain geographic distances but market test. In cases where there is a hospitals, public universities, and small not others, training offered to managers legitimate, pre-existing business businesses. According to these but not to nonexempt employees, to relationship between the employer and commenters, these organizations may name just a few examples. The costs the third party, and the work to be not have in-house counsel or the involved in a labor certification are just performed will benefit that third party, resources to hire counsel and have one instance where benefits may be, at the employer is not influenced to the traditionally negotiated a cost-sharing the employer’s option, extended to some point of preselection of the alien worker agreement with the alien employee. employees or classes of employees but in the labor market test. By requiring Commenters also claimed the proposed not to others. The same is true of those that the relationship be a business rule would penalize those same who bypass the labor certification interest that predates the labor institutions—nonprofit research process entirely and who are able to file certification process, the Department is organizations and institutions of higher an immigrant petition directly with protecting against fraudulent education—that the Congress has DHS, such as the outstanding professors relationships. expressly recognized as worthy of and researchers noted by the The Department also received support. The different standard for commenters. The Department reminds comments regarding money paid to a prevailing wages and the exemption employers, especially those small trust fund established by a union for from training fees under the H–1B employers and non-profits who defraying the costs of legal services for

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27924 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

employees, their families, and Some cited possible delays in both DOL the maximum window for the viability dependents. The proposed rule, the and DHS processes, which they claimed of labor market information. Consistent commenters maintained, would prohibit would make the filing of an immigrant with this determination, the current payment of attorneys’ fees and costs for visa petition with DHS within the 45- regulation, at § 656.17(1)(i) and (ii), an alien employee by such a union fund day time period impractical, if not requires that mandatory recruitment be because payment would not be coming impossible. conducted no more than 180 calendar from the employer. These commenters Commenters provided very similar if days prior to filing. A 180-day validity believed the proposed rule may not identical lists of reasons why a period after certification aligns contravene Supreme Court cases validity period of only 45 days would be programmatically with this recruitment confirming a union’s First and inadequate. The reasons included: requirement and follows a similar Fourteenth Amendment right to assert Untimely receipt of labor certifications rationale. legal rights. This comment is misplaced. from DOL; a prolonged absence of the The Department has determined that To the extent such a trust fund is individual, or individuals, necessary to 180 days provides sufficient time for an reimbursing a worker for the worker’s the I–140 and I–485 filing processes; employer to move to the next step in the legitimate costs and not for the unavailability of documentation; and permanent residence process while employer’s costs, reimbursement is not general, unforeseeable delays. minimizing the risk of potential changes prohibited by the Final Rule. Opportunities for delays in local economies. Taken together, the The Department reiterates that this notwithstanding, many commenters did timeframe as currently conceived (i.e., Final Rule seeks to require the employer not oppose a validity period and some recruitment within six months of to pay its own costs, including expressly supported the concept of a submission of the application, PERM’s attorneys’ fees, for its own activities labor certification being valid for only a average processing time which is greatly related to obtaining permanent labor finite length of time. Most, however, improved and generally within 60 days, certification, which is an employer- believed a longer time period was and a 180-day validity period) will all driven process. However, this rule does warranted. Others opposed a finite provide as valid and timely a picture of not regulate payment by an alien or validity period but were willing to the labor market as current program others of their own costs, attorneys’ fees accept such a period only if it was for parameters will allow while providing or other expenses. Nor does this rule a time longer than 45 days. sufficient flexibility for contingencies in regulate contract arrangements, cost After reviewing the arguments, the employment-based immigration allocation and financial transactions considering the reasons presented for process. within a corporation or its affiliates, needing a longer validity period, and 1. Statutory Authority between an entity and its insurers or weighing the merits of alternative time legal service providers, or between and periods, the Department, in this Final Some commenters opposing among entities engaged in a joint Rule, increases the validity period for a imposition of a validity period claimed enterprise. permanent labor certification from 45 to the Department is exceeding its Employer paying alien’s attorney— 180 days. The Department has statutory authority under INA section Another commenter described a determined that increasing the validity 212(a)(5)(A) which requires the scenario in which an alien retains his or period to 180 calendar days is a Secretary of Labor’s determination on her own attorney separately from reasonable alternative, in that it U.S. worker availability and adverse counsel retained by his or her employer provides additional time to impact on wages and working and the employer is willing to pay the accommodate possible delays, while conditions. Most asserted that although attorneys’ fee, but the attorney may be maintaining the integrity of the labor the statute does not expressly provide prohibited from accepting such a market test and the security of the labor for a validity period, it does refer to payment under state bar rules. As certification. Labor market conditions DOL’s determination being used ‘‘at the previously noted, this rule does not are subject to rapid change, and it is time of application for a visa.’’ The regulate the attorney-client relationship consistent with DOL’s mandate under Department does not agree it lacks the or the alien’s retention of counsel. INA section 212(a)(5)(A) to require a authority. To the contrary, by limiting Neither does this rule prohibit payment retest of the market after the passage of the period of validity of the labor market by the employer of costs beyond those that time. test that underlies the Secretary’s that are exclusively the employer’s— The question of the appropriate determination, the Department more payment, for example, of the alien’s validity period directly addresses the closely adheres to the letter of the law. attorneys’ fees or other costs attributed reliability of the information that The statute requires the Secretary to solely to the alien. Finally, nothing in underlies and supports the Secretary’s make the certification as a function of this regulation regulates payment by an determinations of the availability of U.S. evaluating the introduction of the alien alien, or others, of their own attorneys’ workers and whether the job immigrant into the workforce; the fees or other expenses. opportunity’s wages and working Secretary’s determination is to be made conditions will adversely affect the at the time of the application for D. Labor Certification Validity and wages and working conditions of U.S. admission. A validity period serves to Filing Period workers. The Department’s certification forge a closer temporal link between the The Department received numerous speaks to the unavailability of U.S. determination and the admission. comments about the proposed language workers and, hence, extends only to the One commenter argued that the INA at § 656.30(b) establishing a validity point (either because of the passage of limits the Department’s authority to an period of 45 calendar days for time or because, as in the case of assessment of the employment permanent labor certifications. substitution, the circumstances opportunity, i.e., the test of the labor Although some commenters asserted the surrounding the job opportunity have market, in order to make a Department lacks the authority to define changed) at which point availability determination of whether or not to a validity period, the majority of again comes into question. The PERM certify. No such limiting language exists commenters focused instead on regulation reflects the determination, in the INA. The test of the labor market proposing alternative time periods made by the Department when the new was instituted by the Department as a ranging from ninety days to five years. program was instituted, that 180 days is means by which to implement the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27925

requirements of the statute. Procedures provide the time necessary to submission of applications to replace for the examination of the labor market accommodate any delay that may occur labor certifications that expire before the and the larger labor certification process in certification receipt. Form I–140 can be filed, which will, in of which it is a part have varied, but the turn, result in filing backlogs. This 3. Relationship to Fraud labor market test has always functioned claim does not take into consideration as a prerequisite to the employment- Some comments in support of a the efficiency of the PERM system. based admission of an alien. The validity period argued that indefinite Moreover, given the importance of the imposition of a validity period is a validity allows some unscrupulous labor certification for both the employer logical mechanism by which the companies to stall the filing with DHS and the alien, it is unlikely that a Department can ensure that the as a means of preventing the worker significant number of labor information upon which a from leaving their employ, and that it certifications will be allowed to expire. determination was based remains also allows employers so disposed to Similarly, the claim that a ‘‘rush to file’’ legitimate. prolong non-payment of the wage the Form I–140 will result in inaccurate indicated on the application. One and incomplete Form I–140 filings is 2. Delays in Processing of Applications commenter opposed to a validity period also difficult to envision, given the and Receipt of Labor Certifications hypothesized that an employer might significance of the filing. DOL expects Some commenters attempted to not want to file the I–140 within an that employers, attorneys and agents establish a nexus between the long imposed validity period if it would be will be thoughtful and careful as they processing times at both DOL and DHS unable to demonstrate to DHS the complete each labor certification and a validity period. They contended ability to pay the wages attested to on application and immigrant petition and the Department’s argument that a the Form ETA 9089. We agree that that at least some preparation for the certification grows stale with the indefinite validity may contribute to a entire permanent residence process passage of time is disingenuous, given variety of undesirable or unlawful would have taken place in advance of the extremely long processing times and behaviors and, further, that the longer certification. Furthermore, the resultant staleness of at least some the period of time the labor certification lengthening of the validity period from information in applications submitted is in circulation, the greater the 45 to 180 days will provide the years earlier, and implied the probability that the information on the employer a reasonable period of time in Department’s argument is not justifiable. application, not only that pertaining to which to ensure that all documentation The Department disagrees. The Final recruiting, is stale or increasingly less and information necessary are accurate Rule addresses the question of validity relevant. and complete prior to filing. post-certification. While questions of Some commenters pointed to other wages and recruitment are adjudicated provisions currently in place or E. Program Integrity and Debarment on an individual basis as applications proposed in the NPRM, including the The preamble to the PERM Final Rule come up for review in our Backlog elimination of substitution, which serve indicated the Department would Processing Centers—independent of to protect against fraud and argued that consider the imposition of stricter how long each of those applications has more fraud protection is unnecessary remedial measures in any future been pending—the Department must and merely prejudices the honest rulemaking involving the permanent determine how long it will stand behind employer. As stated above with respect program. Consistent with this intent, the those certifications once issued, and to the elimination of substitution, while NPRM to this Final Rule contained when it is appropriate to once again test we do not doubt that other fraud several provisions to promote the the market. The question of a validity prevention and detection methods are program’s integrity and assist the period addresses these broader available, the appropriateness or Department in obtaining compliance concerns. effectiveness of those other methods with the proposed amendments and We also note the PERM system was does not obviate the need for additional, existing program requirements. The implemented in direct response to the targeted techniques to address the Department proposed several revisions long processing times experienced problems generated by a specific issue, to § 656.31, the regulatory section under the previous program model, and such as, in this case, the indefinite governing the Department’s response to we have already significantly reduced validity periods for labor certifications. instances of potential fraud or processing times from years to months. It is difficult to see how a reasonable misrepresentation, including extending The reduction in time provides the validity period prejudices honest the time for potential suspension of Department assurance that the employers who presumably wish to processing for applications filed by information upon which a obtain the admission of the alien worker certain employers, attorneys, or agents. determination is based is current and they have sponsored as quickly as In addition, the NPRM made the section valid. possible. The revised validity period applicable to applications filed under Commenters also complained of accommodates the need for a reasonable the current regulation and the regulation frequent and long delays in the receipt period of time in which to submit the in effect prior to March 28, 2005. This of granted labor certifications and I–140. Final Rule adopts the provisions on suggested that another basis, other than suspension of applications and notice to the date of issuance, should be the 4. Increased Burden at DOL Due to employers largely as proposed in the starting point from which the time Untimely Filings and at DHS Due to NPRM. period begins to run. While it is true Incomplete or Inaccurate I–140 Filings As stated in the proposed rule, given that delays in delivery, when they Several commenters argued that the breadth and increased sophistication occur, negatively impact timely filing imposing the requirement that a Form of the immigration fraud that has been with DHS, these comments were based I–140 petition be filed within a limited identified in the recent past, the on the experiences at the outset of the period of time will result in increased Department requires added flexibility to new PERM program. Labor certifications burdens for both DOL and DHS. That respond to potential improprieties in are now being adjudicated in a more likelihood is overstated. Commenters permanent labor certification filings. timely manner. Moreover, the longer posited that DOL will likely see an While the Department already has the validity period of 180 days serves to increase in filings due to the re- authority, this Final Rule clarifies

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27926 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

§ 656.31(a) to state the Department may should be an opportunity for persons to prosecution of possible criminal activity deny any application for permanent present an affirmative defense that they supports this position. In addition, after labor certification which contains false mistakenly believed their conduct was due consideration, the Department has statements, is fraudulent, or otherwise allowed. concluded the proposed provisions was submitted in violation of the As always, applicants must remain extending the suspension period are permanent labor certification program aware of their responsibilities under the exempt from the notice and comment regulations. permanent labor certification process provision of the Administrative The Department received a variety of and of the consequences of submitting Procedure Act as matters of agency comments on the proposed amendments false or misleading information to a practice and procedure and as part of to § 656.31. While we carefully Federal agency. The application form the agency’s inherent authority to considered these comments, we have makes it clear that the person signing effectuate the labor certification review elected to keep the provisions largely as the form is certifying, under penalty of process. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b). proposed. However, in response to perjury, to the accuracy of the Accordingly, this Final Rule includes comments, the Final Rule amends the information contained in the the provisions allowing the Department debarment provisions to clarify the application. No one who signs an to suspend, initially for up to 180 days, intent requirements (‘‘willful’’) and application should be confused about the processing of any application other review standards applicable to the capacity in which he or she signs it. relating to an employer, attorney, or debarment. After review of the comments, the agent involved in possible fraud or Department has decided to retain the 1. When an Employer, Attorney, or willful misrepresentation. use of ‘‘willful’’ as the more appropriate Terms recommended for deletion Agent Is Involved in Possible Fraud or terminology. Black’s Law Dictionary and/or considered inappropriate in Willful Misrepresentation provides that a ‘‘[w]illful act may be § 656.31(a)—In this Final Rule, the In § 656.31(b), the Final Rule revises described as one done intentionally, Department has taken the last sentence what was § 656.31(a) in the NPRM and knowingly, and purposely’’ [emphasis of proposed § 656.31(a) and finalized it current regulation to clarify that if an supplied]. Hence, the phrase ‘‘willful as the entirety of § 656.31(a), moving the employer, attorney, or agent connected misrepresentation’’ as used in the remainder of the proposed text to to a permanent labor certification permanent labor certification program § 656.31(b). One commenter took issue application is involved in either regulations means a person who with the portion of § 656.31(a) which possible fraud or willful intentionally and knowingly meant to reads: ‘‘A Certifying Officer may deny misrepresentation, the Department may, make a misrepresentation. any application for permanent labor for up to 180 days, suspend the Suspension of case processing for 180 certification if the officer finds the processing of any permanent labor days—The Department proposed to application contains false statements, is certification application involving that increase the initial suspension of case fraudulent, or was otherwise submitted employer, attorney, or agent. Thereafter, processing in § 656.31(b) (§ 656.31(a) in in violation of the DOL permanent labor the Certifying Officer may either the proposed rule) from 90 to 180 days certification regulations.’’ This continue to process some or all of the and to allow the suspension of any commenter recommended the phrases applications or extend the suspension permanent labor certification ‘‘false statements’’ and ‘‘or was until completion of any investigation application involving such employer, otherwise submitted in violation of the and/or judicial proceeding. attorney, or agent until completion of regulations’’ should be deleted from ‘‘Possible fraud’’ standard—One any investigation and/or judicial § 656.31(a). According to the commenter maintained § 656.31(b) proceeding. The Department also commenter, the term ‘‘false statements’’ (§ 656.31(a) in the NPRM) proposed a proposed to revise § 656.31(b) and (c) should be removed because attorneys, new legal standard of ‘‘possible fraud.’’ (§ 656.31(a) and (b) in the NPRM)) to aliens, employers, or agents may The discovery of ‘‘possible fraud or clarify the Department may suspend inadvertently make mistakes on the willful misrepresentation’’ is not a new processing of any permanent labor labor certification application about legal standard. This basic provision, certification application if an employer, minor details, or omit inconsequential allowing applications to be suspended attorney or agent connected to the information. The commenter believed it for a period of time if the Department application is involved in either improper to equate such ‘‘innocent discovers possible fraud or willful possible fraud or willful errors or omissions’’ with fraud, and misrepresentation involving a labor misrepresentation or is named in a insisted the section improperly imposed certification, has been in the permanent criminal indictment or information penalties for innocent errors. The phrase labor certification regulations since related to the permanent labor ‘‘or was otherwise submitted in 1977 (see 42 FR 3449 (January 18, certification program. Virtually all violation of the regulations,’’ according 1977)). The Final Rule continues the use commenters objected to these proposals. to the commenter, is overbroad and of the language ‘‘discovers * * * The Department has concluded that, simply too vague to be understood or possible fraud or willful in view of the extensive history of fraud fairly applied. Because other sections of misrepresentation.’’ in the permanent labor certification the regulations already explain when Use of ‘‘knowing’’ instead of program, the need to promulgate what denial is appropriate, the commenter ‘‘willful’’—One commenter suggested are now paragraphs (b) and (c) of recommended that § 656.31 should only using ‘‘knowing’’ instead of ‘‘willful’’ in § 656.31—concerning initially focus on fraud and willful the phrase ‘‘willful misrepresentation’’ suspending applications for 180 days misrepresentation. in § 656.31(b) (proposed as § 656.31(a)). and clarifying the Department’s The technological enhancements to The Department should be required to authority as to which permanent labor the PERM system discussed above make prove, the commenter continued, that certification applications may be it difficult to have inadvertent errors or the employer, attorney, or agent knew suspended—outweighs the concerns omissions, and those few that will be the nature of his acts, and that he or she raised by the commenters. Our made despite these enhancements may knew his acts violated the regulation; responsibility as a government agency to still not rise to the level of a false and to promote fair notice and minimize cooperate with law enforcement statement. The provision is not designed risk of arbitrary enforcement, there agencies in the investigation and to impose penalties for innocent errors

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27927

not in the control of the submitter but Another commenter recommended otherwise fail to result in a finding of is applicable to any material inaccuracy. that, when providing notice to fraud or willful misrepresentation. The Although a false statement may not rise employers not under investigation that Department did not receive comments to the level of fraud, the statement may processing of their applications has on these provisions and, consequently, involve information or a subject matter been suspended, the notice clarify for is implementing the language as noted that is material to the application. The the employer receiving the notice that it above in this Final Rule. Where a court, phrase ‘‘or was otherwise submitted in is not under investigation. The DHS, DOS, or another body finds the violation of the regulations’’ is in large Department will provide appropriate employer, attorney, or agent did commit measure merely a restatement of the notice in cooperation with the fraud or willful misrepresentation, authority already provided in investigatory and prosecuting agencies. redesignated § 656.31(e), as revised in § 656.24(b)(1) of the current permanent Notification by employer within 30 the Final Rule, provides that any labor certification regulations. Section days when attorney or agent has pending applications related to the 656.24(b)(1) provides, in relevant part, committed fraud—In the case of a employer, attorney, or agent will be that one of the factors the Certifying pending application involving a finding decided on their respective merits and Officer considers in making a of fraud or willful misrepresentation by may be denied in accordance with determination to either grant or deny a the employer’s attorney or agent, § 656.24 and § 656.31(a). certification is whether or not the § 656.31(e)(3) (§ 656.31(d)(3) in the 4. Debarment Proceedings employer has met the requirements of NPRM) provides that the Department part 656. will notify the employer and allow 30 Commenters generally expressed As stated in the NPRM, we have days for the employer to notify the concern that, as proposed, the added the above sentence to clarify the Department, in writing, that the debarment provisions of § 656.31(f)(1) Department’s authority. As a further employer will withdraw the application, (§ 656.31(e)(1) in the NPRM) failed to set clarification, the Department has designate a new attorney or agent, or a materiality standard and, hence, left removed the last sentence from continue the application without employers and attorneys open to § 656.31(a) as published in the NPRM representation. If the employer elects to consequences that were inconsistent and has placed it alone as the first continue representation by the attorney with the individual’s intent and paragraph and designated it § 656.31(a). or agent, the Department shall suspend disproportionate to the violation’s The other paragraphs are redesignated processing of affected applications. impact or importance. With respect to accordingly. One commenter maintained that 30 the various grounds for debarment, days was not a reasonable timeframe for generally, commenters stated concern 2. When an Employer, Attorney, or notification. The commenter noted the that the rule would impose a severe Agent Is the Subject of a Criminal decisions are complex, it takes time just penalty for relatively minor and likely Indictment or Information to receive DOL’s decisions, and time inadvertent offenses. With minor changes from the may be required to secure second After reviewing the comments, we proposed rule, the Final Rule revises opinions, decide whether to secure have modified the proposed rule to add § 656.31(c) (§ 656.31(b) in the NPRM) to other representation, and provide the in this Final Rule an intent requirement clarify that, if the Department learns an Department with a response. (‘‘willfully’’). The Final Rule revises the employer, attorney, or agent is named in We disagree. The 30 days required for provisions on failure to comply with the a criminal indictment or information in notification is the same as the time terms of the form, failure to comply connection with the permanent labor provided for employers to submit with the audit process, and failure to certification program, it may suspend requests for reconsideration pursuant to comply with Certifying Officer-ordered the processing of any applications § 656.24(g) or review by the BALCA supervised recruitment by adding a related to that employer, attorney, or under § 656.26(a). Such requests for requirement that, for there to be a basis agent until the judicial process is reconsideration or review involve for debarment, there must be a pattern completed. Further, the regulation making decisions similar to those or practice of misconduct. As elsewhere provides that, unless the investigatory involved in furnishing the notice in the Final Rule, the determination of or prosecuting agency requests required under the section now when debarment is appropriate is made otherwise, the Department must provide redesignated as § 656.31(e)(3). Like the by the Administrator, Office of Foreign written notification to the employer of § 656.31(e)(3) notice, the BALCA Labor Certification, a nomenclature the suspension in processing. requests also require complex decisions change from the proposed rule, which Provision of notice—One commenter to be made; time elapses between the named the Chief of the former Division. objected that, under this section as mailing of the denial and its receipt by Improper or prohibited—One proposed, no notice of an investigation the employer; second opinions may be commenter maintained the term was to be provided to the employer, sought; a request for review must be ‘‘improper’’ is impermissibly vague in attorney or agent. As noted above, the prepared and submitted; and the the portion of § 656.31(f)(1) Final Rule does provide for limited employer may prepare a detailed brief of (§ 656.31(e)(1) of the NPRM) that notice to employers whose applications the matter. Accordingly, the Department provides for debarment from the are impacted by an investigation of an has concluded 30 days is sufficient time program based upon any action that was agent or attorney. Our program for the employer to provide the improper or prohibited at the time the experience has shown that notifying notification required by § 656.31(e). action occurred. The term improper is a parties under investigation can impede broad term and does not necessarily the effectiveness and outcome of 3. Determination of Fraud or Willful imply illegality or an action that was in investigations that are initiated or Misrepresentation violation of the permanent labor ongoing, and the rule accordingly As proposed, § 656.31(d) (§ 656.31(c) certification program regulations. provides that an investigating or in the NPRM) continues to provide the Accordingly, the Department has prosecuting agency, which is in the best Certifying Officer will decide each removed the term from § 656.31(f)(1). position to judge the adverse impact of application on its merits where the Time limits to pursue debarment—A notice, can request that notification not employer, attorney, or agent is acquitted commenter maintained most punitive be made. of wrongdoing or if criminal charges laws include a statute of limitations,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27928 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

beyond which violations cannot be regulation allowing for permanent suggested that, because the Congress did prosecuted or pursued. Further, debarment. not explicitly establish debarment according to this commenter, statutes of Requested changes to debarment authority for the permanent labor limitations are promulgated because proceedings—More than one commenter certification program as it did in the H– evidence and recollections fade with maintained debarment proceedings 1B and H–2A programs, the Department time. Conceivably, DOL could pursue should include the right to specifically has no authority to create debarment debarment 20 years after an application articulated charges; the right to request mechanisms by this rule. is filed. In this connection, the a hearing before an Administrative Law The Department has considered the commenter noted the H–1B program Judge (ALJ); the ability to present and comments and has decided to retain the imposes a one-year time limit to lodge confront witnesses; a transcript; and a a complaint. stay of debarment upon timely appeal. proposed remedial measure of The Department has concluded it With respect to the request for clearly debarment for employers, attorneys and would be appropriate to include a articulated charges, § 656.31(f)(2), as agents in the Final Rule. There is provision limiting the time in which to redesignated in this Final Rule, has been extensive case law establishing that initiate debarment actions against amended to provide that a notice of Federal agencies have the authority to employers, attorneys or agents. We debarment must include a detailed determine who can practice and considered requiring initiation of an explanation of how the employer, participate in administrative investigation any time within the five attorney, and/or agent has participated proceedings before them. The general years the employer is required to retain in or facilitated one or more of the bases authority of an agency to prescribe its copies of applications for permanent for debarment listed in paragraphs own rules of procedure is sufficient employment certification filed with the (f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(v) of § 656.31. authority for an agency to determine Department and all supporting With respect to the right to request a who may practice and participate in documentation from the date of filing hearing before an ALJ, this Final Rule administrative proceedings before it, the labor certification application (see provides, at § 656.26(a)(1), for the right even in the absence of an express § 656.10(f) at 69 FR 77390 (Dec. 27, to a review by the BALCA upon filing statutory provision authorizing that 2004)), or within a reasonable time a written request with the agency to prescribe the qualifications of thereafter. Since investigations can be Administrator, Office of Foreign Labor those individuals or entities. Koden v. time consuming, we have provided in Certification, within 30 days of the date United States Department of Justice, 546 § 656.31(f)(1) of this Final Rule that of the debarment. Section 656.27(e) F.2d 228, 232–233 (7th Cir. 1977) (citing debarment actions must be formally authorizes the BALCA to hold hearings Goldsmith v. United States Board of Tax initiated within six years of the original governed by the Rules of Practice and Appeals, 270 U.S. 117 (1926)). See also filing date of the labor certification Procedure for Administrative Hearings Schwebel v. Orrick, 153 F. Supp. 701, application on which the debarment before the Office of Administrative Law 704 (D.D.C. 1957) (‘‘The Securities and action is based. For purposes of a Judges, found at 29 CFR part 18, Exchange Commission has implied pattern or practice, the statute of encompassing both the right to present authority under its general statutory limitations will start to run with the last evidence and confront witnesses. While power to make rules and regulations or most recent application that historically the ALJs have held very few necessary for the execution of its demonstrates or constitutes the pattern. hearings in permanent labor functions[,] to establish qualifications Mandatory and permanent certification cases, we assume the for the attorneys practicing before it and debarment—One commenter proposed BALCA will order hearings in to take disciplinary action against that debarment be mandatory rather appropriate cases. attorneys found guilty of unethical or than permissive. After carefully With respect to the ability to present improper professional conduct’’). In considering this option, the Department and confront witnesses, the procedures addition, an agency with the power to has concluded it should retain outlined in 29 CFR part 18, which determine who may practice before it discretion in the administration of the govern the Office of Administrative Law debarment provision. Debarment is a Judges and apply to the BALCA also has the authority to debar or serious remedial measure not to be proceedings, establish the right to discipline such individuals for undertaken lightly. Discretion is also examine and cross-examine witnesses. unprofessional conduct. See Koden, 564 necessary to administer the debarment 29 CFR 18.34. With respect to the right F. 2d at 233. Further, as the Department provision in the manner stated above to a transcript, the BALCA procedures has the authority to prescribe and in the preamble to the proposed already provide for a hearing transcript. regulations for the performance of its rule at 71 FR 7660 (Feb. 13, 2006). As With respect to the right of a stay of business (as is the case with all a result, we conclude the debarment debarment upon a timely appeal, the executive departments under 5 U.S.C. provision in the Final Rule should regulation at § 656.26(a) of this Final 301), it likewise has the authority to remain discretionary rather than Rule has been amended to provide that determine who may practice or mandatory. debarment is stayed upon receipt of the participate in administrative The same commenter proposed that request for review. proceedings before it and may debar or repeat offenders should be permanently discipline those individuals engaging in debarred from the program following a 5. Debarment of Attorneys and Agents unprofessional conduct. The second offense. The Department has Many commenters maintained the Department has exercised such concluded that we should gain Department lacks the statutory authority authority in the past in prescribing the operational experience with the to debar attorneys or agents. They qualifications, and procedures for debarment provision in this Final Rule argued, for example, that INA section denying the appearance, of attorneys before considering a provision to make 212(a)(5) relates solely to the and other representatives before the debarment permanent following a admissibility of an alien coming to work Department’s Office of Administrative second or later offense. Further, the in the United States and does not grant Law Judges under 29 CFR 18.34(g). See Department is of the opinion that notice authority to legislate a system of also Smiley v. Director, Office of and comment rulemaking should be penalties against an employer or its Workers’ Compensation Programs, 984 undertaken before promulgating a attorney or agent. Further, commenters F.2d 278, 283 (9th Cir. 1993).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27929

6. Debarment of Employers In order to encourage compliance, the such reports, the Congress indicated its regulatory scheme for PERM relies on intent that DOL take action based on At the time of the NPRM on the PERM attestations, audits and, through this that information to address reported program, some commenters Final Rule, the remedial measures of problems. recommended enhancing program suspension and debarment proceedings Ensuring the integrity of a statutory integrity by establishing suspension and to assure compliance. Use of debarment program enacted to protect U.S. workers debarment procedures for employers as a mechanism to encourage is an important part of the Department’s that engage in fraudulent labor compliance has been endorsed in the mission. The Department was certification activities, prohibited INA for a number of foreign labor established, ‘‘to foster, promote, and transactions, or otherwise abuse the certification and attestation programs, develop the welfare of the wage earners permanent certification process. In the e.g., the H–1A, H–1B, H–1C, H–2A and of the United States, to improve their NPRM to this rulemaking, the D visa programs. INA sections working conditions, and to advance Department proposed establishing 212(m)(2)(E)(iv) and (v), 212(n)(2)(C), their opportunities for profitable debarment procedures as an important 218(b)(2), and 258(c)(4)(B). employment [Act of Feb. 14, 1903, Pub. part of efforts to avoid fraud, enhance In those programs, the Congress has L. 62–426, sec. 1, 37 Stat. 736] * * *.’’ and protect program integrity, and chosen to delineate and establish limits See also Janik Paving & Construction, protect U.S. workers. on the manner in which debarment is Inc. v. Brock, supra. Many comments on the NPRM imposed. Consequently, the H–1A, H– In December 2004, DOL changed, by expressed support for the Department’s 1B, and H–1C programs, under section regulation, the operation of the effort to debar from the permanent alien 212(m)(2)(E) and (n)(2)(D) of the INA, permanent labor certification program. labor certification program employers impose specific penalties on employers Under the current regulation at 20 CFR and others who defraud or abuse the who willfully make a misrepresentation part 656, employers may attest to system. However, similar to comments of a material fact in an application. See compliance with requirements to recruit received on the debarment of attorneys Immigration Act of 1990, Public Law U.S. workers rather than engaging in all and agents, some commenters 101–649, 104 Stat. 104–4978 (1990); cases in supervised, post-filing questioned the Department’s authority Immigration Nursing Relief Act of 1989, recruitment. Essential to maintaining to debar employers. Public Law 101–238, 103 Stat. 2099 the integrity of the new, streamlined (1989); Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged process is a need to audit compliance, The Department has carefully Areas Act of 1999, Public Law 106–95, already included in the regulations, and considered the comments on the 113 Stat. 1312 (1999); and Nursing a remedial measure for continued and proposal to debar employers and has Relief for Disadvantaged Areas serious non-compliance, which is determined that the availability of Reauthorization Act of 2005, Public Law included in this Final Rule. A system of suspension of case processing and 109–423, 120 Stat. 2900 (2006); see also attestation and audit, relying heavily on debarment mechanisms for employers, INA section 258 (regarding penalties in the veracity of employer submissions, attorneys and agents is necessary to the program for nonimmigrant maritime requires a system for ‘‘effective maintain program integrity. Therefore, crewmembers performing longshore enforcement,’’ as described in the Janik these provisions are included in this work). In each of these programs, Paving holding, supra. Final Rule. The suspension and Congress took for granted the For the above reasons, the remedial debarment of entities from participating Department’s authority to debar, but measure of debarment, modified as in a Government program is an inherent acted to limit or expand that inherent discussed above, is retained in this part of an agency’s responsibility to authority to enforce compliance in the Final Rule as it applies to employers. maintain the integrity of that program. employment-based immigration As the Second Circuit found in Janik 7. Provision of False or Inaccurate programs under the Department’s Information Paving & Construction, Inc. v. Brock, jurisdiction. In the case of the H–2A 828 F.2d 84 (2d Cir. 1987), the program, the Congress elevated existing Consistent with complaints about the Department possesses an inherent practice to express statutory status. other terms for debarment, many authority to refuse to provide a benefit Immigration Reform and Control Act of commenters expressed concern the rule or lift a restriction for an employer that 1986, Public Law 99–603, 100 Stat. 3359 would impose a severe penalty for has acted contrary to the welfare of U.S. (1986). providing false information that was, all workers. In assessing DOL’s authority to Beyond DOL’s inherent authority to things considered, minor, immaterial, or debar violators, the court found that ensure compliance with the permanent not meaningful. Numerous commenters ‘‘[t]he Secretary may * * * make such alien labor certification program, there submitted identical comments listing rules and regulations allowing is an implied grant of statutory authority specific circumstances they believed reasonable variations, tolerances, and in section 122(b) of the Immigration Act could lead to unjustified debarment and exemptions to and from any or all of 1990, which requires the Secretary to unfair punishment of attorneys, provisions * * * as [s]he may find accept reports from the public on including: (1) Typographical errors in necessary and proper in the public violations of the terms and conditions of the application regarding the alien’s interest to prevent injustice or undue a permanent alien labor certification.4 date of birth; (2) an inaccuracy in the hardship or to avoid serious impairment By specifically directing DOL to accept foreign national’s job history due to of the conduct of Government someone’s faulty memory; (3) business.’’ Id. at 89. In that case, the 4 The Secretary of Labor shall provide, in the employer’s relationship to the alien; or implied authority to debar existed even labor certification process under section (4) an inadvertent mistake in the though the statute in question 212(a)(5)(A) of [the Act] that— number of workers or the Federal (2) any person may submit documentary evidence ‘‘specifically provided civil and bearing on the application for certification (such as Employer Identification Number (FEIN). criminal sanctions for violations of information on available workers, information on Some commenters opined that attorneys overtime work requirements but failed wages and working conditions, and information on should be allowed to rely on to mention debarment.’’ Id. The court the employer’s failure to meet terms and conditions information provided by clients unless with respect to the employment of alien workers held that debarment may be necessary and co-workers). [Pub. L. 101–619, sec. 122(b), Nov. there is a clear indication of fraud, and to ‘‘effective enforcement of a statute.’’ 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4995.] that ‘‘no conduct of any attorney in any

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27930 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

setting is punishable without the Further, the attorney does not have to determined that these debarment elements of materiality and fraud.’’ sign the application unless he or she is provisions are appropriate to apply to Some commenters raised due process the ‘‘preparer’’ in Section M of the conduct under the streamlined PERM concerns. One commenter believed that application. Presumably, the attorney processes because that system depends existing mechanisms, e.g., denial of an will take reasonably prudent steps to on ensuring employers furnish the application or imposition of supervised apprise him or herself of the facts before required documentation within the recruitment (but in future filings), were signing the application. However, to required timeframes, as required by more viable options than what the allay any fears the regulated community §§ 656.20 and 656.21 (69 FR 77396 (Dec. commenter interpreted as indefinite may have concerning the Department’s 27, 2004)). Further, a repeated failure to suspension. possible use of the debarment provision, comply with core program requirements The Department has concluded that the Department has added the signals not only disregard for the § 656.31(f)(1)(ii) (§ 656.31(e)(1)(ii) in the requirement that there must be a pattern process, but an intentional abuse of NPRM) should be modified to address or practice with respect to failure to valuable, limited administrative the commenters’ concerns. Accordingly, comply with the terms of the labor resources, a practice the Department the term ‘‘willful’’ has been added to certification application (either Form cannot tolerate. this section so this Final Rule now ETA 9089 or Form ETA 750). A similar Some commenters provided scenarios applies to ‘‘the willful provision or requirement for a pattern or practice has in which an employer might fail to willful assistance in the provision of been added to § 656.31(f)(1)(iv), failure comply with audit or supervised false or inaccurate information in to comply in the audit process, and to recruitment requirements because the applying for permanent labor § 656.31(f)(1)(v), failure to comply with employer no longer wishes to go certification.’’ The Department wants to the Certifying Officer-ordered forward with the application, for make clear it views debarment as an supervised recruitment process. example: (1) The employer has extraordinary remedy and does not Commenters asserted the provision terminated the alien and, therefore, does intend to invoke it except under the discussing the failure to comply with not wish to respond to the audit request; most serious of circumstances. the terms of the Form ETA 9089 or Form (2) after an employer is requested to Authority to prohibit false or ETA 750 is vague or needs further engage in supervised recruitment, its inaccurate information on an clarification. We disagree. The terms human resources office decides to Application for Permanent Employment and areas the Department is interested terminate the application process; or (3) Certification—Commenters further in are best represented in the the employer decides to terminate the argued the Department lacks the certification sections of the two authority to regulate the information process after an audit when the application forms, specifically, Section employee resigns. provided on an Application for N, Employer Certifications, on the Form These comments do not warrant Permanent Employment Certification. ETA 9089, and item 23, Employer removal from this Final Rule of the One commenter insisted the Department Certifications, on the Form ETA 750. (f)(1)(iv) and (f)(1)(v) bases for lacked the authority to prohibit an More detailed information on the debarment. We recognize that there are employer from providing false employer certifications listed on the legitimate reasons for terminating an information on an application. As stated Form ETA 9089 in Section N of the application during the audit or above, the authority given to the application can be found in § 656.10(c) supervised recruitment processes and Department under the INA to approve of the current regulation and in the applications carries with it the authority do not intend that these reasons should preamble thereto at 69 FR 77389 (Dec. 5 to regulate the program, debar abusers, 27, 2004). Detailed information on the provide a basis for debarment. There and prohibit false or inaccurate employer certifications listed in item 23, are, however, cases in which the information. Form ETA 750, can be found in the persistent failure to cooperate in the former labor certification regulations at audit or supervised recruitment 8. Failure To Comply With the Terms of processes is evidence of an intent to the Labor Certification Application § 656.20 (2004), ‘‘General filing instructions’’ and in Technical avoid the discovery of serious violations Proposed § 656.31(f)(1)(iii) Assistance Guide No. 656 Labor of the regulations. Thus, the fact (§ 656.31(e)(1)(iii) in the NPRM) Certifications. These resources provide patterns these commenters cite must be provided that failure to comply with the ample guidance to the information considered individually as they arise. terms of the ETA 9089 or ETA 750 will sought in these sections and no further The existence of legitimate reasons to be a factor in determining whether to clarification is required. discontinue an application does not issue a notice of debarment. Some commenters argued that such a rule 9. Failure To Comply in the Audit or 5 The Department reminds users of the labor would make the attorney the guarantor Supervised Recruitment Process certification program of the importance of the audit process to maintaining the integrity of PERM. As of the accuracy of the Application for Some commenters sought clarification the Department stated in the 2004 preamble to the Permanent Employment Certification. of the provisions at § 656.31(f)(1)(iv) and Final Permanent Labor Certification Regulation, we The Department disagrees. Section (v) (§ 656.31(e)(1)(iv) and (v) in the will ‘‘minimize’’ the impact of non-meritorious 656.3(f)(1) provides that a notice of NPRM) that failure to comply with the applications by adjusting the audit mechanism in the new system as needed. We have the authority debarment from the permanent labor audit and supervised recruitment under the regulations to increase the number of certification program may be provided processes may be a factor in issuing a random audits or change the criteria for targeted to an employer, attorney, agent, or any debarment. Section 656.31(f)(1)(iv) and audits. As we gain program experience, we will combination thereof. As stated in the (v) will not normally apply to adjust the audit mechanism as necessary to maintain program integrity. We note that under preamble to the proposed rule the applications submitted under the former § 656.21(a), the Certifying Officer has the authority Department acknowledges that not all permanent labor certification to order supervised recruitment ‘‘when he or she debarment triggers should be treated regulations (20 CFR part 656 (2004)), determines it to be appropriate.’’ 69 FR 77329 (Dec. equally and will, therefore, take steps to because audit and supervised 27, 2004). It should also be noted that § 656.10(f) requires employers to maintain copies of ensure that any debarment is reasonable recruitment are not procedures applications and supporting documentation for up and proportionate to the improper currently in place under the backlog to five years from the date of the submission of the activity. program. The Department has application.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27931

moot the need for these debarment within DOL’s authority and furthers the application once the Department has provisions. INA’s statutory purpose. detected fraud and found the employer, While fraud cases arising under the agent or attorney willfully engaged in F. Other Objections and Comments new PERM system were not described such fraudulent behavior. It remedies a Investigation of past substitution in the NPRM, this should not be taken particular instance of fraud, but it does cases—Another commenter suggested as proof that fraud is not occurring not, in and of itself, deter or prevent the that DOL investigate all past under the system. The system is new increasing fraud occurring in the substitution cases with the help of and has not had the full opportunity for program. USCIS. DOL does not have primary investigation and prosecution as has For the reasons stated throughout this responsibility for investigation of past occurred under the previous regulation. preamble, the measures instituted by substitutions that were made after In fact, the Department is aware of and this Final Rule—eliminating certification. The Department has has referred cases of possible fraud for substitution, limiting the validity period participated in investigations and investigation under the new PERM of a permanent labor certification, criminal prosecutions in appropriate system. Further, we disagree that the prohibiting sale of labor certifications, cases involving substitution, and we issue of fraud in the permanent labor prohibiting employers from recouping will continue to work with DHS, DOL certification program lies solely in the recruitment costs and attorney fees from OIG, and DOJ when there are Backlog Processing Centers or that the aliens, and prohibiting violators from indications of possible fraud. fraud detection examples provided by using the permanent labor certification Adequacy of current fraud the Department indicate we are program—will deter and redress fraud safeguards—According to one asserting that fraud cannot or will not and abuse in the permanent labor commenter, the PERM system’s occur under the new re-engineered certification program. For the same vulnerability to fraud provides PERM program. We disagree that not reasons, the rule also clarifies the insufficient justification for DOL’s providing anecdotal evidence of fraud Department’s authority to deny an proposals as articulated in the proposed under the new PERM program is proof Application for Permanent Employment rule. A certain amount of fraud should that no fraud is being conducted by Certification when we find an employer, be tolerated, the commenter insisted, some employers, agents or attorneys. agent or attorney has provided false PERM introduced many important citing Medicare, credit card systems, information to us. safeguards that will help deter and and the entire tax system as processes detect fraud. However, these protections G. Comments Outside the Scope of the in which some level of fraud is simply are insufficient to eliminate the Rule accepted by society. This commenter incidence and incentives for fraud in The Department received a number of invited DOL to ignore the PERM the permanent labor certification system’s vulnerability to fraud as the comments not directly related to the program. The existence of some anti- issues raised by the NPRM. These price to be paid for offering what the fraud measures does not preclude the commenter characterized as a ‘‘benefit’’ comments generally addressed the agency from initiating and establishing following topic areas: to all. Having acknowledged fraud additional fraud detection and • exists, the commenter next pointed to Lack of consistency between avoidance mechanisms, particularly agencies, especially related to the need the design of the PERM system itself as when considering the value of such containing built-in fraud protection for labor certifications in light of USCIS mechanisms against their relatively policies limiting the availability of mechanisms. As examples, the small costs. Our Federal partner commenter cited built-in safeguards to National Interest Waivers when the agencies have demonstrated through need for the individual stems from a detect fraud prior to filing such as: investigations and prosecutions that the Initial establishment of the PERM labor shortage. level of fraud today is far more • Suggestions of other measures the account; verification of employer’s advanced and sophisticated than it was Department should consider related to existence; establishment of PINs; and 10 years ago and that it continues to the permanent labor certification limiting changes to accounts and sub- evolve and become even more program, including conducting more accounts. Finally, the commenter sophisticated. It is incumbent upon the investigations of suspected fraud, viewed Federal prosecutions as Department to remain aware of these eliminating the authority of agents to significant in preventing fraud or abuse. trends and to strengthen the program to represent employers or aliens in labor The Department declines the withstand the changing nature of fraud certification cases, fixing problems in commenter’s suggestion to simply being committed against it. Because the the PERM software, and revising current acquiesce in a certain amount of fraud Department has direct experience with requirements for advertising. by those seeking certification. No how fraudulent behavior within the • Descriptions of personal regulatory scheme can eliminate all permanent labor certification process is experiences with the immigration possibilities of fraud, but, as a matter of pervasive throughout the process and process generally provided as examples good government, the Department must detrimental to the purpose and intent of of fraud and abuse. make every reasonable effort to the process, we can assess what systems • Comments concerning delays in the eliminate fraud. DOL takes its role and and/or procedures are adequately processing centers and, specifically, its statutory authority under the INA detecting fraud and where delays resulting from the audit process. quite seriously and will continue to look improvements are needed. We do not respond here to these for ways to eliminate fraud and the Many commenters stated that because issues individually, as they fall outside enticements to fraud in the permanent we currently possess the authority to the scope of this rulemaking. labor certification system. This Final invalidate an application for labor Rule’s elimination of substitution and of certification up to five years after it has H. Other Amendments indefinite certification validity bolster been certified, we already have In addition to the specific revisions fraud protection and reduce incentives sufficient safeguards in the permanent described above, the Department has and opportunities to commit fraud. The labor certification program. We made other minor, technical, and need to protect the system from fraud respectfully disagree. The invalidation editorial changes to the regulatory text, and eliminate vulnerabilities is clearly of an application is what happens to an as appropriate.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27932 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

IV. Required Administrative labor certification in PY 2005, then To estimate the cost of the Final Rule Information applied a similar distribution (same on small businesses, the Department industries and general percentages) to calculated each employer would likely A. Regulatory Flexibility Act applications currently being processed pay in the range of $300 to $1,500 to In crafting this Final Rule and through the Backlog Processing Centers. meet the advertising and recruitment reviewing public comments, the Although some, but not all, employers requirements for a job opportunity, and Department conferred with the Office of will file multiple applications with the take one hour to prepare the recruitment the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Department in a given year, the report required for each application. Business Administration (SBA), as Department’s analysis treated each The cost range for advertising and required by the Regulatory Flexibility application as a separate economic recruitment is taken from a recent Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 609(b). This impact impact on the employer and, (September 2006) sample of newspapers analysis reflects those consultations and consequently, the estimated impacts of in various urban and rural U.S. cities, generally incorporates the Chief the Final Rule may be overstated. Based and reflects approximate costs for Counsel’s comments. Based on the on anecdotal evidence, and in the placing two 10-line advertisements in analysis detailed below, the Department absence of precise historical data to those newspapers. The cost to prepare submits that this Final Rule will not accurately track substitution requests, the recruitment report is based on the have a significant economic impact on the analysis also assumed that 10 median hourly wage rate for a Human a substantial number of small entities. percent of all employer applications Resources Manager ($36.52), as In this rule, the Department takes will request substitution of the alien on published by the U.S. Department of measures to enhance program integrity the permanent labor certification Labor’s Occupational Information and reduce the incentives and application prior to implementation of Network, O*Net OnLine, and increased opportunities for fraud and abuse in the this Final Rule, even though the by a factor of 1.42 to account for permanent employment of aliens in the historical practice of alien substitution employee benefits and other United States. The rule’s limitations on by employers participating in the compensation.7 the acquisition and use of permanent Department’s permanent labor The Department determined the labor certification applications and following industries predominate in the permanent labor certifications will have certification process is far less. The permanent labor certification program: an economic effect on only those analysis does not attempt to quantify (1) Professional, Scientific, and employers seeking DOL certification to lost productivity costs employers could Technical Services; (2) Manufacturing; hire foreign workers for permanent potentially incur after the loss of an (3) Accommodation and Food Services; positions. The prohibition against alien worker for whom a permanent (4) Healthcare and Social Assistance; (5) substitution on the employer’s labor certification application has been Educational Services; and (6) permanent labor certification filed and for whom substitution is no Construction. The Department has application and the validity period of longer permitted. In the Department’s reviewed the data from each of these 180 days on approved certifications experience, such costs are believed to be industries as described below to each trigger a retest of the labor market negligible, since the overwhelming determine there is no significant impact (when original alien becomes majority of applications filed are for on small businesses. unavailable a certification expires) to nonimmigrants already working in the The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 ensure that no U.S. workers are United States and in the position that is Economic Census reported that qualified and available to fill the job the subject of the application. approximately 602,578 employer opportunity, carrying with it an Under the Small Business establishments were operating year- economic cost. Employers’ compliance Administration Act, a small business is round in the Professional, Scientific, with the procedures set forth in the one that is ‘‘independently owned and and Technical Services Industry, and Final Rule will not require completion operated and which is not dominant in 96.7 percent of those employed less of additional preprinted forms or the its field of operation.’’ The definition of than 50 employees. In PY 2005, 13,286 collection of information beyond that small business varies from industry to PERM applications were filed with the already required by Form ETA 9089, industry to the extent necessary to Department by employers who Application for Permanent Employment properly reflect industry size indicated they employed less than 50 Certification. differences. In Program Year (PY) 2005 (July 1, The Department conducted its size workers in the area of intended 2005—June 30, 2006), the Department standard analysis based on 13 CFR part employment for positions in this received approximately 115,952 121, which describes the SBA’s size industry. We estimate approximately applications from employers seeking standards for businesses in various 20,223 of the backlogged applications labor certification under the PERM industries. To group employers by size, currently in process were submitted by program. Because the Final Rule would the Department relied on information similarly sized employers in this also impact permanent labor submitted by each employer on the industry sector. Assuming employers certification applications being permanent labor certification will attempt to substitute the alien on 10 processed and certifications issued application, which provides data on the percent of applications filed with the through ETA’s Backlog Processing total number of employees in the area of Department, we estimate the annual Centers, the Department also included intended employment for each number of employer applications in this in its analysis 176,496 backlogged application. Because the Department industry that may be impacted by the applications in process as of September does not collect information with Final Rule is 3,351 at a cost range of 7, 2006.6 respect to the annual receipts of $1,346,597 to $5,200,161. To conduct its analysis, the employers, it used the average The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 Department looked to the major employment level of firms in each Economic Census reported that industries that PERM program data industry that predominates in the 7 The O*Net OnLine summary information on showed had applied for permanent permanent labor certification program Human Resources Manager positions may be found as the size standard for small businesses at http://online.onetcenter.org/link/summary/11– 6 Reserved. in each of those industries. 3040.00.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27933

approximately 350,828 employer impacted by the Final Rule is 1,063 at Comparing the number of small establishments were operating in the a cost range of $427,311 to $1,650,149. businesses that have applied under the Manufacturing Industry, and 98.9 The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 PERM and prior programs to the total percent of those employed less than 500 Economic Census reported that number of businesses that have applied employees. In PY 2005, 9,342 PERM approximately 38,293 employer under those programs; and (2) applications were filed with the establishments were operating year- comparing the number of labor Department by employers who round in the Educational Services certification applications filed by small indicated they employed less than 500 Industry, and 98.9 percent of those businesses to the number filed by all workers in the area of intended employed less than 100 employees. In businesses. employment for positions in this PY 2005, 1,336 PERM applications were Several commenters focused on the industry. We estimate approximately filed with the Department by employers impact on small businesses of the 14,220 of the backlogged applications who indicated they employed less than prohibitions on substitution and currently in process were submitted by 100 workers in the area of intended reimbursement as a subset of the costs similarly sized employers in this employment for positions in this incurred by small businesses in industry sector. Assuming employers industry. We estimate approximately successfully obtaining labor will attempt to substitute the alien on 10 2,034 of the backlogged applications certifications. One commenter described percent of applications filed with the currently in process were submitted by the steps employers take when Department, we estimate the annual similarly sized employers in this submitting labor certification number of employer applications in this industry sector. Assuming employers applications, including verifying the job industry that may be impacted by the will attempt to substitute the alien on 10 skills and cultural fit of the worker, Final Rule is 2,356 at a cost range of percent of applications filed with the conducting labor market tests, and $946,855 to $3,656,473. Department, we estimate the annual determining future needs based on The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 number of employer applications in this demand. Another commenter described Economic Census reported that industry that may be impacted by the the requirement to advertise positions in approximately 456,856 employer Final Rule is 337 at a cost range of print, along with other recruiting establishments were operating year- $135,410 to $522,912. activities. One commenter estimated the The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 round in the Accommodation and Food cost for each application was Economic Census reported that Services Industry, and 90.8 percent of approximately $10,000, based on approximately 710,307 employer informal conversations with others. The those employed less than 50 employees. establishments were operating in the same commenter said the costs for In PY 2005, 7,478 PERM applications Construction Industry, and 99.9 percent applications were at least $1,000 each. were filed with the Department by of those employed less than 500 Commenters claimed the costs to small employers who indicated they employees. In PY 2005 PERM, 5,579 businesses were substantial. employed less than 50 workers in the PERM applications were filed with the As described above, the Department’s area of intended employment for Department by employers who analysis focused only on those small positions in this industry. We estimate indicated they employed less than 500 businesses that filed or are likely to file approximately 11,383 of the backlogged workers in the area of intended applications for permanent labor applications currently in process were employment for positions in this certification, and accounts for costs of submitted by similarly sized employers industry. We estimate approximately advertising and related recruitment in this industry sector. Assuming 8,492 of the backlogged applications activities. As stated in the section of the employers will attempt to substitute the currently in process were submitted by preamble addressing substitution, these alien on 10 percent of applications filed similarly sized employers in this are not costs unanticipated by the with the Department, we estimate the industry sector. Assuming employers statute. Also, the Form ETA 9089 may annual number of employer will attempt to substitute the alien on 10 be filed electronically and does not applications in this industry that may be percent of applications filed with the require a filing fee. The Department’s impacted by the Final Rule is 1,886 at Department, we estimate the annual analysis does not estimate a cost range of $757,930 to $2,926,901. number of employer applications in this reimbursement amounts, as the The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 industry that may be impacted by the Department has always assumed an Economic Census reported that Final Rule is 1,407 at a cost range of employer is not entitled to approximately 619,517 employer $565,457 to $2,183,629. reimbursement; as explained in the establishments were operating year- Several commenters maintained the section governing payments, above, the round in the Healthcare and Social rule would have a significant impact on costs of labor certification are generally Assistance Industry, and 93 percent of a substantial number of small entities. the employer’s, and this rule simply those employed less than 50 employees. One commenter challenged the analysis codifies that responsibility. Our analysis In PY 2005, 4,216 PERM applications used by the Department to support its leads us to conclude this rule’s were filed with the Department by statement that the rule’s impact on economic impact will not be significant. employers who indicated they small business will be immaterial. The employed less than 50 workers in the commenter maintained that although B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of area of intended employment for less than one percent of all small 1995 positions in this industry. We estimate businesses would be affected, the This Final Rule will not result in the approximately 6,417 of the backlogged appropriate universe to consider would expenditure by state, local, and tribal applications currently in process were consist only of those small businesses governments, in the aggregate, or by the submitted by similarly sized employers that wish to hire a foreign worker using private sector, of $100 million or more in this industry sector. Assuming the labor certification process. in any one year, and it will not employers will attempt to substitute the According to the commenter, the rule significantly or uniquely affect small alien on 10 percent of applications filed would not affect those businesses that governments. Therefore, no action is with the Department, we estimate the do not submit applications. The necessary under the provisions of the annual number of employer commenter also suggested other Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of applications in this industry that may be measures of materiality, including: (1) 1995.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27934 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

One commenter stated this rule would application process before DOL or DHS,9 thus minimizing or amount to an unfunded mandate implementation of the rule. For a proper eliminating impact of the prohibition on because it would be difficult to enforce evaluation of the benefits and costs of those employers for purposes of those and would require ETA to employ a the rule and its alternatives, we explain applications.10 Nonetheless, in large police force to monitor how the actions the rule requires of acknowledgment of the multi-agency compliance. The Department disagrees workers, employers, government process required for employment-based with this comment. We do not agencies, and others are linked to the immigration, the analysis makes a good anticipate significant additional costs to expected benefits. We also identify faith attempt to quantify the most State, local, or tribal governments as a expected undesirable side effects of the salient (potential) costs and benefits to result of this rule. Although we do not Final Rule and the alternatives employers with substitutable petitions speak here to any budgetary considered. currently pending at DHS, regardless of implications of the rule, additional Following OMB Circular A–4, this when filed. For purposes of a cost costs, if any, to ETA as a result of this analysis focuses primarily on benefits estimate, this analysis assumes that any regulation are strictly Federal and and costs that accrue to citizens and employer who may find itself in need of attendant to the Department’s permanent residents of the United substitution after the prohibition is in responsibility in administering the States; it does not factor in benefits and place could, in order to fill the vacancy, permanent labor certification program. costs to aliens who, for example, may be incur certain additional costs not The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act named on labor certification required if substitution were still an does not cover costs to Federal agencies. applications but are not yet U.S. citizens option. Because up-front, one-time costs C. Executive Order 12866 or lawful permanent residents. As explained in greater detail below, to the associated with reading and This Final Rule has been drafted and extent this Final Rule’s economic costs understanding the Final Rule would not reviewed in accordance with Executive or benefits are affected by the existence result in significant costs to employers Order 12866, section 1(b), Principles of of foreign workers who are already here or government agencies, we did not Regulation. The Department has in the United States and part of the include them in our analysis. In determined, based on its benefit-cost economy, the analysis considers those addition, we assumed that annual costs analysis 8 of the key provisions of the costs or benefits to be transfers between would be the same each year. Following regulation, that the rule is not an U.S. and foreign workers and not OMB guidance, we used discount rates ‘‘economically significant’’ regulatory measurably impacting the rule’s net of seven percent and three percent. action within the meaning of section economic impact. The Department separately analyzed 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order. This rule In most cases, this benefit-cost the benefits and costs of the major will not have an annual effect on the analysis covers 10 years to ensure it provisions of the Final Rule. The Department’s analysis (elimination of economy of $100 million or more, nor captures all major benefits and costs substitution, establishment of a validity will it adversely affect in a material way with respect to key entities and period, etc.) and response to public the economy, a sector of the economy, programmatic activities. For purposes of comments are set forth below. The size productivity, competition, jobs, the this analysis, the 10-year period starts in of the net benefits, the absolute environment, public health or safety, or the next fiscal year on October 1, 2007. difference between the projected State, local, or tribal governments or The analysis does not include benefits and costs, indicates whether communities. We estimate the Final permanent labor certification one policy is more efficient than Rule’s quantified benefits to be $64.3 applications filed under the regulation another. We estimated that total 10-year million per year and the quantified costs in effect prior to March 28, 2005 and discounted quantified and monetized to be $39.8 million per year. The pending at the Department’s Backlog Department made every effort, where benefits range from $445.0 to $540.4 Processing Centers. As stated above, we million and the total 10-year discounted feasible, to quantify and monetize the expect to eliminate the backlog by benefits and costs of this Final Rule. quantified and monetized cost ranges September 30, 2007. In the unlikely from $279.5 to $339.4 million for a net Where we could not quantify them—for even that the Department does not example, due to data limitations—we present value of the benefits of $165.5 completely eliminate the backlog by to $201.0 million. described benefits and costs September 30, 2007, the costs of the qualitatively. In such cases, the rulemaking may be slightly 1. Employer Costs and Burden Generally Department has provided a underestimated. Some commenters maintained the comprehensive qualitative discussion of With respect to immigrant worker proposed rule is a ‘‘significant’’ the impacts of the rule. Finally, the petitions currently pending and open to regulatory action within the meaning of Department has concluded, after substitution at the Department of Executive Order 12866 for several consideration of both the quantitative Homeland Security, the analysis reasons, including its overall cost to and qualitative impacts of the assumes a one-time impact (rather than rulemaking, that the benefits of the rule recurring impact over 10 years) until 9 This Final Rule’s prohibition on substitution justify the costs. those applications are adjudicated. As does not cover substitution requests submitted by Overall, the analysis estimated the this preamble states earlier in response the rule’s effective date. Separately, the rule establishes a 180-day validity period for labor benefits and costs associated with the to commenter concerns about Final Rule compared to the baseline, certifications not filed with DHS. Although we application of the rule to pending anticipate there are employers who—prior to the that is, the permanent labor certification applications, program users have had effective date of the rule—may either request sufficient notice of the Department’s substitutions they already know to be required or 8 The Department’s analysis followed the seek to file old but unused labor certifications in guidelines provided by the Office of Management intent to eliminate the practice of support of I–140 petitions with DHS, this analysis and Budget (OMB) in Circular A–4. This circular substitution; therefore, we believe that does not quantify the number of employers or labor constitutes OMB’s guidance to Federal agencies employers have had the opportunity to certifications in these categories. There is simply no governing regulatory analysis pursuant to Executive act on any substitution requests they information from which to draw conclusions, and Order 12866 and other statutes and authorities. It any such estimate would be at best speculative. is available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ know to be required but remain 10 This analysis assumes one substitution over the omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf. outstanding and not yet submitted to life of a labor certification application.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27935

employers and its potential impact on material way within the meaning of employment opportunities for U.S. the U.S. economy. These commenters Executive Order 12866. Moreover, the workers, cost-savings to employers in based their concerns on the process they commenters made little effort to explain the form of reduced staff time and say employers generally undertake in how costs associated with the rule could incidental costs, cost savings to State successfully applying for a certification result in an annual effect on the governments in the form of reduced and their estimate of costs incurred by economy of $100 million or more. unemployment insurance benefits, and employers in pursuing those Instead, the commenters took issue with cost savings to the Federal Government applications. One commenter pointed the individual, activity-based costs and in the form of reduced staff time out the certification application is only economic impact of the labor resulting from a reduction in processing one of several steps in hiring a foreign certification process itself. substitution requests. worker. In addition, according to the The Department readily acknowledges The current practice of allowing commenter, the employer must verify that employers incur various costs substitution of alien beneficiaries the job skills and cultural fit of the associated with the decision to hire provides a strong incentive for the filing worker, conduct a labor market test, and alien workers. The labor certification of fraudulent labor certification determine its hiring and training needs process, by its very nature, imposes applications. If substitution is based on demand. Another commenter costs to employers to establish, to the permitted, permanent labor certification made similar points, noting that it Secretary of Labor’s satisfaction, the applications or resulting certifications engages in required print advertising unavailability of and no adverse impact can be marketed to aliens who are and other recruiting activities at a cost on U.S. workers. Since the costs are willing to pay a considerable sum of of more than $200,000 annually. It also standard to the labor certification money to be substituted for the named reviews resumes, interviews candidates, process, we do not consider these costs aliens on the applications or and engages legal counsel to assist in as incremental to the rulemaking. certifications. The substitution ban preparing and reviewing materials Further, as detailed in each of the increases program integrity by reducing required for the application. Although sections below, the Department’s the incentives or opportunities for fraud none of the commenters provided analysis reveals the Final Rule’s through the lawful permanent resident detailed figures for each of their quantified and monetized benefits process. Due to a lack of adequate data, activities, at least one commenter outweigh costs, and will impose no however, we were not able to quantify estimated, based largely on feedback it significant economic impact or material or monetize this important benefit. states it received from other companies, adverse effect within the meaning of Banning substitution will deter that the cost for each application was Section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order unscrupulous employers, attorneys, or approximately $10,000. 12866. agents from filing permanent labor Several commenters made broad 2. Ban on Alien Substitution certification applications simply to sell observations related to the general them later for profit, and reduce the burdens that the proposed rule would Before this Final Rule takes effect, number of fraudulent applications impose. One commenter stated the employers may substitute a different received by the Department. We proposed rule is burdensome because alien on a permanent labor certification estimate the cost savings achieved from the labor certification process itself has application if the original alien named recovery of processing resources by numerous requirements and is difficult on the certification application is no multiplying the number of fraudulent to understand. Two other commenters longer available. Under the Final Rule, substitutions (assume a subset of the argued the proposed rule is likely to employers may not substitute the alien total number of substitution requests curb business growth, inhibit job named on the application. Separately, received) by the average number of creation, and encourage employers to the rule prohibits employers from hours spent by our staff on each move jobs and operations offshore. amending any information on the fraudulent substitution, by the average Another commenter stated its concern application once it is submitted to the compensation of our staff reviewing that the rule would punish nonprofit Department. If an alien is no longer fraudulent substitutions. We estimate research institutions due to the costs of available for the job described on the the annual cost saving to the compliance. One commenter suggested application, an employer must conduct Department at $2.8 million per year.11 the rule could result in a reduction of a new labor market test, and if this test This analysis captures savings foreign workers, which in itself would indicates no qualified U.S. workers are specifically linked to applications we have an impact on the economy because available and the only qualified worker estimate involve fraudulent foreign workers themselves create is an alien, then the employer must substitutions, rather than all fraudulent demand in the economy for housing, submit a new permanent labor applications (that is, applications food and other essentials. Finally, one certification application. employing fraud, regardless of type). commenter protested that the rule will We estimate the 10-year discounted An important purpose of the impose significant additional costs on quantified and monetized benefits substitution ban is to ensure that if an the many employers who are honest in associated with this provision of the alien is no longer available, the their acquisition and use of Final Rule will be between $177.4 and employer will conduct a new labor certifications, based on the misdeeds of $215.5 million, and total quantified and market test to determine whether a a small number of employers who have monetized costs will be between $147.0 suitable U.S. worker is available. Since abused the process. and $178.6 million. Thus, the quantified labor market dynamics can change in a The Department agrees with the benefits exceed the quantified costs, and matter of months, it is possible that commenters that this rule is a the net present value over a 10-year time significant regulatory action under EO horizon will range from $30.4 to $36.9 11 As described above, the Department estimated 12866, and has been submitted to OMB million. the annual number of substitutions to be for review. While the commenters approximately 11,595 and estimated that 10 percent express general concern over possible Benefits of these substitutions are fraudulent. Average DOL staff time per fraudulent substitution is estimated harm to employers, however, they failed The ban on alien substitution has at 40 hours and their average hourly salary (staff to articulate how the rule itself will several important benefits to society: with pay grade GS 14, step 5) is $42.24, which was adversely affect the economy in a improved program integrity, increased increased by 1.42 to account for employee benefits.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27936 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

when the alien on a permanent labor important benefit for lack of adequate Federal agencies involved in the certification is no longer available, and data. immigration system. However, due to a the employer conducts new recruiting Further, because the employer would lack of adequate data, we were not able efforts, qualified U.S. workers will be have otherwise hired an alien if it had to quantify or monetize these benefits to identified. Some U.S. workers hired not conducted the labor market test, the society. employer will experience cost savings would have otherwise remained Costs unemployed. by not continuing with the permanent The ban on substitution does impose Without the ban on substitution and labor certification application process. We estimate this cost savings by several costs to society: additional job required labor market test, the employer calculating the monetary value of the advertising and recruitment by may not be aware that U.S. workers decrease in employer staff time for employers, increased employer staff became available since their original test preparing, filing, and tracking labor time for filing labor certification of the labor market, and may have certification applications; preparing and applications, and increased staff time in otherwise hired an alien.12 Therefore, maintaining the recruitment report and State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) and the second labor market test required by submitting the recruitment report (to the Department, all described in greater the Final Rule should result in comply with an audit, where requested). detail below. We estimate the 10-year increased employment opportunities for We estimate this cost savings by discounted cost to society to be between U.S. workers. We estimate the monetary multiplying the staff time required to $147.0 and $178.6 million. value of this benefit by examining the conduct such activities by the staff If the employer’s second labor market compensation earned by U.S. workers compensation, by the number of U.S. test indicates that no qualified U.S. that would not have otherwise been workers hired as a result of labor market workers are available, then the employer hired. To estimate this benefit, we tests. It is important to note that this must submit a new permanent labor accounted for the number of U.S. cost savings to employers partially certification application with the name workers that would be favored by offsets the costs of compliance to of the new alien. However, to fill the requiring employers to conduct new employers discussed below. The cost of position, employers who otherwise labor market tests and the compensation compliance to employers outweighs this might have substituted must test the of these workers, which includes both partial cost-savings. We also account for market for U.S. workers and incur their salaries and benefits, and reflects the incidental costs (such as delivery, recruitment costs, independent of the decrease in time that those workers copying, and telephone charges) whether they eventually file a would have stayed unemployed. We incurred by employers. We estimate the permanent labor certification estimate this benefit to be $21.3 million annual cost savings to employers to be application. To the extent an employer 13 per year. $1.2 million.14 finds a qualified U.S. worker to fill the The analysis assumes the U.S. In addition, we anticipate other cost position, it is inappropriate to attribute workers hired who were previously savings or benefits associated with the those costs to the labor certification unemployed will no longer be required ban on substitution will have a ripple process, as in those cases the need for to seek unemployment insurance effect through the publicly administered labor certification has been removed. benefits. Therefore, other things being immigration system. We believe cost The main cost to employers constant, as an added benefit we savings could be realized in the associated with the substitution ban is estimate the states will experience a following areas: reduction in the the increase in employer staff time to reduction in unemployment insurance Department of Labor’s Office of prepare, file, and track labor expenditures as a consequence of U.S. Inspector General (OIG) staff time certification applications. We estimate workers being hired after labor market required to review or investigate this cost by multiplying the number of tests are conducted. The Department, potentially fraudulent substitutions; substitutions leading to labor market however, was not able to quantify this reduced DHS staff time to review I–140 tests not favoring U.S. workers by the immigrant petitions; reduced DHS staff number of employer staff hours to 12 For purposes of this analysis, the Department time to review I–485 applications; a prepare, file, and track the labor assumed that U.S. workers favored by the new labor reduction in DOS staff time resulting certifications, by the compensation of market tests were unemployed. However, a benefit from a need to conduct fewer interviews the employer staff undertaking these to U.S. workers could still exist even if these with aliens seeking permanent workers were employed elsewhere: their departure activities. from their old jobs would open up new residence; and less DOJ staff time spent Another cost to employers of the employment opportunities for other U.S. workers on investigation and prosecution of substitution ban results from the and potentially result in higher wages being earned. fraudulent substitutions. We believe additional recruiting efforts, in 13 The Department estimated that of the 115,952 that deterring and preventing particular job advertising, as well as the PERM applications filed between July 1, 2005 and substitution-related fraud will have an June 30, 2006, 10 percent requested a substitution. increased employer staff time to arrange This is also the Department’s estimate of percentage important and visible impact on other for and track recruiting efforts and for of substitution requests in cases filed under the receiving, compiling, interviewing, preceding regulations. This analysis estimates 15 14 The Department estimated that employers analyzing, and reporting the results of percent of labor market tests favor U.S. workers. spend 10 staff hours on average preparing, filing, 15 The average annual wage on permanent labor and tracking the labor certifications. As stated in the recruitment. The Department certifications applications in the PERM database is the preamble to the PERM Final Rule, it takes on $69,000 per year. The average wage was increased average one (1) hour for an employer to prepare a 15 It is possible some employers would not have by 1.42 to account for employee benefits (source: recruitment report for each application it files. We conducted any recruiting activities to locate a Bureau of Labor Statistics). DOL assumed that estimated that 10 percent of these applications are second applicant if substitution were allowed (e.g., workers would have been unemployed for an audited, which will require an additional hour for if a qualified alien was already working for the additional 1.5 months. There may be some portion the employer to submit the report. We assumed that employer under a temporary H1B visa). If an of these jobs filled by U.S. workers already Human Resources Managers (or their equivalent) employer would normally hire another alien that is employed. For these employees the range of conduct this activity for the employer and that their already employed by the employer, then most of the benefits may, as a result of their being employed median hourly wage is $36.52, which we increased recruiting activities required by PERM would be when taking the new opportunity, be less than the by 1.42 to account for employee benefits (source: additional cost. If the employer would normally full salary and benefits accounted for in this range Bureau of Labor Statistics). The Department conduct an extensive recruiting effort to find a new found in this analysis. This analysis does not estimated that employers spend $100 in incidental qualified employee, few of the PERM required quantify that lesser amount. costs per application. recruiting activities would constitute an additional

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27937

included in its cost estimate the time determine the prevailing wage by the substituted. To the extent they stem spent to comply in excess of the time compensation of the staff, by the annual from a longer wait, or backlogs at other the employer would normally spend in number of substitution requests. We Federal agencies, the number of factors recruiting efforts. We estimate the estimate the annual costs to SWAs to be bearing on such costs (variables recruiting costs by examining what $0.5 million per year.19 determining time in respective queues, recruiting efforts were reported by The primary cost government-wide is mitigating factors such as options for employers filing PERM applications and the increased staff time to review interim sources of labor, etc.), and the by surveying local newspapers, additional labor certification relative impact of each factor, are websites, and SWAs to determine the applications, immigrant petitions, etc., simply too speculative for the costs associated with these activities.16 that may be submitted when a legitimate Department to be able to accurately We estimate the costs for filing change in the alien beneficiary is measure. applications and preparing recruitment necessary. If employers must resubmit reports by multiplying the staff time labor certification applications when the Impact of Prohibition Based on required to conduct such activities by original alien becomes unavailable, then Availability of Alien the staff’s compensation by the annual Department of Labor staff will spend As stated above, the analysis assumes number of additional labor certification that much more time reviewing 10% of employers may require applications.17 We estimated the total applications. We estimate this cost to substitution at the labor certification annual cost to employers to process and the Department by multiplying the time stage (11,595 applications). The analysis track labor certification applications and spent reviewing each application by the assumes all of those applications will conduct additional recruitment efforts compensation of our analysts, by the require a second market test, 15% (1,739 to be $19.8 million per year.18 increased number of applications.20 applications) of which will favor U.S. SWAs also experience an additional Another related cost to the Federal workers. As stated, in that 15% of cases cost. The substitution ban may increase Government is the increased in which an employer finds a qualified the number of applications filed by Departmental staff time to audit an U.S. worker, recruitment costs related to employers, which requires employers to increased number of recruitment the labor certification process should place a job order with the SWA serving reports. We estimate this cost by not be attributed to this rulemaking. In the area of intended employment for a multiplying the time spent auditing the remaining 9,856 cases, the analysis period of 30 days. Employers must also each recruitment report by the average already includes the costs of the second obtain a prevailing wage determination compensation of one of our analysts, by labor market test and other costs of the from the SWA. SWAs will incur some the increased number of recruitment labor certification process, including additional costs associated with reports that will be audited.21 We average filing and application increased SWA staff time to process job estimated the total annual Departmental management expenditures (recruitment, orders and provide employers with costs to be $0.7 million per year. staff time, etc.) for each employer. prevailing wage determinations. We In addition, the Department As a refinement on this estimate, it is estimate this cost by multiplying the considered potential costs to employers possible to make some broad SWA staff time to process job orders and associated with a later priority date and assumptions about impact on different a longer wait for an alien who would categories of employers holding those cost. For the purposes of this analysis, DOL otherwise be the beneficiary of a remaining 9,856 applications. We may assumed that on average, an employer would place substitution. However, this analysis an ad in a Sunday paper and conduct other assume, broadly and based on our recruiting efforts, such as placing a notice on the does not quantify such costs. As stated programmatic experience, that organization’s website or attending a job fair. previously, to the extent such costs are approximately 80% of employers (7,885 16 The Department estimated that the cost of an quantifiable, they are potentially applications) have replacements at the advertisement in a Sunday paper is $750. DOL also negligible since most substituted jobs ready (at their own place of business or estimated it would take an employer 0.5 hours to place the advertisement with the Sunday paper and are already held by the alien to be another U.S. establishment), and the 0.5 hours to place a job order with the SWA. In remaining 20% (1,971 applications, or addition, this analysis assumes an employer would 19 The Department estimated SWA staff spend 1.7% of total applications processed in spend 10 hours to arrange for and track recruiting one (1) hour on average to process job orders and the system) must reach outside the efforts and an additional 10 hours for receiving, determine the prevailing wage. We also estimated compiling, interviewing, analyzing, and reporting the hourly rate for SWA staff to be $34.94 per hour, country when the original alien the results of the recruitment. which was increased by 1.42 to account for becomes unavailable.22 17 According to the preamble to the PERM Final employee benefits (source: Bureau of Labor As a general proposition, an employer Rule, it takes on average one (1) hour for an Statistics). who now has the option to substitute employer to prepare a recruitment report for each 20 The Department estimated that 70 percent of but would normally have another alien application it files. DOL estimated that 10 percent applications are ‘‘clean’’ and do not raise any audit of these applications are audited, which will flags. ‘‘Clean’’ applications require 0.25 hours of at the ready (thereby incurring no need require an additional hour for the employer to DOL staff time. We assumed that the remaining to advertise) would incur additional submit the report. DOL assumed that Human applications raise audit flags and must be reviewed recruitment costs after the substitution Resources Managers (or their equivalent) conduct manually, requiring four (4) hours of DOL staff prohibition to meet the requirement for this activity for the employer. time. We estimated that the median hourly wage for 18 As mentioned above, the Department estimated DOL reviewers is $30.06 (GS 12, step 5, which was a second labor market test. An employer that employers spend 10 staff hours on average increased by 1.42 to account for employee benefits who can now substitute but must preparing, filing, and tracking the labor (source: Bureau of Labor Statistics). As explained generally look outside the country to fill certifications. DOL assumed Human Resources above, DOL assumed that approximately 9,856 vacancies may not necessarily incur Managers (or their equivalent) conduct this work for additional permanent labor certification the employer and that the median hourly wage for applications will be filed with DOL each year. additional costs specifically for Human Resource Managers is $36.52, which DOL 21 The Department assumed auditors spend two increased by 1.42 to account for employee benefits. (2) hours to audit recruitment reports. We assumed 22 The Department’s longstanding programmatic This analysis assumes 85 percent of the required the median hourly wage for DOL auditors is $30.06 experience, both under the previous regulation and labor market tests favor aliens, and that employers (GS 12, step 5; source: DOL), which DOL increased the more current PERM rule, is that a significant request substitutions on 10 percent of the 115,952 by 1.42 to account for employee benefits (source: percentage of applications for permanent labor applications submitted per year, resulting in Bureau of Labor Statistics). As explained above, certification name aliens already here and approximately 9,856 additional permanent labor DOL assumed that approximately 9,856 additional participating in another visa program. Recent certification applications to be filed with DOL each permanent labor certification applications will be program data indicate approximately 80% name year. filed with DOL each year. aliens on H–1B visas.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27938 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

recruitment as a result of the prohibition specifically to employers with petitions with a foreign or U.S. worker. Benefits (assuming even with substitution, there pending with DHS are described in result from long-term stability and would be similar costs associated with greater detail below. These benefits and productivity gains to the employer from foreign recruiters and locating another costs are in addition to the overall filling the vacancy, and pay and worker abroad). For both groups of regulatory impact estimates provided satisfaction to a new worker from a employers—those with ready candidates above. permanent position. The potential and without—the analysis assumes As of April 2007, a total of benefit to the employer—and the expenses associated with beginning the approximately 70,000 immigrant economy—from filling the vacancy process anew, and builds in costs in petitions were pending at USCIS in would not change significantly whether addition to recruitment. Accordingly, as immigrant preferences categories that the new worker is a U.S. or foreign described in the main costs discussion were identified by DHS as dependent worker; assuming a qualified individual above, the analysis already accounts for upon a labor certification. The fills the slot, the worker is meeting the an average cost across employers for Department assumed the same 10 same legitimate business need, and the labor certification expenses in the percent substitution rate for labor employer incurs similar costs for absence of substitution (e.g., certification applications now attached comparable fringe benefits and preparation, filing and tracking of a to a pending immigrant petition at DHS compensation. The analysis already second labor certification). To the extent that would be prohibited from a future discusses the potential impact and that potentially there is greater substitution. The analysis accordingly assumptions associated with filling the incremental impact at the labor assumes all of the 7,000 applications vacancy with a U.S. worker. If, certification stage to employers who, in identified will require a second test of alternatively, the vacancy is filled with the event they must substitute, must the labor market. As above, the a second foreign worker—and to the seek workers outside the country—over Department has assumed that 15% of extent foreign workers physically in the and above the diverse costs already these applications (1,050 applications) country and working are deemed part of included and explained above—there is will favor U.S. workers, and thus the U.S. economy—the potential benefit insufficient data to quantify it. recruitment costs are not attributable. to U.S. workers would be decreased by Additional impact to these employers The costs of the labor certification that number of slots and transferred to may be captured in the discussion process leading to labor market tests not foreign workers who now enter the below, covering substitutable petitions favoring U.S. workers, including average stream for permanent residency. So pending at DHS. filing and application management although total economic benefits do not expenditures (staff time as indicated by change, their relative allocation does Application of the Prohibition to staff compensation, costs of additional Pending Applications transfer between foreign and domestic recruitment, etc.) for each employer, are workers, depending on who is awarded As explained above, this analysis then attributed to the remaining 5,950 the permanent position. And in fact, considers the additional, one-time applications for a total of $10.62 non-material benefits to foreign workers impact of this rulemaking on employers million. The Department is mindful that may even be higher than to U.S. with substitutable immigrant worker amount represents a one-time expense workers, were the analysis to factor in petitions currently pending at DHS. As for a discrete group of applications and the positive impact that comes with a DHS is a separate Federal agency, and is, moreover, not discounted by the permanent residency-bound as employer decisionmaking, unique likelihood that some percentage of these immigration track. case circumstances, and agency applications that would otherwise be processing dynamics at the I–140 stage substituted would be too far into the Issues Raised by Public Comment are not within either the Department of adjudicatory process at DHS to be the Several commenters argued the rule’s Labor’s expertise or, even more subject of a future substitution.23 importantly, its influence, this analysis prohibition of substitution of alien can make only the broadest of Transfer beneficiaries will create significant assumptions. The Department cannot To the extent the ban on substitution economic impact. One commenter, estimate with precision this rule’s will have an economic impact on presuming direct employer costs per benefits or costs to those employers or foreign labor—that impact could be a application of $10,000, stated the to DHS program activities. However, carve-out from the overall economic impact would be at least $1 billion if these data limitations notwithstanding, impact of the rule as measured in this employers could no longer substitute we have included in this analysis an analysis, and not an additive. The beneficiaries. Another commenter estimate of the potential impact on foreign worker who is substituted has by focused on the effect it believed the employers. Noting that the rule does not definition become unavailable for the substitution prohibition could have on impact labor certifications already filed position for reasons unrelated to this the recruitment of workers. Noting that with DHS, the prohibition on rulemaking, and therefore does not backlogs have reached 4.5 to five years substitution will impact DHS processing incur either a cost or benefit in this at times, the commenter claimed the at least to some extent going forward. analysis. The vacancy created results in application process, which he The extensive benefits of the both costs and benefits for the employer, characterized as lengthy, makes it substitution prohibition described above U.S. workers, and foreign workers. Costs imperative that employers be permitted apply equally to those labor certification are associated with recruitment; we to use certifications that are applications currently in the immigrant assume the employer will take steps ‘‘abandoned.’’ One commenter stated petition backlog at DHS, and are also necessary to fill the vacancy, whether the substitution prohibition would deemed part of this one-time impact. In increase the likelihood that employers addition to other benefits described 23 For example, no discounting has been applied would take jobs offshore because they above, DHS’s workload would benefit to remove labor certification applications from the would be unable to recruit and obtain from a reduction, as some of those calculation that are part of a filing which includes certification for foreign workers in a an adjustment application and for which a visa is abandoned immigrant petitions would immediately available, which would greatly reduce timely manner. The same commenter not be replaced with foreign workers but the chances that a substitution to benefit another also suggested that a few plant closings with U.S. workers. Potential costs alien would follow. or other business disruption could

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27939

easily result in an economic impact in certifications, were subject to a consider the marginal social costs of excess of $100 million. significant degree of fraud and abuse. filing the next fraudulent labor One commenter focused on the costs The purpose of this Final Rule is to certification applications as long as the and expenses of abandoning and impose clear limitations on the marginal private benefits (i.e., revenue reapplying for a labor certification due acquisition and use of permanent labor from selling the labor certifications to a solely to the unavailability of a foreign certifications in order to reduce different alien) continue to exceed the worker. Noting the costs of advertising, incentives and opportunities for fraud marginal private costs (i.e., costs to market surveys, attorneys and and abuse, and enhance the integrity of process and track the labor certification) recruitment, the commenter also the permanent labor certification of the transaction. pointed out the loss in productivity program to the benefit of the U.S. By eliminating alien substitution, this from delayed approval of applications, workforce. rule seeks to restore to certifications all of which it said results in thousands The ban on substituting alien their rivalrous and excludable qualities, of dollars in employer expenses. The beneficiaries reduces the incentives and in that they may no longer be commenter argued that substitution is opportunities for fraud in important transferred, sold, bartered, or purchased; and should remain ‘‘perfectly ways. First, absent this regulatory the employer, job opportunity, and alien legitimate’’ because it ‘‘mitigates the action, employers possess incomplete beneficiary on the application are employer’s investment risk in an information about the current exclusive and cannot be transferred to a employment-based immigration visa availability of qualified U.S. workers in different alien beneficiary. By requiring process that still takes (and will likely the labor market. Because labor markets appropriate, timely market tests; continue to take) many years to are inherently dynamic, even well promoting better information on market complete.’’ In addition to claiming the informed employers may not keep conditions and worker availability; and economic impact was significant, the abreast of changes in worker availability restoring the exclusivity and integrity of commenter asserted the rule’s after their initial recruitment for a job labor certifications, we believe this substitution prohibition was an attempt opportunity. In addition, information regulatory action will more effectively to eliminate an unknown, but likely may not always be accurate or widely align the marginal social costs of insignificant, quantum of fraud. Finally, available if it is costly to produce, processing permanent labor the commenter stated that the impact on analyze, or disseminate. Banning certifications with the marginal benefits. high technology industry employers substitution ‘‘remedies’’ the problem of 3. Validity Period would be substantial because such imperfect information, consistent with employers must recruit foreign the statutory intent to protect U.S. Permanent labor certifications have nationals, often from U.S. universities, workers, by requiring employers to go thus far been valid indefinitely, and given the limited supply of U.S. citizens back to the labor market a second time employers have been free to submit a available for technical positions. when the original alien becomes permanent labor certification to DHS at The commenters have failed to unavailable. This measure improves any time. At least one commenter explain how the elimination of the employer decision-making with respect argued that a 45-day proposed validity practice of substitution itself will result to filling critical job openings, and period such as that proposed in the in material adverse impact, let alone improves the probability that a qualified NPRM would result in a significant economic impact exceeding $100 U.S. worker will be selected for the job. impact. The Department disagrees with million. While some commenters Second, the ban on alien substitution this conclusion. However, in response estimated the costs of obtaining a new significantly reduces the incidence of to other comments and our own certification at nearly $10,000, the ‘‘overconsumption,’’ where analysis, we have lengthened the Department finds no support for that unscrupulous employers, attorneys, or validity period to 180 days. Under this claim, and has estimated the costs as agents submit large numbers of Final Rule, all permanent labor much lower as noted above. applications for processing and, once certifications will expire after 180 As stated elsewhere, the INA’s certified, sell the certification to a calendar days of certification unless treatment of employment-based different alien at prices that grossly filed in support of an I–140 immigrant immigration is designed to protect the exceed marginal costs. This petition with DHS. wages and working conditions of U.S. overconsumption is driven by the The 180-day period in which a workers. The Department meets the exchangeability of the alien name on the permanent labor certification can be requirements of the statute through the certification, which in turn increases the filed in connection with the I–140 labor certification process. As the document’s transferability. In the petition to the DHS effectively limits the administrator of that process, the absence of this Final Rule, a time in which certifications may be Department has an obvious interest in certification that was granted to be used marketed. The ban on substitution and and responsibility to identify, address to benefit or name one alien and no one the establishment of a finite validity and eliminate fraud, which is what the other than the parties originally named period, when taken together, effectively Final Rule will accomplish. The for purposes of filing with DHS (in reduce the likelihood of validating stale Department’s experience, as articulated economic terms, a ‘‘rivalrous and recruitment while simultaneously and discussed herein, resulted in the excludable good’’), can be used by eliminating ‘‘rent-seeking’’ behavior on PERM process, which increased fraud another alien simply by exchanging the the part of unscrupulous employers, protection. The Department’s name (in economic terms, a ‘‘rivalrous attorneys, and agents in selling these experience also shows the practice of and non-excludable good’’). certifications to uninformed alien substitution leaves the process These individuals or entities are not beneficiaries. We estimate the cost susceptible to fraud. equating marginal social costs with impact of a 180-day validity period will As discussed extensively throughout marginal benefits, but rather marginal be insignificant because sufficient time this Final Rule, the Department is private costs with marginal benefits; is provided to put the certification to concerned that various immigration hence, they overconsume from the use, since it is granted to the employer practices, including the substitution of permanent labor certification program. under the presumption that there is a alien beneficiaries and the indefinite In other words, unscrupulous employers critical need for the foreign worker and validity of permanent labor or attorneys have no incentive to no qualified U.S. workers are available.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27940 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

This analysis does not quantify the U.S. workers, improved program contributed, along with substitution, to marginal value of eliminating indefinite integrity, and cost savings to the Federal the growth of a secondary market in validity of labor certifications—that is, Government resulting from positions approved labor certifications. A 180- the value of establishing a limited filled with U.S. workers. validity period promotes more security validity period over and above the value An important purpose of the 180-day in the labor market test conducted, gained from prohibiting substitution. validity is to ensure that the certified job adding significant protections for U.S. The commoditization of labor opportunity still exists as described on workers in the strength of the tests certifications is a function of the the initial application. If an employer regarding availability and adverse availability of substitution and the files with DHS 180 days or more after effects of the test on wages and working absence of a finite expiration date. As the certification was approved by the conditions of the affected U.S. worker this Final Rule eliminates both root Department, the passage of time may population. Having a defined validity causes, the analysis assumes most if not have impacted worker availability for period in combination with the all quantifiable benefits are captured by purposes of the job opportunity that is elimination of substitution does not the analysis above with respect to the subject of the certification. This lessen fraud as much as it enhances the substitution. provision requires employers to conduct validity of the labor market test that was The analysis does measure two major new labor market tests and submit a done. Due to a lack of adequate data, benefits associated with a defined new application to the Department once however, we were not able to quantify validity period. First, a validity period validity expires. or monetize this important benefit. ensures labor market information is As with the benefits discussed under Enforcing a 180-day validity period current, the prevailing wage recorded on the substitution section, above, the will result in a small decrease in the the permanent labor certification is Department estimates that without the number of applications dependent on a current and accurate, and the bona fide 180-day validity period and required successful labor market test that are job opportunity exists as it appeared on labor market test, the employer may not submitted to DHS and DOS. An the original application. When a be aware that U.S. workers are available, employer that does not submit the certification becomes invalid, an and may have otherwise hired an permanent labor certification to DHS 24 employer must conduct new recruiting alien. Therefore, the second labor within 180 days will need to conduct a efforts that may indicate qualified U.S. market test required by the Final Rule new labor market test and, if the test workers are available and open that job may favor and result in increased favors an alien, the employer must file opportunity for their consideration. employment opportunities for U.S. a new application with the Department. Second, a validity period will slow the workers. As under the substitution If the test favors a U.S. worker, then the ‘‘black market’’ in approved labor section above, we estimated the employer will not submit an application certifications. monetary value of this benefit by to the Department. Employers will examining the compensation earned by As discussed in the benefit-cost submit fewer applications to DHS and U.S. workers that would not have analysis below, enforcing a validity DOS because after the original otherwise been hired. To estimate this period will increase costs for employers certifications expire, some of the new benefit, we accounted for the number of that do not file with DHS prior to the labor market tests will favor U.S. U.S. workers that would be favored by end of the validity period. In these workers or may not be further pursued. requiring employers to conduct new cases, the employer must conduct a new In these cases, cost savings results from labor market tests and the compensation labor market test and submit a new the reduced DHS staff time to review I– of these workers, which includes both permanent labor certification 140 immigrant petitions and I–485 their salaries and benefits, and reflects application to the Department. The applications to adjust to permanent the decrease in time that the U.S. Department’s costs will also increase, resident status. In addition, DOS will since it will review additional workers favored by the 180-day validity period stay unemployed. We estimate have fewer interviews to conduct with applications that are submitted because aliens seeking a lawful immigrant visa the original certification expired. this benefit to be $10.7 million per year.25 to obtain permanent residence. Because The Department considered two of data limitations, we are not able to periods of validity, 45 days and 180 The 180-day validity period decreases the opportunity for fraud through the provide a quantitative or monetary days. Both alternatives are discussed value of these benefits.26 further below. lawful permanent resident process. The current indefinite validity of approved Costs 3(A). Validity Period of 180 Days permanent labor certifications has The 180-day validity period imposes We estimate that the 10-year several costs to society: Additional job discounted quantified benefits 24 For purposes of this analysis, the Department advertising and recruiting from associated with this provision of the assumed that U.S. workers favored by the new labor market tests were unemployed. However, a benefit employers, increased employer staff Final Rule will be between $74.8 and to U.S. workers could still exist even if these time for filing labor certification $90.9 million, and total quantified costs workers were employed elsewhere; their departure applications, and increased staff time at will be between $132.4 and $160.8 from their old jobs would open up new the Department. In addition, a 180-day million. Thus, the net present value employment opportunities for other U.S. workers and a move to a new job may imply a higher wage validity period requires employers to over a 10-year time horizon will range for the U.S. worker. conduct labor market tests that will from ¥$57.6 to ¥$70 million. Due to a 25 The Department assumed that of the 115,952 favor U.S. workers in some cases, which lack of adequate data, we were not able PERM applications filed between July 1, 2005 and to quantify or monetize some important June 30, 2006, five (5) percent would expire prior to filing with DHS within 180 days. As before, we 26 The 180-day validity period will help deter benefits of this provision of the Final assumed 15 percent of the labor market tests favor unscrupulous employers, attorneys, or agents filing Rule. U.S. workers. The average annual wage on permanent labor certification applications with permanent labor certifications applications in the DOL because there will be fewer opportunities to Benefits PERM database is $69,000. The average wage was profit off of fraudulent applications. In addition, increased by 1.42 to account for employee benefits Department of Justice staff time can be expected to The 180-day validity period has (source: Bureau of Labor Statistics). We assumed be reduced from avoided investigation and several important benefits to society: workers would have been unemployed for an prosecution of fraudulent applications for positions Increased employment opportunities for additional 1.5 months. filled by U.S. workers.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27941

results in a small reduction in revenue annual costs to employers for processing from application fees. Since employers to DHS from I–140 petitions and I–485 labor certifications and additional must conduct a labor market test after a applications and to DOS from recruitment efforts to be $18.5 million certification expires and since some of immigrant visa applications. We per year. the labor market tests will favor U.S. estimate the 10-year discounted costs to A small cost to the Federal workers, there will be a slight decrease society to range between $132.4 and Government resulting from the 180-day in the number of Forms I–140 and I–485 $160.8 million. validity period is the increased time for that would have been submitted to DHS As described above, approved Departmental staff time to review the and immigrant visa applications that permanent labor certifications will relatively small number of applications would have been submitted to DOS. expire if employers do not file the labor that are resubmitted if the original Because these forms have application certification in support of an immigrant certification expired and subsequent fees, DHS and DOS will experience a petition with DHS within 180 calendar labor market tests favor an alien. If small decrease in revenue.31 Due to a days of the date the Department grants employers resubmit applications, then lack of adequate data, we could not certification. If the certification expires, our staff must spend additional time quantify or monetize these costs. reviewing an increased number of the employer must conduct a new labor 3(B). Validity Period of 45 Days market test if it chooses to pursue the applications. We estimated this cost by foreign labor option. If the test favors a multiplying the time spent reviewing In the proposed rule, the Department U.S. worker, then the employer will hire each application by the compensation of proposed a validity period of 45 a U.S. worker. If the labor market test a foreign labor certification analyst, by calendar days. In response to public indicates that no qualified U.S. workers the increased number of applications.29 comments regarding the hardships are available, then the employer must We also factored in the potential associated with a 45-day validity period, resubmit a permanent labor certification increase in our staff time to audit we increased the validity period to 180 application. additional recruitment reports. We calendar days. The most important A significant cost to employers of the estimated this cost by multiplying the benefit of the validity period is 180-day validity period is the increase time spent auditing each recruitment increased employment opportunities for in employer staff time to prepare, file, report by the average compensation of a U.S. workers, and the primary cost is to and track labor certification DOL auditor by the increased number of employers that must conduct new labor applications. We estimate this cost by recruitment reports that will be market tests and file new applications 30 multiplying the number of expired audited. We estimated the total annual with the Department if approved certifications leading to labor market costs to the Federal government to be certifications are not filed with DHS tests not favoring U.S. workers by the $0.3 million per year. within the validity period and the labor number of employer staff hours to Finally, DHS and DOS will market test favors an alien. experience small decreases in revenue prepare, file, and track the labor In the section below, the Department certifications, by the compensation of analyzed the major benefits and costs. employer would spend 25 hours to arrange for and the employer staff undertaking these We assumed that twice as many track recruiting efforts and for receiving, compiling, certifications would expire before activities.27 interviewing, analyzing, and reporting the results of Another significant cost to employers the recruitment. According to the preamble to the reaching DHS with a 45-day validity of the 180-day validity period is the PERM Final Rule, it takes an average of one (1) hour period as compared to a 180-day for an employer to prepare a recruitment report for additional recruitment efforts, in validity period. We estimated the 10- each application it files. For purposes of this year discounted benefits associated with particular job advertising, as well as the analysis, we estimated that 10 percent of these increased employer staff time to arrange applications are audited, which will require an a 45-day validity period to be between additional hour for the employer to submit the $149.6 and $181.7 million, and the total for and track recruitment efforts and for report. We assumed that Human Resources receiving, compiling, interviewing, costs to be between $264.9 and $321.7 Managers (or their equivalent) conduct this work for million. Thus, the net present value analyzing, and reporting the results of the employer and that their median hourly wage is the recruitment. We estimate the costs $36.52, which was increased by 1.42 to account for over a 10-year time horizon will range benefits (source: Bureau of Labor Statistics). This from ¥$115.2 to ¥$140.0 million. for preparing recruitment reports by analysis assumes five (5) percent of all certifications multiplying the staff time required to will expire and that 85 percent of the required labor Benefits conduct such activities by the staff’s market tests favor aliens, resulting in an additional We estimate the monetary value of compensation, by the annual number of 4,928 permanent labor certification applications to be filed with DOL. this benefit by examining the additional labor certification 29 28 The Department estimated that 70 percent of compensation earned by U.S. workers applications. We estimated the total applications are ‘‘clean’’ and do not raise any audit that would not have otherwise been flags. ‘‘Clean’’ applications require 0.25 hours of our hired. To estimate this benefit, we 27 As mentioned above, the Department estimated staff time. We assumed that the remaining that employers spend 10 staff hours on average applications raise audit flags and must be reviewed account for the number of U.S. workers preparing, filing, and tracking the labor manually, requiring 4 hours of our staff time. We that would be favored by requiring certifications. We assumed that Human Resource estimated that the median hourly wage for our staff employers to conduct new labor market Managers (or their equivalent) conduct this activity analysts is $30.06 (GS 12, step 5, which was tests and the compensation of these for the employer and that their media hourly wage escalated by 1.42 to account for employee benefits is $36.52, which was increased by 1.42 to account (source: Bureau of Labor Statistics). As explained workers, which includes both their for employee benefits (source: Bureau of Labor above, we estimated that approximately 4,928 salaries and benefits and reflects the Statistics). We assumed that five (5) percent of all additional permanent labor certification decrease in time that those workers stay certifications will expire and that 85 percent of the applications will be filed with the Department each unemployed. We estimate this benefit to required labor market tests favor aliens, resulting in year as a result of this provision. 32 an additional 4,928 permanent labor certification 30 The Department assumed auditors spend two be $21.3 million per year. applications to be filed with DOL. (2) hours to audit recruitment reports. We assumed 28 The Department estimated the cost of a Sunday the median hourly wage for DOL auditors is $30.06 31 At time of publication, the DHS form I–140 paper advertisement is $750. We also estimated it (GS 12, step 5), which was increased by 1.42 to immigrant petition filing fee is $195 and the would take an employer 0.5 hours to place the account for employee benefits (source: Bureau of immigrant visa application processing fee charged advertisement with the Sunday paper and 0.5 hours Labor Statistics). As explained above, we assumed by DOS is $335 per person. to place a job order with the SWA, and 1.5 hours approximately 4,928 additional permanent labor 32 The Department estimated of the 115,952 to conduct additional recruiting, as required by certification applications will be filed with DOL PERM applications filed between July 1, 2005 and PERM. In addition, DOL estimated that the each year as a result of this provision. Continued

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27942 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Costs applications, and cost savings to the approved permanent labor certifications The Department assumed that twice Federal Government in the form of will deter unscrupulous attorneys, as many applications would expire reduced staff time resulting from the employers, and agents from submitting under a 45-day validity period as reduction in fraudulent applications. fraudulent applications. Thus, all else compared to the 180-day validity We estimate the cost savings to be $2.4 being equal, the prohibition will result period. The Department estimated the million per year. in fewer applications that are submitted costs for a 45-day validity period by On the ‘‘black market,’’ employers or to the Department, DHS, and DOS. Cost assuming the cost per application would agents agree to broker applications for savings result from reduced OIG staff be the same but the number of permanent labor certification on behalf time to review and audit permanent applications submitted by employers of aliens in exchange for payment. Such labor certification applications and would double. We estimate the annual payments are not compatible with the reduced DHS staff time to review I–140 cost to employers to be $37 million per purposes of the permanent labor and I–485 applications. In addition, year. This cost includes additional job certification program and may indicate DOS will have fewer interviews to advertising, and employer staff time to a lack of a bona fide job opportunity that conduct with aliens seeking permanent arrange for and track recruiting efforts, is and has been truly open to U.S. residence. Finally, DOJ staff time can be prepare and file certification workers. The Department is instituting expected to be reduced from avoided applications, and prepare and maintain this ban because allowing the sale of a investigation and prosecution of government benefit to continue is recruitment reports. fraudulent applications (for example, simply bad government. Due to a lack of The 45-day validity period imposes a under existing racketeering laws). adequate data, we were not able to cost to the Department resulting from Because of data limitations, we were not quantify or monetize the benefits to the need for increased foreign labor able to quantify or monetize this society of increased program integrity as certification staff time to review important benefit. additional applications resulting from a result of this provision of the Final expired applications. We estimated this Rule. Costs cost to be $0.7 million per year. Also, The Department of Justice, DHS and The prohibition of the sale, barter, or if employers rush to file the I–140 to DOL OIG spend a significant amount of purchase of permanent labor satisfy a 45-day rule, this will slow time and resources to investigate applications and certifications imposes processing at DHS and increase the fraudulent applications. Some of these several costs to the Federal Government number of requests for additional applications are submitted by evidence issued by that agency. unscrupulous attorneys or agents filing in terms of increased DOJ staff time to However, due to a lack of adequate data, on behalf of an alien, although the prosecute unscrupulous agents, we were unable to quantify or monetize business named on the application did attorneys, or employers that submit this cost. not provide authorization and may not fraudulent applications, and a small even have been aware that its name was reduction in revenue to DHS from I–140 4. Prohibition on the Sale, Barter, or being used. When the Federal petitions and I–485 applications and to Purchase of Applications for Permanent Government determines the application DOS from immigrant visa applications. Labor Certification and of Approved is fraudulent, the employer is often Due to a lack of adequate data, we were Permanent Labor Certifications, and on placed in an uncomfortable, precarious unable to quantify the costs to this Related Payments position and required to explain to the provision of the Final Rule. Department that it did not authorize the The Department is prohibiting The main cost to the Federal use of its name in the application. improper commerce and certain Government is the increased DOJ staff payments related to permanent labor We estimate this cost savings by calculating the monetary value of the time to investigate and prosecute certification applications and unscrupulous agents, attorneys, or certifications. We estimate that the 10- increase in employer staff time to discuss the findings and write an employers suspected of violating this year discounted benefits associated with prohibition. In addition, DHS and DOS this provision of the Final Rule will be explanation to the Department. We estimate this cost savings by will experience small decreases in between $16.9 and $20.5 million. Due to revenue from application fees. Since a lack of adequate data, we were unable multiplying the staff time required to conduct such activities by the staff unscrupulous agents, employers, and to specifically quantify the costs to this attorneys will no longer submit provision of the Final Rule. compensation, by the number of fraudulent applications submitted to the fraudulent applications to the Benefits Department. We estimate the annual Department, there will be a slight The prohibition on the sale, barter, or cost savings to employers to be $2.4 decrease in the number of I–140 purchase of applications or million per year.33 petitions and I–485 applications that certifications has several important Enforcing a prohibition on the sale, would have been submitted to DHS and benefits to society: Improved program barter, or purchase of applications of an immigrant visa application that integrity, a small cost savings to permanent labor certifications or would have been submitted to DOS. employers in the form of increased staff Because both these forms have time to clear up their names when they 33 The Department estimated that 10 percent of application fees, DHS and DOS will are unknowingly used for fraudulent applications are fraudulent and that half of these experience small decreases in fraudulent applications involve businesses whose revenue.34 names are used without authorization. We also June 30, 2006, 10 percent would expire prior to estimated that a Human Resources Manager or their filing with DHS. In addition, we estimated 15 equivalent staff spends on average eight (8) hours 34 The DHS form I–140 application fee is $195 per percent of labor market tests favor U.S. workers. to discuss the findings and write a letter to DOL. application and the immigrant visa application The average annual wage on permanent labor This analysis assumes Human Resources Managers processing fee is $335 per person. The Department certifications applications in the PERM database is (or their equivalent) conduct this work for the did not monetize the total estimated reduction in $69,000, which was increased by 1.42 to account for employer and that their median hourly wage is revenue to DHS and DOS due to data limitations. employee benefits (source: Bureau of Labor $36.52, which we increased by 1.42 to account for In addition, the costs may be offset by the cost Statistics). We assumed workers would have been employee benefits (source: Bureau of Labor savings, since staff at DHS and DOS will spend less unemployed for an additional 1.5 months. Statistics). time processing applications.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27943

Issues Raised by Public Comment increase government efficiency in In addition, the Department At least two commenters stated that a processing legitimate permanent labor anticipates that there will be other cost large financial impact would result from certification applications as debarred savings associated with the debarment the proposed rule’s prohibition on employers, attorneys, or agents are provision but, because of data payment or reimbursement of the prevented from participating in the limitations, no quantitative or monetary employer’s attorneys’ fees or other program for a specified period of time values could be provided. One portion employer costs. One of those (i.e., up to three years). of cost savings results from reduced commenting reported that it ‘‘heard We estimate that the 10-year DHS staff time to review I–140 petitions [f]rom several large companies and discounted benefits associated with this and I–485 applications. In addition, universities’’ that the application provision of the Final Rule ranges from DOS will have fewer interviews to process may cost as much as $15,000 to $175.9 to $213.6 million. Due to a lack conduct with aliens seeking lawful $20,000, including attorneys’ fees, of adequate data, we were unable to residence. quantify the costs to this provision of although it conceded that the numbers Costs were informal and not based on the Final Rule. systematic research. Benefits The debarment provision imposes a The Department has considered small cost to the Federal Government in The debarment provision has several comments from several sources the form of reduced revenue to DHS and important benefits to society, including regarding the prohibition on payment or DOS related to fewer I–140 petitions improved program integrity and cost reimbursement by alien workers of the and I–485 applications and immigrant savings to the Federal Government in employer’s expenses. We believe there visa applications. We were unable to the form of reduced staff time resulting are compelling reasons to maintain in monetize these costs because of from the reduction in fraudulent substantial part the prohibitions inadequate data. applications. proposed in the NPRM, including the We are implementing this provision The cost to the Department associated prohibition against employers seeking to promote the program’s integrity and with debarment can be expected to be reimbursement of employers’ attorneys’ to assist the Department in obtaining low, since we have experience creating fees. The Department has detailed these compliance with existing program and implementing electronic tracking reasons above. We reiterate, in addition, requirements and this rulemaking. systems to prevent debarred individuals that assistance of counsel is at the Given the breadth and increased from filing applications with the employer’s option, and not a sophistication of the immigration fraud Department. For example, the requirement of the program. that has been identified in the recent Department’s H–1B Labor Condition The ban on sale, barter, purchase and past, the Department added this Application (LCA) System already certain payments related to permanent provision to attain the necessary includes a ‘‘debarment’’ table that is labor certifications is also justified for flexibility to respond to potential automatically updated with the names its social purpose, which is to prevent improprieties in labor certification of debarred individuals. LCAs filed by labor certifications from becoming a filings. individuals on the list are electronically commodity that can be sold by Debarring unscrupulous employers, flagged, and there is minimal staff time unscrupulous employers, attorneys, and attorneys, or agents who willfully or associated with this process. Although agents to aliens seeking a ‘‘green card.’’ repeatedly violate program requirements the Department does not possess data to The public disclosure that permanent will prevent such conduct in the future. estimate this cost, we do not believe that labor certifications cannot be sold, To the extent that these provisions enforcing the debarment provisions in bartered, or purchased reduces deter, prevent, or forestall inaccurate, this rule will require a significant information asymmetry in the sense that inappropriate, or fraudulent amount of resources. alien beneficiaries are now informed applications, debarment will reduce the Finally, DHS and DOS will that they should no longer be number of applications received by the experience small decreases in revenue purchasing these certifications under Department, all other factors being from application fees. Debarred any circumstances. constant. We estimate this cost savings individuals will not be able to submit 5. Debarment by multiplying the number of fraudulent applications to the Department, and applications submitted by the average The Department may suspend thus will be unable to proceed to the number of hours spent by foreign labor processing of any permanent labor next steps of the process in DHS and certification staff on each fraudulent certification application if an employer, DOS. Because these forms have application, by the average attorney, or agent connected to that application fees, DHS and DOS will compensation of staff reviewing application is involved in either experience a small decrease in fraudulent applications. We estimate the 36 possible fraud or willful revenue. The Department does not annual cost savings to the Federal misrepresentation or is named in a have sufficient data to estimate this cost. Government associated with debarment criminal indictment or information to be $25 million per year.35 related to the permanent labor fraudulent applications that were not fraudulent substitutions by the average review time per certification program. The Department 35 The benefits estimated by the section of this fraudulent application (40 hours). This estimate has instituted a public debarment analysis covering the elimination of substitution does not include cost savings from the decrease in mechanism to effectively deter assume only the fraud associated with substitution fraudulent substitutions to avoid double counting individuals or entities from engaging in and thereby eliminated by prohibiting the practice. the cost savings that are already accounted for in The benefits estimated by this section—covering the the first provision of this rule, the ban on fraudulent permanent labor certification institution of debarment—considers the benefits of substitution. The average compensation of DOL activities or prohibited transactions, and eliminating non-substitution fraud as well as the staff reviewing the fraudulent applications (staff provide employers who seek assistance benefits from the substitution analysis. The with pay grade GS 14, step 5) is $42.24, which was from attorneys or agents with better Department estimated that 10 percent of increased by 1.42 to account for employee benefits. applications are fraudulent and would not be filed 36 The DHS Form I–140 immigrant petition filing information about which individuals or because the employer or attorney/agent would be fee is $195, and the Form I–485 filing fee is $395. entities have committed fraud or abuse. debarred from filing applications. We estimated the The immigrant visa application processing fee In addition, this regulatory action will cost savings by multiplying the number of charged by DOS is $335 per person.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27944 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

D. Small Business Regulatory Department received no comments List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 656 Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 regarding this Executive Order. Administrative practice and This rule is not a major rule as G. Paperwork Reduction Act procedure, Aliens, Employment, defined by section 804 of the Small The collection of information under Employment and training, Enforcement, Business Regulatory Enforcement part 656 is currently approved under Fraud, Health professions, Immigration, Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA). The OMB control number 1205–0015. This Labor, Passports and visas, Penalties, standards for determining whether a Final Rule does not include a Reporting and recordkeeping rule is a major rule as defined by section substantive or material modification of requirements, Unemployment, Wages, 804 of SBREFA are similar to those used that collection of information, because it Working conditions. to determine whether a rule is an will not add to or change paperwork I Accordingly, for the reasons stated in ‘‘economically significant rule under requirements for employers applying for the preamble, part 656 of Chapter V, Executive Order 12866.’’ Because we permanent labor certification. The only Title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, is certified that this is not a major rule consequence of this amendment amended as follows: under Executive Order 12866, we also eliminating the current practice certify it is not a major rule under allowing substitution of alien PART 656—LABOR CERTIFICATION SBREFA. The rule will not result in an beneficiaries on applications and PROCESS FOR PERMANENT annual effect on the economy of $100 approved permanent labor certifications EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS IN THE million or more; a major increase in is to require those relatively few UNITED STATES costs or prices; or significant adverse employers that could have availed effects on competition, employment, I 1. The authority citation for part 656 themselves of the substitution practice is revised to read as follows: investment, productivity, innovation, or to file new applications on behalf of on the ability of United States-based alien beneficiaries. The Department Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A), 1189(p)(1); section 122, Pub. L. 101–649, 109 companies to compete with foreign- does not anticipate any paperwork based companies in domestic and Stat. 4978; and Title IV, Pub. L. 105–277, 112 burden resulting from the creation of a Stat. 2681. export markets. 180-day validity period for approved One commenter took the position that certifications, the prohibition on sale, I 2. Amend § 656.3 to add the following the rule would constitute a ‘‘major rule’’ purchase, and barter of applications and definitions: within the meaning of SBREFA. The labor certifications and on related commenter assumed that employers § 656.3 Definitions, for purposes of this payments, the ban on changes to part, of terms used in this part. must spend approximately $10,000 for applications filed under the new * * * * * each new application that must be streamlined permanent labor Barter, for purposes of an Application submitted in light of the substitution certification procedures, nor the for Permanent Employment Certification prohibition. Based on that analysis, and additional enforcement mechanisms in (Form ETA 9089) or an Application for noting that as many 100,000 this Final Rule. The Department Alien Labor Certification (Form ETA applications are filed each year, the anticipates an insignificant increase in 750), means the transfer of ownership of commenter argues that the impact could volume of permanent labor certification a labor certification application or amount to $1 billion. applications filed as a result of either certification from one person to another While we are aware of and sensitive employers withdrawing and then filing by voluntary act or agreement in to the costs employers incur as part of a corrected application or employers exchange for a commodity, service, the labor certification process, our allowing a certification to expire and property or other valuable regulatory analysis, as detailed above, then filing a new application. In either consideration. indicates the rule will not have a situation, employers could avoid the significant economic effect. Separately, need to file additional applications by * * * * * as pointed out earlier in this preamble, proofreading and complying with Purchase, for purposes of an the costs borne by employers are not regulatory requirements. The Application for Permanent Employment unanticipated by the statute. Therefore, Department did not receive comments Certification (Form ETA 9089) or an under SBREFA, the rule is not ‘‘major.’’ related to this section. Application for Alien Labor E. Executive Order 13132 Certification (Form ETA 750), means the H. Assessment of Federal Regulations transfer of ownership of a labor This Final Rule will not have a and Policies on Families certification application or certification substantial direct effect on the states, on This Final Rule does not affect family from one person to another by voluntary the relationship between the Federal well-being. The Department did not act and agreement, based on a valuable Government and the states, or on the receive any comments related to this consideration. distribution of power and section. Sale, for purposes of an Application responsibilities among the various for Permanent Employment Certification levels of government. Therefore, in I. Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (Form ETA 9089) or an Application for accordance with Executive Order 13132, The Department has made this Alien Labor Certification (Form ETA we have determined this rule does not regulation available for notice and 750), means an agreement between two have sufficient federalism implications comment and, consequently, has parties, called, respectively, the seller to warrant the preparation of a summary complied with the relevant provisions (or vendor) and the buyer (or purchaser) impact statement. The Department of the Administrative Procedure Act. by which the seller, in consideration of received no comments that addressed the payment or promise of payment of Executive Order 13132. J. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number a certain price in money terms, transfers F. Executive Order 12988 ownership of a labor certification This program is listed in the Catalog application or certification to the buyer. This regulation meets the applicable of Federal Domestic Assistance at * * * * * standards set forth in sections 3(a) and Number 17.203, ‘‘Certification for 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. The Immigrant Workers.’’ I 3. Add § 656.11 to read as follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27945

§ 656.11 Substitutions and modifications (c) Evidence that an employer has Labor Certification Appeals by the to applications. sought or received payment from any employer or debarred person or entity (a) Substitution or change to the source in connection with an by making a request for such an identity of an alien beneficiary on any application for permanent labor administrative review in accordance application for permanent labor certification or an approved labor with the procedures provided in certification, whether filed under this certification, except for a third party to paragraph (a) of this section. In the case part or 20 CFR part 656 in effect prior whose benefit work to be performed in of a finding of debarment, receipt by the to March 28, 2005, and on any resulting connection with the job opportunity Department of a request for review, if certification, is prohibited for any would accrue, based on that person’s or made in accordance with this section, request to substitute submitted after July entity’s established business shall stay the debarment until such time 16, 2007. relationship with the employer, shall be as the review has been completed and (b) Requests for modifications to an grounds for investigation under this part a decision rendered thereon. application will not be accepted for or any appropriate Government agency’s (2) A request for review of a denial or applications submitted after July 16, procedures, and may be grounds for revocation: 2007. denial under § 656.32, revocation under (i) Must be sent within 30 days of the § 656.32, debarment under § 656.31(f), date of the determination to the I 4. Add § 656.12 to read as follows: or any combination thereof. Certifying Officer who denied the § 656.12 Improper commerce and I 5. Amend § 656.24 by revising application or revoked the certification; payment. paragraph (g) to read as follows: (ii) Must clearly identify the The following provision applies to particular labor certification § 656.24 Labor certification determination for which review is applications filed under both this part determinations. and 20 CFR part 656 in effect prior to sought; March 28, 2005, and to any certification * * * * * (iii) Must set forth the particular resulting from those applications: (g)(1) The employer may request grounds for the request; and (a) Applications for permanent labor reconsideration within 30 days from the (iv) Must include a copy of the Final certification and approved labor date of issuance of the denial. Determination. (2) For applications submitted after certifications are not articles of (3) A request for review of debarment: July 16, 2007, a request for commerce. They shall not be offered for (i) Must be sent to the Administrator, reconsideration may include only: sale, barter or purchase by individuals Office of Foreign Labor Certification, (i) Documentation that the within 30 days of the date of the or entities. Any evidence that an Department actually received from the application for permanent labor debarment determination; employer in response to a request from (ii) Must clearly identify the certification or an approved labor the Certifying Officer to the employer; certification has been sold, bartered, or particular debarment determination for or which review is sought; purchased shall be grounds for (ii) Documentation that the employer investigation under this part and may be (iii) Must set forth the particular did not have an opportunity to present grounds for the request; and grounds for denial under § 656.24, previously to the Certifying Officer, but revocation under § 656.32, debarment (iv) Must include a copy of the Notice that existed at the time the Application of Debarment. under § 656.31(f), or any combination for Permanent Labor Certification was thereof. (4)(i) With respect to a denial of the filed, and was maintained by the request for review, statements, briefs, (b) An employer must not seek or employer to support the application for receive payment of any kind for any and other submissions of the parties and permanent labor certification in amicus curiae must contain only legal activity related to obtaining permanent compliance with the requirements of labor certification, including payment of argument and only such evidence that § 656.10(f). was within the record upon which the the employer’s attorneys’ fees, whether (3) Paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this as an incentive or inducement to filing, denial of labor certification was based. section notwithstanding, the Certifying (ii) With respect to a revocation or a or as a reimbursement for costs incurred Officer will not grant any request for in preparing or filing a permanent labor debarment determination, the BALCA reconsideration where the deficiency proceeding may be de novo. certification application, except when that caused denial resulted from the work to be performed by the alien in applicant’s disregard of a system prompt * * * * * connection with the job opportunity or other direct instruction. (c) Debarment Appeal File. Upon the would benefit or accrue to the person or (4) The Certifying Officer may, in his receipt of a request for review of entity making the payment, based on or her discretion, reconsider the debarment, the Administrator, Office of that person’s or entity’s established determination or treat it as a request for Foreign Labor Certification, business relationship with the review under § 656.26(a). immediately must assemble an indexed employer. An alien may pay his or her Appeal File: I 6. Amend § 656.26 by revising own costs in connection with a labor (1) The Appeal File must be in paragraph (a) and adding a new certification, including attorneys’ fees chronological order, must have the paragraph (c), to read as follows: for representation of the alien, except index on top followed by the most that where the same attorney represents § 656.26 Board of Alien Labor Certification recent document, and must have both the alien and the employer, such Appeals review of denials of labor consecutively numbered pages. The costs shall be borne by the employer. certification. Appeal File must contain the request for For purposes of this paragraph (b), (a) Request for review. (1) If a labor review, the complete application file(s), payment includes, but is not limited to, certification is denied, if a labor and copies of all written materials, such monetary payments; wage concessions, certification is revoked pursuant to as pertinent parts and pages of surveys including deductions from wages, § 656.32, or if a debarment is issued and/or reports or documents received salary, or benefits; kickbacks, bribes, or under § 656.31(f), a request for review of from any court, DHS, or the Department tributes; in kind payments; and free the denial, revocation, or debarment of State, upon which the debarment was labor. may be made to the Board of Alien based.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 27946 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

(2) The Administrator, Office of (Form ETA 750) or the Application for processing of any permanent labor Foreign Labor Certification, must send Permanent Employment Certification certification application involving such the Appeal File to the Board of Alien (Form ETA 9089) and only for the alien employer, attorney, or agent until Labor Certification Appeals, Office of named on the original application, completion of any investigation and/or Administrative Law Judges, 800 K St., unless a substitution was approved judicial proceedings. Unless the NW., Suite 400–N, Washington, DC prior to July 16, 2007. The certification investigatory agency, in writing, 20001–8002. is valid throughout the United States requests the Department to do (3) The Administrator, Office of unless the certification contains a otherwise, the Department shall provide Foreign Labor Certification, must send a geographic limitation. written notification to the employer of copy of the Appeal File to the debarred (2) A permanent labor certification the suspension in processing. person or entity. The debarred person or involving a specific job offer is valid (2) A suspension pursuant to entity may furnish or suggest directly to only for the particular job opportunity, paragraph (b)(1) of this section may last the Board of Alien Labor Certification the alien named on the original initially for up to 180 days. No later Appeals the addition of any application (unless a substitution was than 180 days after the suspension documentation that is not in the Appeal approved prior to July 16, 2007), and the began, if no criminal indictment or File. The debarred person or entity must area of intended employment stated on information has been issued, or judicial submit such documentation in writing, the Application for Alien Employment proceedings have not been concluded, and must send a copy to the Associate Certification (Form ETA 750) or the the National Certifying Officer may Solicitor for Employment and Training Application for Permanent Employment resume processing some or all of the Legal Services, Office of the Solicitor, Certification (Form ETA 9089). applications, or may extend the U.S. Department of Labor, 200 * * * * * suspension in processing until Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, (e)* * * completion of any investigation and/or DC 20210. (3) A duplicate labor certification judicial proceedings. I 7. Amend § 656.30 by: revising shall be issued by the Certifying Officer (c) Criminal indictment or paragraphs (a), (b), and (c); and adding with the same filing and expiration information. If the Department learns a new paragraph (e)(3), to read as dates, as described in paragraphs (a) and that an employer, attorney, or agent is follows: (b) of this section, as the original named in a criminal indictment or approved labor certification. information in connection with the § 656.30 Validity of and invalidation of I 8. Revise § 656.31 to read as follows: permanent labor certification program, labor certifications. the processing of applications related to (a) Priority Date. (1) The filing date for § 656.31 Labor certification applications that employer, attorney, or agent may be a Schedule A occupation or involving fraud, willful misrepresentation, suspended until the judicial process is sheepherders is the date the application or violations of this part. completed. Unless the investigatory or was dated by the Immigration Officer. The following provisions apply to prosecutorial agency, in writing, (2) The filing date, established under applications filed under both this part requests the Department to do § 656.17(c), of an approved labor and 20 CFR part 656 in effect prior to otherwise, the Department shall provide certification may be used as a priority March 28, 2005, and to any written notification to the employer of date by the Department of Homeland certifications resulting from those the suspension in processing. Security and the Department of State, as applications. (d) No finding of fraud or willful appropriate. (a) Denial. A Certifying Officer may misrepresentation. If an employer, (b) Expiration of labor certifications. deny any application for permanent attorney, or agent is acquitted of fraud For certifications resulting from labor certification if the officer finds the or willful misrepresentation charges, or applications filed under this part and 20 application contains false statements, is if such criminal charges are withdrawn CFR part 656 in effect prior to March 28, fraudulent, or was otherwise submitted or otherwise fail to result in a finding of 2005, the following applies: in violation of the Department’s fraud or willful misrepresentation, the (1) An approved permanent labor permanent labor certification Certifying Officer shall decide each certification granted on or after July 16, regulations. pending permanent labor certification 2007 expires if not filed in support of a (b) Possible fraud or willful application related to that employer, Form I–140 petition with the misrepresentation. (1) If the Department attorney, or agent on the merits of the Department of Homeland Security learns an employer, attorney, or agent is application. within 180 calendar days of the date the involved in possible fraud or willful (e) Finding of fraud or willful Department of Labor granted the misrepresentation in connection with misrepresentation. If an employer, certification. the permanent labor certification attorney, or agent is found to have (2) An approved permanent labor program, the Department will refer the committed fraud or willful certification granted before July 16, 2007 matter to the Department of Justice, misrepresentation involving the expires if not filed in support of a Form Department of Homeland Security, or permanent labor certification program, I–140 petition with the Department of other government entity, as appropriate, whether by a court, the Department of Homeland Security within 180 calendar for investigation, and send a copy of the State or DHS, as referenced in days of July 16, 2007. referral to the Department of Labor’s § 656.30(d), or through other (c) Scope of validity. For certifications Office of Inspector General (OIG). In proceedings: resulting from applications filed under these cases, or if the Department learns (1) Any suspension of processing of this part or 20 CFR part 656 in effect an employer, attorney, or agent is under pending applications related to that prior to March 28, 2005, the following investigation by the Department of employer, attorney, or agent will applies: Justice, Department of Homeland terminate. (1) A permanent labor certification for Security, or other government entity for (2) The Certifying Officer will decide a Schedule A occupation or possible fraud or willful each such application on its merits, and sheepherders is valid only for the misrepresentation in connection with may deny any such application as occupation set forth on the Application the permanent labor certification provided in § 656.24 and in paragraph for Alien Employment Certification program, the Department may suspend (a) of this section.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27947

(3) In the case of a pending period of no more than three years, listed in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (v) application involving an attorney or based upon any action that was of this section; shall state the start date agent found to have committed fraud or prohibited at the time the action and term of the debarment; and shall willful misrepresentation, DOL will occurred, upon determining the identify appeal opportunities under notify the employer associated with that employer, attorney, or agent has § 656.26. The debarment shall take application of the finding and require participated in or facilitated one or more effect on the start date identified in the the employer to notify DOL in writing, of the following: Notice of Debarment unless a request for within 30 days of the notification, (i) The sale, barter, or purchase of review is filed within the time whether the employer will withdraw the permanent labor applications or permitted by § 656.26. DOL will notify application, designate a new attorney or certifications, or any other action DHS and the Department of State agent, or continue the application prohibited under § 656.12; regarding any Notice of Debarment. without representation. Failure of the (ii) The willful provision or willful (g) False Statements. To knowingly employer to respond within 30 days of assistance in the provision of false or and willfully furnish any false the notification will result in a denial. inaccurate information in applying for information in the preparation of the If the employer elects to continue permanent labor certification; Application for Permanent Employment representation by the attorney or agent, (iii) A pattern or practice of a failure Certification (Form ETA 9089) or the DOL will suspend processing of affected to comply with the terms of the Form Application for Alien Employment applications while debarment ETA 9089 or Form ETA 750; Certification (Form ETA 750) and any proceedings are conducted under (iv) A pattern or practice of failure to supporting documentation, or to aid, paragraph (f) of this section. comply in the audit process pursuant to abet, or counsel another to do so is a (f) Debarment. (1) No later than six § 656.20; Federal offense, punishable by fine or years after the date of filing of the labor (v) A pattern or practice of failure to imprisonment up to five years, or both certification application that is the basis comply in the supervised recruitment under 18 U.S.C. 2 and 1001. Other for the finding, or, if such basis requires process pursuant to § 656.21; or penalties apply as well to fraud or a pattern or practice as provided in (vi) Conduct resulting in a misuse of ETA immigration documents paragraphs (f)(1)(iii), (iv), and (v) of this determination by a court, DHS or the and to perjury with respect to such section, no later than six years after the Department of State of fraud or willful documents under 18 U.S.C. 1546 and date of filing of the last labor misrepresentation involving a 1621. certification application which permanent labor certification constitutes a part of the pattern or application, as referenced in § 656.31(e). Signed in Washington, DC, this 1st day of practice, the Administrator, Office of (2) The Notice of Debarment shall be May, 2007. Foreign Labor Certification, may issue to in writing; shall state the reason for the Emily Stover DeRocco, an employer, attorney, agent, or any debarment finding, including a detailed Assistant Secretary, Employment and combination thereof a Notice of explanation of how the employer, Training Administration. Debarment from the permanent labor attorney or agent has participated in or [FR Doc. E7–9250 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] certification program for a reasonable facilitated one or more of the actions BILLING CODE 4510–FP–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17MYR2.SGM 17MYR2 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES2 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 95 Thursday, May 17, 2007

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. 955...... 25207 Presidential Documents 3 CFR 1000...... 25986 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: 1001...... 25986 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 8133...... 24173 1005...... 25986 8134...... 24175 Other Services 1006...... 25986 8135...... 24177 1007...... 25986 741–6020 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 8136...... 25181 1030...... 25986 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 8137...... 25183 1032...... 25986 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 8138...... 25185 1033...... 25986 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 8139...... 25187 1124...... 25986 8140...... 26705 1126...... 25986 8141...... 27240 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 1131...... 25986 8142...... 27401 1210...... 26005 World Wide Web 8143...... 27403 1738...... 26742 8144...... 27405 1924...... 27470 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications Executive Orders: is located at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html 12866 (See 13432)...... 27717 9 CFR Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 13338 (See Notice of 205...... 25947 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: May 8, 2007 ...... 26707 Proposed Rules: http://www.archives.gov/federallregister 13399 (See Notice of 149...... 27656 May 8, 2007 ...... 26707 160...... 27656 E-mail 13423 (See 13432)...... 27717 161...... 27656 FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 13431...... 26709 381...... 26567 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 13432...... 27717 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form Administrative Orders: 10 CFR of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and Notices: 11...... 27408 PDF links to the full text of each document. Notice of May 8, 25...... 27408 2007 ...... 26707 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 72...... 26535 Presidential Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list Proposed Rules: (or change settings); then follow the instructions. Determinations: No. 2007–17 of April 26...... 27766 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 25, 2007 ...... 26281 51...... 27068 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 60...... 27766 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 5 CFR 63...... 27766 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Ch. LXIV ...... 26533 72...... 26568 the instructions. Proposed Rules: 73...... 27766 315...... 23772 74...... 27766 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 609...... 27471 respond to specific inquiries. 752...... 23772 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 7 CFR 11 CFR Federal Register system to: [email protected] 210...... 24179 Proposed Rules: The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 220...... 24179 106...... 26569 regulations. 225...... 24179 226...... 24179 12 CFR 246...... 24179 509...... 25948 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, MAY 247...... 24179 585...... 25948 251...... 24179 23761–24176...... 1 13 CFR 24177–24522...... 2 319...... 26711 457...... 24523 120...... 25189 24523–25188...... 3 800...... 27407 25189–25676...... 4 801...... 27407 14 CFR 25677–25944...... 7 916...... 25945 39 ...... 23765, 25957, 25960, 25945–26280...... 8 917...... 25945 26283, 26285, 26538, 26711, 26281–26532...... 9 959...... 25677 26714, 26716, 27721, 27723, 26533–26708...... 10 966...... 24530 27725, 27730 26709–27052...... 11 982...... 23761 71 ...... 23767, 23768, 25962, 27053–27240...... 14 4279...... 27241 25963, 26287, 27053, 27054, 27241–27406...... 15 Proposed Rules: 27412, 27413, 27415, 27416, 27407–27720...... 16 205...... 27252 27417, 27418, 27420, 27421 27721–27948...... 17 810...... 23775 97 ...... 23769, 27241, 27422 925...... 24551 121...... 26540 929...... 23777 135...... 26540 930...... 24553 401...... 27732

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:57 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\17MYCU.LOC 17MYCU sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES ii Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Reader Aids

415...... 27732 602...... 24678 19...... 25930 15...... 26554 431...... 27732 Proposed Rules: 20...... 25930 20...... 27688 435...... 27732 1 ...... 24192, 26011, 26012, 27...... 27688 39 CFR 440...... 27732 26576, 26689 73...... 24190, 24191 460...... 27732 111...... 26543 90...... 27688 Proposed Rules: 28 CFR 40 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 25207 Proposed Rules: 1...... 24213, 27519 33...... 25207 16...... 26037 9...... 24496, 26544 20...... 27519 39 ...... 26008, 27489, 27491, 35...... 24496 27...... 24238 27493, 27497, 27766, 27768 29 CFR 49...... 25698 43...... 27519 71...... 25712 4022...... 27243 51...... 24060 73...... 26331, 26332 52 ...... 24060, 25203, 25967, 217...... 27770 4044...... 27243 234...... 27771 25969, 25971, 25973, 25975, 48 CFR Proposed Rules: 26718, 27056, 27060, 27247, 241...... 27770 1910...... 27771 Ch. 1 (2 248...... 27770 27425, 27640, 27644, 27648, 1915...... 27771 documents) ...... 27364, 27397 250...... 27770 27652 1917...... 27771 1...... 27364 291...... 27770 60...... 27437 1918...... 27771 2...... 27364 298...... 27770 61...... 27437 4...... 27364 374a...... 27770 30 CFR 62...... 25978 7...... 27364 63 ...... 25138, 25980, 27437 14...... 27364 15 CFR 202...... 24448 70...... 24060 203...... 25197 15...... 27364 705...... 25194 71...... 24060 16...... 27364 206...... 24448 730...... 25194 80...... 23900 17...... 27364 210...... 24448 736...... 25194 81 ...... 25967, 26718, 27060, 18...... 27364 217...... 24448 744...... 25194 27247, 27425, 27640, 27644, 19...... 27364 218...... 24448 747...... 25194 27648, 27652 22...... 27364 250...... 25197 754...... 25194 112...... 27443 28...... 27364 251...... 25197 756...... 25194 174...... 26300 31...... 27364 260...... 25197 760...... 25194 180 ...... 24188, 26304, 26310, 32...... 27364 935...... 26291 766...... 25194 26317, 26322, 27448, 27452, 35...... 27364 768...... 25194 Proposed Rules 27456, 27460, 27463 37...... 27364 770...... 25194 Ch. VII...... 27069 372...... 26544 41...... 27364 772...... 25194, 25680 946...... 26329 Proposed Rules: 42...... 27364 774...... 25680 948...... 27782 51...... 24472, 26202 43...... 27364 52 ...... 23783, 25241, 26040, 16 CFR 32 CFR 44...... 27364 26045, 26046, 26057, 26202, 45...... 27364 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 26581, 26759, 27265, 27787 46...... 27364 259...... 26328 216...... 25713 60...... 27178 49...... 27364 571...... 26576 62...... 26069 51...... 27364 18 CFR 63...... 26069 33 CFR 52...... 27364 Proposed Rules: 81 ...... 23783, 26046, 26057, 53...... 27364 35...... 23778 100 ...... 25202, 25685, 25966, 26581, 26759, 27265 1804...... 26560 27735 93...... 24472 19 CFR 1852...... 26560 117...... 24534, 25203 122...... 26582 3001...... 24536 123...... 25965 151...... 27738 131...... 27789 3002...... 24536 141...... 24016 20 CFR 165 ...... 23771, 24185, 24534, 3033...... 24536 180...... 24198 25686, 25966, 26296, 26298, Proposed Rules: 404...... 27424 412...... 26582 27244, 27740 12...... 24554 416...... 27424 Proposed Rules: 498...... 27425 41 CFR 23...... 24554 100...... 25214, 27499 42...... 24554 656...... 27904 117...... 26038, 27264 Proposed Rules: 101-42...... 25723 52...... 24554 21 CFR 165 ...... 23779, 23781, 24196, 25217, 25219, 25226, 25720, 101-45...... 25723 49 CFR 510...... 24184, 26288 27070 102-40...... 25723 520...... 24185, 27733 107...... 24536 171...... 25162 522...... 27733, 27734 34 CFR 42 CFR 529...... 26289 412...... 26870 172...... 25162 Proposed Rules: 866...... 26290 413...... 26870 173...... 25162 200...... 25228 175...... 25162 1308...... 24532 Proposed Rules: 303...... 26456 176...... 25162 Proposed Rules: 411...... 24680 571...... 25484 878...... 26011 36 CFR 412...... 24680, 26230 585...... 25484 413...... 24680, 25526 22 CFR 242...... 25688 418...... 24116 Proposed Rules: 303...... 27055 Proposed Rules: 484...... 25356, 26887 571...... 27535 7...... 27499 489...... 24680 24 CFR 261...... 26578 50 CFR 3280...... 27222 1193...... 26580 43 CFR 100...... 25688 3282...... 27222 1194...... 26580 3000...... 24358 223...... 26722 3288...... 27222 622...... 27251 37 CFR 3200...... 24358 Proposed Rules: 3280...... 24358 635...... 26735 203...... 27048 380...... 24084 648 ...... 25709, 26325, 26563 320...... 25926 44 CFR 660 ...... 24539, 27064, 27759 38 CFR 350...... 25926 65...... 27741 665...... 27065 983...... 24080 2...... 27246 67...... 27752 679...... 27067 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 26 CFR 1...... 25930 47 CFR 17...... 24253 1...... 23771, 26542 14...... 25930 1...... 27688 648...... 25735, 26770

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:57 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\17MYCU.LOC 17MYCU sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Reader Aids iii

660...... 27276 665...... 26771 679...... 27798

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:57 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\17MYCU.LOC 17MYCU sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES iv Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Reader Aids

REMINDERS Compensatory time off for Defense Authorization Wisconsin; comments due The items in this list were travel; published 4-17-07 Act changes; comments by 5-21-07; published 4- editorially compiled as an aid TRANSPORTATION due by 5-22-07; 20-07 [FR E7-07541] to Federal Register users. DEPARTMENT published 3-23-07 [FR Pesticide programs: 07-01375] Inclusion or exclusion from Federal Aviation Plant-incorporated protectant this list has no legal Administration Federal Acquisition Regulation tolerance exemptions; (FAR): significance. Airworthiness directives: administrative revisions; Contractor code of ethics comments due by 5-25- McCauley Propeller and business conduct; 07; published 4-25-07 [FR Systems; published 4-12- RULES GOING INTO comments due by 5-23- E7-07767] 07 EFFECT MAY 17, 2007 07; published 4-23-07 [FR Pesticides; tolerances in food, 07-01985] animal feeds, and raw COMMERCE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS DUE NEXT Contracts with religious agricultural commodities: National Oceanic and WEEK entities; comments due by 6-benzyladenine; comments Atmospheric Administration 5-21-07; published 3-22- due by 5-21-07; published 07 [FR 07-01357] Fishery and conservation AGENCY FOR 3-21-07 [FR 07-01386] management: INTERNATIONAL Subcontractor award data, Spinosad; comments due by DEVELOPMENT reporting requirements; Western Pacific fisheries— 5-21-07; published 3-21- Acquisition regulations: comments due by 5-21- 07 [FR E7-04760] Electronic logbook forms; Administrative changes; 07; published 3-21-07 [FR Thifensulfuron methyl; optional use; published 07-01318] 4-17-07 comments due by 5-21- comments due by 5-21- 07; published 4-19-07 [FR DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 07; published 3-21-07 [FR Fishery conservation and E7-07437] E7-04762] management: Engineers Corps AGRICULTURE Solid wastes: Caribbean, Gulf, and South Danger zones and restricted DEPARTMENT Atlantic fisheries— areas: Safe and environmentally Animal and Plant Health sound recycling and Snapper/grouper; Marine Corps Air Station Inspection Service resource conservation; published 5-15-07 Cherry Point, NC; rifle Plant-related quarantine, range; comments due by and solid waste definition International fisheries domestic: 5-25-07; published 4-25- revisions; comments due regulations: by 5-25-07; published 3- Citrus canker; comments 07 [FR E7-07901] Pacific albacore tuna— 26-07 [FR E7-05159] due by 5-21-07; published ENVIRONMENTAL U.S. vessels eligible to 3-22-07 [FR E7-05229] PROTECTION AGENCY EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE fish in Canadian waters; Air pollutants, hazardous; PRESIDENT annual listing; published AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT national emission standards: Privacy and Civil Liberties 4-17-07 Oversight Board Food Safety and Inspection Surface coating of ENERGY DEPARTMENT Service automobiles, light-duty Freedom of Information Act; Federal Energy Regulatory implementation; comments Meat and poultry inspection: trucks, and plastic parts Commission and products; comments due by 5-25-07; published Poultry product exportation Filing fees; annual update; due by 5-24-07; published 4-10-07 [FR E7-05812] to United States; eligible published 4-17-07 4-24-07 [FR E7-07758] FEDERAL countries; addition— HEALTH AND HUMAN Air pollution control: COMMUNICATIONS Chile; comments due by COMMISSION SERVICES DEPARTMENT 5-25-07; published 5-10- State operating permits Common carrier services: Food and Drug 07 [FR 07-02202] programs— Administration Wireless telecommunication COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Hawaii; comments due by Animal drugs, feeds, and 5-21-07; published 4-20- services— National Oceanic and 07 [FR E7-07550] 698-806 MHz band related products: Atmospheric Administration Ivermectin and clorsulon; Hawaii; comments due by enhanced 911 Fishery conservation and 5-21-07; published 4-20- emergency calling implantation or injectable management: dosage form; published 5- 07 [FR E7-07549] systems and hearing-aid Alaska; fisheries of 17-07 Maryland; comments due compatible telephones; Exclusive Economic by 5-25-07; published comments due by 5-23- Pimobendan; oral dosage Zone— 07; published 5-2-07 form; published 5-17-07 4-25-07 [FR E7-07919] Bering Sea and Aleutian [FR E7-08440] Maryland; comments due HOMELAND SECURITY Islands groundfish; Radio services, special: DEPARTMENT by 5-25-07; published comments due by 5-25- Fixed microwave services— Coast Guard 4-25-07 [FR E7-07920] 07; published 3-26-07 10.7-11.7 GHz band; Pollution: [FR E7-05474] Air quality implementation plans; approval and antenna requirements; Northeastern United States Vessels carrying oil, noxious promulgation; various comments due by 5-25- fisheries— liquid substances, States; air quality planning 07; published 4-25-07 garbage, municipal or Summer flounder, scup, purposes; designation of [FR E7-07796] commercial waste, and and black sea bass; areas: GENERAL SERVICES ballast water; published 5- comments due by 5-24- Montana; comments due by ADMINISTRATION 17-07 07; published 4-24-07 5-25-07; published 4-25- Federal Acquisition Regulation [FR 07-02016] PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 07 [FR E7-07900] (FAR): OFFICE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT Air quality implementation Contractor code of ethics Health benefits; Federal Civilian health and medical plans; approval and and business conduct; employees: program of uniformed promulgation; various comments due by 5-23- Continued coverage during services (CHAMPUS): States: 07; published 4-23-07 [FR retirement; requirements TRICARE program — Nevada; comments due by 07-01985] waiver; published 4-17-07 Dental Program; John 5-21-07; published 4-20- Contracts with religious Pay administration: Warner National 07 [FR E7-07546] entities; comments due by

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:57 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\17MYCU.LOC 17MYCU sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Reader Aids v

5-21-07; published 3-22- guidance; implementation; facilities; reduced Class E airspace; comments 07 [FR 07-01357] comments due by 5-22- benefit rate; comments due by 5-24-07; published Subcontractor award data, 07; published 3-23-07 [FR due by 5-25-07; 4-9-07 [FR E7-06539] reporting requirements; E7-05167] published 3-26-07 [FR TREASURY DEPARTMENT comments due by 5-21- INTERIOR DEPARTMENT E7-05134] National Customs Automation 07; published 3-21-07 [FR Fish and Wildlife Service TRANSPORTATION Program: 07-01318] Migratory bird permits: DEPARTMENT Merchandise entry; remote HEALTH AND HUMAN Migratory birds removal from Federal Aviation location filing; comments SERVICES DEPARTMENT buildings; comments due Administration due by 5-22-07; published Centers for Medicare & by 5-25-07; published 3- Air carrier certification and 3-23-07 [FR 07-01330] Medicaid Services 26-07 [FR E7-05120] operations: U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION Medicaid: INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Light-sport aircraft; definition; National Customs Automation Health care-related taxes; National Park Service comments due by 5-21- comments due by 5-22- 07; published 4-19-07 [FR Program: Special regulations: 07; published 3-23-07 [FR E7-07453] Merchandise entry; remote 07-01331] National Capital Region; Airworthiness directives: location filing; comments parking violations; due by 5-22-07; published HEALTH AND HUMAN Airbus; comments due by 5- comments due by 5-21- 3-23-07 [FR 07-01330] SERVICES DEPARTMENT 21-07; published 4-20-07 07; published 3-21-07 [FR VETERANS AFFAIRS Food and Drug [FR E7-07516] E7-05112] DEPARTMENT Administration Alpha Aviation Design Ltd.; NATIONAL AERONAUTICS comments due by 5-23- Board of Veterans’ Appeals: Human drugs: AND SPACE 07; published 4-23-07 [FR Appeals regulations and Internal analgesic, ADMINISTRATION E7-07644] rules of practice— antipyretic, and Federal Acquisition Regulation Avions Marcel Dassault- Supplemental statement of antirheumatic products (FAR): case; response period (OTC); tentative final Breguet; comments due Contractor code of ethics change; comments due monograph; required by 5-24-07; published 4- and business conduct; by 5-25-07; published warnings and other 24-07 [FR E7-07741] comments due by 5-23- 3-26-07 [FR E7-05435] labeling; comments due Bombardier; comments due 07; published 4-23-07 [FR by 5-25-07; published 12- by 5-21-07; published 4- 07-01985] 26-06 [FR E6-21855] 26-07 [FR E7-07979] LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Contracts with religious Diamond Aircraft Industries HOMELAND SECURITY entities; comments due by GmbH; comments due by This is a continuing list of DEPARTMENT 5-21-07; published 3-22- 5-24-07; published 4-24- public bills from the current Coast Guard 07 [FR 07-01357] 07 [FR E7-07752] session of Congress which Drawbridge operations: Subcontractor award data, Empresa Brasileira de have become Federal laws. It Maryland; comments due by reporting requirements; Aeronautica S.A. may be used in conjunction 5-21-07; published 4-5-07 comments due by 5-21- (EMBRAER); comments with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws [FR E7-06303] 07; published 3-21-07 [FR due by 5-24-07; published Update Service) on 202–741– 07-01318] Virginia; comments due by 4-24-07 [FR E7-07736] 6043. This list is also 5-21-07; published 4-6-07 available online at http:// POSTAL SERVICE Eurocopter Deutschland [FR E7-06146] Domestic Mail Manual: www.archives.gov/federal- GmbH; comments due by register/laws.html. Ports and waterways safety; Lithium batteries; revised 5-22-07; published 3-23- regulated navigation areas, mailing standards; 07 [FR E7-05139] The text of laws is not safety zones, security comments due by 5-25- McDonnell Douglas; published in the Federal zones, etc.: 07; published 4-25-07 [FR comments due by 5-21- Register but may be ordered Columbia River, OR; E7-07817] 07; published 4-4-07 [FR in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual comments due by 5-23- Sharps and other regulated E7-06269] pamphlet) form from the 07; published 4-23-07 [FR Superintendent of Documents, medical waste containers; Short Brothers; comments E7-07634] U.S. Government Printing revised mailing standards; due by 5-23-07; published Office, Washington, DC 20402 HOMELAND SECURITY comments due by 5-25- 4-23-07 [FR E7-07118] (phone, 202–512–1808). The DEPARTMENT 07; published 4-25-07 [FR SOCATA-Groupe Transportation Security E7-07816] text will also be made Aerospatiale; comments available on the Internet from Administration SOCIAL SECURITY due by 5-24-07; published GPO Access at http:// ADMINISTRATION Air cargo security 4-24-07 [FR E7-07756] www.gpoaccess.gov/plaws/ requirements; compliance Social security benefits and Stemme GmbH & Co.; index.html. Some laws may dates; comments due by 5- supplemental security comments due by 5-23- not yet be available. 21-07; published 3-20-07 income: 07; published 4-23-07 [FR [FR 07-01327] Federal old age, survivors, E7-07642] H.R. 1681 / P.L. 110-26 HOUSING AND URBAN and disability insurance, Airworthiness standards: The American National Red Cross Governance DEVELOPMENT and aged, blind, and Special conditions— DEPARTMENT disabled— Modernization Act of 2007 Boeing Model 787-8 FHA programs; introduction: Consultative examinations; (May 11, 2007; 121 Stat. 103; airplane; comments due 8 pages) Uniform physical condition annual onsite review of by 5-24-07; published Last List May 10, 2007 standards and physical medical providers; 4-9-07 [FR E7-06542] threshold billing amount inspection requirements; McDonnell Douglas revision; comments due physical inspection report Models DC-10-10, 10- by 5-21-07; published Public Laws Electronic response time; comments 15, 10-30, 10-30F, 10- 3-20-07 [FR E7-04958] Notification Service due by 5-24-07; published 40, and 10-40F 4-24-07 [FR E7-07706] Supplemental security income: airplanes; comments (PENS) Grants and agreements: Aged, blind, and disabled— due by 5-23-07; Nonprocurement debarment Individuals residing in published 4-23-07 [FR PENS is a free electronic mail and suspension; OMB medical treatment E7-07699] notification service of newly

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:57 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\17MYCU.LOC 17MYCU sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES vi Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Reader Aids

enacted public laws. To Note: This service is strictly PENS cannot respond to subscribe, go to http:// for E-mail notification of new specific inquiries sent to this listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ laws. The text of laws is not address. publaws-l.html available through this service.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:57 May 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\17MYCU.LOC 17MYCU sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES