Agricultural Marketing Service
Rural Utilities Service
Engineers Corps
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Army Department
Engineers Corps
Navy Department
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
National Drug Control Policy Office
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Children and Families Administration
Indian Health Service
National Institutes of Health
Customs and Border Protection Bureau
Minerals Management Service
Employment and Training Administration
Copyright Office, Library of Congress
National Drug Control Policy Office
Federal Aviation Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Surface Transportation Board
Internal Revenue Service
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Final rule; correction.
The Federal Civil Monetary Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended, requires all Federal agencies with statutory authority to impose civil money penalties (CMPs) to evaluate and adjust those CMPs every four years. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ((FDIC) last adjusted the maximum amounts of CMPs under its jurisdiction in 2000. The FDIC is issuing this final rule to implement the required adjustments to its CMPs. The FDIC is also correcting a technical error as to one CMP that occurred when the FDIC last adjusted CMPs in 2000.
This rule is effective on December 31, 2004.
Philip P. Houle, Counsel, (202) 898-3722, Enforcement Unit, Legal Division, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429.
The Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA) amended section 4 of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (Inflation Adjustment Act) (28 U.S.C. 2461 note), to require the head of each Federal agency to enact regulations within 180 days of the enactment of the DCIA and at least once every four years thereafter, to adjust each CMP provided by law within the jurisdiction of the agency (with the exception of certain specifically listed statutes) by the inflation adjustment formula set forth in section 5(b) of the Inflation Adjustment Act.
To satisfy the requirements of the DCIA, the FDIC is amending 12 CFR 308 of its regulations pertaining to its Rules of Practice and Procedure which address CMPs. The amount of each CMP which the FDIC has jurisdiction to impose has been increased according to the prescribed formula. The penalties were last adjusted in 2000 (65 FR 64887). Any increase in penalty amounts under the DCIA shall apply only to violations which occur after the effective date of the increase.
The FDIC is also implementing a technical correction of the maximum amount of tier three CMPs that may be assessed for violation of 12 U.S.C. 1817(c) involving the submission of certified statements to the FDIC for determining institutions' semiannual deposit insurance assessments. Although the FDIC had stated in the preamble to the 2000 final rule that the CMP was to be adjusted from $1,100,000 to $1,175,000, the CMP was not actually adjusted due to a technical error in the publication of the final rule (65 FR 64887). Under their own rulemaking, other Federal banking agencies did successfully adjust this CMP from $1,100,000 to $1,175,000 in 2000.
If the $1,100,000 CMP were now adjusted using the 17.2% CPI figure for the June 1996 to June 2003 period (as with those CMPs that were last adjusted to a higher amount in 1996), this CMP's maximum amount would be increased to $1,300,000 rather than to the lower $1,250,000 amount that is actually adopted in this final rule and correction. In the interests of fairness to respondents and consistency with other Federal banking agencies, the FDIC is making a technical correction that increases the $1,100,000 CMP to $1,175,000 for the June 1996 to June 1999 period and also adjusts the corrected CMP from $1,175,000 to $1,250,000 for the June 2000 to June 2003 period.
The correction and the adjustments are being made simultaneously and prospectively. This rulemaking shall become a final rule on publication in the
The Inflation Adjustment Act requires that each CMP amount be increased by the “cost of living” adjustment, which is defined as the percentage by which the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U)
Under the DCIA, the first adjustment may not exceed ten percent of the current penalty amount.
The following example explains the inflation adjustment calculation for CMP amounts that were last adjusted in 2000. Under 12 U.S.C. 1818(i), as adjusted at 12 CFR 308.132(c), the FDIC may impose a daily maximum Tier Three CMP not to exceed $1,175,000 for violating certain laws.
First, the appropriate CPI-U is determined. The statute requires the FDIC to use the CPI-U for June of the calendar year preceding the year of adjustment. Since the FDIC is adjusting the CMP in 2004, the CPI-U for June 2003, which was 183.7, is used. The statute also requires the FDIC to use the CPI-U for June of the year that the CMP
Next, the cost of living adjustment or inflation factor is then calculated by dividing the CPI-U for June 2003 (183.7) by the CPI-U for June 2000 (172.4). The result is 1.066 (
Third, the raw inflation adjustment is calculated by multiplying the maximum CMP amount by the percentage increase. In this example, $1,175,000 is multiplied by 6.6 percent, which equals $77,550.
Fourth, the raw inflation adjusted amount is rounded according to the rounding rules in section 5(a) of the Inflation Adjustment Act. Under the rounding rules, if the penalty is greater than $200,000, the increase is rounded to the nearest multiple of $25,000. Therefore, the maximum penalty increase in this example is $75,000 (
Fifth, the rounded increase is added to the current maximum CMP amount that is being adjusted. In this example, $1,175,000 plus $75,000 yields a new maximum inflation adjusted CMP amount of $1,250,000.
Under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note), the FDIC must adjust for inflation the civil monetary penalties in statutes under which it has authority to assess penalties. The following chart displays the adjusted civil money penalty amounts for the enumerated statutes. The amounts in this chart apply to violations that occur after December 31, 2004:
Section 308.116(b) pertains to the amount of any CMP that may be assessed for violations of the Change in Bank Control Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)). This section has been amended by increasing the: (A) Tier One CMP amount from $5,500 for each day the violation continues to $6,500 for each day that the violation continues; (B) Tier Two CMP amount from $27,500 for each day that the violation continues to $32,500 for each day that the violation continues; and (C) Tier Three CMP amount from $1,175,000 to $1,250,000 for each day that the violation continues or, in the case of a depository institution, increasing the CMP from an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,250,000 or one percent of the total assets of the institution for each day that the violation continues. Section 308.116(b)(4) has also been amended by revising the date after which the adjusted CMPs will apply to violations covered by § 308.116 by deleting “November 12, 1996” and replacing it with “December 31, 2004.”
Section 308.132 pertains to the manner in which the FDIC assesses CMPs. Paragraph (c)(2) of that section pertains to the CMPs imposed pursuant to section 7(a) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA) (12 U.S.C. 1817(a)) for the late filing of a bank's Reports of Condition and Income (Call Reports) or for the submission of false or misleading Call Reports or information. With respect to late filings, paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of § 308.132 has been amended to reflect the increase in the Tier Two CMP amount from a maximum of $22,000 per day to $27,000 per day for each day the failure to file continues. No change has been made to the Tier One CMP. Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of § 308.132 has also been amended by revising the date after which the adjusted CMPs will apply to violations covered by that paragraph by deleting “November 12, 1996” and replacing it with “December 31, 2004.”
Paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of § 308.132 pertains to CMPs for the submission of false or misleading Call Reports or information. Paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(B) of that section has been amended to reflect the increase in Tier Two CMP amounts from a maximum of $22,000 per day for each day that the information is not corrected to a maximum of $27,000 per day for each day that the information is not corrected. Paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(C) of that section reflects the increase in Tier Three CMPs from an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,175,000 or one percent of the total assets of the institution for each day the information is not corrected to an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,250,000 or one percent of the total assets of such institution for each day the information is not corrected. No change has been made to the Tier One CMP amount. Paragraphs (c)(2)(iii)(B) and (C) have also been amended by revising the date after which the adjusted CMPs will apply to violations covered by paragraph (c)(2)(iii) by deleting “November 12, 1996” in both paragraphs and replacing it in both paragraphs with “December 31, 2004.”
Paragraph (c)(3)(i) of § 308.132 sets forth the increases for CMPs assessed pursuant to section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1818(i)(2)). A Tier One CMP will increase from a maximum of $5,500 per day to a maximum of $6,500 per day for each day that the violation continues. A Tier Two CMP will increase from a maximum of $27,500 per day to a maximum of $32,500 per day for each day that the violation, practice, or breach of fiduciary duty continues. A Tier Three CMP will increase from an amount not to exceed, in the case of any person other than an insured depository institution, $1,175,000 to a maximum of $1,250,000 or, in the case of any insured depository institution, the amount will increase from a maximum of $1,175,000 to $1,250,000 or an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,250,000 or one percent of the total assets of such institution for each day during which the violation, practice, or breach continues.
Paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of § 308.132 lists a number of statutes which grant jurisdiction to the FDIC to assess CMPs under section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA for violation thereof, including the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (12 U.S.C. 2804
Paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of § 308.132 reflects the increases in CMP amounts that may be assessed pursuant to section 7(c) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1817(c)) for late filing or the submission of false or misleading certified statements. A Tier Two CMP pursuant to section 7(c)(4)(B) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1817(c)(4)(B)) will increase from an amount not to exceed $22,000 per day to an amount not to exceed $27,000 for each day during which the failure to file continues or the false or misleading information is not corrected. As noted above, a Tier Three CMP which may be assessed pursuant to section 7(c)(4)(C) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1817(c)(4)(B)) will be corrected for the June 1996 to June 1999 period from an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,100,000 or one percent of the total assets of the institution for each day during which the failure to file continues or the false or misleading information is not corrected to an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,175,000 or one percent of the total assets of the institution for each day during which the failure to file continues or the false or misleading information is not corrected. Also, a Tier Three CMP which may be assessed pursuant to section 7(c)(4)(C) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1817(c)(4)(B)) will be adjusted for the June 2000 to June 2003 period by increasing it from an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,175,000 or one percent of the total assets of the institution for each day during which the failure to file continues or the false or misleading information is not corrected to an amount not to exceed the lesser of $1,250,000 or one percent of the total assets of the institution for each day during which the failure to file continues or the false or misleading information is not corrected. No change has been made to the Tier One CMP amount.
Paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of § 308.132 sets forth the increases in the CMP amounts that may be assessed pursuant to section 10(e)(4) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1820(e)(4)) for refusal to allow an examination or to provide required information during an examination. The maximum CMP amount will increase from $5,500 to $6,500.
Paragraph (c)(3)(ix) of § 308.132 sets forth the increases in the CMP amounts that may be assessed pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1970 for prohibited tying arrangements. A Tier One CMP which may be assessed pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1972(2)(F)(i) will increase from a maximum of $5,500 to a maximum of $6,500. A Tier Two CMP which may be assessed under 12 U.S.C.
Paragraph (c)(3)(x) of § 308.132 pertains to the assessment of CMPs under the International Banking Act of 1978 (IBA) (12 U.S.C. 3108(b)), for failure to comply with the requirements of the IBA, pursuant to section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1818(i)(2)). The amount of these CMPs will increase in the amounts set forth in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of § 308.132 which contains the increases for section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA.
Paragraph (c)(3)(xi) of § 308.132 sets forth the increase in CMP amounts that may be assessed pursuant to section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1818(i)(2)), as made applicable by 12 U.S.C. 3349(b), where a financial institution seeks, obtains, or gives any other thing of value in exchange for the performance of an appraisal by a person that the institution knows is not a state certified or licensed appraiser in connection with a federally-related transaction. Such CMP amounts will increase in the amounts set forth in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of § 308.132 which contains the increases for section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA.
Paragraph (c)(3)(xiii) of § 308.132 states that pursuant to the Community Development Banking and Financial Institution Act (CDBA) (12 U.S.C. 4717(b)) a CMP may be assessed for violation of the CDBA pursuant to section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA (12 U.S.C. 1818(i)(2)). Such CMP amounts will increase in the amounts set forth in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of § 308.132 which contains the increases for section 8(i)(2) of the FDIA.
Paragraph (c)(3)(xiv) of § 308.132 states that pursuant to section 21B of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) (15 U.S.C. 78u-2), CMPs may be assessed for violations of certain provisions of the Exchange Act, where such penalties are in the public interest. The Tier One CMP amounts which may be assessed pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 78u-2(b)(1) will increase from an amount not to exceed $5,500 for a natural person or $60,000 for any other person for violations set forth in 15 U.S.C. 78u-2(a), to $6,500 for a natural person or $65,000 for any other person. The Tier Two CMP which may be assessed pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 78u-2(b)(2) for each violation set forth in 15 U.S.C. 78u-2(a) will increase from an amount not to exceed $60,000 for a natural person to $300,000 for any other person to an amount not to exceed $65,000 for a natural person or $325,000 for any other person if the act or omission involved fraud, deceit, manipulation, or deliberate or reckless disregard of a regulatory requirement. The Tier Three CMP which may be assessed pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 78u-2(b)(3) for each violation set forth in 15 U.S.C. 78u-2(a), in an amount not to exceed $120,000 for a natural person or $575,000 for any other person, if the act or omission involved fraud, deceit, manipulation, or deliberate or reckless disregard of a regulatory requirement, and such act or omission directly or indirectly resulted in substantial losses, or created a significant risk of substantial losses to other persons or resulted in substantial pecuniary gain to the person who committed the act or omission, will be increased to an amount not to exceed $130,000 for a natural person or $625,000 for any other person.
Paragraph (c)(3)(xv) of § 308.132 states that a CMP may be assessed for violation of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (31 U.S.C. 3802) for violations involving false claims and statements. The maximum CMP amount will increase from $5,500 to $6,500. Paragraph (c)(3)(xvi) of § 308.132 states that CMPs may be assessed pursuant to the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA)(42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)) against any regulated lending institution that engages in a pattern or practice of violations of the FDPA. The amount of the maximum penalty for each violation will increase from an amount not to exceed $350 to an amount not to exceed $385. The maximum amount of CMPs which may be assessed annually against a regulated lending institution will increase from an amount not to exceed a total of $115,000 to an amount not to exceed a total of $125,000.
Paragraph (c)(3) of § 308.132 has also been amended by revising the date after which the adjusted CMPs will apply to violations covered by that paragraph by deleting “November 12, 1996” and replacing it with “December 31, 2004.”
The law requires the FDIC to amend its rules, provides the specific adjustments to be made and leaves the FDIC no discretion in calculating the amount of those adjustments, the changes are ministerial, technical, and noncontroversial. The FDIC has thus determined for good cause that public notice and comment is unnecessary and impracticable under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)), and that the rule should be published in the
For the same reasons that the FDIC for good cause has determined that public notice and comment is unnecessary and impractical, the FDIC also finds that it has good cause to adopt an effective date that would be less than 30 days after the date of publication in the
The FDIC also finds that the increase in the maximum amounts of CMPs under the FDIC's jurisdiction should be effective as of December 31, 2004 since the rule is ministerial, technical, and noncontroversial. Under the statute, agencies must make the required CMP inflation adjustments: (A) According to the formula in the statute and (B) within four years of the last inflation adjustment. Federal agencies have no discretion as to the amount or timing of the adjustment.
An initial regulatory flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 603) is required only when an agency must publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking. As already noted, the FDIC has determined that publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking is not necessary for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA does not require
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857) provides generally for agencies to report rules to Congress and for Congress to review such rules. The reporting requirement is triggered in instances where the FDIC issues a final rule as defined by the APA (5 U.S.C. 551
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this final revision to 12 CFR 308 does not constitute a “major” rule as defined by the statute.
The FDIC has determined that this final rule will not affect family well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law No. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998)).
No collection of information pursuant to section 3504(h) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501
This regulation is authorized by the FDIC's general rulemaking authority and pursuant to its fundamental responsibilities to ensure the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions. Specifically, 12 U.S.C. 1819(a)(Tenth) provides the FDIC with general authority to issue such rules and regulations as it deems necessary to carry out the statutory mandates of the FDIA and other laws that the FDIC is charged with administering or enforcing.
Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, Banking, Claims, Crime, Equal access to justice, Ex parte communications, Hearing procedure, Lawyers, Penalties, State nonmember banks.
5 U.S.C. 504, 554-557; 12 U.S.C. 93(b), 164, 505, 1815(e), 1817, 1818, 1820, 1828, 1829, 1831i, 1831m(g)(4), 1831o, 1831p-1, 1832(c), 1884(b), 1972, 3102, 3108(a), 3349, 3909, 4717; 15 U.S.C. 78(h) and (i), 78o-4(c), 78o-5, 78q-1, 78s, 78u, 78u-2, 78u-3, 78w, 6801(b), 6805(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 31 U.S.C. 330, 5321; 42 U.S.C. 4012a; Sec. 3100(s), Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321-358.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Gulfstream Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, and G-IV series airplanes. This AD requires a one-time inspection of the left and right aileron and elevator
Effective November 2, 2004.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 2, 2004.
We must receive comments on this AD by December 17, 2004.
Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this AD.
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
• Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to
• Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590.
• Fax: (202) 493-2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, PO Box 2206, Mail Station D-10, Savannah, Georgia 31402-9980. You can examine this information at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to:
You can examine the contents of this AD docket on the Internet at
The FAA has implemented new procedures for maintaining AD dockets electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new AD actions are posted on DMS and assigned a docket number. We track each action and assign a corresponding directorate identifier. The DMS AD docket number is in the form “Docket No. FAA-2004-99999.” The Transport Airplane Directorate identifier is in the form “Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-999-AD.” Each DMS AD docket also lists the directorate identifier (“Old Docket Number”) as a cross-reference for searching purposes.
You can examine the AD docket on the Internet at
We have received a report from the airplane manufacturer, Gulfstream, that the damper shafts in two actuators broke under normal torquing requirements during assembly of the actuators for a Gulfstream Model GV-SP airplane. Approximately one week after the original occurrence, a third actuator was found with a cracked damper shaft. In each case, the cracks originated at the threaded base of the damper shaft. In addition, the third actuator was found to be from a manufacturing lot previous to that of the other two actuators. Parker Aerospace, the actuator manufacturer, notified Gulfstream that the production process used after 1998 to manufacture aileron and elevator actuator damper shafts (internal to the actuator) may induce cracks in the threaded portion of the shaft. This cracking could cause the retaining nut and the separated portion of the failed damper shaft to become dislodged from the damper body and block the movement of the assembly. This condition, if not corrected, could result in locking of an aileron or elevator actuator (hard-over condition), subsequent loss of aileron or elevator control, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.
The affected aileron and elevator actuators installed on Gulfstream Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, G-IV, and GV series airplanes, are identical to those installed on Model GV-SP airplanes. Therefore, all of these models may be subject to the identified unsafe condition.
Operators should note that, as we explained previously, Gulfstream Model GV and GV-SP series airplanes are subject to the same unsafe condition addressed in this AD. We are currently considering additional rulemaking to address the unsafe condition for those airplanes. However, because the unsafe condition is less severe for those models, the planned compliance time for that action would allow enough time to provide notice and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of the corrective actions.
We have reviewed the following Gulfstream alert customer bulletins:
The alert customer bulletins describe procedures for a one-time inspection of the left and right aileron and elevator actuators to determine the part number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) of each actuator. The alert customer bulletins also describe procedures for an inspection of the actuators with certain P/Ns and S/Ns to detect broken damper shafts, and replacement of any actuator having a broken damper shaft with a new or serviceable actuator.
The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design. Therefore, we are issuing this AD to detect and correct broken damper shafts, which could result in locking of an aileron or elevator actuator (hard-over condition), subsequent loss of aileron or elevator control, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between the AD and Alert Customer Bulletins.” This AD also requires that operators report any broken damper shafts found during the initial and repetitive inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD to the FAA.
The alert customer bulletins do not specify the type of inspection to use to determine the P/N and S/N of the actuators. We have determined that the location of the actuators will require access and possibly additional inspection aides, and therefore, this AD requires a general visual inspection to determine the P/N and S/N of the actuators. We have included the definition of a general visual inspection in this AD.
The alert customer bulletins do not specify what to do if an installed actuator either has a P/N and/or S/N that is missing or is unreadable. This AD requires that those actuators be inspected to detect broken damper shafts—as if they have a P/N and S/N listed in the alert customer bulletin.
The alert customer bulletins recommend a one-time inspection of the aileron and elevator actuators for broken damper shafts. However, a suspect damper shaft found undamaged during the initial inspection still has the potential to break at some time in the future. Because a one-time inspection alone would not provide the degree of safety necessary, we have determined that repetitive inspections of the suspect actuators are necessary to ensure an adequate level of safety for the affected transport airplane fleet. We have also determined that an interval of 500 flight hours or 12 months, whichever is first, is an appropriate compliance time for the repetitive inspections. Although the alert customer bulletins do not include repetitive inspections, they do note that a recurring inspection will be added to the applicable airplane maintenance manual.
The alert customer bulletins also do not specify the type of inspection to use to detect broken damper shafts. We have determined that a detailed inspection for this action is appropriate; we have included the definition of this inspection in this AD. Therefore, this AD requires a detailed inspection to detect broken damper shafts. We have included the definition of a detailed inspection in this AD.
The alert customer bulletins specify replacing an actuator having a broken damper shaft, but they do not specify with what type of replacement actuator. This AD requires replacement with either:
• A new or serviceable actuator having a subject P/N and S/N listed in the alert customer bulletin, provided it has been inspected for broken damper shafts in accordance with the requirements of this AD; or
• A new or serviceable actuator having a P/N and/or S/N different than those listed in the alert customer bulletin. Replacing an actuator with an actuator having a different P/N and/or S/N terminates the requirements of this AD for that actuator only.
We are not requiring the terminating action (
The alert customer bulletins do not recommend that findings of broken damper shafts be reported. This AD requires findings of all broken damper shafts be reported to the FAA. When the unsafe condition addressed by an AD is likely due to a manufacturer's quality control (QC) problem, a reporting requirement is instrumental in ensuring that we can gather as much information as possible regarding the extent and nature of the QC problem or breakdown, especially in cases where the data may not be available through other established means. This information is necessary to ensure that proper corrective action will be taken. Based on the results of these reports, we may determine that further corrective action is warranted.
The Accomplishment Instructions of the referenced alert customer bulletins specify to submit the Service Reply Card or compliance information to the manufacturer. This AD does not include those actions; we do not need this information from operators.
The effectivities of the alert customer bulletins include all Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, and G-IV series airplanes, equipped with aileron or elevator actuators having certain P/Ns and S/Ns. Because there is no way to determine if an actuator with a suspect P/N and S/N is installed without inspecting the airplane, this AD applies to all Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, and G-IV series airplanes. We would, however, point out that the first action in the alert customer bulletins is an inspection to determine if an actuator having a certain P/N and S/N is installed.
This AD is considered to be interim action. The inspection reports that are required by this AD will enable us to obtain better insight into the nature and extent of the broken damper shafts, and eventually to develop final action to address the unsafe condition. Once final action has been developed and replacement parts are available, we may consider further rulemaking.
On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the FAA's airworthiness directives system. The regulation now includes material that relates to altered products, special flight permits, and alternative methods of compliance (AMOC). This material is included in part 39, except that the office authorized to approve AMOCs is identified in each individual AD.
However, as amended, part 39 provides for the FAA to add special requirements for operating an airplane to a repair facility to do the work required by an airworthiness directive. For purposes of this AD, we have determined that such a special flight permit is prohibited.
An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD; therefore, providing notice and opportunity for public comment before the AD is issued is impracticable, and good cause exists to make this AD effective in less than 30 days.
This AD is a final rule that involves requirements that affect flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment; however, we invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We are reviewing the writing style we currently use in regulatory documents. We are interested in your comments on whether the style of this document is clear, and your suggestions to improve the clarity of our communications with you. You can get more information about plain language at
We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD. See the
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
(a) This AD becomes effective November 2, 2004.
(b) None.
(c) This AD applies to all Gulfstream Model G-1159, G-1159A, G-1159B, and G-IV series airplanes; certificated in any category.
(d) This AD is prompted by reports of broken or cracked damper shafts within the aileron and elevator actuator assemblies. The FAA is issuing this AD to detect and correct broken damper shafts, which could result in locking of an aileron or elevator actuator (hard-over condition), subsequent loss of aileron or elevator control, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done.
This AD refers to certain portions of Gulfstream alert customer bulletins for applicability and inspection information. In addition, this AD specifies inspection requirements beyond those included in the alert customer bulletins. Where the AD and the alert customer bulletins differ, the AD prevails.
(f) The term “alert customer bulletin,” as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions of the Gulfstream alert customer bulletins, as applicable, specified in Table 1 of this AD. Although the applicable alert customer bulletin recommends completing and submitting the Service Reply Card or reporting compliance with the applicable alert customer bulletin, those actions are not required by this AD.
(g) Within 50 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, do a one-time general visual inspection of the left and right aileron and elevator actuators to determine the part number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) of each actuator, in accordance with the applicable alert customer bulletin.
For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection is: “A visual examination of an interior or exterior area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain proximity to the area being checked.”
(h) For any actuator identified during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD with a P/N and S/N listed in the applicable alert customer bulletin, and for actuators for which the P/N and/or S/N were missing or unreadable: Before further flight, do a detailed inspection of each identified actuator to detect a broken damper shaft, in accordance with the applicable alert customer bulletin.
For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: “An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate procedures may be required.”
(1) If no damper shaft is found broken: Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight hours or 12 months, whichever occurs first.
(2) If any damper shaft is found broken: Before further flight, do the action specified in paragraph (h)(2)(i) or (h)(2)(ii) of this AD, in accordance with the applicable alert customer bulletin.
(i) Replace the actuator with a new or serviceable actuator having a P/N and S/N listed in the applicable alert customer bulletin, provided the new or serviceable actuator has been inspected in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD at intervals not to exceed 500 flight hours or 12 months, whichever occurs first.
(ii) Replace the actuator with a new or serviceable actuator having a P/N and/or S/N not listed in the applicable alert customer bulletin. This replacement terminates the requirements of this AD for that actuator only.
(i) Replacement of all suspect actuators with new or serviceable actuators having a P/N and/or S/N not listed in the applicable alert customer bulletin terminates the requirements of this AD.
(j) Submit a report of any broken damper shafts to the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349; fax (770) 703-6097. The report must be done at the applicable time specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD. The report must include the inspection date, the airplane model and S/N, the actuator position (left or right aileron or elevator), and the actuator P/N and S/N. Information collection requirements contained in this AD have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501
(1) If the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD was done after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the inspection.
(2) If the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the effective date of this AD.
(k) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an aileron or elevator actuator having a P/N and S/N specified in the applicable alert customer bulletin, on any airplane, unless the actuator has been inspected according to paragraph (h) of this AD.
(l) Special flight permits (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) are not allowed.
(m) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(n) You must use the service information that is specified in Table 2 of this AD to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
The Director of the Federal Register approves the incorporation by reference of those documents in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. For copies of the service information, contact Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, P.O. Box 2206, Mail Station D-10, Savannah, Georgia 31402-9980. You can review copies at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., room PL-401, Nassif Building, Washington, DC; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Correcting amendment.
This document corrects final regulations (TD 9144) that were
The document contains final regulations relating to statutory options. These final regulations affect certain taxpayers who participate in the transfer of stock pursuant to the exercise of incentive stock options and the exercise of options granted pursuant to an employee stock purchase plan (statutory options).
This document is effective on August 3, 2004.
Erinn Madden, (202) 622-6030 (not a toll-free number).
The final regulations (TD 9144) that is the subject of this correction are under sections 421, 422, and 424 of the Internal Revenue Code.
As published, the final regulations (TD 9144) contains errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification.
Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
26 U.S.C. 7805.
Department of the Navy, DoD.
Final rule.
The Department of the Navy is amending its certifications and exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has determined that USS VIRGINIA (SSN 774) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
Effective January 12, 2004.
Commander Scott A. Kenney, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of the Judge Advocate General, Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5066, Telephone number: (202) 685-5040.
Pursuant to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 1605, the Department of the Navy amends 32 CFR part 706. This amendment provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty) of the Navy, under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS VIRGINIA (SSN 774) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot comply fully with the following specific provisions of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship: Rule 21(c), pertaining to the arc of visibility of the sternlight; Annex I, section 2(a)(i), pertaining to the height of the masthead light; Annex I, section 2(k), pertaining to the height and relative positions of the anchor lights; and Annex I, section 3(b), pertaining to the location of the sidelights. The Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty) has also certified that the aforementioned lights are located in closest possible compliance with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements.
Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its military functions.
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and Vessels.
33 U.S.C. 1605.
This document was received at the Office of the Federal Register October 13, 2004.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Final rule.
The Department of the Navy is amending its certifications and exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has determined that USS JAMES E. WILLIAMS (DDG 95) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
Commander Gregg A. Cervi, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of the Judge Advocate General, Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE., Suite 3000 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5066 Telephone number: (202) 685-5040.
Pursuant to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 1605, the Department of the Navy amends 32 CFR part 706. This amendment provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS JAMES E. WILLIAMS (DDG 95) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with the following specific provisions of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship: Annex I, paragraph 3(a) pertaining to the location of the forward masthead light in the forward quarter of the vessel, and the horizontal distance between the forward and after masthead lights; Annex I, paragraph 3(c), pertaining to placement of task lights not less than two meters from the fore and aft centerline of the ship in the athwartship direction; Annex I, paragraph 2(f)(i), pertaining to the placement of the masthead light or lights above and clear of all other lights and obstructions; and Annex I, paragraph 2(f)(ii), pertaining to the vertical placement of task lights. The Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has also certified that the lights involved are located in closest possible compliance with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements.
Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its military functions.
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and Vessels.
33 U.S.C. 1605.
Approved: July 9, 2004.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Final rule.
The Department of the Navy is amending its certifications and exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General of the Navy (Admiralty and Maritime Law) (Acting) has determined that USS OKLAHOMA CITY (SSN 723) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
Lieutenant Commander M. Robb Hyde,
Pursuant to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 1605, the Department of the Navy amends 32 CFR part 706. This amendment provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General of the Navy (Admiralty and Maritime Law) (Acting), under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS OKLAHOMA CITY (SSN 723) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with the following specific provision of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship: Rule 21(a), pertaining to the location of the masthead lights over the fore and aft centerline of the ship. The Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General of the Navy (Admiralty and Maritime Law) (Acting) has also certified that the lights involved are located in closest possible compliance with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements.
Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its military functions.
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and Vessels.
33 U.S.C. 1605.
This document was received at the Office of the Federal Register October 13, 2004.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Final rule.
The Department of the Navy is amending its certifications and exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has determined that USS CHUNG-HOON (DDG 93) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
January 12, 2004.
Commander Scott A. Kenney, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of the Judge Advocate General, Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5066, Telephone number: (202) 685-5040.
Pursuant to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 1605, the Department of the Navy amends 32 CFR part 706. This amendment provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS CHUNG-HOON (DDG 93) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with the following specific provisions of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship: Annex I, paragraph 3(a) pertaining to the location of the forward masthead light in the forward quarter of the vessel, and the horizontal distance between the forward and after masthead lights; Annex I, paragraph 3(c), pertaining to placement of task lights not less than two meters from the fore and aft centerline of the ship in the athwartship direction; Annex I, paragraph 2(f)(i), pertaining to the placement of the masthead light or lights above and clear of all other lights and obstructions; and Annex I,
Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its military functions.
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and Vessels.
33 U.S.C. 1605.
This document was received at the Office of the Federal Register October 13, 2004.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Final rule.
The Department of the Navy is amending its certifications and exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General of the Navy (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has determined that USS PAUL HAMILTON (DDG 60) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
January 12, 2004.
Commander S.A. Kenney, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of the Judge Advocate General, Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5066, Telephone number: (202) 685-5040.
Pursuant to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 1605, the Department of the Navy amends 32 CFR part 706. This amendment provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General of the Navy (Admiralty and Maritime Law), under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS PAUL HAMILTON (DDG 60) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with the following specific provision of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship: Annex I paragraph 3(a) pertaining to the location of the forward masthead light in the forward quarter of the vessel, and the horizontal distance between the forward and after masthead lights. The Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General of the Navy (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has also certified that the lights involved are located in closest possible compliance with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements. This amendment further provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), has amended that certification to reflect that certain masthead lights on USS PAUL HAMILTON (DDG 60), previously certified as not in compliance with 72 COLREGS, now comply with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements, to wit: the arc of visibility of the forward masthead light is no longer obstructed, as required by Rule 21(a).
Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its military functions.
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and Vessels.
33 U.S.C. 1605.
This document was received at the Office of the Federal Register October 13, 2004.
Federal Communications Commission.
Final rules.
In this rule, the Commission modifies limited aspects of the rules previously adopted in this proceeding to provide incentives for wireless telecommunications carriers to serve individuals living on tribal lands. Specifically, the Commission raises the wireline telephone penetration rate at which tribal lands are eligible for a bidding credit from 70 percent or less, to 85 percent or less. The Commission also increases the amount of the bidding credit available to carriers that pledge to deploy on and serve qualifying tribal lands.
Effective December 17, 2004.
Renee Crittendon or Michael Connelly, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, at (202) 418-0620.
This is a summary of the Federal Communications Commission's
1. In June 2000, the Commission issued a
2. In the
3. In the
4. In the
5. In the
6. While the increased rates in penetration, subscribership, and facilities deployment reflect the Commission's resolve in assuring that all Americans, including those living in Indian Country, have the benefits of access to basic telecommunications services, the Commission noted, nevertheless, that well over half of tribes continue to have penetration rates below our national average. The Commission therefore raised the telephone penetration level at which tribal lands are eligible for a credit. At the current 70 percent benchmark, based on the 2000 Census data, only a few dozen (out of nearly 450) federally recognized tribal lands would qualify under our rules for a tribal lands bidding credit. The Commission believes that raising the wireline telephone penetration benchmark from 70 to 85 percent will both increase the number of qualifying tribal lands eligible for this bidding credit program (to roughly 150) and provide a greater incentive for carriers to deploy facilities on tribal lands. The Commission also believes that an 85 percent benchmark for tribal lands bidding credit eligibility represents a balance between its efforts to expand the scope of, and encourage participation in, the existing tribal lands bidding credit program, with the Commission's objective to target those tribal communities with the greatest need for access to telecommunications services.
7. The Commission sought comment on a limited expansion of the bidding credit program that would allow carriers who obtain tribal lands bidding credits to obtain additional credit for extending their coverage to immediately adjacent non-tribal areas that have comparably low penetration rates, noting that certain areas abutting tribal lands often share the same characteristics as tribal lands (
8. While noting that it continues to seek ways to extend telecommunications service to all Americans, including providing incentives to carriers that will serve areas that might otherwise be neglected, the Commission decided not to extend the bidding credit program to adjacent non-tribal areas at this time. The Commission noted that, using Census tract data, the number of immediately adjacent non-tribal areas that would qualify for such a bidding credit (
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the
In this
The Commission believes that increasing the wireline telephone subscription rate at which tribal lands are eligible for a bidding credit to 85 percent or less, will have the affect of increasing participation in the program by increasing the number of qualifying tribes and providing additional incentives to carriers to enter into agreements with tribal governments to deploy wireless services within Indian Country. The Commission also believes that increasing the amount of bidding credit available will provide additional incentives to prospective wireless providers in Indian Country. Regarding the other issues raised, the Commission believes that the lack of a record supporting the proposed changes in the rules, as well as the availability of
No comments were filed that specifically addressed the rules and policies proposed in the IRFA.
The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A “small business concern” is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).
The auction of the 1,050 800 MHz SMR geographic area licenses for the General Category channels began on August 16, 2000, and was completed on September 1, 2000. Eleven (11) winning bidders for geographic area licenses for the General Category channels in the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard. In an auction completed on December 5, 2000, a total of 2,800 Economic Area licenses in the lower 80 channels of the 800 MHz SMR service were sold. Of the 22 winning bidders, 19 claimed “small business” status. Thus, 40 winning bidders for geographic licenses in the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small business. In addition, there are numerous incumbent site-by-site SMR licensees on the 800 and 900 MHz band. The Commission awards bidding credits in auctions for geographic area 800 MHz and 900 MHz SMR licenses to firms that had revenues of no more than $15 million in each of the three previous calendar years. This analysis applies to SMR providers in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands that either hold geographic area licenses or have obtained extended implementation authorizations. The Commission does not know how many firms provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR pursuant to extended implementation authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of no more than $15 million. One firm has over $15 million in revenues. The Commission assumes, for purposes of this analysis, that all of the remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by small entities, as that small business size standard is established by SBA.
This
The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in developing its approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small Entities.
In the
9. This document does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198.
10. Pursuant to the authority of sections 1, 4(i), 303(r), and 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 303(r), and 309(j), this
11. Pursuant to the authority of sections 4(i), 7, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 157, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), and 332, the rule changes specified in Appendix A are adopted.
12. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center,
Communications common carriers, telecommunications.
47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 225, 303(r), 309 and 325(e).
(f) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Qualifying tribal land means any federally recognized Indian tribe's reservation, Pueblo, or Colony, including former reservations in Oklahoma, Alaska Native regions established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (85 Stat. 688), and Indian allotments, that has a wireline telephone subscription rate equal to or less than eighty-five (85) percent based on the most recently available U.S. Census Data.
(iii)
(iv)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
Termination of rulemaking.
The purpose of this document is to announce the termination of a rulemaking in which the agency had considered establishing performance criteria and tests for the existing requirements for low speed vehicles. After considering the amount of additional research that is still needed before the necessary criteria and tests can be finalized and proposed for public comment, and the absence of data showing a safety problem with current safety equipment, the agency has decided to terminate the rulemaking. The agency may pursue future research relative to low speed vehicles (LSV) as funding and priorities permit.
For non-legal issues, contact Mr. William D. Evans, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, phone (202) 366-2272. For legal issues, contact Christopher Calamita, Office of Chief Council, phone (202) 366-2992. You may send mail to both of these officials at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
On June 17, 1998, NHTSA published a final rule establishing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 500, “Low-speed vehicles,” and added a definition of “low-speed vehicle” to 49 CFR 571.3 (63 FR 33194). This new FMVSS and vehicle classification responded to the growing public interest in using golf cars and other similarly sized small vehicles to make short trips for shopping and social/recreational purposes primarily within retirement or other self-contained communities. An LSV is defined in 49 CFR 571.3 as a 4-wheeled motor vehicle, other than a truck, whose speed attainable in 1.6 km (1 mile) is more than 32 kilometers per hour (20 mph) and not more than 40 kilometers per hour (25 mph) on a paved level surface
• A windshield that conforms to the FMVSS on glazing materials (49 CFR 571.205).
• A Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) that conforms to the requirements of 49 CFR part 565, Vehicle Identification Number.
• A Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt assembly conforming to 49 CFR 571.209, Seat belt assemblies, installed at each designated seating position.
NHTSA received Petitions for Reconsideration to the Final Rule from the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles, the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). These organizations requested that NHTSA establish performance criteria and tests for the safety equipment required by FMVSS No. 500. NHTSA recognized that a requirement for LSVs to be equipped with an item of equipment without specifying its performance could result in the introduction of LSVs by different manufacturers whose safety equipment would not perform in an identical manner. NHTSA also recognized that allowing a manufacturer total freedom of choice regarding the performance of equipment might result in the installation of equipment that did not provide an adequate level of safety. NHTSA considered the Petitions for Reconsideration from Connecticut, Florida and AAMVA to be Petitions for Rulemaking and granted them in 2000.
NHTSA initiated a research plan in an effort to develop performance requirements for LSVs. Some research testing has been performed on LSVs relative to the safety equipment currently required by FMVSS No. 500. In addition, other equipment such as service brakes and seat belt assembly anchorages have been examined and tested. NHTSA still has further research and testing to complete on lighting photometric requirements, seat belt anchorages and service brakes. Research and testing has verified that LSVs are equipped with a variety of safety equipment with various performance characteristics. Some systems and equipment that vary widely in performance characteristics are lighting and service brake systems. However, due to the lack of crash data on LSVs it is difficult to determine the safety consequences of these variations in system performance. Searches in NHTSA's Fatal Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) have not provided any crash data involving LSVs. This may reflect police reporting practices that do not recognize LSVs as motor vehicles. After considering the amount of additional research that is still needed before the necessary performance criteria and test procedures could be finalized and proposed for public comment, and the absence of data showing a safety problem with current safety equipment, the agency has decided to terminate the rulemaking. The agency may pursue future research relative to LSVs as funding and priorities permit.
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Proposed rule; notice of hearing delay.
The Agricultural Marketing Service is delaying the hearing for the proposed rule that appeared in the
The hearing will convene at 1 p.m. on Monday, December 6, 2004.
The hearing will be held at the Hilton Kansas City Airport, 8801 NW 112th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64153; (816) 891-8900.
Jack Rower, Marketing Specialist, Order Formulation and Enforcement, USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, STOP 0231—Room 2971, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-0231, (202) 720-2357, e-mail address:
In the proposed rule beginning on page 56725 of the
The hearing will convene at 1:00 p.m. on Monday, December 6, 2004.
This administrative action is governed by the provisions of sections 556 and 557 of Title 5 of the United States Code and, therefore, is excluded from the requirements of Executive Order 12866.
Notice is hereby given of a public hearing to be held at the Hilton Kansas City Airport, 8801 NW 112th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64153; (816) 891-8900, beginning at 1 p.m., on Monday, December 6, 2004, with respect to proposed amendments to the tentative marketing agreement and to the order regulating the handling of milk in the Central milk marketing area. The hearing is being delayed to accommodate a request by industry participants for additional time to prepare for the hearing.
7 U.S.C. 601-674.
Criminal Division, Department of Justice.
Proposed rule.
The Criminal Division (CRM), Department of Justice, proposes to amend its Privacy Act regulations to add exemptions for a newly-created Privacy Act system of records entitled “Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center System,” JUSTICE/CRM-028, as described in today's notice section of the
Submit any comments by November 17, 2004.
Address all comments to Mary Cahill, Management and Planning Staff, Justice Management Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530 (1400 National Place Building), Facsimile Number (202) 307-1853. To ensure proper handling, please reference the AAG/A Order No. on your correspondence. You may view an electronic version of this proposed rule at www.regulations.gov. You may also comment via the Internet to the DOJ/Justice Management Division at the following e-mail address:
Mary Cahill, (202) 307-1823.
This proposed rule seeks to amend 28 CFR 16.91 to add paragraphs (u) and (v) as set forth below. These new paragraphs exempt the “Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center System,” JUSTICE/CRM-028, from certain provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended.
This order relates to individuals rather than small business entities. Nevertheless, pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, this order will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Administrative practices and procedures, Courts, Freedom of Information, Sunshine Act and Privacy.
Pursuant to the authority vested in the Attorney General by 5 U.S.C. 552a and delegated to me by Attorney General Order No. 793-78, it is proposed to amend 28 CFR part 16 as follows:
1. The authority citation for Part 16 continues to read as follows:
5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 552b(g), and 553; 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1); 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 534; 31 U.S.C. 3717 and 9701.
2. Section 16.91 is amended by adding paragraphs (u) and (v) as follows:
(u) The following system of records is exempted pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k) from subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (5), and (8); and (g) of 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center System (JUSTICE/CRM-028). These exemptions apply only to the extent that information in this system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k).
(v) Exemptions from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons:
(1) From subsection (c)(3) because to provide the subject with an accounting of disclosures of records in this system could inform that individual of the existence, nature, or scope of an actual or potential law enforcement or counterintelligence investigation by the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center or the recipient agency, and could permit that individual to take measures to avoid detection or apprehension, to learn the identity of witnesses and informants, or to destroy evidence, and would therefore present a serious impediment to law enforcement or counterintelligence efforts. In addition, disclosure of the accounting would amount to notice to the individual of the existence of a record. Moreover, release of an accounting may reveal information that is properly classified pursuant to Executive Order 12958 (or successor or prior Executive Order) or a statute and could compromise the national defense or foreign policy.
(2) From subsection (c)(4) because this subsection is inapplicable to the extent that an exemption is being claimed for subsection (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4).
(3) From subsection (d)(1) because disclosure of records in the system could alert the subject of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation of the existence of that investigation, of the nature and scope of the information and evidence obtained as to his activities, of the identity of confidential witnesses and informants, of the investigative interest of Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center and other intelligence or law enforcement agencies (including those responsible for civil proceedings related to laws against drug trafficking or related financial crimes); lead to the destruction of evidence, improper influencing of witnesses, fabrication of testimony, and/or flight of the subject; reveal the details of a sensitive investigative or intelligence technique, or the identity of a confidential source; or otherwise impede, compromise, or interfere with investigative efforts and other related law enforcement and/or intelligence activities. In addition, disclosure could invade the privacy of third parties and/or endanger the life, health, and physical safety of law enforcement personnel, confidential informants, witnesses, and potential crime victims. Access to records could also result in the release of information properly classified pursuant to Executive Order 12958 (or successor or prior Executive Order) or by statute, thereby compromising the national defense or foreign policy.
(4) From subsection (d)(2) because amendment of the records thought to be incorrect, irrelevant, or untimely would also interfere with ongoing investigations, criminal or civil law enforcement proceedings, and other law enforcement activities and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring investigations, analyses, and reports to be continuously reinvestigated and revised.
(5) From subsections (d)(3) and (4) because these subsections are inapplicable to the extent exemption is claimed from (d)(1) and (2).
(6) From subsection (e)(1) because, in the course of its acquisition, collation, and analysis of information under the statutory authority granted to it, the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center will occasionally obtain information concerning actual or potential violations of law that are not strictly within its statutory or other authority or may compile information in the course of an investigation which may not be relevant to a specific prosecution. It is impossible to determine in advance what information collected during an investigation will be important or crucial to the apprehension of fugitives. In the interests of effective law enforcement, it is necessary to retain such information in this system of records because it can aid in establishing patterns of criminal activity and can provide valuable leads for federal and other law enforcement agencies. This consideration applies equally to information acquired from, or collated or analyzed for, both law enforcement agencies and agencies of the U.S. foreign intelligence community and military community.
(7) From subsection (e)(2) because in a criminal, civil, or regulatory investigation, prosecution, or proceeding, the requirement that information be collected to the greatest extent practicable from the subject individual would present a serious impediment to law enforcement because the subject of the investigation, prosecution, or proceeding would be placed on notice as to the existence and nature of the investigation, prosecution, and proceeding and would therefore be able to avoid detection or apprehension, to influence witnesses improperly, to destroy evidence, or to fabricate testimony. Moreover, thorough and effective investigation and prosecution may require seeking information from a number of different sources.
(8) From subsection (e)(3) (to the extent applicable) because the requirement that individuals supplying information be provided a form stating the requirements of subsection (e)(3) would constitute a serious impediment to law enforcement in that it could compromise the existence of a confidential investigation or reveal the identity of witnesses or confidential informants and endanger their lives, health, and physical safety. The individual could seriously interfere with undercover investigative techniques and could take appropriate steps to evade the investigation or flee a specific area.
(9) From subsection (e)(5) because the acquisition, collation, and analysis of information for law enforcement purposes from various agencies does not permit a determination in advance or a prediction of what information will be matched with other information and thus whether it is accurate, relevant, timely and complete. With the passage of time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely information may acquire new significance as further investigation brings new details to light and the accuracy of such information can often only be determined in a court of law. The restrictions imposed by subsection (e)(5) would restrict the ability of trained investigators, intelligence analysts, and government attorneys to exercise their judgment in collating and analyzing information and would impede the development of criminal or other intelligence necessary for effective law enforcement.
(10) From subsection (e)(8) because the individual notice requirements of subsection (e)(8) could present a serious impediment to law enforcement by revealing investigative techniques, procedures, evidence, or interest and interfering with the ability to issue warrants or subpoenas, and could give persons sufficient warning to evade investigative efforts.
(11) From subsection (g) because this subsection is inapplicable to the extent that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act.
(12) In addition, exemption is claimed for this system of records from compliance with the following
Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
Proposed rule.
The Copyright Office of the Library of Congress is proposing to amend its regulations governing the filing of claims to allow for the on-line submission of cable, satellite, and DART claims and to require claimants file their claims by hand delivery or by mail using forms created by the Copyright Office.
Comments must be received no later than November 17, 2004.
If hand delivered by a private party, an original and five copies of comments should be brought to Room LM-401 of the James Madison Memorial Building and the envelope should be addressed as follows: Office of the General Counsel/CARP, U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. If delivered by a commercial courier, an original and five copies of comments must be delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site located at 2nd and D Streets, N.E. between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. The envelope should be addressed as follows: Office of the General Counsel/CARP, Room LM-403, James Madison Memorial Building, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. If sent by mail (including overnight delivery using U.S. Postal Service Express Mail), an original and five copies of comments should be addressed to: Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP), PO Box 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, DC. 20024. Comments may not be delivered by means of overnight delivery services such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service, etc., due to delays in processing receipt of such deliveries.
David O. Carson, General Counsel, or Gina Giuffreda, Attorney-Advisor, Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP), PO Box 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 707-8380. Telefax: (202) 252-3423.
The Copyright Act directs the Copyright Office to collect royalties paid by cable systems and satellite carriers for the retransmission of over-the-air broadcast signals, 17 U.S.C. 111(d)(4)(A), 119(b)(4)(A), respectively, as well as royalties paid by manufacturers and importers of digital audio recording devices and media (“DART”) who distribute the products in the United States. 17 U.S.C. 1003. Eligibility to receive royalties from any of these three funds is predicated upon the submission of a claim during the time specified by statute: DART claims must be filed during the months of January and February, 17 U.S.C. 1007; cable and satellite claims must be filed during the month of July, 17 U.S.C. 111, 119.
Prior to 2002, claims to the cable, satellite, and DART royalties generally were considered timely filed with the Copyright Office only if they were hand delivered to the correct location within the Copyright Office during the requisite month, or if the claim was mailed to the correct address and bore the appropriate U.S. Postal Service postmark. However, in October 2001, concerns about possible anthrax contamination of mail addressed to facilities in the District of Columbia caused severe disruptions of postal service to the Copyright Office.
Although mail delivery to the Copyright Office resumed, the Office continued to experience delays in the receipt of mail due in part to the diversion of all incoming mail to an off-site location for screening. Consequently, the Office again waived its CARP regulations that required an original signature and prohibited the submission of DART claims via facsimile transmission, and the Office offered alternative methods for the electronic filing of DART, cable, and satellite claims for the claim years 2002 and 2003. However, instead of submitting claims via electronic mail, claimants were allowed to make on-line submissions of claims. DART:
As noted in the May 28, 2004, Notice regarding the filing of claims to the 2003 cable and satellite royalty funds, the Office's mail will continue to be diverted to an off-site location for screening. Moreover, problems associated with untimely filings of claims by mail,
With one exception (see the discussion on signatures below), the permanent system of electronic filing of claims that the Office is proposing will be virtually identical to the system in place for the claim year 2003. Specifically, on-line electronic forms for filing both single and joint cable and satellite claims will be available on the Copyright Office Web site. Claimants will be able to access and complete the forms via the Office's Web site in accordance with instructions accompanying the forms. As is the current practice, joint claimants will have the option of either listing up to ten joint copyright owners directly on the on-line joint claim form or submitting the list of joint copyright owners as a file attachment to the submission page. The acceptable formats for submission of such attachments will be specified in the instructions accompanying the on-line forms. Any attachment to a joint claim must contain only the names and addresses of the joint copyright owners; attachments containing information other than the names and addresses of joint copyright owners will not be accepted.
The cable and satellite on-line forms will be available for use during the month of July. During the past three years, cable and satellite claims submitted on-line had to be received by the Office no later than 11:59 p.m. E.D.T. on July 31. However, near the end of the filing period that just closed, some claimants notified the Office that they were experiencing technical difficulties when trying to file their claims. Because the Office was made aware of these difficulties during its normal business hours, the technical problems were rectified quickly. Had those notifications come after business hours on July 31, the Office probably would not have been able to respond. Therefore, to better ensure the swift resolution of any technical difficulties in the unlikely event they occur, the Office is proposing that claims submitted on-line must be received by the Office by no later than 5 p.m. E.D.T. on July 31. Specifically, the completed on-line form must be received by the Office's server by that time. Any claim received after that time will be considered as untimely filed.
Claimants filing their claims on-line can ascertain the timeliness of their claim by the receipt of two confirmations. First, immediately after submitting the claim, a confirmation page will appear showing a copy of the claim submitted, noting the attachment of a file, when applicable, and displaying the time and date the claim was submitted. Second, the claimant will receive shortly thereafter an electronic mail message stating that the Office has received the submission. The electronic mail message will show a copy of the claim filed, will contain a copy of the attachment listing the names and addresses of the joint copyright owners to a joint claim, when applicable, and will note the time and date of submission. Either confirmation will constitute sufficient proof of a timely filed on-line claim should a question arise regarding timeliness. Therefore, claimants submitting their claims on-line should not consider their claims successfully submitted to the Office until they receive at least one of the two aforementioned forms of official confirmation. If for some reason neither confirmation is received and the claimant is unable to complete the electronic filing process, the claimant should immediately notify the Office of the problem and be prepared to submit a claim by other means such as by hand delivery or by mail in accordance with current §§ 252.4 (cable) and 257.4 (satellite).
The proposed procedure for the on-line submission of DART claims will operate identically to that for cable and satellite claims as described above, with a few exceptions. First, the on-line electronic forms for filing both single and joint DART claims will be available during the months of January and February. Second, as with cable and satellite claims, joint DART claimants will have the option of either listing up to ten joint claimants directly on the on-line joint claim form or submitting the list of joint claimants as a file attachment to the submission page. However, DART claimants filing a joint claim are required to provide only the names—and not the addresses as required for cable and satellite claims—of the joint DART claimants.
Therefore, any attachment to a joint DART claim must contain only the names of the joint claimants; attachments containing information other than the names of joint claimants will not be accepted.
Finally, as with cable and satellite claims, the Office is proposing that DART claims submitted on-line must be received by the Office by no later than 5 p.m. E.S.T., instead of 11:59 p.m. E.S.T., on the last day of February for the reasons discussed above. Specifically, the completed on-line form must be received by the Office's server by that time. Any claim received after that time will be considered as untimely filed.
Ascertainment of the timeliness of DART claims will be determined in the same manner as for cable and satellite claims, as DART claimants will receive the same two forms of official confirmation of receipt of the claim. Again, if neither confirmation is received, the claimant should immediately notify the Office and be prepared to submit the claim by hand delivery or by mail in accordance with current § 259.5.
The current regulations governing the filing of cable, satellite and DART claims require an original signature of the copyright owner claimant or of a duly authorized representative of the copyright owner claimant. For claim years 2001 through 2003, the Office reluctantly waived these regulations for cable, satellite and DART claims submitted electronically because the Office was not equipped to receive and process electronic signatures. While the Office still is not able at this time to institute such a process Office-wide and because of the risk of fraudulent claims, the Office is loath to waive its CARP regulations requiring an original signature on claims. Consequently, the Office is proposing a system for the on-line submission of claims that utilizes a Personal Identification Number (“PIN”) as a proxy for a signature. The system proposed herein applies only to the submission of cable, satellite, and DART claims and in no way applies to any other filings with the Copyright Office.
The Office notes at the outset that the signature on a claim constitutes an affirmative statement to the Office that the person signing the claim has the authority to submit the claim. The proposed PIN system allows the Office to obtain this same affirmation in a simple, reasonable way without unduly burdening claimants.
The Office is proposing to use a PIN comprised of six to eight alphanumeric characters (ex: A1B2C3D) which will be selected by the person “signing” the claim on-line and placed in the designated space on the appropriate on-line claim form. Selection of a PIN will
The Office is proposing to allow claimants to select a PIN prior to the filing period for cable, satellite and DART claims. Under this option, claimants would select a PIN by completing a form (“Advance Selection Form”) located on the Office's Web site at
During the respective filing periods for DART, cable and satellite claims, the person submitting the claim, whether it be the copyright owner or an authorized representative of the copyright owner, will select the PIN and place it in the designated space on the appropriate on-line claim form. As previously described, upon submitting the claim, a confirmation page displaying the claim, including the PIN selected, will be generated. The copyright owner or an authorized representative of the copyright owner, whomever is submitting the claim, must then print this page, sign it, and return it to the Copyright Office in accordance with the instructions accompanying the confirmation page.
In order to validate the use of the PIN, regardless of the method used for selection, the Office must receive either the signed Advance Selection Form or signed confirmation page. The signature then will be kept on file with the Office. Once the Office receives the signed Advance Selection Form or the signed confirmation page, the PIN and the name will be placed in a confidential directory of PINs created and maintained by the Office.
Because the signature denotes authority to submit the claim, it is important to note that the PIN will correspond and be personal to the person submitting the claim, whether it be the copyright owner or a representative of the copyright owner authorized to file the claim on behalf of the copyright owner. Therefore, as long as that person submits claims on-line, this same PIN must be used each time that person submits a cable, satellite or DART claim on-line. Conversely, if a person fails to provide the Office with an original signature in accordance with the proposed regulations, any claim submitted on-line bearing the PIN selected by that person will be subject to dismissal for failure to comply with the original signature requirement.
Claimants may request from the Office their self-selected PIN in the event the PIN is lost or forgotten. A link titled “Lost or Forgotten PIN” will be located on the instruction page accompanying the Advance Selection Form located on the Office's Web site at
Upon receipt of a request, the Office will send the PIN to the claimant via electronic mail to the electronic mail address on file with the Office by close of business the next business day. Therefore, claimants requesting their PIN during a filing period should do so early in the period in order to allow the Office a sufficient time to respond. The Office will not guarantee a same-day response for requests made on the last day of a filing period.
Because the PIN corresponds to the copyright owner or to an authorized representative of the copyright owner, the request for the PIN must come from that person. Similarly, the Office will provide the PIN only to that person.
Finally, the Office will accept only those requests for a lost or forgotten PIN made as set forth above and, therefore, will not accept any requests made by telephone.
Until such time as the Office develops an Office-wide system for receiving and processing electronic signatures, the Office believes that the PIN system proposed above represents the most reasonable method for the on-line submission of claims because it does not require any further waivers of its CARP regulations nor does it impose any undue burdens on claimants.
As noted above, the Office is concerned about the risk of fraudulent claims. This concern stems from a serious incident of fraud in which fraudulent cable and satellite claims covering several claim years were filed with the Office. In an effort to deter any future filings of fraudulent claims, the Office proposes to require an affirmation under penalty of law that the person filing the claim has the authority to do so, can attest to the veracity of the information contained in the claim, and is filing the claim in good faith. Therefore, the person filing the claim must be someone who can make this affirmation, namely, the copyright owner or a representative of the copyright owner authorized to file the claim on behalf of the copyright owner.
Since February 5, 2002, DART claimants have been allowed to submit their claims via facsimile transmission. However, very few claimants utilized this method. In addition, in proposing changes to the regulations governing the filing of claims, the Office seeks uniformity in its methods for filing all claims. For these reasons, the Office is not proposing to amend the regulations governing the filing of DART claims to allow for the submission of claims via facsimile.
The Office is proposing to amend its regulations governing the filing of cable, satellite, and DART claims to require that all claims, not just claims filed on-line, be furnished on the appropriate form prescribed by the Copyright Office. Heretofore, the Office has not issued claim forms, except for those created for the on-line submission of claims. However, the Office has decided to propose the use of standard forms for the filing of all claims, regardless of the filing method selected, in an effort to minimize, if not eliminate, errors frequently made on self-made forms, such as the failure to provide required information. Reduction or elimination of such errors will facilitate the processing of claims.
The proposed regulation will state that forms for claims filed by mail or by hand delivery are available on the Office's Web site at
Prototypes of the proposed forms, including the Advance Selection Form, and the confirmation page to be signed and returned to the Office are, or soon will be, available on the Office's Web site at
The Copyright Office also proposes to amend its regulations governing the filing of cable, satellite and DART claims by requiring that each claim include the e-mail address, if any, of the person or entity filing the claim. An e-mail address for the person or entity filing the claim will be required when submitting the claim on-line. In addition, the Office proposes to require the name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, of a person whom the Office can contact about the claim. The contact person may be the copyright owner, a representative of the copyright owner authorized to file the claim on behalf of the copyright owner, or a designee of either of these entities. However, the contact information must identify an actual person who can respond to inquiries from the Office. Having this information will assist in the processing of claims.
In 2001, in an effort to eliminate the filing of placeholder claims, the Copyright Office amended its regulations governing the filing of cable and satellite claims to clarify that such claims must list the name of each copyright owner covered by the claim.
Finally, the Office is proposing to amend current §§ 252.4 (cable), 257.4 (satellite) and 259.5 (DART) to clarify that the only acceptable means of overnight delivery of claims is via U.S. Postal Service Express Mail addressed to the CARP mailbox. On June 30, 2004, the Office amended its regulations to reflect the new procedures for delivering items to the Copyright Office, including the filing of claims. 69 FR 39331 (June 30, 2004). The new procedures do not allow the filing of claims by overnight delivery services such as Federal Express and United Parcel Service (“UPS”) because these services will not deliver packages to post office boxes. Since the Office has received questions regarding this provision, we are proposing to amend our regulations to clarify that claimants wishing to deliver their claims by means of overnight delivery can do so only by using the Express Mail service provided by the U.S. Postal Service, as using this service will better ensure the procurement of the appropriate U.S. Postal Service postmark. In addition, such deliveries, unlike those from services such as Federal Express and UPS, will reach the Office in a timely manner.
All interested parties are requested to file comments with the Copyright Office in accordance with the information set forth in this document. Unless persuaded otherwise by the commenters, the Office intends to issue final rules in time for the submission of DART claims in January and February 2005.
Cable television, Claims, Copyright.
Claims, Copyright, Satellite television.
Claims, Copyright, Digital audio recording devices and media.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office proposes to amend 37 CFR chapter II as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 252 continues to read as follows:
17 U.S.C. 111(d)(4), 801, 803.
2. Section 252.1 is amended by removing “parties” and adding “copyright owners” in its place.
3. Section 252.2 is amended by removing “party” each place it appears and adding “copyright owner” in its place; and by removing “Claimants” and adding “Copyright owners, or an authorized representative of the copyright owner,” in its place.
4. Revise § 252.3 to read as follows:
(a)
(2) Copies of cable claim forms are available:
(i) On the Office's Web site at
(ii) On the Office's Web site at
(iii) Upon request to the Public Information Office, Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000.
(b)
(i) The full legal name and address of the copyright owner entitled to claim the royalty fees.
(ii) A general statement of the nature of the copyright owner's work or works, and identification of at least one secondary transmission by a cable system of such work or works establishing a basis for the claim.
(iii) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, full address, including a specific number and street name or rural route, and e-mail address, if any, of the person or entity filing the single claim. An e-mail address must be provided on claims submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site.
(iv) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, of the person whom the Copyright Office can contact regarding the claim. The contact person may be the copyright owner, an authorized
(v) An original signature of the copyright owner or of a duly authorized representative of the copyright owner. The signature on a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site shall be provided in accordance with § 252.4.
(vi) A declaration of the authority to file the claim and of the veracity of the information contained in the claim and the good faith of the person signing in providing such information. Penalties for fraud and false statements are provided under 18 U.S.C. 1001
(2)
(i) A list including the full legal name and address of each copyright owner to the joint claim entitled to claim royalty fees.
(ii) A concise statement of the authorization for the person or entity filing the joint claim. For this purpose, a performing rights society shall not be required to obtain from its members or affiliates separate authorizations, apart from their standard membership affiliate agreements, or to list the name of each of its members or affiliates in the joint claim as required by paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section.
(iii) A general statement of the nature of the copyright owners' works and identification of at least one secondary transmission of one of the copyright owners' works by a cable system establishing a basis for the joint claim and the identification of the copyright owner of each work so identified.
(iv) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, full address, including a specific number and street name or rural route, and e-mail address, if any, of the person or entity filing the joint claim. An e-mail address must be provided on claims submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site.
(v) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, of the person the Copyright Office can contact regarding the claim. The contact person may be the copyright owner, an authorized representative of the copyright owner, or a designee of either of these entities.
(vi) Original signatures of the copyright owners to the joint claim or of a duly authorized representative or representatives of the copyright owners. The signatures on a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site must be provided in accordance with § 252.4.
(vii) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, a declaration of the authority to file the claim and of the veracity of the information contained in the claim and the good faith of the person signing in providing such information. Penalties for fraud and false statements are provided under 18 U.S.C. 1001
(c) In the event that the legal name and/or address of the copyright owner entitled to royalties or the person or entity filing the claim changes after the filing of the claim, the Copyright Office shall be notified of the change. If the good faith efforts of the Copyright Office to contact the copyright owner or person or entity filing the claim are frustrated because of failure to notify the Office of a name and/or address change, the claim may be subject to dismissal.
5. Revise § 252.4 to read as follows:
(a)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(c)
(2) The Copyright Office will not guarantee a same-day response for requests made for a lost or forgotten PIN.
(3) The Copyright Office will not accept requests for a PIN made by telephone.
(d)
(e)
6. Revise § 252.5 to read as follows:
(a) Claims filed with the Copyright Office shall be considered timely filed only if:
(1) They are filed on-line through the Copyright Office Web site at
(2) They are hand delivered by a private party and addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel/CARP, U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000. These claims must be delivered to the Public Information Office, located at the U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000, Monday through Friday, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. during the month of July.
(3) They are hand delivered by a commercial courier (excluding overnight delivery services such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service and similar overnight delivery services) and addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel/CARP, Room LM-403, James Madison Memorial Building, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. These claims must be delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site (CCAS) located at Second and D Street, NE., Washington, DC, during the month of July. The CCAS will accept items from couriers with proper identification,
(4) They are sent through the U.S. Postal Service and addressed as follows: Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel, P.O. Box 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0977. Claims sent through the U.S. Postal Service must have sufficient postage and bear a July U.S. postmark.
(5) Federal Express, United Parcel Service and similar overnight delivery services may not be used for the filing of claims. A claim sent by means of overnight delivery shall be done via U.S. Postal Service Express Mail, and the claim shall be addressed in accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(b) Claims dated only with a business meter that are received after July 31 will not be accepted as having been timely filed.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, in any year in which July 31 falls on a Saturday, Sunday, holiday, or other nonbusiness day within the District of Columbia or the Federal Government, claims received by the Copyright Office by the first business day in August, or properly addressed and deposited with sufficient postage with the United States Postal Service and postmarked by the first business day in August, shall be considered timely filed.
(d) No claim may be filed by facsimile transmission.
(e) In the event that a properly addressed and mailed claim is not timely received by the Copyright Office, proper filing of the claim may nonetheless be proven if it was sent by certified mail return receipt requested, and a receipt bearing a July date stamp of the U.S. Postal Service, except where paragraph (c) of this section applies, can be provided. No affidavits will be accepted in lieu of the receipt.
(f) The Copyright Office will accept either the confirmation page generated upon submission of the claim on-line through the Copyright Office Web site or the electronic mail message from the Copyright Office confirming receipt of the claim as proof that a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site was received timely in the Office's server. No affidavits will be accepted in lieu thereof.
6a. Add § 252.6 to read as follows:
A copyright owner or an authorized representative of the copyright owner shall, for each claim submitted to the Copyright Office by hand delivery or by mail, file an original and two copies of the claim to cable royalty fees.
7. The authority citation for part 257 continues to read as follows:
17 U.S.C. 119(b)(4).
8. Section 257.1 is amended by removing “parties” and adding “copyright owners” in its place.
9. Section 257.2 is amended by removing “party” each place it appears and adding “copyright owner” in its place; and by removing “Claimants” and adding “Copyright owners, or an authorized representative of the copyright owner,” in its place.
10. Section 257.3 is revised to read as follows:
(a)
(2) Copies of satellite claim forms are available:
(i) On the Office's Web site at
(ii) On the Office's Web site at
(iii) Upon request to the Public Information Office, Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000.
(b)
(i) The full legal name and address of the copyright owner entitled to claim the royalty fees.
(ii) A general statement of the nature of the copyright owner's work or works, and identification of at least one secondary transmission by a satellite carrier of such work or works establishing a basis for the claim.
(iii) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, full address, including a specific number and street name or rural route, and e-mail address, if any, of the person or entity filing the single claim. An e-mail address must be provided on claims submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site.
(iv) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, of the person whom the Copyright Office can contact regarding
(v) An original signature of the copyright owner or of a duly authorized representative of the copyright owner. The signature on a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site shall be provided in accordance with § 257.4.
(vi) A declaration of the authority to file the claim and of the veracity of the information contained in the claim and the good faith of the person signing in providing such information. Penalties for fraud and false statements are provided under 18 U.S.C. 1001
(2)
(i) A list including the full legal name and address of each copyright owner to the joint claim entitled to claim royalty fees.
(ii) A concise statement of the authorization for the person or entity filing the joint claim. For this purpose, a performing rights society shall not be required to obtain from its members or affiliates separate authorizations, apart from their standard membership affiliate agreements, or to list the name of each of its members or affiliates in the joint claim as required by paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section.
(iii) A general statement of the nature of the copyright owners' works, identification of at least one secondary transmission of one of the copyright owners' works by a satellite carrier establishing a basis for the joint claim, and the identification of the copyright owner of each work so identified.
(iv) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, full address, including a specific number and street name or rural route, and e-mail address, if any, of the person or entity filing the joint claim. An e-mail address must be provided on claims submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site.
(v) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, of a person whom the Copyright Office can contact regarding the claim. The contact person may be the copyright owner, an authorized representative of the copyright owner, or a designee of either of these entities.
(vi) Original signatures of the copyright owners to the joint claim or of a duly authorized representative or representatives of the copyright owners. The signatures on a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site must be provided in accordance with § 257.4.
(vii) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, a declaration of the authority to file the claim and of the veracity of the information contained in the claim and the good faith of the person signing in providing such information. Penalties for fraud and false statements are provided under 18 U.S.C. 1001
(c) In the event that the legal name and/or address of the copyright owner entitled to royalties or the person or entity filing the claim changes after the filing of the claim, the Copyright Office shall be notified of the change. If the good faith efforts of the Copyright Office to contact the copyright owner or person or entity filing the claim are frustrated because of failure to notify the Office of a name and/or address change, the claim may be subject to dismissal.
11. Revise § 257.4 to read as follows:
(a)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(c)
(2) The Copyright Office will not guarantee a same-day response for requests made for a lost or forgotten PIN.
(3) The Copyright Office will not accept requests for a PIN made by telephone.
(d)
(e)
12. Revise § 257.5 to read as follows:
(a) Claims filed with the Copyright Office shall be considered timely filed only if:
(1) They are filed on-line through the Copyright Office Web site at
(2) They are hand delivered by a private party and addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel/CARP, U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000. These claims must be delivered to the Public Information Office, located at the U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000, Monday through Friday, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. during the month of July.
(3) They are hand delivered by a commercial courier (excluding overnight delivery services such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service and similar overnight delivery services) and addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel/CARP, Room LM-403, James Madison Memorial Building, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. These claims must be delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site (CCAS) located at Second and D Street, NE., Washington, DC, during the month of July. The CCAS will accept items from couriers with proper identification,
(4) They are sent through the U.S. Postal Service and addressed as follows: Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel, P.O. Box 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0977. Claims sent through the U.S. Postal Service must have sufficient postage and bear a July U.S. postmark.
(5) Federal Express, United Parcel Service and similar overnight delivery services may not be used for the filing of claims. A claim sent by means of overnight delivery shall be done via U.S. Postal Service Express Mail, and the claim shall be addressed in accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(b) Claims dated only with a business meter that are received after July 31 will not be accepted as having been timely filed.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, in any year in which July 31 falls on a Saturday, Sunday, holiday, or other nonbusiness day within the District of Columbia or the Federal Government, claims received by the Copyright Office by the first business day in August, or properly addressed and deposited with sufficient postage with the United States Postal Service and postmarked by the first business day in August, shall be considered timely filed.
(d) No claim may be filed by facsimile transmission.
(e) In the event that a properly addressed and mailed claim is not timely received by the Copyright Office, proper filing of the claim may nonetheless be proven if it was sent by certified mail return receipt requested, and a receipt bearing a July date stamp of the U.S. Postal Service, except where paragraph (c) of this section applies, can be provided. No affidavits will be accepted in lieu of the receipt.
(f) The Copyright Office will accept either the confirmation page generated upon submission of the claim on-line through the Copyright Office Web site or the electronic mail message from the Copyright Office confirming receipt of the claim as proof that a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site was received timely in the Office's server. No affidavits will be accepted in lieu thereof.
12a. Revise § 257.6 to read as follows:
A copyright owner or an authorized representative of the copyright owner shall, for each claim submitted to the Copyright Office by hand delivery or by mail, file an original and two copies of the claim to satellite carrier royalty fees.
12b. Add § 257.7 to read as follows:
If a copyright owner or an authorized representative of the copyright owner intends to file claims for both cable compulsory license and satellite carrier compulsory license royalty fees during the same month of July, that copyright owner or authorized representative of the copyright owner must file separate claims with the Copyright Office. Any single claim which purports to file for both cable and satellite carrier royalty fees will be dismissed.
13. The authority citation for part 259 continues to read as follows:
17 U.S.C. 1007(a)(1).
14. Revise § 259.3 to read as follows:
(a)
(2) Copies of DART claim forms are available:
(i) On the Office's Web site at
(ii) On the Office's Web site at
(iii) Upon request to the Public Information Office, Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000.
(b)
(1) The full legal name and address of the person or entity claiming royalty payments.
(2) The telephone number, facsimile number, if any, full address, including a specific number and street name or rural route, and e-mail address, if any, of the person or entity filing the claim. An e-mail address must be provided on claims submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site.
(3) The name, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, of a person whom the Copyright Office can contact regarding the claim. The contact person may be the copyright owner, an authorized representative of the copyright owner, or a designee of either of these entities.
(4) A statement as to how the claimant fits within the definition of interested
(5) A statement as to whether the claim is being made against the Sound Recordings Fund or the Musical Works Fund, as set forth in 17 U.S.C. 1006(b) and as to which Subfund of the Sound Recordings Fund (
(6) Identification, establishing a basis for the claim, of at least one musical work or sound recording embodied in a digital musical recording or an analog musical recording lawfully made under title 17 of the United States Code that has been distributed (as that term is defined in 17 U.S.C. 1001(6)), and that, during the period to which the royalty payments claimed pertain, has been (i) Distributed (as that term is defined in 17 U.S.C. 1001(6)) in the form of digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings, or (ii) Disseminated to the public in transmissions.
(7) A declaration of the authority to file the claim and of the veracity of the information contained in the claim and the good faith of the person signing in providing such information. Penalties for fraud and false statements are provided under 18 U.S.C. 1001
(c) Claims shall bear the original signature of the claimant or of a duly authorized representative of the claimant. The signature on a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site must be provided in accordance with § 259.5.
(d) In the event that the legal name and/or address of the claimant changes after the filing of the claim, the claimant shall notify the Copyright Office of such change. If the good faith efforts of the Copyright Office to contact the claimant are frustrated because of failure to notify the Office of a name and/or address change, the claim may be subject to dismissal.
(e) If the claim is a joint claim, it shall include a concise statement of the authorization for the filing of the joint claim in addition to the declaration required under paragraph (b)(7) of this section and the name of each claimant to the joint claim.
(f) If an interested copyright party intends to file claims against more than one Subfund, each such claim must be filed separately with the Copyright Office. Any claim that purports to file against more than one subfund will be rejected.
15. Redesignate §§ 259.5 and 259.6 as §§ 259.6 and 259.7, respectively.
15a. Add a new § 259.5 to read as follows:
(a)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(c)
(2) The Copyright Office will not guarantee a same-day response for requests made for a lost or forgotten PIN.
(3) The Copyright Office will not accept requests for a PIN made by telephone.
(d)
(e)
16. Revise newly redesignated § 259.6 to read as follows:
(a) Claims filed with the Copyright Office shall be considered timely filed only if:
(1) They are filed on-line through the Copyright Office Web site at
(2) They are hand delivered by a private party and addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel/CARP, U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000. These claims must be delivered to the Public Information Office, located at the U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000, Monday through Friday, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. during the month of January or February.
(3) They are hand delivered by a commercial courier (excluding overnight delivery services such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service and similar overnight delivery services) and addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel/CARP, Room LM-403, James Madison Memorial Building, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. These claims must be delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site (CCAS) located at Second and D Street, NE., Washington, DC, during the month of January or February. The CCAS will accept items from couriers with proper identification,
(4) They are sent through the U.S. Postal Service and addressed as follows: Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel, P.O. Box 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0977. Claims sent through the U.S. Postal Service must have sufficient postage and bear a January or February U.S. postmark.
(5) Federal Express, United Parcel Service and similar overnight delivery services may not be used for the filing of claims. A claim sent by means of overnight delivery shall be done via U.S. Postal Service Express Mail, and the claim shall be addressed in accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(b) Claims dated only with a business meter that are received after the last day in February will not be accepted as having been timely filed.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, in any year in which the last day of February falls on a Saturday, Sunday, a holiday, or other nonbusiness day within the District of Columbia or the Federal Government, claims received by the Copyright Office by the first business day in March, or properly addressed and deposited with sufficient postage with the United States Postal Service and postmarked by the first business day in March, shall be considered timely filed.
(d) No claim may be filed by facsimile transmission.
(e) In the event that a properly addressed and mailed claim is not timely received by the Copyright Office, a claimant may nonetheless prove that the claim was properly filed if it was sent by certified mail return receipt requested, and the claimant can provide a receipt bearing a January or February date stamp of the U.S. Postal Service, except where paragraph (c) of this section applies. No affidavits will be accepted in lieu of the receipt.
(f) A claimant may prove that a claim submitted on-line through the Copyright Office Web site was received timely in the Office's server by providing either the confirmation page generated upon submission of the claim or the electronic mail message from the Copyright Office confirming receipt of the claim. No affidavits will be accepted in lieu thereof.
17. Amend newly redesignated § 259.7 by adding “by hand delivery or by mail,” after “Copyright Office'.
Federal Communications Commission.
Proposed rule.
In this document, the Commission seeks comment on the recommendation of the North American Numbering Council (NANC), its advisory committee on numbering issues, for reducing the time interval for intermodal porting (porting between wireline and wireless carriers). The Commission also seeks comment on implementation issues in the event that a reduced intermodal porting interval is adopted.
Comments are due on or before November 17, 2004. Reply comments are due on or before December 17, 2004.
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
Pam Slipakoff, Attorney Advisor, Wireline Competition Bureau, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, (202) 418-7705, TTY (202) 418-0484 or Jennifer Salhus, Attorney Advisor, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-1310, TTY (202) 418-1169.
This is a summary of the Commission's Second Further
1. In this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we seek comment on the NANC's recommendation for reducing the time interval for intermodal porting. We also seek comment on implementation issues in the event that a reduced intermodal porting interval is adopted.
2.
3. On November 10, 2003, the Commission released a
4.
5. To reduce the overall four-day porting interval, the NANC considered reductions to the Confirmation Interval and the Activation Interval. Specifically, it developed two Confirmation Interval proposals (Proposals C1 and C2) and three Activation Interval proposals (Proposals A1, A2, and A3). Each of the two Confirmation Interval proposals were considered with each of the three Activation Interval proposals, for a total of six proposals for reducing the intermodal porting interval.
6. After reviewing the proposals, the NANC found that the costs of Proposal C1 outweighed the potential benefits. With respect to the Activation Interval, the NANC determined that Proposal A3 provides a substantial reduction in the intermodal porting interval at a much lower cost to the industry and consumers than the other Activation Interval proposals. Likewise, the NANC notes that Proposal A2 would likely result in greater costs to the industry in comparison to the costs to implement Proposal A3.
7. The NANC concluded that the C2/A3 combination provides a shorter porting interval and the most economical approach to a reduced intermodal porting interval. If this approach is adopted, orders received in a mechanized manner should be responded to in five hours or less (Proposal C2) and the ten-digit triggers should be set 24 hours before 12:01 a.m. of the confirmed due date (Proposal A3). According to the NANC, this combination provided the shortest “maximum porting interval” (53 hours) and the greatest total time saved (43 hours) compared to the four business day (96 hours) interval in our rules. For example, if a request to port was placed at 9:00 a.m. on a Monday, the Confirmation Interval would be completed by 2:00 p.m. that afternoon. The Activation Interval could then begin. The ten-digit trigger could then be set for 11:59 p.m on Wednesday. The port could be completed as early as 12:01 a.m. on Thursday.
8.
9. According to the NANC's report, a uniform format for the exchange of information and a single mechanized interface could reduce the Confirmation Interval from 24 hours to five hours. Currently, each LEC may choose a different Local Service Ordering Guideline (LSOG) version based on its business needs. The NANC recommends that the industry establish one common LSOG version for porting to facilitate a reduction in the Confirmation Interval. We seek comment on the NANC's recommendation. We also seek comment on whether or not the costs of a standardized LSOG and mechanized interface would outweigh the benefits, including for small entities. Commenters advocating a uniform LSOG should specify the items that should be included in a standardized LSOG.
10. In its report, the NANC also notes that reducing the intermodal porting interval could increase the number of inadvertent ports. We seek comment on the impact of a reduced intermodal porting interval on inadvertent ports. We also seek comment on the procedures that should be established to minimize and restore inadvertent ports. We further seek comment on the costs for correcting inadvertent ports that result from a reduced intermodal porting interval.
11. The NANC did not consider the extent to which reducing the intermodal porting interval will benefit consumers. Thus, we seek comment on whether the costs of a reduced intermodal porting interval outweigh the benefits of making it quicker for consumers to port their numbers.
12. Recently, many small carriers providing service in areas outside of the top 100 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) implemented number portability. We recognize that reducing the intermodal porting interval now for these carriers may produce unique challenges. The NANC notes that the economic impacts of shortening the intermodal porting interval may not be justified for rural telephone companies. We seek comment on whether certain classes of carriers (e.g., SBA Tier III wireless carriers, rural telephone companies and/or rural carriers) should be exempt from a reduced intermodal porting interval, if one is adopted. Similarly, we seek comment on whether an exemption is necessary for certain classes of small telephone companies as defined generically by the SBA. We seek comment on what costs these classes of carriers face to reduce the intermodal porting interval pursuant to the NANC proposal. Specifically, we seek comment on the costs SBA Tier III wireless carriers, rural telephone companies and/or rural carriers would face to establish a mechanized interface pursuant to Proposal C2. In addition, we seek comment on the costs these carriers would face to establish an early morning activation method as outlined in Proposal A3. Finally, we seek comment on the appropriate length of any potential exemption and any other alternative approaches to minimizing the economic impact for SBA Tier III wireless carriers, rural telephone companies and/or rural carriers.
13.
14. The NANC also noted several issues that it believes require further exploration prior to implementing its recommendation. Specifically, the NANC recommends further exploration of the following issues which are currently being addressed by the NANC's Local Number Portability Administration Working Group: (1) Ports attempted while port conflict still unresolved; (2) intermodal “port confirmation” date not recognized; (3) inconsistent intermodal porting process causes service disruption on due date; (4) intermodal port date change (post confirmation) not recognized; (5) Customer Service Request (CSR) not executable for intermodal porting from a Type 1 reseller; and (6) various service provider operational systems issues. We seek comment on the impact of these, and any other outstanding issues, on implementing a shorter intermodal porting interval. Specifically, we seek comment on whether the resolution of these, and any other outstanding issues, will help or hinder the implementation of a reduced intermodal porting interval. Similarly, we seek comment on whether a reduced intermodal porting interval will help or hinder industry efforts to resolve these outstanding issues.
15.
16. We note that section 251(e)(2) provides that “[t]he cost of establishing telecommunications numbering administration arrangements and number portability shall be borne by all telecommunications carriers on a competitively neutral basis as determined by the Commission.” In the
17. This is a permit-but-disclose notice and comment rulemaking proceeding. Members of the public are advised that ex parte presentations are permitted, provided they are disclosed under the Commission's Rules.
18. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a significant number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed in this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the
19. This
20. In this
21. The proposed action is authorized under sections 1, 3, 4(i), 201, 202, 251 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 153, 154(i), 201-202, and 251.
22. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act, unless the Commission has developed one or more definitions that are appropriate to its activities. Under the Small Business Act, a “small business concern” is one that: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) meets any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).
23. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a “small business” under the RFA is one that,
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 422 C and F Broadband PCS licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35 winning bidders in this auction, 29 qualified as “small” or “very small” businesses. Subsequent events, concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being available for grant.
30. After reviewing several alternatives, the NANC found that the C2/A3 Proposal provides a shorter porting interval and the most economical approach to an intermodal porting interval based on the proposals considered. Pursuant to this plan, orders received in a mechanized manner should be responded to in five hours or less (Proposal C2) and the ten-digit trigger should be set a full day before 12:01 a.m. of the confirmed due date (Proposal A3). According to the NANC, this combination provides the shortest “maximum porting interval” (53 hours) and the greatest reduction in total time saved (43 hours). The NANC, however, estimates that the industry would need approximately 24 months to implement Proposal C2 after a Commission mandate is issued. Should the Commission decide to adopt the NANC's recommendation, or any other change, all carriers, including small entity carriers, may require upgrades to their porting systems. These potential changes may impose new obligations and costs on carriers. We seek comment on the types of burdens carriers could face if the proposed recommendations, or any other suggested recommendations are adopted. Entities, especially small businesses, are encouraged to quantify, if possible, the costs and benefits of potential reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements. We note that the NANC estimates that the C2/A3 Proposal would cost less than $50 million to implement industry wide. The Commission seeks comment on this estimate. Commenters should address the specific costs of the NANC's recommendations for the C2/A3 Proposal, including the costs associated with establishing a mechanized interface pursuant to Proposal C2 and an early morning activation approach as described in Proposal A3. The Commission also seeks comment on the impacts of such changes on small and rural telephone companies. The Commission also considers an exemption for certain classes of carriers. We also note that the Commission may choose to keep the intermodal porting interval at four days. Thus, there would be no new requirements on any group of carriers, including small entity carriers.
31. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
32. This IRFA seeks comment on how the NANC's recommendation, and any other potential changes to the intermodal porting interval, could be implemented in a manner that reduces the potential burden of cost compliance for small entities. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on whether, and for what period of time, certain classes of carriers, (
33. None.
34. This document contains proposed modified information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due December 17, 2004. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198,
35. We invite comment on the issues and questions set forth in the Further Notice or Proposed Rulemaking and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis contained herein. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments as follows: Comments are due on or before November 17, 2004, and reply comments are due on or before December 17, 2004. All filings should refer to CC Docket No. 95-116. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper
36. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to
37. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
38. Parties also must send three paper copies of their filing to Sheryl Todd, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Room 5-B540, Washington, DC 20554. In addition, commenters must send diskette copies to the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20054.
39. Accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording and Braille) are available to persons with disabilities by contacting Brian Millin, of the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202) 418-7426, TTY (202) 418-7365, or at
40. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 218, 251, and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 218, 251, and 332, this
41. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this
Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
Notice of applications selected to receive grant awards.
The Rural Utilities Service (RUS) hereby announces the recipients selected to receive grant awards during fiscal year (FY) 2004 under the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grant Program.
Subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), applications will be available for public inspection at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250.
Gary B. Allan, Branch Chief, Universal Services Branch, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Utilities Service. Telephone: (202) 720-0413, Fax (202) 720-1051,
Pursuant to 7 CFR 1703.101, RUS hereby publishes the names of the 62 organizations that have been awarded $24.6 million in grants under 7 CFR part 1703, subpart D, Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grant Program. The recipients are as follows:
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Notice of extension of time limit for preliminary results of countervailing duty administrative review.
October 18, 2004.
Darla Brown or Eric B. Greynolds, AD/CVD Enforcement, Office III, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2786.
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) to make a preliminary determination within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order for which a review is requested. However, if it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results of review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the preliminary determination to a maximum of 365 days.
On April 28, 2004, the Department initiated an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain in-shell pistachios from the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran).
Due to the fact that we have received several new subsidy allegations from petitioners and due to the complicated nature of this case, we find that it is not practicable for the Department to complete the preliminary results of the administrative review within the 245-day statutory time frame. Therefore, the Department is extending the time limits for completion of the preliminary results until March 31, 2005.
This extension is in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
On June 10, 2004, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain polyester staple fiber from the Republic of Korea (“Korea”). The period of review is May 1, 2002, through April 30, 2003. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments received and an examination of our calculations, we have made certain changes for the final results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the three manufacturers/exporters are listed below in the “Final Results of the Review” section of this notice.
October 18, 2004.
Andrew McAllister, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1174.
Since the publication of the preliminary results in this review (
We invited parties to comment on the preliminary results of the review. On June 10, 2004, we granted a request submitted by Saehan for an extension to file rebuttal briefs until July 19, 2004. On July 12, 2004, Arteva Specialties S.a.r.l., d/b/a KoSa and Wellman, Inc. (“the petitioners”), and the respondents Saehan Industries, Inc. (“Saehan”) and Huvis Corporation (“Huvis”) filed case briefs. On July 19, 2004, Huvis filed a rebuttal brief. A public hearing was held at the request of Saehan on August 3, 2004.
For the purposes of this order, the product covered is certain polyester staple fiber (“PSF”). PSF is defined as synthetic staple fibers, not carded, combed or otherwise processed for spinning, of polyesters measuring 3.3 decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more in diameter. This merchandise is cut to lengths varying from one inch (25 mm) to five inches (127 mm). The merchandise subject to this order may be coated, usually with a silicon or other finish, or not coated. PSF is generally used as stuffing in sleeping bags, mattresses, ski jackets, comforters, cushions, pillows, and furniture. Merchandise of less than 3.3 decitex (less than 3 denier) currently classifiable under the
The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and 5503.20.00.65. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under order is dispositive.
The period of review (“POR”) is May 1, 2002, through April 30, 2003.
As stated in the
The Department “may revoke, in whole or in part” an antidumping duty order upon completion of a review under section 751 of the Act. While Congress has not specified the procedures that the Department must follow in revoking an order, the Department has developed a procedure for revocation that is described in 19 CFR 351.222. This regulation requires,
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(e)(1), Keon Baek requested revocation of the antidumping duty order as it pertains to that company. Consistent with the
According to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), upon receipt of such a request, the Department may revoke an order, in part, if it concludes that (1) the company in question has sold subject merchandise at not less than NV for a period of at least three consecutive years; (2) the continued application of the antidumping duty order is not otherwise necessary to offset dumping; and (3) the company has agreed to its immediate reinstatement in the order if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to the revocation, sold subject merchandise at less than NV.
As explained in these final results, our calculations show that Keon Baek sold PSF at not less than NV during the current review period. In addition, Keon Baek sold PSF at not less than NV during the 1999-2001 review period (
Moreover, based on our examination of the sales data submitted by Keon Baek, we find that Keon Baek sold the subject merchandise in the United States in commercial quantities in each of the consecutive years cited by Keon Baek to support its request for revocation.
Finally, we find that application of the antidumping order to Keon Baek is no longer warranted for the following reasons: (1) As noted above, the company had zero or
Therefore, we determine that Keon Baek qualifies for revocation of the order on PSF pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2) and that the order, with respect to subject merchandise produced and exported by Keon Baek, should be revoked. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(f)(3), we are terminating the suspension of liquidation for subject merchandise produced and exported by Keon Baek that was entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 1, 2003, and will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to refund with interest any cash deposits for such entries.
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” from Jeffrey A. May, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated October 8, 2004 (
We calculated export price (“EP”), NV, and the cost of production (“COP”) based on the same methodologies used in the
• For Saehan, we have adjusted the general and administrative expense ratio.
• For Saehan, we also corrected certain clerical errors made in the preliminary margin programs.
• With respect to Huvis, for one of its home market customers, we have adjusted the credit period for open payment sales.
Pursuant to section 773(b)(1)(C)(i) of the Act, where less than 20 percent of a respondent's sales of a given product were made at prices less than the COP, we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that product because we determined that the below-cost sales were not made in “substantial quantities.” Where 20 percent or more of a respondent's sales of a given product during the 12-month period were at prices less than the COP, we determined such sales to have been made in “substantial quantities” within an extended period of time in accordance with section 773(b)(1)(A) of the Act. In such cases, we also determined that such below-cost sales were not made at prices which would permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with section 773(b)(1)(B) of the Act.
We found that, for certain specific products, more than 20 percent of Keon Baek's, Saehan's and Huvis' home market sales were at prices less than the COP and, thus, the below-cost sales were made within an extended period of time in substantial quantities. In addition, these sales were made at prices that did not provide for the recovery of costs within a reasonable period of time. Therefore, we excluded these sales and used the remaining sales, if any, as the basis for determining NV, in accordance with section 773(b)(1).
We made currency conversions in accordance with section 773A of the Act in the same manner as in the
We determine that the following percentage margins exist for the period May 1, 2002, through April 30, 2003:
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated exporter/importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. To determine whether the duty assessment rates were
The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to the CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review.
The following antidumping duty deposits will be required on all shipments of PSF from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, effective on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates listed above (except no cash deposit will be required if a company's weighted-average margin is
These cash deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (“APOs”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these results and this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Comment 1: Inclusion of Indirect Selling Expenses in Saehan's G&A Calculation.
Comment 2: Inclusion of Non-Operating Gains and Losses in Saehan's G&A Calculation.
Comment 3: Calculation of Saehan's Net Interest Expense Ratio.
Comment 4: Clerical Errors in Saehan's Preliminary Margin Calculations.
Comment 5: Huvis' Reported Credit Expenses on Home Market Sales.
Comment 6: Huvis' Home Market Short-Term Interest Rate.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Notice.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Written comments must be submitted on or before December 17, 2004.
Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Douglas W. Christel, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930; telephone: 978-281-9141.
The proposed rule for Framework Adjustment 40-A (Framework 40-A) to the NE Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP) was published in the
In addition, Framework 40-A proposes to relieve an Amendment 13 restriction that currently prohibits vessels from fishing both in the Western U.S./Canada Area, and outside that area on the same trip.
The information collection for the provisions within Framework 40-A was approved by the Office of Management and Budget in an emergency clearance on September 22, 2004. This information collection submission included automated vessel monitoring system (VMS) polling of vessel position; observer notifications; area and DAS category declarations via VMS; when fishing on a Category B DAS, declaration of a DAS category “flip” to a Category A DAS when a vessel exceeds the possession limit; and a declaration to participate in the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
Automated VMS polling of vessel position would be required of all vessels intending to participate in the programs proposed under Framework 40-A. The vessel operator would not be required to submit this information manually. Vessel owners would be charged a monthly operational fee for VMS usage. The area to be fished and the category of DAS to be used would be required to be declared prior to leaving port on a trip in which a vessel intends to participate in one of the programs proposed in Framework 40-A. A DAS category “flip” would be required if a vessel exceeds the possession limit specified for several species of concern when fishing on a Category B DAS. Reporting this information via VMS is required to monitor: (1) DAS usage; (2) compliance with the provisions of the specific programs proposed in Framework 40-A; and (3) compliance with the closed area regulations.
Notification of the intent to participate in any of the programs proposed under Framework 40-A prior to each trip, as well as the declaration of a vessel's intent to participate in the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, would occur via a telephone call to the contracting company tasked with providing observer coverage. This information is required to determine the necessary observer coverage for these programs.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Notice.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Written comments must be submitted on or before December 17, 2004.
Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to James M. Nance, Ph.D., F/SEC5, NOAA Fisheries, 4700 Avenue U, Galveston, TX 77551-5997 (phone 409-766-3507).
Bycatch Reduction Devices (BRDs) are used in shrimp trawls in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to reduce the bycatch of other species. Only BRDs certified by the NOAA Fisheries can be used. Persons seeking to get certification from NOAA Fisheries for BRDs must submit information showing that testing proves the effectiveness of the equipment.
The information is submitted in paper form.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Notice.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Written comments must be submitted on or before December 17, 2004.
Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Tom Fish at NOAA Coastal Services Center, (843) 740-1271 or
This survey will be used by the NOAA Coastal Services Center to obtain information from our customers about their natural resource management
A paper survey will be used, but a password-protected Web version of the survey will also be available.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Notice.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Written comments must be submitted on or before December 17, 2004,
Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Douglas W. Christel, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930; telephone: 978-281-9141.
The proposed rule for Framework Adjustment 40-A (Framework 40-A) to the NE Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP) was published in the
In addition, Framework 40-A proposes to relieve an Amendment 13 restriction that currently prohibits vessels from fishing both in the Western U.S./Canada Area, and outside that area on the same trip.
The information collection for the provisions relating to logbook requirements within Framework 40-A was approved by the Office of Management and Budget in an emergency clearance submission on September 22, 2004. This information collection submission included daily catch reports for vessels participating in the Category B (regular) DAS Pilot Program or fishing on combined trips in the Western U.S./Canada Area and outside of the area. This submission also included daily catch reports for vessels that are not participating in the Georges Bank (GB) Cod Hook Sector and that would be fishing in the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. Daily catch reports for vessels participating in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area Haddock SAP Pilot Program were previously considered and approved under the information collection submitted for Amendment 13.
Catch reports for vessels participating in the above programs proposed in Framework 40-A would be required to be submitted on a daily basis. In addition, for those vessels participating in the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock SAP or fishing on a combined trip into the Western U.S./Canada Area, vessels would also be required to submit a catch report when entering or exiting each area. The catch reports would be required to be submitted using the vessel monitoring system (VMS) aboard each vessel. Reporting this information via VMS is required to monitor the catches of regulated multispecies so that the incidental catch hard total allowable catches (TACs) associated with the U.S./Canada Resource Sharing Agreement for GB cod, GB haddock, or GB yellowtail flounder, and the incidental catch TACs for species of concern proposed in Framework 40-A, would not be exceeded. These data would also be used in biological analyses and stock assessments, regulatory impact analyses, quota allocation selections and monitoring, economic profitability profiles, and analysis of ecological interactions among species.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Extension of public comment period; notice of rescheduled public hearing.
In June 2004, NMFS proposed a new policy for the consideration of hatchery salmon (chum,
The due date for written comments is extended from October 20, 2004, to November 12, 2004. A public hearing is rescheduled to be held on November 9, 2004.
You may submit comments on the proposed hatchery listing policy (69 FR 31354; June 3, 2004) by any of the following methods:
E-mail: The mailbox address for submitting e-mail comments on the proposed hatchery listing policy is
Mail: Submit written comments and information to Chief, NMFS, Protected Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232-2737. Please identify the comment as regarding the “Hatchery Listing Policy.” You may hand-deliver written comments to our office at the street address given above, suite 210. Business hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Hand Delivery/Courier: NMFS, Protected Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon Street, Suite 210, Portland, OR 97232-2737. Business hours are noted above.
Fax: 503-230-5435. Please identify the fax comment as regarding the “Hatchery Listing Policy.”
The public hearing will be held at the Doublettree Hotel Portland-Columbia River, 1401 N. Hayden Island Drive, Portland, OR 97217. You may obtain information updates on the public hearing on the Internet at the following web address:
Garth Griffin, NMFS, Northwest Region, (503) 231-2005. Copies of the
On June 3, 2004, NMFS published a proposed policy addressing the role of hatchery produced Pacific salmon and O. mykiss in ESA listing determinations (69 FR 31354; “proposed hatchery listing policy”). The proposed hatchery listing policy would supersede NMFS' 1993 Interim Policy on salmonid artificial (hatchery) propagation (58 FR 17573; April 5, 1993), which requires revision following the 2001 U.S. District Court ruling in
With the publication of the proposed hatchery listing policy NMFS announced a 90-day public comment period extending through September 1, 2004. In
NMFS has received a request from a U.S. congressional representative to extend the public comment period and postpone any remaining public meetings to provide additional opportunity for the public to consider the proposed hatchery listing policy and to provide comment. In this notice NMFS is extending the public comment period through November 12, 2004.
In addition to extending the public comment period, NMFS is rescheduling a public hearing in Portland, OR (originally to be held on October 13, 2004) to be held on November 9, 2004 (see
Joint Commerce-Interior ESA implementing regulations state that the Secretary shall promptly hold at least one public hearing if any person requests one within 45 days of publication of a proposed regulation to list a species or to designate critical habitat (see 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3)). In past ESA rule-making, NMFS has conducted traditional public hearings, consisting of recorded oral testimony from interested individuals. This format, although providing an alternative means of public input, is time consuming for the attendees and does not provide opportunities for dialogue and information exchange. In the
An afternoon session (1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., November 9, 2004) in Portland (Oregon) will be provided for local practitioners and stakeholders involved with managing the ESA on a regular basis, including: tribal governments; forestry and agricultural interests; home builders and developers; the sport and commercial fishing community; the environmental community; the business community; utility and special districts; local government elected officials and their staff; other locally based Federal and state agencies; and public interest groups. Attendance at the afternoon sessions in Portland (Oregon) will be on a pre-registration basis. Information on attending the practitioners' afternoon session in Portland is available from NMFS upon request (see
An evening “open house” session, designed for broader public participation, will be conducted in Portland (Oregon) on the same day as the afternoon practitioners' session (November 9, 2004) from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. The “open house” format will provide the general public with an opportunity to meet with NMFS staff in small groups on specific topics. This evening meeting will also provide opportunities for the public to make formal recorded comments on the proposal. There is no need to register; just drop in anytime during the course of the evening event.
This hearing is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language or other aids should be directed to Garth Griffin (see
Copies of the
16 U.S.C. 1531
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Extension of public comment period; notice of rescheduled public hearing.
In June 2004, NMFS proposed to list 27 Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of salmon (chum, Oncorhynchus keta; coho, O. kisutch, sockeye, O. nerka; chinook, O. tshawytscha) and O. mykiss as threatened and endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and subsequently extended the public comment period and announced public hearings. NMFS is again extending the public comment period on the proposed listing determinations through November 12, 2004. Additionally, NMFS is rescheduling a public hearing in Portland, Oregon (originally to be held on October 13, 2004) to be held on November 9, 2004.
The due date for written comments is extended from October 20, 2004, to November 12, 2004. A public hearing is rescheduled to November 9, 2004.
You may submit comments on the proposed hatchery listing policy (69 FR 31354; June 3, 2004) by any of the following methods:
E-mail: The mailbox address for submitting e-mail comments on the proposed listing determinations is
Mail: Submit written comments and information to Chief, NMFS, Protected Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232-2737. Please identify the comment as regarding the “Proposed Listing Determinations.” You may hand-deliver written comments to our office at the street address given above, suite 210. Business hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Hand Delivery/Courier: NMFS, Protected Resources Division, 525 NE
Fax: 503-230-5435. Please identify the fax comment as regarding the “Proposed Listing Determinations.”
The public hearing will be held at the Doublettree Hotel Portland-Columbia River, 1401 N. Hayden Island Drive, Portland, OR 97217. You may obtain information updates on the public hearing on the Internet at the following web address:
Garth Griffin, NMFS, Northwest Region, (503) 231-2005. Copies of the
On June 14, 2004, NMFS published proposed ESA listing determinations for 27 salmon and
With the publication of the proposed listing determinations NMFS announced a 90-day public comment period extending through September 13, 2004. In
NMFS has received a request from a U.S. congressional representative to extend the public comment period and postpone any remaining public meetings to provide additional opportunity for the public to consider the proposed listing determinations and to provide comment. In this notice NMFS is extending the public comment period through November 12, 2004.
In addition to extending the public comment period, NMFS is rescheduling a public hearing in Portland, Oregon (originally to be held on October 13, 2004) to be held on November 9, 2004 (see
Joint Commerce-Interior ESA implementing regulations state that the Secretary shall promptly hold at least one public hearing if any person requests one within 45 days of publication of a proposed regulation to list a species or to designate critical habitat (see 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3)). In past ESA rule-making, NMFS has conducted traditional public hearings, consisting of recorded oral testimony from interested individuals. This format, although providing an alternative means of public input, is time consuming for the attendees and does not provide opportunities for dialogue and information exchange. In the
An afternoon session (1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., November 9, 2004) in Portland (Oregon) will be provided for local practitioners and stakeholders involved with managing the ESA on a regular basis, including: tribal governments; forestry and agricultural interests; home builders and developers; the sport and commercial fishing community; the environmental community; the business community; utility and special districts; local government elected officials and their staff; other locally based Federal and state agencies; and public interest groups. Attendance at the afternoon sessions in Portland (Oregon) will be on a pre-registration basis. Information on attending the practitioners' afternoon session in Portland is available from NMFS upon request (see
An evening “open house” session, designed for broader public participation, will be conducted in Portland (Oregon) on the same day as the afternoon practitioners' session (November 9, 2004) from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. The “open house” format will provide the general public with an opportunity to meet with NMFS staff in small groups on specific topics. This evening meeting will also provide opportunities for the public to make formal recorded comments on the proposal. There is no need to register; just drop in anytime during the course of the evening event.
This hearing is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language or other aids should be directed to Garth Griffin (see
References
Copies of the
16 U.S.C. 1531
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) 7 Assessment Workshop for Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper.
The SEDAR process for the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper consists of a series of three workshops: a data workshop, an assessment workshop, and a review workshop. A second Assessment Workshop is being held to continue the assessment work that could not be completed during the first Assessment Workshop for red snapper. See
The SEDAR 7 Assessment Workshop II for red snapper will take place December 14-17, 2004. The workshop will be held December 14-16, 2004, 8:30 a.m. 5:30 p.m. and December 17, 2004, 8:30 a.m.-1 p.m.
The Assessment Workshop will be held at the Wyndham Grand Bay Hotel, 2669 South Bayshore Drive, Coconut Grove, FL 33133; telephone: (305)858-9600.
John Carmichael, SEDAR Coordinator, SEDAR/SAFMC, One Southpark Circle, Suite 306, Charleston, SC 29407; telephone: (843) 571-4366 or toll free (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520.
The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the SEDAR process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR typically includes three workshops: (1) Data workshop, (2) assessment workshop, and (3) review workshop. The product of the data workshop and the assessment workshop is a stock assessment report, which describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The assessment report is independently peer reviewed at the review workshop. The products of the review workshop are a Consensus Summary Report, which reports Panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data, and an Advisory Report, which summarizes the status of the stock. Participants for SEDAR workshops are appointed by the Regional Fishery Management Councils. Participants include data collectors, database managers, stock assessment scientists, biologists, fisheries researchers, fishermen, environmentalists, Council members, international experts, and staff of Regional Councils, Interstate Commissions, and state and Federal agencies.
The Assessment Workshop conducts stock assessments, prepares stock rebuilding analyses, and estimates population benchmarks. Workshop Panelists analyze the available data and document their opinions on various stock assessment models. Panelists are responsible for drafting section III of the SEDAR Stock Assessment Report.
During the first SEDAR 7 Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper Assessment Workshop a number of data and modeling issues were identified that could not be adequately addressed in the time allotted. Therefore a second Assessment Workshop will be held to complete the stock assessment of red snapper.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council office at the address listed above at least 5 business days prior to the workshop.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce
Notice of a public meeting.
The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Research Steering Committee in November, 2004. Recommendations from the committee will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.
The meeting will held on Monday, November 1, 2004 at 9:30 a.m.
The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Colonial, One Audubon Road, Wakefield, MA 01880; telephone: (781) 245-9300.
Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.
The Research Steering Committee will address issues related to the use of days-at-sea for vessels participating in cooperative research projects, the experimental fishery permit process and its interface with cooperative research, and Council research priorities for 2005.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard (see
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of Intent to prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS); notice of scoping meetings; request for written comments.
The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) and NMFS announce their intent to prepare a PEIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) on the development of an ecosystem-based fisheries management regime in the Western Pacific Region. The Council and NMFS are jointly holding public scoping meetings throughout the region to solicit comments on management options for ecosystem-based fisheries management. The scoping meetings and written comments will provide for public input on the issues, range of alternatives, impacts, and any other issues or concerns related to the proposed action which should be analyzed in detail in the PEIS, as described in this scoping notice.
Public scoping meetings will be held in October, November and December 2004. See
Submit written comments to Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, and/or William L. Robinson, Administrator, Pacific Islands Regional Office (PIRO), NMFS, 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814. You may submit comments to the Council via facsimile (fax) at 808-522-8226 or PIRO at 808-973-2941. You may also submit comments via e-mail to
Eric Kingma (Council) at 808-522-8220 or Alvin Katekaru (PIRO) at 808-973-2937.
Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801
The Council has developed FMPs for the following fisheries: bottomfish and seamount groundfish, coral reef ecosystems, crustaceans, pelagics, and precious corals. At its 123rd meeting (June 2004), the Council decided to initiate a process to develop fishery ecosystem management plans (FEMPs), thereby managing fisheries within an ecosystem context. Thus, the primary objective of the PEIS is to serve as a broad-scale planning tool for the Council's shift toward ecosystem-based management, and ultimately the development and implementation of FMPs, if approved by the Secretary, for managed fisheries of the Western Pacific Region. The scope of the PEIS analysis will, among other things, describe the management, monitoring, and conduct of fisheries FMPs of the Western Pacific Region; examine various options for managing fisheries within an ecosystem context; consider the potential impacts of ecosystem-based management on target species, non-target species, essential fish habitat, protected species; and describe mechanisms for community involvement and participation in the management of local fishery resources.
NEPA requires preparation of an environmental impact statement for any major Federal action significantly impacting the quality of the human environment. Regulations implementing NEPA at 40 CFR 1502.4(b) state:
Environmental impact statements may be prepared, and are sometimes required, for broad Federal actions such as adoption of new agency programs or regulations. Agencies shall prepare statements on broad actions so that they are relevant to policy and are timed to coincide with meaningful points in agency planning and decision making.
Under 40 CFR 1508.25(a), cumulative and connected actions require the development of a PEIS. However, relevant case law since the promulgation of NEPA has further expanded the PEIS requirement to: (1) actions relating to broad program or regional planning and, (2) when there are cumulative or synergistic environmental impacts upon the environment from past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions. In this regard, the PEIS serves as an analytical tool for regional planning and potential implementation of an ecosystem-based management regime in the Western Pacific.
The Council and NMFS are conducting scoping meetings to establish a reasonable range of alternatives. Preliminary alternatives have been drawn from the following categories: (1) FEMP boundaries (e.g. archipelagic vs. island-by-island),(2) management unit species (e.g., multi-species linkages, (3) environmental indicators (e.g., productivity cycles), (4) the role of communities in ecosystem-based management (e.g., monitoring) and (5) the Council process relating to advisory body structures (e.g., sector specific representation vs. ecosystem boundary representation). In addition to developing possible alternatives, the scoping meetings will serve to identify and eliminate the issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review.
Public scoping is an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed. A principal objective of the scoping and public involvement process is to identify a reasonable range of management alternatives that, with adequate analysis, will delineate critical issues and provide a clear basis for distinguishing between those alternatives and selecting a preferred alternative.
In order to broaden the public scoping opportunity described above, the Council and NMFS will also solicit public comments on the following issues: marine mammal mitigation measures, blue marlin, bigeye and yellowfin tuna management, and c) recreational fisheries data collection.
1. Hilo, HI — Wednesday, October 27, 2004, from 6-9 p.m. at the Naniloa Hotel, 93 Banyon DR, Hilo, HI 96720;
2. Kona, HI — Thursday, October 28, 2004, from 6-9 p.m. at the King Kamehameha Hotel, 75-5660 Palani Rd., Kona, HI 96740;
3. Oahu, HI — Monday, November 1, 2004, from 6-9 p.m. at the Ala Moana Hotel, 410 Atkinson Dr., Honolulu, HI 96815;
4. Kauai, HI — Tuesday, November 2, 2004, from 6-9 p.m. at the Chiefess Kamakahelei Middle School, 4431 Nuhou St., Lihue, HI 96766;
5. Maui, HI — Wednesday, November 3, 2004, from 6-9 p.m. at the Maui Beach Hotel, 170 Kaahumanu Ave., Kahului, HI 96732;
6. Saipan, CNMI — Wednesday, November 17, 2004, from 6-9 p.m. at the Pedro P. Tenorio Multipurpose Building, Susupe, CNMI 96950;
7. Hagatna, Guam — Thursday, November 18, 2004 from 6-9 p.m. at the Guam Fishermen's Cooperative, Perez Marina, Hagatna, Guam 96932; and
8. Pago Pago, American Samoa — Wednesday, December 8, 2004, from 7-9 p.m. at the Department of Marine Resources and Wildlife Conference Room, Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799.
These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, 808-522-8220 (voice) or 808-522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.
Notice of membership of NOAA Performance Review Board.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), NOAA announces the appointment of twenty-six members to serve on the NOAA Performance Review Board (PRB). The NOAA PRB is responsible for reviewing performance appraisals and ratings of Senior Executive Service (SES) members and making written recommendations to the appointing authority on SES retention and compensation matters, including performance-based pay adjustments, awarding of bonuses and reviewing recommendations for potential Presidential Rank Award nominees. The appointment of members to the NOAA PRB will be for a period of 24 months.
The effective date of service of the twenty-six appointees to the NOAA Performance Review Board is October 15, 2004.
Claudia McMahon, Executive Resources Program Manager, Human Resources Management Office, Office of Finance and Administration, NOAA, 1305 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (301) 713-0530 (ext. 204).
The names and position titles of the members of the NOAA PRB are set forth below (all are NOAA officials except Tyra Smith, Director, Human Resources, Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce; Gerald R. Lucas, Director for Strategic Initiatives, Office of Human Resources Management, Department of Commerce; and Timothy J. Hauser, Deputy Under Secretary for International Trade, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce:
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Notice of pilot programs and request for comments.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) is launching two pilot programs that will open CPSC staff activities for public review and comment. The first pilot program will provide information on CPSC staff participation with respect to a cross-section of voluntary standards, including advance notice of proposed staff positions on issues to be considered by voluntary standards organizations. The second pilot program will provide public access to a set of research reports and an opportunity to submit comments to be considered by the staff before finalization.
The primary goals of both programs are to make the CPSC staff's activities more transparent and to obtain the benefit of public review and input before finalizing CPSC staff positions. The Commission believes that timely public input will strengthen the CPSC's efforts in these important areas. Comments received through these programs will be reviewed by staff to ensure each research report and staff recommendation on voluntary standards activities is based on the best scientific, economic, and technological information available. The Commission is hopeful that the two pilot programs will enhance the quality of the conclusions and recommendations drawn by CPSC staff without limiting its ability to make timely contributions to the ever-evolving voluntary standards development process or to complete its research work in a timely fashion.
The Commission will evaluate the two pilot programs after a period of six months. Should the pilot programs be deemed successful, the Commission will consider expanding them to include a broader cross-section of CPSC staff voluntary standards activities and research reports developed by CPSC staff and/or contractors. The two pilot programs are further described below.
The pilot programs described in this notice commence on publication of this notice and run through April 18, 2005.
Comments on a proposed staff recommendation concerning a voluntary standards activity selected for the pilot may be submitted through the CPSC Web site at
Comments on any research report that is the subject of the Research Reports Technical Review Pilot Program may be submitted via e-mail to the Commission's Office of the Secretary at
General comments on whether to continue these programs beyond the pilot period and any suggestions for improving the programs may be submitted to the address below and must be received not later than May 18, 2005.
General comments on the pilot programs should be mailed to the Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207-0001; telephone (301) 504-7923, or delivered to the Office of the Secretary, Room 502, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814-4423. Comments should be captioned “Comments on Pilot Programs for Public Review and Comment on Voluntary Standards Activities and Draft Research Reports.” Comments may also be filed by telefacsimile to (301) 504-0127, or by e-mail to
For further information on the specific voluntary standards activities and draft technical reports that are the subject of the pilot programs contact:
Hugh McLaurin, Director, Directorate for Engineering Sciences, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207, (301) 504-7531, e-mail:
For general information on the pilot programs, contact: Lowell Martin, Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207, (301) 504-7628, e-mail:
The Commission is actively engaged in the voluntary standards development process for a wide range of consumer products. The staff works with several different standards development organizations. All provide an open, deliberative process featuring a balance of interests and due process protections.
CPSC staff members participate, as non-voting members, in a number of steps in the voluntary standards development process. CPSC staff often provide expert advice, technical assistance, injury and death data and analysis, as well as supporting research. In addition, CPSC staff will commonly submit recommendations concerning new consumer product safety standards or modification of existing standards. These recommendations are often based on previous research conducted by the agency or a review of injury and death data associated with the product category at issue. From 1990 through 2002, CPSC staff has participated with other interested stakeholders in developing or revising 217 voluntary standards.
CPSC is initiating a pilot program to begin posting notice of CPSC staff activities and recommendations concerning voluntary standards development on its web site. At present, Commission staff is involved in over 60 consumer product voluntary standards development activities. For purposes of the pilot, CPSC has selected eight different voluntary standards activities to evaluate this system of sharing CPSC staff information with the public for review and comment.
The voluntary standards activities selected for the pilot are: (1) Smoke alarms; (2) arc fault circuit interrupters; (3) ground fault circuit interrupters; (4) pool and spa safety vacuum release systems; (5) bunk beds; (6) gasoline containers for child resistance; (7) portable generators (within the engine driven tools project); and (8) garage door and gate operators. For these voluntary
The information on these eight activities can be accessed by visiting the CPSC Web site at
This new area of the CPSC Web site will also provide the public with the opportunity to review and comment on newly developed staff materials/recommendations before they are submitted for consideration by the voluntary standards organization. During the pilot, the Commission staff will post proposed staff recommendations for the selected voluntary standards activities in the voluntary standards area of the CPSC Web site for a period of five (5) working days. Interested parties will be able to forward comments to CPSC staff though this web area. Following the five day public comment period, staff will provide due consideration to inputs received, inform the Assistant Executive Director for Hazard Identification and Reduction of any significant issues raised, and finalize the staff recommendation for the Director's review. Although public comments may affect the staff's proposed recommendations, the staff will not respond directly to comments.
The Commission would prefer to allow a longer period than five days for public input, but we lack control over the deadlines set by voluntary standards organizations. We are concerned that a more generous review period may leave the staff too little time for formulating a position and taking account of public comments. The Commission invites comments on this and other aspects of the pilot programs.
The pilot project will alert the public to eight current voluntary standards activities within the CPSC and enable them to access detailed information and analysis regarding the proposed approach and staff recommendations for new or revised standards. We believe it is in the public interest to ensure all interested parties have the opportunity to review this information and make comments to staff for consideration prior to finalizing a recommendation to a voluntary standards organization. We have developed this pilot project to evaluate that hypothesis and to develop a better understanding of the practical implications of this new, more open process.
It is important to note that this pilot addresses only information pertaining directly to CPSC staff involvement in voluntary standards activities and is not intended to create a complete repository for all voluntary standards activities information. Each voluntary standards organization is responsible for maintaining such comprehensive information. Accordingly, for each activity in the pilot program, contact information for the appropriate voluntary standards organization and/or staff member will be included.
The CPSC conducts many research and study projects in furtherance of its activities to improve product safety and eliminate potential hazards associated with consumer products. The findings from such projects may be used by staff to develop and refine positions on voluntary and mandatory product safety standards. The staff also conducts research on new and emerging technologies to evaluate their potential for enhancing consumer product safety and reducing hazards. Each research project typically concludes with development of a final report outlining the hazard scenario or product safety issue that was researched, the scope of the project, methodology utilized, findings, and recommendations when appropriate. On occasion, the staff also engages outside contractors to perform research. In such cases, the final contractor report is usually transmitted to the Commission and the public with a cover memorandum from the staff addressing any issues presented by the report and/or making recommendations as appropriate.
The Research Reports Technical Review pilot program will give interested persons the opportunity to review and provide timely technical comments on CPSC staff and CPSC-sponsored research reports prior to their finalization. The reports will be located on the CPSC Web site at
We have selected the following draft staff reports to initiate this pilot: (1)
CPSC staff will assess technical comments submitted through the Research Reports Technical Review Web site and will take account of such comments when finalizing staff reports or in the final staff assessment to accompany a contractor report. Staff will provide due consideration to inputs received, inform the Assistant Executive Director for Hazard Identification and Reduction of any significant issues that arise, and finalize the report in question for review by the Executive Director and transmittal to the Commission. Although the staff will take account of all comments received, the staff will not respond directly to the commenter.
The Commission has launched these pilot programs in an effort to increase the transparency and openness of CPSC staff voluntary standards activities and CPSC staff and CPSC-sponsored research. The Commission is hopeful that the pilots will enhance the overall quality of the conclusions and recommendations drawn by CPSC staff with regard to voluntary standards development and our product safety research. It is important to note that while comments on specific positions and reports will be reviewed and assessed by CPSC staff member(s) as appropriate, CPSC staff will not prepare formal responses. Rather, the staff will
The pilots will commence upon publication of this notice in the
The Commission also seeks comment on these pilot programs generally in order to inform its judgment about extending or modifying the programs. Such comments should be in writing and submitted to the Office of the Secretary at the address above no later than one (1) month after completion of the pilots, that is, not later than May 18, 2005.
Notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Zeiher at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/ESCD/Information Management Division, 1225 South Clark Street, Suite 504, Arligntron, VA 22202-4326.
Notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Zeiher at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Cushing WHS/ESCD/Information Management Division, 1225 South Clark Street, Suite 504, Arlington, VA 22202-4326.
Notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Consideration will be given to all comments received by November 17, 2004.
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Zeiher at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/ESCD/Information Management Division, 1225 South Clark Street, Suite 504, Arlington, VA 22202-4326.
National Defense University
Notice of meeting.
Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of a forthcoming meeting of the National Security Education Board. The purpose of the meeting is to review and make recommendations to the Secretary concerning requirements established by the David L. Boren National Security Education Act, Title VII of Public Law 102-183, as amended.
October 29, 2004.
The Crystal City Marriott Hotel, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.
Dr. Edmond J. Collier, Deputy Director for Programs, National Security Education Program, 1101 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1210, Rosslyn PO Box 20010, Arlington, VA 22209-2248; (703) 696-1991. Electronic mail address:
The Board meeting is open to the public.
Notice of meeting.
PITAC's Subcommittee on Computational Science will provide an update of its activities. PITAC will discuss the Subcommittee's presentation and provide guidance for use in the completion of its report on computational science. Public input will be solicited during a public comment period. A small fraction of the meeting time may be allocated for other PITAC updates at the discretion of the co-chairs and the designated Federal officer.
Thursday, November 4, 2004, 1:30-3:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
Via teleconference, the Internet, or at Noesis, Inc., 4100 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 800, Arlington, Virginia.
This meeting will be held primarily via a teleconference and the Internet (through the Webex application). In addition, the public is invited to participate in this meeting in-person at Noesis, Inc. in Arlington, Virginia. Detailed information about this meeting, including the agenda and details concerning registration for in-person or remote participation, will be posted at PITAC's Web site (
Alan Inouye at the National Coordination Office for Information Technology Research and Development at 703-292-4873 or by email at
Department of the Army, DOD.
Notice.
In compliance with section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Department of the Army announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by December 17, 2004.
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to the Department of the Army, Institute for Water Resources, Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center, PO Box 61280 (ATTN: Jay Wieriman), New Orleans, LA 70161-1280.
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to the above address, or call Department of the Army Reports Clearance Officer at (703) 325-8433.
The information collected is the basic data from which the Corps of Engineers compiles and published waterborne commerce statistics. The data is used not only to report to Congress, but also to perform cost benefit studies for new projects, rehabilitation projects, and O&M of existing projects. It is also used by other Federal agencies involved in transportation and security. This data collection program is the sole source for domestic navigation statistics.
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice.
In accordance with 37 CFR 404.6 and 404.7, announcement is made of the availability for licensing of the invention described in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 60/501,243 entitled “Small Molecule Inhibitors of Botulinum Toxin,” filed September 8, 2003. The United States government, as represented by the Secretary of the Army, has rights in this invention.
Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, ATTN: Command Judge Advocate, MCMR-JA-Z, 504 Scott Street, Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702-5012.
For patent issues, Ms. Elizabeth Arwine, Patent Attorney, (301) 619-7808. For licensing issues, Dr. Paul Mele, Office of Research & Technology Assessment, (301) 619-6664, both at telefax (301) 619-5034.
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice.
In accordance with 37 CFR part 404.6, announcement is made of the availability for licensing of U.S. Patent No. US 6,800,155 B2 entitled “Conductive (Electrical, Ionic and Photoelectric) Membrane Articlers, and Method For Producing Same” issued October 5, 2004. This patent has been assigned to the United States Government as represented by the Secretary of the Army.
Mr. Robert Rosenkrans at U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center, Kansas Street, Natick, MA 01760, Phone: (508) 233-4928 or E-mail:
Any licenses granted shall comply with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR Part 404.
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice of open meeting.
In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following committee meeting:
Lieutenant Colonel Shaun T. Wurzbach, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY 10996-5000, (845) 938-4200.
Department of Army, DoD.
Notice of meeting.
In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following committee meeting:
Inquiries and notice of intent to attend the meeting may be addressed to
These meetings are open to the public; participation by the public is scheduled for 4 p.m. on November 3.
The entire meeting is open to the public but since seating capacity of the meeting room is limited, advance notice of intent to attend, although not required, is requested in order to assure adequate arrangements. Oral participation by public attendees is encouraged during the time scheduled on the agenda; written statements may be submitted prior to the meeting or up to 30 days after the meeting.
Department of Energy.
Notice of meetings.
The Industry Advisory Board (IAB) to the International Energy Agency (IEA) will meet during the week of October 25-29, 2004, at the headquarters of the IEA in Paris, France in connection with a Training Session for new Standing Group on Emergency Questions (SEQ) Participants and Selected non-IEA Member Countries, a Non-Member Countries Disruption Simulation Exercise, a meeting of key participants in a Disruption Simulation Exercise (ERE3), ERE3, and a meeting of the SEQ.
Samuel M. Bradley, Assistant General Counsel for International and National Security Programs, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, 202-586-6738.
In accordance with section 252(c)(1)(A)(I) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(I)) (EPCA), the following notice of meetings is provided:
A meeting of the Industry Advisory Board (IAB) to the International Energy Agency (IEA) will be held at the headquarters of the IEA, 9 rue de la Fédération, Paris, France, commencing on October 25, 2004, at 2:15 p.m.. The purpose of this notice is to permit attendance by representatives of U.S. company members of the IAB at:
(1) The IEA's Training Session for New Standing Group on Emergency Questions (SEQ) Participants and Selected IEA Non-Member Countries to be held on October 25, 2004, commencing at 2:15 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to educate new delegates to the IEA's SEQ and representatives of selected IEA non-Member countries about the IEA and its emergency response procedures.
(2) The IEA's Non-Member Countries Disruption Simulation Exercise to be held on October 26, 2004, beginning at 9 a.m. and concluding at 3 p.m. The purpose of this meeting is to familiarize and train delegates from countries that are not IEA Members in IEA emergency response procedures by reacting to a hypothetical oil supply disruption scenario.
(3) A meeting with key participants in the IEA's Disruption Simulation Exercise to be held on October 26, 2004, from approximately 4:30-6 p.m. The purpose of this preparatory meeting is to familiarize key participants in ERE3 with the IEA, the purpose and objectives of ERE3, and their roles in the exercise.
(4) The IEA's Disruption Simulation Exercise (ERE3) to be held on October 27-28, 2004, commencing at 9 a.m. on October 27 and again at 9 a.m. on October 28. The purpose of ERE3 is to train IEA government delegates in the use of IEA emergency response procedures by reacting to a hypothetical oil supply disruption scenario. The purpose of the IAB meeting is to collect the reactions and assessments of IAB participants in ERE3, in preparation for the IAB Chairman's report on ERE3 to the IEA's SEQ meeting on October 29, 2004.
(5) A meeting of the IAB to be held on October 29, 2004, commencing at 9 a.m. The purpose of this notice is to permit attendance by representatives of U.S. company members of the IAB at a meeting of the IEA's SEQ at the same time and location.
The Agenda for the meeting is under the control of the IEA. It is expected that the IEA will adopt the following Agenda:
1. Welcome to the IEA.
2. Opening Session Address.
3. Introduction to the IEA Emergency Policies and Objectives.
4. How the Global Oil Market Works.
5. IEA Energy Statistics and Oil Data Systems.
6. IEA Emergency System, Procedures and Measures.
7. The Role of Industry in the IEA Emergency Planning and Procedures.
8. The Emergency Response Oil Disruption Simulation Exercise.
9. Closing Remarks.
The Agenda for the meeting is under the control of the IEA. While the meeting is anticipated to involve break-out sessions, the individual subgroups will not include multiple IAB or Reporting Company representatives. It is expected that the IEA will adopt the following Agenda:
• Welcome Address by the IEA Deputy Executive Director.
• Introduction by the SEQ Chairman.
• Introduction of Simulation and Logistics of the Exercise by the Head of the IEA's Emergency Planning and Preparedness Division.
• Rules are defined and simulation is initiated by the exercise Facilitator.
• Discuss specific questions on market analysis.
• Role of governments during an oil supply disruption.
• Discuss what actions, if any, should be taken.
• Presentation of the Break-Out Group Discussions.
• Reactions from the IEA Experts on Fundamentals and Possible Media Reaction.
• Discussion of the Impacts of Actions taken by Governments on the Market.
• Facilitator's Summary of the Key Conclusions.
• Open discussion—Critique and Conclusions Drawn from the Exercise.
• Chairman's Summary of the Exercise, Conclusions, and Recommendations.
The Agenda for the meeting is under the control of the IEA. It is anticipated that the Agenda will consist of a review of the ERE3 schedule and briefings on the anticipated roles to be played in the exercise by key participants,
The Agenda for the IAB meeting is as follows:
1. Welcome, Review of Agenda, and Introductions.
2. Review of ERE3.
3. Update on Expiration of European Community Exemption for IAB Activities.
4. Closing and Review of Meetings of Interest to IAB Members.
• Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) International Stockholding Conference, November 29-December 2, 2004, Houston, TX.
• SEQ and IAB Meeting, March 15-17, 2005, Paris.
• SEQ and IAB Meeting, June 21-22, 2005, Paris.
• SEQ and IAB Meeting, November 15-17, 2005, Paris.
The Agenda for ERE3 is under the control of the IEA. While ERE3 will involve break-out sessions, the individual subgroups will not include multiple IAB or Reporting Company representatives. It is expected that the IEA will adopt the following Agenda:
• Welcome Address by the IEA Deputy Executive Director.
• Introduction by the SEQ Chairman.
• Introduction of the Logistics of the Exercise by the Head of the IEA's Emergency Planning and Preparedness Division.
• Exercise Starts.
• Rules are defined by the exercise Facilitator.
• Stage 1 event is presented.
• Brief analysis of market impact by the IEA.
• Respond to specific questions on market analysis and IEA decision-making.
• Role of governments during an oil supply disruption.
• Discuss what actions, if any, should be taken.
• Presentation of the Break-Out Group Discussions.
• Presentation of team reports.
• Reactions of the Market Group, Producers Group, and Media Group.
• Discussion of the recommendations.
• Discussion of the impacts of actions taken by governments on the market.
• Facilitator's summary of Stage 1 session.
• Introduction by the SEQ Chairman.
• Exercise initiated by the Facilitator.
• Stage 2 event is presented.
• Brief analysis of market impact by the IEA.
• Respond to specific questions on market analysis and IEA decision-making.
• Role of governments during an oil supply disruption.
• Discuss what actions, if any, should be taken.
• Presentation of the Break-Out Group Discussions.
• Presentation of team reports.
• Reactions of the Market Group, Producers Group, and Media Group.
• Discussion of the recommendations.
• Discussion of the impacts of actions taken by governments on the market.
• Facilitator's summary of Stage 2 session.
• SEQ Chairman's summary of the day.
• Introduction by the SEQ Chairman.
• Exercise initiated by the Facilitator.
• Stage 3 event is presented.
• Brief analysis of market impact by the IEA.
• Respond to specific questions on market analysis and IEA decision-making.
• Role of governments during an oil supply disruption.
• Discuss what actions, if any, should be taken.
• Presentation of the Break-Out Group Discussions.
• Presentation of team reports.
• Reactions of the Market Group, Producers Group, and Media Group.
• Discussion of the recommendations.
• Discussion of the impacts of actions taken by governments on the market.
• Facilitator's summary of Stage 2 session.
• Presentation by the Facilitator of the initial assessments of the exercise.
• Initial conclusions by the Market Group, Producers Group, and Media Group.
• Discussion of the types and magnitudes of the recommended responses.
• Discussion of the decision-making process.
• Chairman's initial summary of the exercise and recommendations.
The Agenda of the meeting is under the control of the SEQ. It is expected that the SEQ will adopt the following agenda:
1. Adoption of the Agenda.
2. Approval of the Summary Record of the 111th Meeting.
3. Program of Work.
4. Update on Compliance with International Energy Program Stockholding Commitments.
5. The Current Oil Market Situation and Emergency Preparedness.
6. Emergency Response Exercise 3.
7. Report on Current Activities of the IAB.
8. Policy and Other Developments in Member Countries.
9. Emergency Response Activities.
10. Activities with Non-Member Countries and International Organizations.
11. Other Documents for Information.
12. Other Business.
As provided in section 252(c)(1)(A)(ii) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(ii)), the meetings of the IAB are open to representatives of members of the IAB and their counsel; representatives of members of the IEA's SEQ; representatives of the Departments of Energy, Justice, and State, the Federal Trade Commission, the General Accounting Office, Committees of Congress, the IEA, and the European Commission; and invitees of the IAB, the SEQ, or the IEA.
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to the Commission's Order in
Algonquin states that copies of the filing were served upon all affected customers of Algonquin and interested state commissions, as well as upon all parties on the Commission's official service list in this proceeding.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
On September 24, 2004, the Commission held a technical conference in the above-referenced dockets regarding the issues raised by a petition for rulemaking submitted by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) related to the adoption of certain requirements for the interconnection of large wind generators. Specifically, the conference focused on the interconnection of wind energy and other alternative technologies, and considered the technical requirements for the interconnection of large and small wind generators and other alternative technologies, and the need for creating specific requirements for their interconnection to the grid. A transcript of the technical conference will be available in the near future from the Commission's Web site,
At the technical conference, Staff stated that the Commission would allow interested parties to file post-technical conference comments. These comments must be filed with the Commission no later than 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) on November 1, 2004.
Take notice that on September 30, 2004, CenterPoint Energy—Mississippi River Transmission Corporation (MRT) tendered for filing and approval a
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on all parties to this proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that the following application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Ms. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-2232-477) on any comments or motions filed. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper.
k.
l.
m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS”, “PROTEST”, OR “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
p. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described applications. A copy of the applications may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC (East Tennessee) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to the Commission's Order in
East Tennessee states that copies of the filing were served upon all affected customers of East Tennessee and interested state commissions, as well as upon all parties on the Commission's official service list in this proceeding.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Egan Hub Storage, LLC (Egan Hub) tendered for filing a compliance filing pursuant to Egan Hub Storage, LLC, 108 FERC ¶61,263 (2004), issued on September 21, 2004, in Docket No. RP04-475-000.
Egan Hub states that copies of the filing were served upon all affected customers of Egan Hub and interested state commissions, as well as upon all parties on the Commission's official service list in this proceeding.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso), Post Office Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, filed in Docket No. CP04-423-000 on September 29, 2004, an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Commission's Regulations, for authorization to abandon in place and by removal, certain pipeline facilities, with appurtenances, located in Eddy County, New Mexico, and Culberson and Hudspeth Counties, Texas, that are no longer required in the operation of El Paso's interstate transmission system. Specifically, El Paso proposes to abandon approximately 87.7 miles of its Jal-El Paso “A” Line and 79.1 miles of its Jal-El Paso “B” Line (referred to as Line Nos. 1000 and 1001), all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing may be also viewed on the Web at
Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Robert T. Tomlinson, Director, Regulatory Affairs, El Paso Natural Gas Company, PO Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, at (719) 520-3788 or fax (719) 520-4318.
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. Unless filing electronically, a party must submit 14 copies of any paper filing made with the
However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper.
Take notice that El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso), Post Office Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, filed in Docket No. CP04-423-000 on September 29, 2004, an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Commission's Regulations, for authorization to abandon in place and by removal, certain pipeline facilities, with appurtenances, located in Eddy County, New Mexico, and Culberson and Hudspeth Counties, Texas, that are no longer required in the operation of El Paso's interstate transmission system. Specifically, El Paso proposes to abandon approximately 87.7 miles of its Jal-El Paso “A” Line and 79.1 miles of its Jal-El Paso “B” Line (referred to as Line Nos. 1000 and 1001), all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing may be also viewed on the Web at
Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Robert T. Tomlinson, Director, Regulatory Affairs, El Paso Natural Gas Company, P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, at (719) 520-3788 or fax (719) 520-4318.
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. Unless filing electronically, a party must submit 14 copies of any paper filing made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper.
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Kern River Gas Transmission Company (Kern River) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, Eighth Revised Sheet No. 495, to be effective November 1, 2004.
Kern River states that the purpose of this filing is to notify the Commission and other interested parties of a redetermination of certain charges under and in accordance with the negotiated rate transportation service agreement dated June 5, 2003, between Kern River and High Desert Power Trust (HDPT) and to update Kern River's tariff to reflect the redetermined charges.
Kern River states that it has served a copy of this filing upon its customers and interested state regulatory commissions.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Kern River Gas Transmission Company (Kern River) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in Appendix A to the filing.
Kern River states that the purpose of this filing is: (1) to comply with the Commission's May 28, 2004 “Order Accepting and Suspending Tariff Sheets Subject to Refund, and Establishing Hearing Procedures” by revising the rates and the Park and Loan revenue sharing provisions proposed in Kern River's April 30, 2004 general rate filing; and (2) to move to place the revised rates into effect.
Kern River states that it has served a copy of this filing upon each person designated on the official service list compiled by the Secretary in this proceeding.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that on October 4, 2004, Kern River Gas Transmission Company (Kern River) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to be effective November 1, 2004:
Kern River states that the purpose of this filing isto supplement Kern River's October 1, 2004 filing in this proceeding by submitting three tariff sheets that were inadvertently omitted. These sheets were originally submitted on April 30, 2004 and accepted to be effective November 1, 2004, however, minor ministerial changes were made to these sheets after the April 30 filing was submitted, so Kern River is submitting substitute sheets to reflect the changes that have occurred between April and November.
Kern River states that it has served a copy of this filing upon its customers and interested state regulatory commissions.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. (Maritimes) tendered for filing a compliance filing pursuant to Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C., 108 FERC ¶61,264 (2004), issued on September 21, 2004, in Docket No. RP04-476-000.
Maritimes states that copies of the filing were served upon all affected customers of Maritimes and interested state commissions, as well as upon all parties on the Commission's official service list in this proceeding.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that on September 30, 2004, Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C. (Petal), Four Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046, filed an application in Docket No. CP04-424-000 pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, requesting that the Commission issue an Order authorizing Petal to increase the capacity of its mainline pipeline, Line 100, without increasing its maximum allowable operating pressure and to uprate its Heidelberg Compressor Station to 9442 hp in order to increase the withdrawal and delivery capacity of downstream interconnects, from 700 MMcf/day to 1.3 Bcf/day, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at
Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Richard W. Porter, Four Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046, (832) 676-3081 (phone), (832) 676-8811 (fax).
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. Unless filing electronically, a party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project, or in support of or in opposition to this project, should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the applicant. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
The Commission may issue a preliminary determination on non-environmental issues prior to the completion of its review of the environmental aspects of the project. This preliminary determination typically considers such issues as the need for the project and its economic effect on existing customers of the applicant, on other pipelines in the area, and on landowners and communities. For example, the Commission considers the extent to which the applicant may need to exercise eminent domain to obtain rights-of-way for the proposed project and balances that against the non-environmental benefits to be provided by the project. Therefore, if a person has comments on community and landowner impacts from this proposal, it is important either to file comments or to intervene as early in the process as possible.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, WestGas InterState, Inc. (WGI) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Second Substitute Sixth Revised Sheet No. 92, with a proposed effective date of July 1, 2003.
WGI asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the Letter Order issued in Docket No. RP03-437-001 on August 25, 2004. WGI states that the above tariff sheet has been revised to restore the headings (
WGI further states that copies of this filing have been mailed to WGI's jurisdictional customers and interested state commissions.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that on September 30, 2004, Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company (Williston Basin or Company), tendered for filing with the Commission a negotiated Rate Schedule FT-1 service agreement. Williston Basin states that the proposed effective date of the service agreement is October 1, 2004.
Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
The following filings have been made with the Commission. The filings are listed in ascending order within each docket classification.
Take notice that on October 7, 2004, American Electric Power Service Corporation, (AEP) on behalf of its electric utility subsidiary, AEP Texas Central Company, formerly known as Central Power and Light Company (TCC), submitted an application
Take notice that on October 6, 2004, Sheboygan Power, LLC (Sheboygan Power) filed an application for a determination that it is an exempt wholesale generator. Sheboygan Power states that it will construct and own a natural gas-fired generating facility, located in the County of Sheboygan, Wisconsin, consisting of three gas fired turbine generators to provide approximately 450 MW net electrical output, with only two turbine generators to be placed in service initially, and to provide approximately 300 MW net electrical output.
Take notice that on October 6, 2004, Cargill-Alliance, LLC (Cargill-Alliant) Incorporated, submitted a compliance filing pursuant to the Commission's Letter Order issued August 17, 2004 in Docket No. ER97-4273-012.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, AES Huntington Beach, L.L.C. (AES Huntington Beach) submitted for filing its triennial market power update in compliance with
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, AES Alamitos (AES Alamitos) submitted for filing its triennial market power update in compliance with
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, AES Redondo Beach, L.L.C. (AES Redondo Beach) submitted for filing its triennial market power update in compliance with
Take notice that, on October 4, 2004, GWF Energy LLC (GWF) amended its compliance filing submitted on July 19, 2004, pursuant to the Commission's letter order issued July 18, 2004 in
GWF states that copies of the filing were served on parties on the official service list in the above-captioned proceeding.
Take notice that on October 4, 2004, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) submitted its compliance with the Commission's August 4, 2004 order in Docket No. ER02-262-002,
PJM states that copies of the filing were served on all persons on the Commission's official service list for this proceeding.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) and the New York Transmission Owners filed a joint Compliance Filing in connection with the Commission's August 6, 2004 Order in Docket No. ER04-449-000,
NYISO states that it has served a copy of this filing on all parties in Docket No. ER04-449-000. The NYISO requests a waiver of the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2010 so as to permit it to electronically serve a copy of this filing on the official representatives of each of its customers, on each participant in its stakeholder committees, on the New York State Public Service Commission and on the electric utility regulatory agencies in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, the Midwest Independent Transmission
Midwest ISO has also requested a waiver of the service requirements set forth in 18 CFR 385.2010. The Midwest ISO has electronically served a copy of this filing, with its attachments, upon all Midwest ISO Members, Member representatives of Transmission Owners and Non-Transmission Owners, the Midwest ISO Advisory Committee participants, Policy Subcommittee participants, as well as all state commissions within the region. In addition, the filing has been electronically posted on the Midwest ISO's Web site at
Take notice that on October 6, 2004, Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc. (VEC) submitted its refund compliance report pursuant to the Commission's September 7, 2004 Order Accepting Market-Based Tariff in the Docket No. ER04-694-000,
Take notice that on October 4, 2004, DTE East China, LLC, DTE River Rouge No. 1, LLC and the Detroit Edison Company (Applicants) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to a Commission order issued on July 16, 2004 in Docket No. ER04-948-000.
Applicants state that copy of the filing was served on parties on the official service list in the above-captioned proceeding.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), amended its August 12, 2004 filing in Docket No. ER04-123-000 by submitting an amended executed interim interconnection service agreement among PJM, Wind Park Bear Creek, L.L.C., and PPL Electric Utilities Corporation (Wind Park ISA) and to identify differences between the Wind Park ISA and the form of interim interconnection service agreement in Attachment O-1 and form of interconnection service agreement in Attachment O of the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff as modified by tariff revisions accepted by the Commission in
PJM states that copies of this filing were served upon the parties to the agreement and the state regulatory commissions within the PJM region, and all parties on the official service list compiled by the Secretary in this proceeding.
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Consolidated Edison Energy, Inc. (CEE), filed an amendment to its filing submitted on August 18, 2004 in Docket No. ER04-1196-000. First Revised Sheet No. 1 of CEE's Market-Based Rate Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, superceding Original Volume No. 1, as well as the red-lined version of that Tariff Sheet.
Take notice that on October 4, 2004, Boston Edison Company (Boston Edison) tendered for filing First Revised Rate Schedule FERC No. 179 (First Revised Rate Schedule) between Boston Edison and the Town of Braintree Electric Light Department (Braintree). Boston Edison requests an effective date of March 1, 2003.
Boston Edison states that copies of the filing were served upon Braintree and the Department of Telecommunications and Energy for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Take notice that on October 4, 2004, American Transmission Systems, Incorporated (ATSI) tendered for filing a proposed Schedule 2.1—Revenue Requirement for Reactive Power. ATSI stated that Schedule 2.1, which allows collection of revenues associated with the supply of Reactive Supply Service within the FirstEnergy Control Area by multiple generation suppliers and the distribution of all revenues collected in a fair and equitable manner, is being modified to accommodate a new revenue requirement for the supply of Reactive Supply Service by FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. ATSI requests an effective date of October 15, 2004.
Take notice that on October 4, 2004, Trans-Elect NTD Path 15 LLC (NTD Path 15) submits for filing the materials necessary under FPA section 205 to establish its transmission revenue requirement. In addition, NTD Path 15 submits its FERC TO Tariff as a participating transmission owner in California Independent System Operator Corporation. NTD Path 15 requests an effective date of December 4, 2004.
NTD Path 15 states that copies of this filing were served on all interested parties.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, Appalachian Power Company (APCo) tendered for filing with the Commission thirteen Notices of Cancellation, designated as indicated below, that cancel the Electric Service Agreements/Rate Schedules under which APCo currently provides service to the following wholesale customers:
APCo requests that the Notices of Cancellation be made effective December 1, 2004.
APCo states that a copy of its filing was served upon the Public Service Commission of West Virginia and the customers set out above.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) submitted Amendment No. 3 to the St. Lucie Nuclear Reliability Exchange Agreement between Florida Power & Light Company and Florida Municipal Power Agency. FPL states that the revisions set forth in Amendment No. 3 to the St. Lucie Nuclear Reliability Exchange Agreement between Florida Power & Light Company and Florida Municipal Power Agency reflect the clarification of the treatment of costs associated with pension benefits and post-retirement benefits other than pensions for the period 2003 and beyond.
FPL states that copies of the filing were served upon Florida Municipal Power Agency.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) submitted Amendment No. 2 to the St. Lucie Nuclear Reliability Exchange Agreement between Florida Power & Light Company and Orlando Utilities Commission. FPL states that the revisions set forth in Amendment No. 2 to the St. Lucie Nuclear Reliability Exchange Agreement between Florida Power & Light Company and Orlando Utilities Commission reflect the clarification of the treatment of costs associated with pension benefits and post-retirement benefits other than pensions for the period 2003 and beyond.
FPL states that the copies of the filing were served upon Orlando Utilities Commission.
Take notice that on October 5, 2004, AES Placerita, Inc. (Placerita) submitted its triennial market power update pursuant to the Commission's Order in Docket No. ER0033-000 and
Take notice that on October 6, 2004, Virginia Electric and Power Company (Dominion) tendered for filing a new Appendix E-1 for the Service Agreement under its open access transmission tariff, FERC Electric Tariff Second Revised Volume No. 5. Dominion states that the service agreement is Dominion's Service Agreement for Network Integration Transmission Service and Network Operating Agreement with the North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC). Dominion also states that the revised service agreement adds charges to reimburse Dominion for costs associated with providing a new Aulander Delivery Point for Roanoke Electric Cooperative. Dominion requests an effective date of October 7, 2004.
Dominion states that copies of the filing were served upon the NCEMC, the North Carolina Utilities Commission and the Virginia State Corporation Commission.
Take notice that on October 1, 2004, Roger Agnelli filed, tendered for filing an Application for Authority to Hold Interlocking Positions under section 305 (b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 825d (b) (2000), and Part 45 of the Commission's Regulations.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all parties to this proceeding.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No.
The EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposal and concludes that approval of the proposal would not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
A copy of the EA is attached to an October 7, 2004 Order titled “Order Amending License and Approving Revised Exhibits,” which is available for review and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
For further information, contact Rebecca Martin at (202) 502-6012.
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Projects' staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for an application for a non-capacity related amendment of the Terror Lake Project. The Terror Lake Project, FERC No. 2743, is located on the Terror and Kizhuyak Rivers in Kodiak, Alaska.
The EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposal and concludes that approval of the proposal would not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
A copy of the EA is attached to an October 7, 2004 Order titled “Order Amending License and Approving Revised Exhibits,” which is available for review and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
For further information, contact Rebecca Martin at (202) 502-6012.
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will discuss the environmental impacts of Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation's (Columbia) Hardy Storage Project located in Hardy and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia. The EA will also address Virginia Looping
Comments may be submitted in written form or verbally. Further details on how to submit written comments are provided in the public participation section of this notice. Public scoping meetings will be held in early November, and an additional public notice will be issued once the dates and locations are determined.
This notice is being sent to affected landowners; Federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; environmental and public interest groups; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers in this proceeding. We encourage government representatives to notify their constituents of these planned projects and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
Columbia proposes to construct and operate a natural gas storage field and related facilities in Hardy and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia, and loop its existing pipeline in Shenandoah, Page, Rockingham, Greene, and Louisa Counties, Virginia. In addition to the facilities described below, both projects will also involve the construction of aboveground facilities such as valves, meters, meter stations, and pig launchers and receivers. The majority of the facilities proposed on these projects are located within or adjacent to existing cleared rights-of-way.
Columbia proposes to store natural gas in the Oriskany sandstone formation in Hardy and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia. The Oriskany is a depleted, self-contained, natural gas producing geologic formation that is located more than a mile underground. Natural gas existed in the Oriskany for millions of years until it was discovered and produced in the 1960s and early 1970s. Natural gas supplies from Appalachia, the Southwest, or other sources will be stored in the field when demand is low, then withdrawn as needed during periods of high demand.
Maps depicting Columbia's proposed storage project and related facilities in West Virginia are provided in Appendix
To transport natural gas from the Hardy Storage Project to markets, Columbia will construct new 24-inch-diameter sections of loop parallel to its existing pipelines in Virginia. This project involves looping approximately 31 miles of Columbia's Line WB-2-VA corridor in Shenandoah, Rockingham, Page, and Greene Counties, and approximately 2.5 miles of Columbia's existing VM-108 corridor in Louisa County. Maps depicting Columbia's proposed loops in Virginia are provided in Appendix 2.
Columbia plans to file a formal application for this project with the FERC in early 2005. They are requesting approval to begin construction in late 2005 or early 2006, with most of the construction to be completed by the end of the 2006. Storage field injections are proposed to begin in the spring of 2007.
Although no formal application for authorizing natural gas facilities has been filed, the FERC staff is initiating its NEPA review now. The purpose of the FERC's Pre-filing Process is to encourage the early involvement of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the FERC.
The FERC will use the EA to consider the environmental impact that could result if it issues Columbia a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.
This notice formally announces our preparation of the EA and the beginning of the process referred to as “scoping.” We
Our independent analysis of the issues will be included in a EA that will be mailed to Federal, state, and local government agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; affected landowners; other interested parties; local libraries and newspapers; and the FERC's official service list for this proceeding. A 30-day comment period will be allotted for review of the EA. We will consider all comments on the EA in any Commission Order that is issued for the project.
With this notice, we are asking these and other Federal, state, and local agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. Agencies that would like to request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided below.
You can make a difference by providing use with your specific comments or concerns about the proposals. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives (including alternative storage sites and pipeline routes), and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before November 22, 2004, and carefully follow these instructions:
• Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
• Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas Branch 1, DG2E;
• Reference Docket No. PF04-14-000 on the original and both copies.
Please note that the Commission encourages electronic filing of comments. See 18 Code of Federal Regulations 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Internet Web site at
When Columbia submits its application for authorization to construct and operate the storage facility, the Commission will publish a Notice of Application in the
If you wish to remain on our environmental mailing list, please return the Information Request Form included in Appendix 3. If you do not return this form, you will be removed from our mailing list.
Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208-FERC (3372) or on the FERC Internet Web site (
In addition, the FERC now offers a free service called “eSubscription” that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the
Finally, Columbia has established an Internet Web site for its project at
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will discuss the environmental impacts of Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation's (Columbia) Hardy Storage Project located in Hardy and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia. The EA will also address Virginia Looping
Comments may be submitted in written form or verbally. Further details on how to submit written comments are provided in the public participation section of this notice. Public scoping meetings will be held in early November, and an additional public notice will be issued once the dates and locations are determined.
This notice is being sent to affected landowners; Federal, State, and local government representatives and agencies; environmental and public interest groups; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers in this proceeding. We encourage government representatives to notify their constituents of these planned projects and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
Columbia proposes to construct and operate a natural gas storage field and related facilities in Hardy and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia, and loop its existing pipeline in Shenandoah, Page, Rockingham, Greene, and Louisa Counties, Virginia. In addition to the facilities described below, both projects will also involve the construction of aboveground facilities such as valves, meters, meter stations, and pig launchers and receivers. The majority of the facilities proposed on these projects are located within or adjacent to existing cleared rights-of-way.
Columbia proposes to store natural gas in the Oriskany sandstone formation in Hardy and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia. The Oriskany is a depleted, self-contained, natural gas producing geologic formation that is located more than a mile underground. Natural gas existed in the Oriskany for millions of years until it was discovered and produced in the 1960s and early 1970s. Natural gas supplies from Appalachia, the Southwest, or other sources will be stored in the field when demand is low, then withdrawn as needed during periods of high demand.
Maps depicting Columbia's proposed storage project and related facilities in West Virginia are provided in Appendix 1.
To transport natural gas from the Hardy Storage Project to markets, Columbia will construct new 24-inch-diameter sections of loop parallel to its existing pipelines in Virginia. This project involves looping approximately 31 miles of Columbia's Line WB-2-VA corridor in Shenandoah, Rockingham, Page, and Greene Counties, and approximately 2.5 miles of Columbia's existing VM-108 corridor in Louisa County. Maps depicting Columbia's proposed loops in Virginia are provided in Appendix 2.
Columbia plans to file a formal application for this project with the FERC in early 2005. They are requesting approval to begin construction in late 2005 or early 2006, with most of the construction to be completed by the end of 2006. Storage field injections are proposed to begin in the spring of 2007.
Although no formal application for authorizing natural gas facilities has been filed, the FERC staff is initiating its NEPA review now. The purpose of the FERC's Pre-filing Process is to encourage the early involvement of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the FERC.
The FERC will use the EA to consider the environmental impact that could result if it issues Columbia a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.
This notice formally announces our preparation of the EA and the beginning of the process referred to as “scoping.” We
Our independent analysis of the issues will be included in a EA that will be mailed to Federal, State, and local government agencies; elected officials;
With this notice, we are asking these and other Federal, State, and local agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. Agencies that would like to request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided below.
You can make a difference by providing us with your specific comments or concerns about the proposals. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives (including alternative storage sites and pipeline routes), and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before November 22, 2004, and carefully follow these instructions:
• Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
• Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas Branch 1, DG2E;
• Reference Docket No. PF04-14-000 on the original and both copies.
Please note that the Commission encourages electronic filing of comments.
When Columbia submits its application for authorization to construct and operate the storage facility, the Commission will publish a Notice of Application in the
If you wish to remain on our environmental mailing list, please return the Information Request Form included in Appendix 3. If you do not return this form, you will be removed from our mailing list.
Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208 FERC (3372) or on the FERC Internet Web site (
In addition, the FERC now offers a free service called “eSubscription” that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. To register for this service, go to
Finally, Columbia has established an Internet Web site for its project at
On September 25, 2002, PPL Holtwood, LLC, licensee for the Lake Wallenpaupack Project No. 487, filed an application for a new or subsequent license pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA) and the Commission's regulations thereunder. Project No. 487 is located on Wallenpaupack Creek and the Lackawaxen River in Wayne and Pike Counties, Pennsylvania.
The license for Project No. 487 was issued for a period ending September 30, 2004. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1), requires the Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue from year to year an annual license to the then licensee under the terms and conditions of the prior license until a new license is issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section 15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior license waived the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project has filed an application for a subsequent license, the licensee may continue to operate the project in accordance with the terms and conditions of the license after the minor or minor part license expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If the licensee of such a project has not filed an application for a subsequent license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to continue project operations until the Commission issues someone else a license for the project or otherwise orders disposition of the project.
If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 487 is issued to PPL Holtwood, LLC for a period effective October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005, or until the issuance of a new license for the project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first. If issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does not take place on or before October 1, 2005, notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) of the FPA is renewed automatically without further order or notice by the
If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is hereby given that PPL Holtwood, LLC is authorized to continue operation of the Lake Wallenpaupack Project No. 487 until such time as the Commission acts on its application for subsequent license.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j. Description of Request: Madison Paper Industries, as licensee, has filed a license amendment application to include the 520-foot-long, 13.8-kilovolt transmission line connecting the Anson powerhouse to the licensee's paper mill. The licensee states that it became evident following issuance of the new license for the project that the point of interconnection with the local utility's distribution system is at the bus in the paper mill, where project power is transformed to 115 kilovolts for distribution to the utility when the power is not consumed within the mill. The application includes a revised exhibit G drawing showing the location of the transmission line.
k.
l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, OR “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
o. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
p. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
o. Agency Comments—Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
p. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper.
In a Notice of Technical Conference issued September 17, 2004, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission announced that it would host a technical conference on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 to discuss infrastructure issues for the State of Connecticut and the surrounding region. The technical conference will be held in Room 2C of the Legislative Office Building, 300 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut. The time for the technical conference has been changed. The technical conference was previously announced to begin at 10 a.m. and end at 3 p.m. The technical conference is now scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. (EST) and end at 4 p.m.
The goal of the technical conference is to provide a forum for discussion of issues affecting energy infrastructure in and around Connecticut. This discussion will take place between federal, state and regional leaders and industry representatives. The conference will explore proposals for new electric transmission, their impact on electric reliability for the region, implications for connectivity with the entire New England grid and its relation to neighboring regions, the costs of the proposals and possible allocation of those costs. The agenda for this meeting is included as Attachment A to this notice.
The conference is a technical discussion between policy leaders, which members of the public are welcome to attend. Registration is not required; however, in-person attendees are asked to register for the conference on-line by close of business on Monday, October 11, 2004 at
Transcripts of the conference will be immediately available from Ace Reporting Company (202-347-3700 or 1-800-336-6646) for a fee. They will be available for the public on the Commission's eLibrary system seven calendar days after FERC receives the transcript. Additionally, Capitol Connection offers the opportunity for remote listening of the conference via Real Audio or a Phone Bridge Connection for a fee. Persons interested in making arrangements should contact David Reininger or Julia Morelli at the Capitol Connection (703-993-3100) as soon as possible or visit the Capitol Connection Web site at
For more information about the conference, please contact Sarah McKinley at 202-502-8004,
Take notice that a technical conference will be held on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 at 10:30 a.m. (EST) at the Commission's Headquarters, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Arrangements will be made for parties to participate in the technical conference by telephone, with a telephone number to be provided later.
The purpose of the conference is to address Cranberry Pipeline Corporation's (Cranberry) section 311 petition for rate approval filed on December 16, 2003. Cranberry should be prepared to discuss cost of service and rate design issues.
Questions about the conference and the telephone conference call arrangements should be directed to: Jerilyn Stanley, Office of the General Counsel—Markets, Tariffs and Rates, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8159,
A one-day, Commissioner-led workshop will be held on Thursday, December 9, 2004, beginning at 10 a.m. (EST), in the Commission Meeting Room at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC. The workshop will focus on the above-listed pending license applications filed at the Commission. The workshop is open to the public and all interested persons are invited to attend and participate.
The goals of the workshop are to: (1) Review and discuss the pending license applications; (2) identify unresolved issues; (3) determine next steps; (4) agree on who will take the next steps; and (5) focus on solutions. The workshop will concentrate on identifying the unresolved issues associated with each project, and determining the best course of action to resolve or remove obstacles to final action on each pending license application.
A transcript of the discussions will be placed in the public record for Docket No. AD04-014-000 and in the record for each of the pending license applications.
Comments, papers, or other documents related to this proceeding may be filed in paper format or electronically. Those filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing.
For paper filings, the original and 8 copies of the comments should be submitted to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Paper filings should, at the top of the first page, refer to Docket No. AD04-014-000 and reference the specific project name(s) and project number(s) that the comments concern. The deadline to file comments is January 10, 2005.
Comments may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Documents filed electronically via the internet may be prepared in MS Word or Portable Document Format. To file the document, access the Commission's Web site at
All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and will be available for inspection in the Commission's Public Reference Room at 888 First Street, NE., Washington DC 20426, during regular business hours. Additionally, all comments may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
For assistance, call toll free 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY 202-502-8659, or by e-mail to
The workshop will be transcribed. Those interested in transcripts immediately for a fee should contact Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc., at 202-347-3700, or 1-800-336-6646. Transcripts will be available free to the public on the Commission's e-library system about two weeks after the workshop.
For those involved in the specific projects being discussed, we believe the best way to achieve the goals of the workshop is for you and your staff to attend the workshop in person. However, we understand that budgetary and other constraints may limit travel to Washington, DC. Therefore, we have made alternative arrangements for you to listen, view, or participate in the workshop through the internet, video conferencing, or teleconferencing.
The Capitol Connection offers the opportunity for remote listening and viewing of the conference. It is available for a fee, live over the Internet, by phone or via satellite. Persons interested in receiving the broadcast, or who need information on making arrangements should contact David Reininger or Julia Morelli at the Capitol Connection (703-993-3100) as soon as possible or visit the Capitol Connection Web site at
Anyone wishing to participate via teleconference should call or e-mail Ken Hogan at 202-502-8434 or
Anyone interested in participating in the workshop via video teleconference from one of the Commission's regional offices should call or e-mail the following staff, by December 1, 2004, to make arrangements. Seating capacity is limited.
By December 2, 2004, an agenda for the workshop and information about the pending license applications will be posted on the Commission's Web site under Hydro Licensing Status Workshop 2004. Anyone without access to the Commission's Web site, or who has questions should contact Alan Mitchnick at 202-502-6074, or e-mail
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of meetings.
Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (ORD), gives notice of four meetings of the Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDC) Subcommittee.
Three conference call meetings will be held on: (1) Tuesday, November 2, 2004 from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m., (2) Wednesday, December 1, 2004 from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m., and (3) Thursday, January 6, 2005 from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m. One face-to-face meeting will begin on Monday, December 13, 2004 (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.); continue on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.); and conclude on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 (8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.). All times noted are eastern standard time. The meetings may adjourn early if all business is finished.
Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft agenda for, or making a presentation at, one of the conference calls or the face-to-face meeting, may contact Dr. Neil Stiber, Designated Federal Officer, via telephone/voice mail at (202) 564-1573, via e-mail at
In general, each individual making an oral presentation will be limited to a total of three minutes. Requests for the draft agendas or for making oral presentations at the conference calls or the face-to-face meeting will be accepted up to 1 business day before each conference call/meeting date. The draft agendas can also be viewed through EDOCKET, as provided in Unit I.A. of the
Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I.B. of the
Dr. Neil Stiber, Designated Federal Officer, via telephone/voice mail at (202) 564-1573, via e-mail at
Proposed agenda items for the conference calls include, but are not limited to: charge questions, objective of program reviews, background on the U.S. EPA's EDC research program, writing assignments, and planning for the face-to-face meeting. Proposed agenda items for the face-to-face meeting include, but are not limited to: presentations by key EPA principal investigators in the EDC research program, poster sessions on EPA's EDC research, writing the draft report, and presentation of the subcommittee's draft responses to the charge questions. The conference calls and face-to-face meeting are open to the public.
Information on Services for the Handicapped: Individuals requiring special accommodations at this meeting should contact Neil Stiber, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 564-1573 at least five business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made to facilitate their participation.
1.
2.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through EDOCKET. You may use EDOCKET at
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket.
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period.
1.
i.
ii.
iii.
2.
3.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of tentative approval.
Notice is hereby given that the State of Wisconsin is revising its approved Public Water System Supervision Program. Wisconsin has: Revised its definition of “public water system'; revised its administrative penalty authority for public water systems; adopted the Consumer Confidence Report Rule for all community water systems; adopted the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, which will help improve control of microbial pathogens in drinking water; and adopted the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, which will set new requirements to limit the formation of chemical disinfection byproducts in drinking water.
EPA has determined that these revisions are no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends to approve these program revisions.
All interested parties may request a public hearing. A request for a public hearing must be submitted by November 17, 2004, to the Acting Regional Administrator at the EPA Region 5 address shown below. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing may be denied by the Acting Regional Administrator. However, if a substantial request for a public hearing is made by November 17, 2004, a public hearing will be held.
If no timely and appropriate request for a hearing is received and the Acting Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, this determination shall become final and effective on November 17, 2004. Any request for a public hearing shall include the following information:
The name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Acting Regional Administrator's determination and a brief statement of the information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; and the signature of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.
All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection between the hours of 7:45 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the following offices: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, DG-2, 2nd Floor, 101 South Webster, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, Wisconsin 53707, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Ground Water and Drinking Water Branch (WG-15J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Joe Janczy, EPA Region 5, Ground Water and Drinking Water Branch, at the address given above, by telephone at (608) 267-2763, or at
(Sec. 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 3006-2 (1996), and 40 CFR part 142 of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations).
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice.
This document seeks comment on a petition for declaratory ruling filed by the American Teleservices Association (ATA), asking the Commission to preempt certain provisions of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and New Jersey Administrative Code relating to telemarketing.
Comments are due November 17, 2004, and reply comments are due December 2, 2004.
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
Kelli Farmer, Consumer Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202) 418-2512.
This is a summary of the Commission's
Parties who choose to file by paper must send an original and four (4) copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by electronic media, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings or electronic media for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial and electronic media sent by overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capital Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room TW-B204, Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit but disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
The full text of this document and copies of any subsequently filed documents in this matter will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554, (202) 418-0270. This document may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing (BCPI), Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Customers may contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site:
To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format) send an e-mail to
On August 24, 2004, the ATA filed a petition for declaratory ruling, asking the Commission to preempt certain provisions of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and New Jersey Administrative Code (New Jersey Rules) relating to telemarketing. ATA contends that the New Jersey Rules are more restrictive than the rules established by the Commission under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). More specifically, ATA argues that the New Jersey Rules are inconsistent with the Commission's “established business relationship” exemption, fail to provide a personal relationship exemption, and impose stricter identification requirements on telemarketers. Furthermore, ATA indicates that the New Jersey Rules are not limited to intrastate telemarketing, but apply to all telemarketing calls to New Jersey consumers regardless of where the calls originate. ATA therefore requests that the Commission preempt those provisions of the New Jersey Rules which are more restrictive than the Commission's rules as they relate to interstate telemarketing.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice.
This document seeks comment on a petition for expedited declaratory ruling filed by FreeEats.com, Inc., dba ccAdvertising, asking the Commission to preempt certain provisions of North Dakota state law which restricts the use of autodialed, prerecorded message technology.
Comments are due November 8, 2004, and reply comments are due November 17, 2004.
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
Kelli Farmer, Consumer Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202) 418-2512.
This is a summary of the Commission's
Parties who choose to file by paper must send an original and four (4) copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by electronic media, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings or electronic media for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial and electronic media sent by overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capital Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room TW-B204, Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit but disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
The full text of this document and copies of any subsequently filed documents in this matter will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554, (202) 418-0270. This document may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing (BCPI), Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Customers may contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site:
To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format) send an e-mail to
On September 13, 2004, FreeEats.com, Inc., dba ccAdvertising (Petitioner or ccAdvertising) filed a petition for expedited declaratory ruling, asking the Commission to preempt certain provisions of North Dakota state law. Petitioner explains that it is a Virginia-based company that uses prerecorded messages to conduct political polling, most of which involves interstate calls. According to Petitioner, the North Dakota attorney general's office has notified ccAdvertising that its use of autodialed, prerecorded message technology is regulated by the state's telemarketing statutes, and that the state intends to enforce against ccAdvertising section 51-28-02 of the North Dakota Century Code, which prohibits the use of prerecorded messages without authorization from the called party. Petitioner contends that North Dakota's law is inconsistent with the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and with the Commission's telemarketing rules, both of which permit political polling calls using prerecorded messages. Therefore, Advertising requests that the Commission preempt North Dakota's more restrictive regulation of interstate political polling calls.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice.
This document seeks comment on a petition for declaratory ruling filed by Express Consolidation, Inc., asking the Commission to preempt a Florida telemarketing law, Florida Statute, section 501.059 which restricts the making of certain telephonic sales calls to Florida citizens.
Comments are due November 17, 2004, and reply comments are due December 2, 2004.
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
Kelli Farmer, Consumer Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202) 418-2512.
This is a summary of the Commission's
Parties who choose to file by paper must send an original and four (4) copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by electronic media, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings or electronic media for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue,
This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit but disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
The full text of this document and copies of any subsequently filed documents in this matter will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554, (202) 418-0270. This document may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing (BCPI), Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Customers may contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site:
To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format) send an e-mail to
On July 28, 2004, Express Consolidation, Inc. (Express or Petitioner) filed a petition for declaratory ruling asking the Commission to preempt a Florida telemarketing law, Florida Statute, section 501.059 (Florida Statute). According to Petitioner, Express has been charged in a complaint by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services with violating the Florida Statute, which restricts the making of telephonic sales calls to Florida citizens whose names appear on the state's quarterly “no sales solicitation calls listing.” The Florida law also restricts the use of automatic dialing systems and artificial or prerecorded messages to make sales calls. Express contends that the Florida Statute is inconsistent with the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by placing more onerous restrictions on the making of interstate telephone calls by a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. Express indicates that, unlike the Florida Statute, the TCPA exempts calls made by tax-exempt nonprofit organizations from the restrictions on “telephone solicitations.” Express further explains that the calls that are the basis of the state's enforcement action are made on behalf of Express, a nonprofit corporation with offices in Florida, by a California company. Express maintains that the TCPA authorizes a state to implement more restrictive regulations only with respect to intrastate calls; therefore, the state law should be preempted.
As required by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-454), Chairman Michael K. Powell appointed the following executives to the Performance Review Board: Julius Knapp, Renee Licht, Mary Beth Richards, and David Solomon.
Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that, at 10:30 a.m. on Tuesday, October 12, 2004, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters relating to the Corporation's corporate and liquidation activities.
In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Vice Chairman John M. Reich, seconded by Director Thomas J. Curry, concurred in by Director James E. Gilleran (Office of Thrift Supervision), Director John D. Hawke, Jr. (Comptroller of the Currency), and Chairman Donald E. Powell, that Corporation business required its consideration of the matters on less than seven days' notice to the public; that no notice of the meeting earlier than October 7, 2004, was practicable; that the public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(9)(B) and (c)(10) of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10).
The meeting was held in the Board Room of the FDIC Building located at 550-17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS.
Notice.
This notice announces the intention of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) allow the proposed information collection project:
This proposed information collection was previously published in the
Comments on this notice must be received by November 17, 2004.
Written comments should be submitted to: John Kraemer, at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB at the email address
Copies of the proposed collection plans, data collection instruments, and specific details on the estimated burden can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer.
Cynthia D. McMichael, AHRQ, Reports Clearance Officer, (301) 427-1651.
AHRQ plans to employ the latest techniques to improve it's current data collections by developing new surveys, and by revising existing surveys in anticipation of, or in response to, changes in the healthcare field, for a 3 year period. The clearance request is limited to testing research questionnaires, data collection methods, and related reports. Data collected under this clearance will be used to improve agency products and such data are not intended for direct use in the development of health policy. The final instruments will be used for subsequent data collections that may impact health policies. A generic clearance for his work will allow AHRQ to draft and test survey instruments more quickly and with greater lead time, thereby managing project time more efficiently and improving the quality of the data it collects.
It is envisioned that in some instances the ability to pretest/pilot-test survey-related instruments, in anticipation of work, or early in a project, may result in the decision not to proceed with particular survey activities, thereby saving both public and private resources and effectively eliminating or reducing respondent burden.
The health care environment changes rapidly and requires a quick response from the agency to provide appropriately refined tools. A generic clearance for this methodological work will facilitate the agency's timely development of survey tools suitable for use in changing conditions.
It is particularly important to refine AHRQ's survey tools because many of the survey tools AHRQ develops are made widely available to users in the private sector. They are made available to help the private sector improve health care quality by enabling the gathering of useful data for analysis and for providing information about health care quality to consumers and purchasers so that they can use their marketplace choices to influence and improve health care quality.
Participation in survey testing will be fully voluntary and non-participation will have no affect on eligibility for, or receipt of, future AHRQ health services research support or on future opportunities to participate in research or to obtain informative research results. Specific estimation procedures, when used, will be described when we notify OMB as to actual studies conducted under the clearance.
Expenses for equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff will be incurred by AHRQ components as part of their normal operating budgets. No additional cost to the Federal Government is anticipated. Any deviation from these limits will be noted in reports made to OMB with respect to a particular study or studies conducted under the clearance.
In accordance with the above-cited legislation, comments on the AHRQ information collection are requested with regard to any of the following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of AHRQ, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the AHRQ's estimate of burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information upon the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of public record.
In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, call the CDC Reports Clearance Officer on (404) 498-1210. CDC is requesting an emergency clearance for this data collection with a two week public comment period. CDC is requesting OMB approval of this package 7 days after the end of the public comment period.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments to Seleda M. Perryman, CDC Assistant Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, MS-D24, Atlanta, GA 30333 or send an e-mail to
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) Research—New—National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
As part of the effort taken by CDC to learn more about the epidemiology and clinical dynamics of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) coronavirus, CDC's National Center for Infectious Diseases would like to collect information in the event of a re-emergence of SARS. Protocols have been developed for the study of SARS transmission, dynamics of infection and SARS infection during pregnancy. Information on symptoms of illness, activities during periods of contact with a SARS case or within a SARS-affected area and outcomes of illness will be requested from SARS case-patients, contacts of SARS case-patients, health care professionals and state and local public health providers. Data will be used for research to contribute to the global understanding of SARS illness and refine methods of SARS infection control. Expedited clearance is necessary so that data may be collected immediately in the event of SARS re-emergence this fall. There is no cost to the respondents.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of information collection requests under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance Officer at (404) 498-1210 or send an e-mail to
National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN)—New—National Center for Infectious Disease (NCID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
OMB first approved the information collection now known as the “National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System” (OMB No.0920-0012) in 1970; it approved the “National Surveillance System for Healthcare Workers(NaSH)” (OMB 0920-0417) in 1997, and the “Surveillance for Bloodstream and Vascular Access Infections in Outpatient Hemodialysis Centers” (OMB No. 0920-0442) in 1999. These three data collections have been modified and are being merged to create the NHSN. The NHSN will evolve with the addition of modules and participating healthcare institutions from a wide spectrum of settings.
The NHSN is a knowledge system for accumulating, exchanging, and integrating relevant information and resources among private and public stakeholders to support local and national efforts to protect patients and to promote healthcare safety. Specifically, the data will be used to determine the magnitude of various healthcare-associated adverse events and trends in the rates of these events among patients and healthcare workers with similar risks. They will be used to detect changes in the epidemiology of adverse events resulting from new and current medical therapies and changing risks.
Healthcare institutions that participate in NHSN voluntarily report their data to the Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion in the National Center for Infectious Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention through the National Electronic Disease Surveillance System that uses a web browser-based technology for data entry and data management. Data are collected by trained surveillance personnel using written standardized protocols. The table below shows the estimated annual burden in hours to collect and report data. The total burden hours are 65,817.
In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the following meeting:
The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
Notice of hearing.
This notice announces an administrative hearing on California's Medicaid State Plan Amendment (SPA) 03-28B to be held on December 2, 2004, 10 a.m., 75 Hawthorne Street; 4th Floor Conference Room, San Francisco, California 94105-3901 to reconsider our decision to disapprove SPA 03-028B.
Kathleen Scully-Hayes, Presiding Officer, CMS, LB-23-20, Lord Baltimore Drive, Baltimore, Maryland 21244, Telephone: (410) 786-2055.
This notice announces an administrative hearing to reconsider our decision to disapprove California's Medicaid State Plan Amendment (SPA) 03-28B.
California submitted SPA 03-28B on September 18, 2003. In this SPA, California proposed to provide targeted case management (TCM) services in several counties for two populations: persons on probation, and individuals with a public guardian. By letter dated July 6, 2004, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) disapproved the SPA.
At issue in this reconsideration is whether SPA 03-28B is consistent with the requirements contained in sections 1902(a)(10) and 1902(a)(23), of the Social Security Act (the Act), as described in more detail below. In general, CMS found that the SPA had three fundamental problems: (1) The proposed TCM services duplicate services that are integral components of the State's adult probation program and the State's public guardian program; (2) the amendment would result in charges to Medicaid for services available without charge to individuals on probation; and (3) the provider qualifications limit providers of services for these groups to the probation officers employed by the county probation departments and to court-appointed guardians under county public guardian agencies.
More specifically, at issue is whether the SPA complies with the requirement in section 1902(a)(10) of the Act which authorizes State Medicaid plans to provide for “medical assistance.” In the definition of that term, at section 1905(a)(19) of the Act, case management services are authorized “as defined in section 1915 (g)(2).” That section defines case management as services that assist beneficiaries in gaining access to needed services. The Congressional Conference committee report accompanying Pub. L. 99-272, which added section 1915(g) to the Act, emphasized that payment for case management services must not duplicate payments made to public agencies or private entities under other program authorities for the same purpose. CMS uses the term “duplication of required coverage to refer to this situation. In this instance, Medicaid payment for services provided by the adult probation program and the public guardian program would duplicate payments under other programs that are the responsibility of the State government. Because the congressional definition of Medicaid TCM excluded duplicate coverage, CMS determined that the proposed case management services are not within the scope of the definition of “medical assistance” that is authorized to be included in a State Medicaid plan by section 1902(a)(10).
The CMS’ reading of the term “medical assistance” to exclude “duplication of required coverage” is also consistent with the language of section 8435 of Pub. L. 100-647, which states that the Medicaid case management benefit is not to be construed as to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make payment for case management services that are provided without charge to the users of such services. Approval of SPA 03-028B would be contrary to this provision, because the proposed adult population services are available without charge.
In addition, at issue is whether the proposed SPA is consistent with the requirements at section 1902(a)(23) of the Act that a state plan must provide that beneficiaries may obtain services from any qualified entity or person who undertakes to provide such services. The proposed SPA restricts providers of
Section 1116 of the Act and 42 CFR part 430 establish Department procedures that provide an administrative hearing for reconsideration of a disapproval of a state plan or plan amendment. CMS is required to publish a copy of the notice to a state Medicaid agency that informs the agency of the time and place of the hearing and the issues to be considered. If we subsequently notify the agency of additional issues that will be considered at the hearing, we will also publish that notice.
Any individual or group that wants to participate in the hearing as a party must petition the presiding officer within 15 days after publication of this notice, in accordance with the requirements contained at 42 CFR 430.76(b)(2). Any interested person or organization that wants to participate as amicus curiae must petition the presiding officer before the hearing begins in accordance with the requirements contained at 42 CFR 430.76(c). If the hearing is later rescheduled, the presiding officer will notify all participants. Therefore, based on the reasoning set forth above, and after consultation with the Secretary as required under 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2), CMS disapproved California SPA 03-28B.
The notice to California announcing an administrative hearing to reconsider the disapproval of its SPA reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Rosenstein:
I am responding to your request for reconsideration of the decision to disapprove California State Plan Amendment (SPA) 03-28B, which the State submitted on September 18, 2003. In this SPA, California proposed to provide targeted case management (TCM) services in several counties for two populations, persons on probation and individuals with a public guardian. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reviewed this proposal, and for the reasons set forth below, was unable to approve SPA 03-28B as submitted.
At issue in this reconsideration is whether SPA 03-28B is consistent with the requirements contained in sections 1902(a)(10) and 1902(a)(23) of the Social Security Act (the Act), as described in more detail below. In general CMS found that the SPA has three fundamental problems: (1) The proposed TCM services duplicate services that are integral components of the State's adult probation program and the State's public guardian program; (2) the amendment would result in charges to Medicaid for services available without charge to individuals on probation; and (3) the provider qualifications limit providers of services for these groups to the probation officers employed by the county probation departments and to court-appointed guardians under county public guardian agencies.
Section 1902(a)(10) of the Act authorizes state Medicaid plans to provide for “medical assistance.” In the definition of that term, at section 1905(a)(19) of the Act, case management services are authorized “as defined in section 1915(g)(2).” That section defines case management as services that assist beneficiaries in gaining access to needed services. The Congressional Conference committee report accompanying Pub. L. 99-272, which added section 1915(g) to the Act, emphasized that payment for case management services must not duplicate payments made to public agencies or private entities under other program authorities for the same purpose.
The CMS uses the term “duplication of required coverage” to refer to this situation, in order to distinguish it from circumstances in which two payments are actually made for the same claim. In this instance, Medicaid payment for services provided by the adult probation program and the public guardian program would duplicate payments under other programs that are the responsibility of the State government. Therefore, CMS determined that Medicaid funding is not available for case management for individuals in the adult probation or public guardian system because claiming such activities as Medicaid TCM would result in duplication of necessary coverage. Because the congressional definition of Medicaid TCM excluded duplicate coverage, CMS determined that the proposed case management services are not within the scope of the definition of “medical assistance” that is authorized to be included in a state Medicaid plan by section 1902(a)(10).
Congress further states in section 8435 of Pub. L. 100-647 that the Medicaid case management benefit was not to be construed as to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make payment for case management services that are provided without charge to the users of such services. Approval of SPA 03-028B would be contrary to this provision. The activities in question are key service and/or administrative activities of the State's adult probation program. Thus, CMS determined that the SPA cannot be approved because the adult population services are available without charge.
The proposed SPA restricts providers of services to the two target groups in question, to probation officers employed by the county probation department and to court-appointed guardians. While states are free to set qualifications for providers, states must comply with Medicaid laws and regulations concerning freedom-of-choice at section 1902(a)(23) of the Act and the implementing regulation at 42 CFR 431.51. The State did not establish why it is consistent with those requirements to restrict providers to probation officers or public guardians. The State did not show why those providers are uniquely qualified to assist the target population in gaining access to medical, educational, social, and other services. Nor did the State explain how beneficiaries would have access to qualified providers who do not work as a probation officer or public guardian. As a result, the State did not demonstrate compliance with the requirements of section 1902(a)(23) and its implementing regulation.
Therefore, based on the reasoning set forth above, and after consultation with the Secretary as required under 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2), CMS disapproved California SPA 03-28B. This disapproval only applies to SPA 03-028B. The currently approved sections of the State Plan for these target groups will remain in effect. However, CMS would like to emphasize that providing Medicaid TCM to individuals in the adult probation or public guardian State systems is not consistent with CMS' interpretation of applicable laws, as noted above. To the extent that current plan provisions do so, CMS expects the State to revise its plan in order to come into compliance on this issue. Moreover, CMS may review State claims to determine if Federal Medicaid funding is appropriate when another program or entity is liable for payment.
I am scheduling a hearing on your request for reconsideration to be held December 2, 2004, at 10 a.m., 4th Floor Conference Room, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901. If this date is not acceptable, we would be glad to set another date that is mutually agreeable to the parties. The hearing will be governed by the procedures prescribed at 42 CFR, part 430.
I am designating Ms. Kathleen Scully-Hayes as the presiding officer. If these arrangements present any problems, please contact the presiding officer. In order to facilitate any communication which may be necessary between the parties to the hearing, please notify the presiding officer to indicate acceptability of the hearing date that has been scheduled and provide names of the individuals who will represent the State at the hearing. The presiding officer may be reached at (410) 786-2055.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)(formerly the Health Care Financing Administration).
Notice of Modified or Altered System of Records (SOR).
In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, we are proposing to modify or alter an SOR, “Group Health Plan System,” System No. 09-70-4001. We propose to broaden the scope of this system with the redesign of the electronic processing procedure used to process data currently from a Common Object Business Oriented Language (commonly referred to as COBOL) format resident on the CMS mainframe to Data Base 2 format (commonly known as DB2). To more accurately reflect the changes proposed for this system, we will modify the name to read: “Medicare Managed Care System (MMCS).” We propose to delete published routine use number 5 authorizing disclosures to contractors; published routine use number 6 authorizing disclosures to contractors; and published routine use number 7 authorizing disclosures to a Medicaid State Agency.
Proposed routine use number 1 for contractors and consultants makes material changes to published routine uses numbers 5 and 6. Routine uses 5 and 6 authorized release to contractors. They are being deleted because their meaning is unclear as to what data is being disclosed to what entity. Routine use number 7 is being deleted because disclosure to a State Medicaid Agency will now be made under proposed routine use number 2 that reads, “to another Federal and/or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent.”
CMS proposes to add new routine uses to permit release of information to: (1) Third parties where the contact has information relating to the individual's capacity to manage his or her own affairs; (2) other insurers, third party administrators (TPA), employers, self-insurers, managed care organizations, other supplemental insurers, non-coordinating insurers, multiple employer trusts, group health plans (i.e., health maintenance organizations (HMOs) or a competitive medical plan (CMP) with a Medicare contract, or a Medicare-approved health care prepayment plan (HCPP)), directly or through a contractor, and other groups providing protection for their enrollees to assist in the processing of individual insurance claims; and (3 & 4) combat fraud and abuse in certain health benefits programs.
The security classification previously reported as “None” will be modified to reflect that the data in this system are considered to be “Level Three Privacy Act Sensitive.” We are modifying the language in the remaining routine uses to provide clarity and uniformity to CMS's intention to disclose individual-specific information contained in this system. The routine uses will then be prioritized and reordered according to their proposed usage. We will also take the opportunity to update any sections of the system that were affected by the recent reorganization and to update language in the administrative sections to correspond with language used in other CMS SORs.
The primary purpose of the SOR is to maintain a master file of Medicare Managed Care Organizations (MCO) plan members for accounting and payment control; expedite the exchange of data with MCOs; and control the posting of pro-rata amounts to the Part B deductible of currently enrolled MCO members. MMCS include the following entities: Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO), Competitive Medical Plans (CMP), Health Care Prepayment Plan (HCPP), and Medicare Choice Organizations (MCO). Information in this system will also be disclosed to: (1) Support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the Agency or by a contractor or consultant, (2) support another Federal and/or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent; (3) provider and suppliers of service directly or dealing through contractors, fiscal intermediaries (FI) or carriers for administration of Title XVIII; (4) provide information to third party contacts in situations where the contact has information relating to the individual's capacity to manage his or her affairs; (5) other insurers, third party administrators (TPA), and other groups providing protection for their enrollees to assist in the processing of individual insurance claims (6) facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, as well as payment-related projects, (7) support constituent requests made to a congressional representative, (8) support litigation involving the Agency, and (9 & 10) combat fraud and abuse in certain health benefits programs.
CMS filed a modified or altered system report with the Chair of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, the Chair of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and the Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on August 19, 2004. To ensure that all parties have adequate time in which to comment, the modified or altered SOR, including routine uses, will become effective 40 days from the publication of the notice, or from the date it was submitted to OMB and the Congress, whichever is later, unless CMS receives comments that require alterations to this notice.
The public should address comments to: Director, Division of Privacy Compliance Data Development (DPCDD), CMS, Room N2-04-27, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. Comments received will be available for review at this location, by appointment, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 9 a.m.-3 p.m., Eastern daylight time.
Laquia Marks, Information Technology Specialist, Division of Managed Care Systems, Informational Services Modernization Group, OIS, CMS, Room N3-16-24, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. The telephone number is 410-786-3312.
In 1987, CMS established an SOR, Group Health Plan System,” System No. 09-70-4001, under the authority of §§ 1833(a)(1)(A), 1866, and 1876 of Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (the Act) (42 U.S.C. 1395 (a)(1)(A), 1395cc, and 1395mm). Notice of this system,
The system includes the following information about a beneficiary's health insurance entitlement and supplementary medical benefits usage, including name, health insurance claims number (HICN), and social security number.
The Privacy Act permits us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such disclosure of data is known as a “routine use.” The government will only release MMCS information that can be associated with an individual as provided for under “Section III. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures of Data in the System.” Both identifiable and non-identifiable data may be disclosed under a routine use.
We will only collect the minimum personal data necessary to achieve the purpose of MMCS. CMS has the following policies and procedures concerning disclosures of information that will be maintained in the system. Disclosure of information from the SOR will be approved only to the extent necessary to accomplish the purpose of the disclosure and only after CMS:
1. Determines that the use or disclosure is consistent with the reason data is being collected;
2. Determines that the purpose for which the disclosure is to be made can only be accomplished if the record is provided in individually identifiable form;
a. The purpose for which the disclosure is to be made is of sufficient importance to warrant the effect and/or risk on the privacy of the individual that additional exposure of the record might bring; and
b. There is a strong probability that the proposed use of the data would in fact accomplish the stated purpose(s).
3. Requires the information recipient to:
a. Establish administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized use of disclosure of the record;
b. Remove or destroy at the earliest time all patient-identifiable information; and
c. Agree to not use or disclose the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed.
4. Determines that the data are valid and reliable.
A. These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the MMCS without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. Each proposed disclosure of information under these routine uses will be evaluated to ensure that the disclosure is legally permissible, including but not limited to ensuring that the purpose of the disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the information was collected. We are proposing to establish or modify the following routine use disclosures of information maintained in the system:
1. To Agency contractors, or consultants who have been contracted by the Agency to assist in accomplishment of a CMS function relating to the purposes for this system and who need to have access to the records in order to assist CMS.
We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contractual or similar agreement with a third party to assist in accomplishing a CMS function relating to purposes for this system.
CMS occasionally contracts out certain of its functions when doing so would contribute to effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor or consultant whatever information is necessary for the contractor or consultant to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor or consultant from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requires the contractor or consultant to return or destroy all information at the completion of the contract.
2. To support another Federal or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent to:
a. Contribute to the accuracy of CMS's proper payment of Medicare benefits,
b. Enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or as necessary to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds, and/or
c. Assist Federal/state Medicaid programs within the state.
Other Federal or state agencies in their administration of a Federal health program may require MMCS information in order to support evaluations and monitoring of Medicare claims information of beneficiaries, including proper reimbursement for services provided.
In addition, other state agencies in their administration of a Federal health program may require MMCS information for the purposes of determining, evaluating and/or assessing cost, effectiveness, and /or the quality of health care services provided in the state.
Disclosure under this routine use shall be used by state Medicaid agencies pursuant to agreements with the HHS for determining Medicaid and Medicare eligibility, for quality control studies, for determining eligibility of recipients of assistance under Titles IV, XVIII, and XIX of the Social Security Act (the Act), and for the administration of the Medicaid program. Data will be released to the state only on those individuals who are patients under the services of a Medicaid program within the state or who are residents of that state.
We also contemplate disclosing information under this routine use in situations in which state auditing agencies require MMCS information for auditing state Medicaid eligibility considerations. CMS may enter into an agreement with state auditing agencies to assist in accomplishing functions relating to purposes for this system to providers and suppliers of services directly or through fiscal intermediaries (FIs) or carriers for the administration of Title XVIII of the Act.
3. To providers and suppliers of services directly or through fiscal intermediaries (FIs) or carriers for the administration of Title XVIII of the Act.
Providers and suppliers of services require MMCS information in order to establish the validity of evidence or to verify the accuracy of information presented by the individual, as it concerns the individual's entitlement to benefits under the Medicare program,
4. To provide information to third party contacts in situations where the party to be contacted has information relating to the individual's capacity to manage his or her affairs or to his or her eligibility for, or an entitlement to, benefits under the Medicare program and,
a. The individual is unable to provide the information being sought (an individual is considered to be unable to provide certain types of information when any of the following conditions exists: The individual is confined to a mental institution, a court of competent jurisdiction has appointed a guardian to manage the affairs of that individual, a court of competent jurisdiction has declared the individual to be mentally incompetent, or the individual's attending physician has certified that the individual is not sufficiently mentally competent to manage his or her own affairs or to provide the information being sought, the individual cannot read or write, a language barrier exist, or the custodian of the information will not, as a matter of policy, provide it to the individual), or
b. The data are needed to establish the validity of evidence or to verify the accuracy of information presented by the individual, and it concerns one or more of the following: the individual's entitlement to benefits under the Medicare program, the amount of reimbursement, and in cases in which the evidence is being reviewed as a result of suspected fraud and abuse, program integrity, quality appraisal, or evaluation and measurement of activities.
Third parties contacts require MMCS information in order to provide support for the individual's entitlement to benefits under the Medicare program; to establish the validity of evidence or to verify the accuracy of information presented by the individual, and assist in the monitoring of Medicare claims information of beneficiaries, including proper reimbursement of services provided.
5. To insurance companies, third party administrators (TPA), employers, self-insurers, managed care organizations, other supplemental insurers, non-coordinating insurers, multiple employer trusts, group health plans (
a. Certify that the individual about whom the information is being provided is one of its insured or employees, or is insured and/or employed by another entity for whom they serve as a TPA;
b. Utilize the information solely for the purpose of processing the identified individual's insurance claims; and
c. Safeguard the confidentiality of the data and prevent unauthorized access.
Other insurers, TPAs, HMOs, and HCPPs may require MMCS information in order to support evaluations and monitoring of Medicare claims information of beneficiaries, including proper reimbursement for services provided.
6. To an individual or organization for a research, evaluation, or epidemiological project related to the prevention of disease or disability, the restoration or maintenance of health, or payment-related projects.
MMCS data will provide for research, evaluation, and epidemiological projects, a broader, longitudinal, national perspective of the status of Medicare beneficiaries. CMS anticipates that many researchers will have legitimate requests to use these data in projects that could ultimately improve the care provided to Medicare beneficiaries and the policy that governs the care.
7. To a Member of Congress or a congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained.
Beneficiaries often request the help of a Member of Congress in resolving some issues relating to a matter before CMS. The Member of Congress then writes CMS, and CMS must be able to give sufficient information tin response to the inquiry.
8. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when:
a. The Agency or any component thereof, or
b. Any employee of the Agency in his or her official capacity, or
c. Any employee of the Agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or
d. The United States Government, is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation.
Whenever CMS is involved in litigation, or occasionally when another party is involved in litigation and CMS's policies or operations could be affected by the outcome of the litigation, CMS would be able to disclose information to the DOJ, court, or adjudicatory body involved.
9. To a CMS contractor (including, but not limited to FIs and carriers) that assists in the administration of a CMS-administered health benefits program, or to a grantee of a CMS-administered grant program, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs.
We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contract or grant with a third party to assist in accomplishing CMS functions relating to the purpose of combating fraud and abuse.
CMS occasionally contracts out certain of its functions when doing so would contribute to effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor or grantee whatever information is necessary for the contractor or grantee to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor or grantee from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requiring the contractor or grantee to return or destroy all information.
10. To another Federal agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States (including any state or local governmental agency), that administers, or that has the authority to investigate potential fraud or abuse in, a health benefits program funded in whole or in part by Federal funds, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs.
Other agencies may require MMCS information for the purpose of combating fraud and abuse in such Federally funded programs.
This system contains Protected Health Information as defined by HHS regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, 65 FR 82462 (12-28-00), Subparts A and E. Disclosures of Protected Health Information authorized by these routine
In addition, our policy will be to prohibit release even of data not directly identifiable, except pursuant to one of the routine uses or if required by law, if we determine there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary).
CMS has safeguards in place for authorized users and monitors such users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Personnel having access to the system have been trained in the Privacy Act and information security requirements. Employees who maintain records in this system are instructed not to release data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate management, operational and technical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the information and information systems and to prevent unauthorized access.
This system will conform to all applicable Federal laws and regulations and Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards as they relate to information security and data privacy. These laws and regulations include but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1974; the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002; the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996; the E-Government Act of 2002, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, and the corresponding implementing regulations. OMB Circular A-130, Management of Federal Resources, Appendix III, Security of Federal Automated Information Resources also applies. Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards include but are not limited to: All pertinent NIST publications; the HHS Automated Information Systems Security Handbook and the CMS Information Security Handbook.
CMS proposes to establish this system in accordance with the principles and requirements of the Privacy Act and will collect, use, and disseminate information only as prescribed therein. Data in this system will be subject to the authorized releases in accordance with the routine uses identified in this system of records.
CMS will monitor the collection and reporting of MMCS data. MMCS information on individuals is completed by contractor personnel and submitted to CMS through standard systems located at different locations. CMS will utilize a variety of onsite and offsite edits and audits to increase the accuracy of MMCS data.
CMS will take precautionary measures (see item IV. above) to minimize the risks of unauthorized access to the records and the potential harm to individual privacy or other personal or property rights. CMS will collect only that information necessary to perform the system's functions. In addition, CMS will make disclosure of identifiable data from the modified system only with consent of the subject individual, or his/her legal representative, or in accordance with an applicable exception provision of the Privacy Act.
CMS, therefore, does not anticipate an unfavorable effect on individual privacy as a result of the disclosure of information relating to individuals.
“Medicare Managed Care System (MMCS)” HHS/CMS/CBC
Level Three Privacy Act Sensitive
CMS Data Center, 7500 Security Boulevard, North Building, First Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
Recipients of Medicare hospital insurance (Part A) and Medicare medical insurance (Part B) who are enrolled in a Medicare Managed Care Plan.
The system contains information about a beneficiary's health insurance entitlement and medical insurance benefits usage.
Authority for maintenance of the system is given under the provisions of §§ 1833(a)(1)(A), 1866, and 1876 of Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (the Act) (42 U.S.C. 1395(A)(1)(a), 1395cc, and 1395mm).
The primary purpose of the SOR is to maintain a master file of Medicare Managed Care Organizations (MCO) plan members for accounting and payment control; expedite the exchange of data with MCOs; and control the posting of pro-rata amounts to the Part B deductible of currently enrolled MCO members. MMCS include the following entities: Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO), Competitive Medical Plans (CMP), Health Care Prepayment Plan (HCPP), and Medicare Choice Organizations (MCO). Information in this system will also be disclosed to: (1) Support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the Agency or by a contractor or consultant, (2) support another Federal and/or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent; (3) provider and suppliers of service directly or dealing through contractors, fiscal intermediaries (FI) or carriers for administration of Title XVIII; (4) provide information to third party contacts in situations where the contact has information relating to the individual's capacity to manage his or her affairs; (5) other insurers, third party administrators (TPA), and other groups providing protection for their enrollees to assist in the processing of individual insurance claims (6) facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, as well as payment-related projects, (7) support constituent requests made to a congressional representative, (8) support litigation involving the Agency, and (9 & 10) combat fraud and abuse in certain health benefits programs.
A. These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the MMCS without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. Each proposed disclosure of information under these routine uses will be evaluated to ensure that the disclosure is legally permissible, including but not limited to ensuring that the purpose of the disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the information was collected. We are proposing to establish or modify the following routine use disclosures of information maintained in the system:
1. To Agency contractors, or consultants who have been contracted by the Agency to assist in accomplishment of a CMS function relating to the purposes for this system and who need to have access to the records in order to assist CMS.
2. To support another Federal or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent to:
a. Contribute to the accuracy of CMS's proper payment of Medicare benefits,
b. Enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or as necessary to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds, and/or
c. Assist Federal/state Medicaid programs within the state.
3. To providers and suppliers of services directly or through fiscal intermediaries (FIs) or carriers for the administration of Title XVIII of the Act.
4. To provide information to third party contacts in situations where the party to be contacted has information relating to the individual's capacity to manage his or her affairs or to his or her eligibility for, or an entitlement to, benefits under the Medicare program and,
a. The individual is unable to provide the information being sought (an individual is considered to be unable to provide certain types of information when any of the following conditions exists: the individual is confined to a mental institution, a court of competent jurisdiction has appointed a guardian to manage the affairs of that individual, a court of competent jurisdiction has declared the individual to be mentally incompetent, or the individual's attending physician has certified that the individual is not sufficiently mentally competent to manage his or her own affairs or to provide the information being sought, the individual cannot read or write, a language barrier exists, or the custodian of the information will not, as a matter of policy, provide it to the individual), or
b. The data are needed to establish the validity of evidence or to verify the accuracy of information presented by the individual, and it concerns one or more of the following: the individual's entitlement to benefits under the Medicare program, the amount of reimbursement, and in cases in which the evidence is being reviewed as a result of suspected fraud and abuse, program integrity, quality appraisal, or evaluation and measurement of activities.
5. To insurance companies, third party administrators (TPA), employers, self-insurers, managed care organizations, other supplemental insurers, non-coordinating insurers, multiple employer trusts, group health plans (
a. Certify that the individual about whom the information is being provided is one of its insured or employees, or is insured and/or employed by another entity for whom they serve as a TPA;
b. Utilize the information solely for the purpose of processing the identified individual's insurance claims; and
c. Safeguard the confidentiality of the data and prevent unauthorized access.
6. To an individual or organization for a research, evaluation, or epidemiological project related to the prevention of disease or disability, the restoration or maintenance of health, or payment-related projects.
7. To a Member of Congress or a congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained.
8. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when:
a. The Agency or any component thereof, or
b. Any employee of the Agency in his or her official capacity, or
c. Any employee of the Agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or
d. The United States Government, is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation.
9. To a CMS contractor (including, but not limited to FIs and carriers) that assists in the administration of a CMS-administered health benefits program, or to a grantee of a CMS-administered grant program, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs.
10. To another Federal agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States (including any state or local governmental agency), that administers, or that has the authority to investigate potential fraud or abuse in, a health benefits program funded in whole or in part by Federal funds, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs.
This system contains Protected Health Information as defined by HHS regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, 65 FR 82462 (12-28-00), Subparts A and E. Disclosures of Protected Health Information authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.”
In addition, our policy will be to prohibit release even of data not directly identifiable, except pursuant to one of the routine uses or if required by law, if we determine there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary).
Computer diskette and on magnetic storage media.
Information can be retrieved by name and health insurance claim number of the beneficiary.
CMS has safeguards in place for authorized users and monitors such users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Personnel having access to the system have been trained in the Privacy Act and information security requirements. Employees who maintain records in this system are instructed not to release data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate management, operational and technical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the information and
This system will conform to all applicable Federal laws and regulations and Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards as they relate to information security and data privacy. These laws and regulations include but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1974; the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002; the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996; the E-Government Act of 2002, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, and the corresponding implementing regulations. OMB Circular A-130, Management Of Federal Resources, Appendix III, Security of Federal Automated Information Resources also applies. Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards include but are not limited to: all pertinent NIST publications; the HHS Automated Information Systems Security Handbook and the CMS Information Security Handbook.
Records are maintained in a secure storage area with identifiers. Disposal occurs three years from the last action on the hospital's cost report, and should be coordinated with disposal of the reports.
Director, Division of Managed Care Operations, Information Services Modernization Group, Office of Information Services, CMS, 7500 Security Boulevard, N3-16-24, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
For purpose of access, the subject individual should write to the systems manager who will require the system name, SSN, address, date of birth, sex, and for verification purposes, the subject individual's name (woman's maiden name, if applicable). Furnishing the SSN is voluntary, but it may make searching for a record easier and prevent delay.
For purpose of access, use the same procedures outlined in Notification Procedures above. Requestors should also reasonably specify the record contents being sought. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.5(a)(2)).
The subject individual should contact the system manager named above, and reasonably identify the record and specify the information to be contested. State the corrective action sought and the reasons for the correction with supporting justification. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.7).
Data for this system is collected from MCO (which obtained the data from the individuals concerned), Social Security Administration, and the Enrollment Database system of records.
None.
In compliance with the requirements of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Administration, Office of Information Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer, E-mail address:
The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.
The regulations governing Indian Health Care Improvement Act Programs (Pub. L. 94-437) provide at 42 CFR 136.334 that the Indian Health Service shall publish annually in the
The following is a list of Indian Health Scholarship Recipients funded under sections 103 and 104 for Fiscal Year 2004:
The Indian Health Service Scholarship Branch, 801 Thompson Avenue, Suite 120, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Telephone: (301) 443-6197, Fax: (301) 443-6048.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.
General notice.
This notice advises the public of the quarterly Internal Revenue Service interest rates used to calculate interest on overdue accounts (underpayments) and refunds (overpayments) of customs duties. For the calendar quarter beginning October 1, 2004, the interest rates for overpayments will be 4 percent for corporations and 5 percent for non-corporations, and the interest rate for underpayments will be 5 percent. This notice is published for the convenience of the importing public and Customs and Border Protection personnel.
October 1, 2004.
Trong Quan, National Finance Center, Collections Section, 6026 Lakeside Boulevard, Indianapolis, Indiana 46278; telephone (317) 614-4516.
Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1505 and Treasury Decision 85-93, published in the
The interest rates are based on the Federal short-term rate and determined by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on behalf of the Secretary of the Treasury on a quarterly basis. The rates effective for a quarter are determined during the first-month period of the previous quarter.
In Revenue Ruling 2004-92, the IRS determined the rates of interest for the calendar quarter beginning October 1, 2004, and ending December 31, 2004. The interest rate paid to the Treasury for underpayments will be the Federal short-term rate (2%) plus three percentage points (3%) for a total of five percent (5%). For corporate overpayments, the rate is the Federal short-term rate (2%) plus two percentage points (2%) for a total of four percent (4%). For overpayments made by non-corporations, the rate is the Federal short-term rate (2%) plus three percentage points (3%) for a total of five percent (5%). These interest rates are subject to change for the calendar quarter beginning January 1, 2005, and ending March 31, 2005.
For the convenience of the importing public and Customs and Border Protection personnel the following list of IRS interest rates used, covering the period from before July of 1974 to date, to calculate interest on overdue accounts and refunds of customs duties, is published in summary format.
Minerals Management Service, Interior.
List of restricted joint bidders.
Pursuant to the authority vested in the Director of the MMS by the joint bidding provisions of 30 CFR 256.41, each entity within one of the following groups shall be restricted from bidding with any entity in any other of the following groups at OCS oil and gas lease sales to be held during the bidding period November 1, 2004, through April 30, 2005. The List of Restricted Joint Bidders published April 6, 2004, in the
Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior.
Availability of the proposed notice of sale.
Alaska OCS, Beaufort Sea; Notice of Availability of the proposed Notice of Sale for proposed Oil and Gas Lease Sale 195 in the Beaufort Sea. This Notice is published pursuant to 30 CFR 256.29(c) as a matter of information to the public.
With regard to oil and gas leasing on the OCS, the Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to section 19 of the OCS Lands Act, provides the affected States the opportunity to review the proposed Notice. The proposed Notice sets forth the proposed terms and conditions of the sale, including minimum bids, royalty rates, and rentals.
The proposed Notice of Sale for Sale 195 and a “Proposed Sale Notice Package” containing information essential to potential bidders may be obtained by mail from the Alaska OCS Region, Information Resource Center,
The final Notice of Sale will be published in the
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice of Commission determination to conduct a full five-year review concerning the antidumping finding on polychloroprene rubber from Japan.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it will proceed with a full review pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping finding on polychloroprene rubber from Japan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. A schedule for the review will be established and announced at a later date. For further information concerning the conduct of this review and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207).
October 4, 2004.
Mary Messer (202-205-3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
On October 4, 2004, the Commission determined that it should proceed to a full review in the subject five-year review pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Act. The Commission found that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (69 FR 39905, July 1, 2004) was adequate and that the respondent interested party group response to its notice of institution was inadequate. The Commission also found that other circumstances warranted conducting a full review.
This review is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.62 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
October 21, 2004 at 2 p.m.
Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.
Open to the public.
1. Agenda for future meetings: None.
2. Minutes
3. Ratification List
4. Inv. No. 731-TA-1088 (Preliminary) (Polyvinyl Alcohol from Taiwan)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination to the Secretary of Commerce on or before October 22, 2004; Commissioners' opinions are currently scheduled to be transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce on or before October 29, 2004.)
5. Outstanding action jackets:
(1) Document No. GC-04-114 concerning proposed rulemaking and changes in Agency procedures.
In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.
By order of the Commission.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a), notice is given that the Criminal Division (CRM), Department of Justice, proposes to establish a new system of records entitled “Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center System,” Justice/CRM-028, which covers the records maintained by the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center, Executive Office for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, Criminal Division.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a (e)(4) and (11), the public is given a 30-day period in which to comment; the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which has oversight responsibility of the Act, requires a 40-day period in which to conclude its review of the system. Therefore, please submit any comments by November 17, 2004. The public, OMB, and Congress are invited to submit comments to Mary Cahill, Management and Planning Staff, Justice Management Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530 (1400 National Place Building).
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a (r), the Department has provided a report to OMB and Congress.
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center System.
Classified, sensitive.
U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20530-0001.
1. Individuals, entities, and organizations charged with, convicted of, or known, suspected, or alleged to be involved with, illicit narcotic trafficking or other potentially related criminal activity, including but not limited to facilitating the transportation of narcotics proceeds, money laundering, firearms trafficking, alien smuggling, and terrorist activity. 2. Individuals, entities, and organizations with pertinent knowledge of some circumstances or aspect of a case or record subject, such as witnesses, associates of record subjects, informants, and law enforcement or intelligence personnel. 3. Individuals, entities, and organizations reasonably suspected of engaging in money laundering, other financial crimes, terrorism, and other criminal activity, including individuals, entities, and organizations referenced in information provided to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network from financial institutions and other sources. 4. Individuals, entities, and organizations identified in or involved with the filing, evaluation, or investigation of reports under the Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations.
Records may contain investigative and intelligence information about the individuals in this system, including their identifying information, location, and activities, as well as other data which may assist the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) Fusion Center in fulfilling its responsibilities. Information includes multi-source data that may assist law enforcement agencies, regulatory agencies, and agencies of the U.S. foreign intelligence community or military community in executing their responsibilities with respect to drug trafficking, money laundering, firearms trafficking, alien smuggling, terrorism, and other enforcement efforts, including the identification, location, arrest and prosecution of suspects, and civil proceedings and other activities related to such enforcement activities. This system of records will not contain Federal tax returns and return information as defined by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-199, 118 Stat. 3 (2004); Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, Pub. L. 91-513 (84 Stat. 1236); the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961. Additional authority is derived from Treaties, Statutes, Executive Orders and Presidential Proclamations which the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been charged with administering.
The purpose of this system of records is to facilitate the mission of the OCDETF Program, which is to reduce the drug supply by identifying, disrupting and dismantling the most significant international and domestic drug supply and money laundering organizations and related criminal operations (
Relevant information contained in this system of records may be disclosed as follows:
(a) To any criminal, civil, or regulatory law enforcement authority (whether Federal, State, local, territorial, tribal, or foreign) where the information is relevant to the recipient entity's law enforcement responsibilities.
(b) To a governmental entity lawfully engaged in collecting law enforcement, law enforcement intelligence, or national security intelligence information for such purposes.
(c) To any person or entity in either the public or private sector, domestic or foreign, in the course of an investigation or other proceeding if deemed by the DOJ to be reasonably necessary in eliciting information or cooperation from the recipient for use by the DOJ in furthering its authorized functions related to this system.
(d) To the Department of State and components thereof to further the efforts of those agencies with respect to the national security and foreign affairs aspects of international drug trafficking, money laundering, firearms trafficking, alien smuggling, terrorism, and related crimes.
(e) To the Department of Defense and components thereof to support its role in the detection and monitoring of the transportation of illegal drugs and money laundering in the United States or such other roles in support of counter-drug and money laundering law enforcement, counter-firearms trafficking, counter-alien smuggling, and related crimes as may be permitted by law.
(f) To The United Nations and its employees to the extent that the information is relevant to the recipient's law enforcement or international security functions.
(g) To a Member of Congress or staff acting upon the Member's behalf when the Member or staff requests the information on behalf of and at the request of the individual who is the subject of the record.
(h) To the White House (the President, Vice-President, their staffs, and other entities of the Executive Office of the President), and, during Presidential transitions, to the President Elect and Vice-President Elect and for their designated transition team staff, for coordination of activities that relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President, President Elect, Vice-President or Vice-President Elect.
(i) To complainants and/or victims to the extent necessary to provide such persons with information and explanations concerning the progress and/or results of the investigation or case arising from the matters of which they complained and/or of which they were a victim.
(j) In an appropriate proceeding before a court, or administrative or adjudicative body, when the Department of Justice determines that the records are arguably relevant to the proceeding; or in an appropriate proceeding before an administrative or adjudicative body when the adjudicator holds the records to be relevant to the proceeding.
(k) To an actual or potential party to litigation or the party's authorized representative for the purpose of negotiation or discussion on such matters as settlement, plea bargaining, or in informal discovery proceedings.
(l) To appropriate officials and employees of a Federal agency or entity which requires information relevant to a decision concerning the hiring, appointment, or retention of an employee; the issuance, renewal, suspension, or revocation of a security clearance; the execution of a security or suitability investigation; the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a grant or benefit.
(m) To designated officers and employees of State or local (including the District of Columbia), or tribal law enforcement or detention agencies in connection with the hiring or continued employment of an employee or contractor, where the employee or contractor would occupy or occupies a position of public trust as a law enforcement officer or detention officer having direct contact with the public or with prisoners or detainees, to the extent that the information is relevant and necessary to the recipient agency's decision.
(n) To contractors, grantees, experts, consultants, students, and others performing or working on a contract, service, grant, cooperative agreement, or other assignment for the Federal Government, when necessary to accomplish an agency function related to this system of records.
(o) To the news media and the public pursuant to 28 CFR 50.2 unless it is determined that release of the specific information in the context of a particular case would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
(p) To such recipients and under such circumstances and procedures as are mandated by Federal statute or treaty.
(q) To the National Archives and Records Administration in records management inspections conducted under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.
(r) The Department of Justice may also disclose relevant and necessary information to a former employee of the Department for purposes of: responding to an official inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government entity or professional licensing authority, in accordance with applicable Department regulations; or facilitating communications with a former employee that may be necessary for personnel-related or other official purposes where the Department requires information and/or consultation assistance from the former employee regarding a matter within that person's former area of responsibility.
None.
Computerized records are stored on hard disk, floppy diskettes, or compact disks. Some information, including investigative files and information incorporated into analytical products, may be retained in hard copy format and stored in individual file folders and file cabinets with controlled access, and/or other appropriate GSA-approved security containers.
Access to individual records is gained by use of data retrieval capabilities of computer software acquired and developed for processing of information in the OCDETF Fusion Center System. Data will be retrieved through a number of criteria, including personal identifying information such as name and social security number.
These records are housed in a secure building restricted to DOJ employees and other authorized personnel, and those persons transacting business with the DOJ who are escorted by DOJ or other authorized personnel. Physical and electronic access to the System is safeguarded in accordance with DOJ rules and policies governing automated systems security and access, including the maintenance of technical equipment in restricted areas. The selection of containers or facilities is made in consideration of the sensitivity or National Security Classification as appropriate, of the files. The System is contained in a room secured by intruder alarms and other appropriate physical and electronic security controls. Access to the System terminal(s) are further restricted to Justice Department, Treasury Department, and Homeland Security Department employees and individual contractors who have authorized access (including individual passwords and identification codes), appropriate security clearances, and a demonstrated and lawful need to know the information in order to perform assigned functions on behalf of the OCDETF Fusion Center. All OCDETF Fusion Center personnel capable of accessing the OCDETF Fusion Center System will have successfully passed a background investigation. Unauthorized access to the telecommunications terminals is precluded by a complex authentication procedure.
A schedule for the retention and disposal of these records is under development.
Director, Executive Office for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20530-0001.
Inquires should be addressed to: OCDETF Fusion Center Privacy Act/FOIA Unit, OCDETF Fusion Center, Executive Office for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20530-0001.
A request for access to a record from this system shall be made in writing to the System Manager, with the envelope and the letter clearly marked “Privacy Access Request.” The request should include a general description of the records sought and must include the requester's full name, current address, and date and place of birth. The request must be signed and dated and either notarized or submitted under penalty of perjury. Some information may be exempt from access provisions as described in the section entitled “Exemptions Claimed for the System.” An individual who is the subject of a record in this system may access those records that are not exempt from disclosure. A determination whether a record may be accessed will be made at the time a request is received.
Individuals desiring to contest or amend information maintained in the system should direct their request according to the Record Access Procedures listed above, stating clearly and concisely what information is being contested, the reasons for contesting it, and the proposed amendment to the information sought. Some information is not subject to amendment, such as tax return information. Some information may be exempt from contesting record procedures as described in the section entitled “Exemptions Claimed for the System.” An individual who is the subject of a record in this system may amend those records that are not exempt. A determination whether a record may be amended will be made at the time a request is received.
Information provided by Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, and foreign law enforcement agencies; agencies of the U.S. foreign intelligence community and military community; and open sources, such as broadcast and print media and publicly-available data bases.
The Attorney General has exempted this system from subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (5), and (8); and (g) of the Privacy Act. The exemptions will be applied only to the extent that information in a record is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k). A determination as to exemption shall be made at the time a request for access or amendment is received. Rules have been promulgated in accordance with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553(b), (c) and (e) and are published in today's
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by contacting the Department of Labor (DOL). To obtain documentation, contact Darrin King on (202) 693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail:
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-7316 (this is not a toll-free number), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
By letter dated September 27, 2004, a representative of the Tennessee AFL-CIO requested administrative reconsideration regarding Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The certification for Trade Adjustment Assistance was signed on August 27, 2004. The Notice of determination was published in the
The initial investigation determined that subject worker group possess skills that are easily transferable.
The petitioner provided new information to show that the workers possess skills that are not easily transferable.
The initial investigation revealed that at least five percent of the workforce at the subject firm is at least fifty years of age and competitive conditions within the industry are adverse.
After careful review of the additional facts obtained on reconsideration, I conclude that the requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, have been met for workers at the subject firm.
In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification:
All workers of The Boeing Company, Fabrication Division, Boeing-Oak Ridge, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after April 23, 2004 through August 27, 2006,
By letter postmarked June 8, 2004 (received July 7, 2004), a worker of Cady Industries, Inc., Pearson, Georgia requested administrative reconsideration regarding the Department's Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to the workers of the subject firm.
The initial investigation, initiated on March 12, 2004, resulted in a negative determination based on the finding that imports of bulk bag fabric, silt fences, leno fabric, leno bags, polypropylene fabric, and polypropylene tubing did not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject plant and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred. The negative determination was issued on April 21, 2004. The Department's determination Notice was published in the
The Department had previously processed a request for reconsideration for workers of the subject firm. The earlier request was filed on May 11, 2004, by a company official.
The May 11, 2004 request for reconsideration resulted in a dismissal of the application because no new information was presented that would bear importantly on Department's denial of the petition. The dismissal letter was signed on June 24, 2004. The Notice of Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration was issued on June 25, 2004 and published in the
On July 7, 2004, the Department received the subsequent request for reconsideration (June 8, 2004 postmarked letter) and conducted another reconsideration investigation.
As part of the second reconsideration investigation, the Department further reviewed the initial investigation and engaged in a detailed re-evaluation of the customers' survey. The Department determined that a significant number of major declining customers contacted during the original investigation increased their imports of bulk bag fabric, silt fences, leno fabric, leno bags, polypropylene fabric, and polypropylene tubing in the relevant period. The imports accounted for a meaningful portion of the subject plant's lost sales and production.
Prior to the issuance of a determination certifying the subject worker group, however, the Department was informed that the petitioner had filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) on June 21, 2004. As a result of the filing, the Department suspended the issuance of the revised determination.
In its Motion for Voluntary Remand, the Department requested that it be permitted to render a revised determination for the subject worker group. On August 26, 2004, the USCIT granted the Department's motion.
In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case that the requirements of Section 246 have been met.
A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over and possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions within the industry are adverse.
After careful review of the complete administrative file, I conclude that increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with those produced at Cady Industries, Inc., Pearson, Georgia, contributed importantly to the declines in sales or production and to the total or partial separation of workers at the subject firm. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification:
All workers of Cady Industries, Inc., Pearson, Georgia, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after March 11, 2003 through two years from the date of this certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on August 11, 2004 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers at Degussa Corporation, Silanes Plant, Theodore, Alabama.
The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.
Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on September 2, 2004 in response to a petition filed on behalf of workers at Eddie Labels & Accessories Corporation, City of Industry, California.
The Department has been unable to locate the company official for the subject group or to obtain the information necessary to reach a determination on worker group eligibility. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve
In accordance with section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor issued Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on February 21, 2003, applicable to workers of The Flexaust Company, Inc., Appliance Division, El Paso, Texas. The notice was published in the
At the request of a company official, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of belts and hoses for vacuum cleaners.
New information shows that following a company name change, in January 2003, The Flexaust Company, Inc., Appliance Division is currently known as Flexaust Appliance, Inc. Workers separated from employment as the subject firm had their wages reported under a separated unemployment insurance (UI) tax account for Flexaust Appliance, Inc.
Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to properly reflect this matter.
The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of The Flexaust Company, Inc., Appliance Division who were adversely affected by increased imports.
The amended notice applicable to TA-W-50,368 is hereby issued as follows:
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on September 24, 2004 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Seneca Foods Corporation, Dayton, Washington.
The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on September 16, 2004 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Technical Fabricators, Inc., Spartanburg, South Carolina.
The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on September 23, 2004, applicable to workers of VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership, subsidiary of VF Corporation, Cutting and Parts Division, Fabens, Texas, VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership, subsidiary of VF Corporation, Administrative Division, El Paso, Texas and VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership, subsidiary of VF Corporation, Laundry and Finishing Division, El Paso, Texas. The notice will be published soon in the
At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of jeans for men; women and children provide administrative support services, and laundry and finishing of the jeans and are separately identifiable by location.
New findings show that there was a previous certification, TA-W-40,737 and TA-W-40,737A, issued on February 11, 2002, for workers of VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership, Fabens Facility, Fabens, Texas, Rojas Facility, El Paso, Texas and Riverside Facility, El Paso, Texas who were engaged in employment related to the production of jeans, administrative support services and laundry and finishing of the jeans. That certification expired February 11, 2004. To avoid an overlap in worker group coverage, the certification is being amended to change the impact date from September 10, 2003 to February 12, 2004, for workers of the subject firm.
The amended notice applicable to TA-W-55,597A, TA-W-55,597B and TA-W-55,597C are hereby issued as follows:
Medicare Payment Advisory Commission.
Notice of meeting.
The Commission will hold its next public meeting on Thursday, October 28, 2004, and Friday, October 29, 2004, at the Ronald Reagan Building, International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The meeting is tentative scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. on October 28, and at 9 a.m. on October 29.
Topics for discussion include findings on congressionally mandated studies including: specialty hospitals; certified registered nurse first assistants; physician practice expense; cardiothoracic surgeons, and direct access to physical therapy. Additional presentations will include hospital quality, initial findings on private plans' use of imaging services, and a panel on health information technology. The Commission will also begin discussion on payment adequacy for various Medicare providers.
Agendas will be e-mailed approximately one week prior to the meeting. The final agenda will be available on the Commission's Web site
MedPAC's address is: 601 New Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9000, Washington, DC 20001. The telephone number is (202) 220-3700.
Diane Ellison, Office Manager, (202) 220-3700.
10 a.m., Thursday, October 21, 2004.
Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.
Open.
1. Quarterly Insurance Fund Report.
2. Final Rule: Section 701.14 of NCUA's Rules and Regulations, Change in Official or Senior Executive Officer in Credit Unions that are Newly Chartered or in Troubled Condition.
3. Final Rule: Part 723 of NCUA's Rules and Regulations, Member Business Loans.
Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: (703) 518-6304.
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP).
Notice of appointments.
The following persons have been appointed to the ONDCP Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board: Ms. Michele Marx, Mr. Joseph Keefe, Ms. Christine Morden and Mr. Robert Denniston.
Please direct any questions to Linda V. Priebe, Assistant General Counsel, (202) 395-6622, Office of National Drug Control Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC 20503.
National Science Foundation.
Notice and request for comments.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans to request clearance of this collection. In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), we are providing an opportunity for public comment on this action. After obtaining and considering public comment, NSF will prepare the submission requesting that OMB approve clearance of this collection for no longer than 3 years.
Written comments on this notice must be received by December 17, 2004 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.
Written comments regarding the information collection and requests for copies of the proposed information collection request should be addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Rm. 295, Arlington, VA 22230, or by e-mail to
Contact Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295, Arlington, Virginia 22230; telephone (703) 292-7556; or send e-mail to
The Advanced Study Institutes (ASI) travel awards are offered to advanced graduate students, to attend one of the NATO's ASIs held in the NATO-member and partner countries of Europe. The NATO ASI program is targeted to those individuals nearing the completion of their doctoral studies in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) who can take advantage of opportunities to become familiar with progress in their respective fields of specialization in other countries.
The Division of Graduate Education (DGE) in the Education and Human Resources (EHR) Directorate administers the NATO ASI Travel Awards Program. The following describes the procedures for the administration of the Foundation's NATO Advanced study Institute (ASI) Travel Awards, which provide travel support for a number of U.S. graduate students to attend the ASIs scheduled for Europe.
Once NATO has notified DGE that the schedule of institutes is final, and DGE has received the descriptions of each institute, DGE determines which institutes NSF will support. The ASI travel award program supports those institutes that offer instruction in the STEM fields traditionally supported by NSF as published in
Following the final determination as to which Advanced Study Institutes NSF will support, DGE contacts each institute director to ask for a list of up to 5 nominations to be considered for NSF travel support.
Each individual who is nominated by a director will be sent the rules of eligibility, information about the amount of funding available, and the forms (NSF Form 1379, giving our Division of Financial Management (DFM) electronic banking information; NSF Form 1310 (already cleared), and NSF Form 192 (Application for International Travel Grant)) necessary for our application process.
Once an applicant has been selected to receive NSF travel award support, his or her application is sent to DFM for funding. DFM electronically transfers the amount of $1000 into the bank or other financial institution account identified by the awardee.
Our plan is to have the $1000 directly deposited into the awardee's account prior to the purchase of their airline ticket. An electronic message to the awardee states that NSF is providing support in the amount of $100 for transportation and miscellaneous expenses. The letter also states that the award is subject to the conditions in F.L. 27,
As a follow-up, each ASI director may be asked to verify whether all NSF awardees attended the institute. If an awardee is identified as not utilizing the funds as prescribed, we contact the awardee to retrieve the funds. However, if our efforts are not successful, we will forward the awardee's name to the Division of Grants and Agreements (DGA), which has procedures to deal with that situation.
We also ask the awardee to submit a final report on an NSF Form 250, which we provide as an attachment to the electronic award message.
The criteria used to select NSF Advanced Study Institute travel awardees are as follows:
1. The applicant is an advanced graduate student.
2. We shall generally follow the order of the nominations, listed by the director of the institute, within priority level.
3. Those who have not attended an ASI in the past will have a higher priority than those who have.
4. Nominees from different institutions and research groups have higher priority than those from the same institution or research group. (Typically, no more than one person is invited from a school or from a research group.)
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) received on August 23, 2004, an application, safety analysis report, and environmental report from USEC, Inc. (hereinafter USEC), for a license to possess and use source, byproduct, and special nuclear material and to enrich natural uranium to a maximum of 10 percent U-235 by the gas centrifuge process. The plant, to be known as the American Centrifuge Plant, would be located in Piketon, Ohio. USEC, Inc. is a Delaware corporation.
Copies of USEC's application, safety analysis report, and environmental report (except for portions thereof subject to withholding from public inspection in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, Availability of Public Records) are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR) at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. These documents are also available for review and copying using any of the following methods: (1) Enter the NRC's Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Facility Licensing Web site at
The NRC has now accepted USEC's application for docketing and accordingly is providing this notice of hearing and notice of opportunity to intervene on USEC's application for a license to construct and operate a centrifuge enrichment facility. Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (Act) the NRC staff will prepare a safety evaluation report (SER) after reviewing the application and making findings concerning the public health and safety and common defense and security. In addition, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 51, NRC will complete an environmental evaluation and prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) before the hearing on the issuance of a license is completed. The preparation of the EIS will be the subject of a separate notice in the
When available, the NRC staff's safety evaluation and its EIS (except for portions thereof subject to withholding from public inspection in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390) will also be placed in the PDR and in ADAMS. Copies of correspondence between the NRC and USEC, and transcripts of prehearing conferences and hearings (except for portions thereof subject to withholding from public inspection in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390) similarly will be made available to the public.
If following the hearing, the Commission is satisfied that USEC has complied with the Commission's regulations and the requirements of this Notice and Commission Order and the Commission finds that the application satisfies the applicable standards set forth in 10 CFR 30.33, 40.32, and 70.23, a single license will be issued authorizing (1) the receipt, possession, use, delivery, and transfer of byproduct (
A. Pursuant to 10 CFR 70.23a and section 193 of the Act, as amended by the Solar, Wind, Waste, and Geothermal Power Production Incentives Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-575), a hearing will be conducted according to the rules of procedure in 10 CFR part 2, Subparts A, C, G, and to the extent that classified information becomes involved, Subpart I. The hearing will be held under the authority of sections 53, 63, 189, 191, and 193 of the Act. The applicant and NRC staff shall be parties to the proceeding.
B. Pursuant to 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, the hearing shall be conducted by an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) appointed by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. Notice as to the membership of the Board will be published in the
C. The matters of fact and law to be considered are whether the application satisfies the standards set forth in this Notice and Commission Order and the applicable standards in 10 CFR 30.33, 40.32, and 70.23, and whether the requirements of 10 CFR part 51 have been met.
D. If this proceeding is not a contested proceeding, as defined by 10 CFR 2.4, the Board will determine the following, without conducting a de novo evaluation of the application: (1) Whether the application and record of the proceeding contain sufficient information and whether the NRC staff's review of the application has been adequate to support findings to be made by the Director of the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, with respect to the matters set forth in paragraph C of this section, and (2) whether the review conducted by the NRC staff pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 has been adequate.
E. Regardless of whether the proceeding is contested or uncontested, the Board will, in its initial decision, in accordance with subpart A of 10 CFR part 51: Determine whether the requirements of sections 102(2)(A), (C), and (E) of NEPA and subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 have been complied with in the proceeding; independently consider
F. If the proceeding becomes a contested proceeding, the Board shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law on admitted contentions. With respect to matters set forth in paragraph C of this section but not covered by admitted contentions, the Board will make the determinations set forth in paragraph D without conducting a de novo evaluation of the application.
G. By December 17, 2004, any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written petition for leave to intervene. Petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.309. Interested persons should consult 10 CFR part 2, section 2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, MD (or call the PDR at (800) 397-4209 or (301) 415-4737). NRC regulations are also accessible electronically from the NRC's Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition must provide the name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner and specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order that may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.
A petition for leave to intervene must also include a specification of the contentions that the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the hearing. For each contention, the petitioner must provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted, as well as a brief explanation of the basis for the contention. Additionally, the petitioner must demonstrate that the issue raised by each contention is within the scope of the proceeding and is material to the findings the NRC must make to support the granting of a license in response to USEC's application. The petition must also include a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinions which support the position of the petitioner and on which the petitioner intends to rely at hearing, together with references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely. Finally, the petition must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact, including references to specific portions of the application that the petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the petitioner believes that the application fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the petitioner's belief. Each contention must be one that, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence and to submit a cross-examination plan for cross-examination of witnesses, consistent with NRC regulations, policies, and procedures. The Board will set the time and place for any prehearing conferences and evidentiary hearings, and the respective notices will be published in the
A petition for leave to intervene and proffered contentions must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Non-timely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, and supplemental petitions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the Board that the petition should be granted, based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
H. A State, county, municipality, federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agencies thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as an interested entity under 10 CFR 2.309(d)(2). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by December 17, 2004. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in paragraph G, above, for petitions submitted under 10 CFR 2.309, except that State and federally-recognized Indian tribes do not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d)(1) if the facility is located within its boundaries. The entities listed above could also seek to participate in a hearing as a nonparty pursuant to 10 CFR 2.315(c).
I. Any person who does not wish, or is not qualified, to become a party to this proceeding may request permission to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of position on the issues, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to such limits and conditions as may be imposed by the Board. Persons desiring to make a limited appearance are requested to inform the Secretary of the Commission by December 17, 2004.
The presiding officer shall issue a decision on the admissibility of contentions no later than sixty (60) days after the petitions and contentions are referred to the Board.
If rulings on petitions, on admissibility of contentions or the admitted contentions themselves, raise novel legal or policy questions, the Commission will provide early guidance and direction on the treatment and resolution of such issues. Accordingly, the Commission directs the Board to promptly certify to the Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 2.319(l) and 2.323(f) all novel legal or policy issues that would benefit from early Commission consideration should such issues arise in this proceeding.
(1) All parties, except the NRC staff, shall make the mandatory disclosures required by 10 CFR 2.704 within forty-five (45) days of the issuance of the order admitting that contention.
(2) The presiding officer, consistent with fairness to all parties, should narrow the issues requiring discovery and limit discovery to no more than one round for admitted contentions.
(3) All discovery against the Staff shall be governed by 10 CFR 2.336(b) and 2.709. The Staff shall comply with 10 CFR 2.336(b) no later than 30 days after the Board order admitting contentions and shall update the information at the same time as the issuance of the SER or the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Discovery under 10 CFR 2.709 shall not commence until the issuance of the particular document,
(4) No later than 30 days before the commencement of the hearing at which an issue is to be presented, all parties other than the Staff shall make the pretrial disclosures required by 10 CFR 2.704(c).
In the interest of providing a fair hearing, avoiding unnecessary delays in NRC's review and hearing process, and producing an informed adjudicatory record that supports the licensing determination to be made in this proceeding, the Commission expects that both the Board and NRC staff, as well as the applicant and other parties to this proceeding, will follow the applicable requirements contained in 10 CFR part 2 and guidance in the Commission's Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, CLI-98-12, 48 NRC 18 (1998) [63 FR 41872 (August 5, 1998)] to the extent that such guidance is not inconsistent with specific guidance in this Order. The guidance in the Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings is intended to improve the management and the timely completion of the proceeding and addresses hearing schedules, parties' obligations, contentions and discovery management. In addition, the Commission is providing the following direction for this proceeding:
(1) The Commission directs the Board to set a schedule for the hearing in this proceeding consistent with this order that establishes as a goal the issuance of a final Commission decision on the pending application within two-and-one-half years (30 months) from the date that the application was received. Formal discovery against the Staff shall be suspended until after the Staff completes its final SER and EIS in accordance with the direction provided in paragraph C.(3) above.
(2) The evidentiary hearing with respect to issues should commence promptly after completion of the final Staff documents (SER or EIS) unless the Board, in its discretion, finds that starting the hearing with respect to one or more safety issues prior to issuance of the final SER
(3) The Commission also believes that issuing a decision on the pending application within about two-and-one-half years may be reasonably achieved under the rules of practice contained in 10 CFR part 2 and the enhancements directed by this order. We do not expect the Board to sacrifice fairness and sound decision-making to expedite any hearing granted on this application. We do expect the Board to use the techniques specified in this order and in the Commission's policy statement on the conduct of adjudicatory proceedings (CLI-98-12,
(4) If this is a contested proceeding, the Board should adopt the following milestones, in developing a schedule, for conclusion of significant steps in the adjudicatory proceeding.
To meet these milestones, the Board should direct the participants to serve all filings by electronic mail (in order to be considered timely, such filings must be received by the Board and parties no later than midnight eastern time on the date due, unless otherwise designated by the Board), followed by conforming hard copies that may be sent by regular mail. If participants do not have access to electronic mail, the Board should adopt other expedited methods of service, such as express mail, which would ensure receipt on the due date (“in-hand”). If pleadings are filed by electronic mail, or other expedited methods of service which would ensure receipt on the due date, the additional period provided in our regulations for responding to filings served by first-class mail or express delivery shall not be applicable.
In addition, to avoid unnecessary delays in the proceeding, the Board should not grant requests for extensions of time absent unavoidable and extreme circumstances. Although summary disposition motions are included in the schedule above, the Board shall not entertain motions for summary disposition under 10 CFR 2.710, unless the Board finds that such motions are likely to expedite the proceeding. Unless otherwise justified, the Board shall provide for the simultaneous filing of answers to proposed contentions, responsive pleadings, proposed findings of fact, and other similar submittals.
(5) Parties are obligated in their filings before the Board and the Commission to ensure that their arguments and assertions are supported by appropriate and accurate references to legal authority and factual basis, including, as appropriate, citation to the record. Failure to do so may result in material being stricken from the record or, in extreme circumstances, in a party being dismissed from the proceeding.
(6) The Commission directs the Board to inform the Commission promptly, in writing, if the Board determines that any single milestone could be missed by more than 30 days. The Board must include an explanation of why the milestone cannot be met and the measures the Board will take to mitigate the failure to achieve the milestone and restore the proceeding to the overall schedule.
As in any proceeding, the Commission retains its inherent supervisory authority over the proceeding to provide additional guidance to the Board and participants and to resolve any matter in controversy itself.
A. The Commission will license and regulate byproduct, source, and special nuclear material at the American Centrifuge Plant in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Section 274c.(1) of the Act was amended by Public Law 102-486 (October 24, 1992) to require the Commission to retain authority and responsibility for the regulation of uranium enrichment facilities. Therefore, in compliance with law, the Commission will be the sole licensing and regulatory authority with respect to byproduct, source, and special nuclear material for the American Centrifuge Plant, and with respect to the control and use of any equipment or device in connection therewith.
Many rules and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I are applicable to the licensing of a person to receive, possess, use, transfer, deliver, and process byproduct, source and special nuclear material in the quantities that would be possessed at the American Centrifuge Plant. These include 10 CFR parts 19, 20, 21, 30, 40, 51, 70, 71, 73, 74, 95, 140, 170, and 171 for the licensing and regulation of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material, including requirements for notices to workers, reporting of defects, radiation protection, waste disposal, decommissioning funding, and insurance.
With respect to these regulations, the Commission notes that this is the third proceeding involving the licensing of an enrichment facility. The Commission issued a number of decisions in an earlier proceeding regarding a proposed site in Homer, Louisiana. These final decisions,
Consistent with the Act, and the Commission's regulations, the
1.
(a) General: 10 CFR part 51 governs the preparation of an environmental report and an EIS for a materials license. USEC's environmental report and the NRC staff's associated EIS are to include a statement on the alternatives to the proposed action, including a discussion of the no-action alternative.
(b) Treatment of depleted uranium hexafluoride tails: As to the treatment of the disposition of depleted uranium hexafluoride tails (depleted tails) in these environmental documents, unless USEC demonstrates a use for uranium in the depleted tails as a potential resource, the depleted tails will be considered waste. An approach for disposition of tails that is consistent with section 3113 of the USEC Privatization Act constitutes a “plausible strategy” for disposition of the USEC depleted tails. The Commission is considering matters of law applicable to disposition of tails which may be dispositive of matters arising in a USEC proceeding.
2.
Review of financial qualifications for enrichment facility license applications is governed by 10 CFR part 70. In
3.
The USEC enrichment facility is subject to sections 53 and 63 of the Act, and is not a production and utilization facility licensed under section 103. Consequently, the NRC does not have antitrust responsibilities for USEC similar to the antitrust responsibilities under section 105 of the Act. The NRC will not entertain or consider antitrust issues in connection with the USEC application in this proceeding.
4.
Section 193(f) of the Act addresses foreign ownership, control and domination of enrichment facilities with regard to USEC and its successors. The requirements of section 193(f) are incorporated in 10 CFR 70.40.
5.
Pursuant to section 184 of the Act, the creditor regulations in 10 CFR 50.81 shall apply to the creation of creditor interests in equipment, devices, or important parts thereof, capable of separating the isotopes of uranium or enriching uranium in the isotope U-235. In addition, the creditor regulations in 10 CFR 70.44 shall apply to the creation of creditor interests in special nuclear material. These creditor regulations may be augmented by license conditions as necessary to allow ownership arrangements (such as sale and leaseback) not covered by 10 CFR 50.81, provided it can be found that such arrangements are not inimical to the common defense and security of the United States.
6.
All matters of classification of information related to the design, construction, operation, and safeguarding of the American Centrifuge Plant shall be governed by classification guidance in “DOE Classification Guide for Isotope Separation by the Gas Centrifuge Process (CG-IGC-1)” (June 2002) and any later versions. Any person producing such information must adhere to the criteria in CG-IGC-1. All decisions on questions of classification or declassification of information shall be made by appropriate classification officials in the NRC and are not subject to de novo review in this proceeding.
7.
Portions of USEC's application for a license are classified Restricted Data or National Security Information. Persons needing access to those portions of the application will be required to have the appropriate security clearance for the level of classified information to which access is required. Access requirements apply equally to intervenors, their witnesses and counsel, employees of the applicant, its witnesses and counsel, NRC personnel, and others. Any person who believes that he or she will have a need for access to classified information for the purpose of this licensing proceeding, including the hearing, should immediately contact the NRC, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555, for information on the clearance process. Telephone calls may be made to Linda Marshall, Licensing Assistant, Special Projects Branch. Telephone: (301) 415-8129.
8.
Any person who requires possession of classified information in connection with the licensing proceeding may process, store, reproduce, transmit, or handle classified information only in a location for which facility security approval has been obtained from the NRC's Division of Nuclear Security (NSIR), Washington, DC 20555. Telephone calls may be made to A. Lynn Silvious, Chief, Information Security Section. Telephone: (301) 415-2214.
The above guidance does not foreclose the applicant, any person admitted as a party to the hearing, or an entity participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c) from litigating material factual issues necessary for resolution of contentions in this proceeding. Persons found by the Commission to have standing and entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c) as of the date of the Commission's order on standing may also move the Commission to reconsider any portion of Section IV of this Notice and Commission Order where there is no clear Commission precedent or unambiguously governing statutes or regulations. Any motion to reconsider must be filed within 10 days after the Commission's order on standing. The motion must contain all technical or other arguments to support the motion. Other persons granted standing and entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), including the applicant and the NRC staff, may respond to motions for reconsideration within 20 days of the Commission's Order. Motions will be ruled upon by the Commission. A motion for reconsideration does not stay the schedule set out above in section III.D.(4). However, if the Commission grants a motion for reconsideration, it will, as necessary, provide direction on adjusting the hearing schedule.
The Energy Policy Act of 2003, H.R. 6, is currently pending in Congress. H.R. 6, as currently constituted, contains provisions that address the manner in which certain issues are to be dealt with and a schedule for overall Commission consideration of an application for licensing an uranium enrichment facility. In the event that H.R. 6 is enacted, the Commission may need to issue an additional order to conform guidance and schedules for the USEC application to any new statutory requirements.
As noted above, a hearing on this application will be governed by 10 CFR part 2, subparts A, C, G, and to the extent classified material becomes involved, subpart I. Subpart I requires in accordance with 10 CFR 2.907 that the NRC staff file a notice of intent if, at the time of publication of Notice of Hearing, it appears that it will be impracticable for the staff to avoid the introduction of Restricted Data or National Security Information into a proceeding. The applicant has submitted portions of its application that are classified. The Commission notes that, since the entire application becomes part of the record of the proceeding, the NRC staff has found it impracticable for it to avoid the introduction of Restricted Data of National Security Information into the proceeding.
For the Commission.
This notice describes procedures to be followed with respect to meetings conducted pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW). These procedures are set forth so that they may be incorporated by reference in future notices for individual meetings.
The ACNW advises the NRC on technical issues related to nuclear materials and waste management. The bases of ACNW reviews include 10 CFR parts 20, 60, 61, 63, 70, 71, and 72 and other applicable regulations and legislative mandates, such as the Nuclear Waste Policy Act as amended, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act and amendments, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, as amended. The Committee's reports become a part of the public record.
The ACNW meetings are normally open to the public and provide opportunities for oral or written statements from members of the public to be considered as part of the Committee's information gathering process. The meetings are not adjudicatory hearings such as those conducted by the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel as part of the Commission's licensing process. ACNW meetings are conducted in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
An agenda will be published in the
The following requirements shall apply to public participation in ACNW meetings:
(a) Persons who plan to make oral statements and/or submit written comments at the meeting should provide 35 copies to the DFO at the beginning of the meeting. Persons who cannot attend the meeting but wishing to submit written comments regarding the agenda items may do so by sending a readily reproducible copy addressed to the DFO specified in the
(b) Persons desiring to make oral statements at the meeting should make a request to do so to the DFO. If possible, the request should be made five days before the meeting, identifying the topics to be discussed and the amount of time needed for presentation so that orderly arrangements can be made. The Committee will hear oral statements on topics being reviewed at an appropriate time during the meeting as scheduled by the Chairman.
(c) Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained by contacting the DFO specified in the individual
(d) The use of still, motion picture, and television cameras will be permitted at the discretion of the Chairman and subject to the condition that the use of such equipment will not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. The DFO will have to be notified prior to the meeting and will authorize the use of such equipment after consultation with the Chairman. The use of such equipment will be restricted as is necessary to protect proprietary or privileged information that may be in documents, folders, etc., in the meeting room. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public.
(e) A transcript will be kept for certain open portions of the meeting and will be available in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), One White Flint North, Room O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738. A copy of the certified minutes of the meeting will be available at the same location three months following the meeting. Copies may be obtained upon payment of appropriate reproduction charges. ACNW meeting agenda, transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at
(f) Video teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of some ACNW meetings. Those wishing
From time to time the ACNW may sponsor an in-depth meeting on a specific technical issue to understand staff expectations and review work in progress. Such meetings are called Working Group meetings. These Working Group meetings will also be conducted in accordance with the procedures noted above for the ACNW full Committee meetings, as appropriate. When Working Group meetings are held at locations other than at NRC facilities, reproduction facilities may not be available at a reasonable cost. Accordingly, 25 additional copies (total of 50 copies) of the materials to be used during the meeting should be provided for distribution at such meetings.
If it is necessary to hold closed sessions for the purpose of discussing matters involving proprietary information, persons with agreements permitting access to such information may attend those portions of the ACNW meetings where this material is being discussed upon confirmation that such agreements are effective and related to the material being discussed.
The DFO should be informed of such an agreement at least five working days prior to the meeting so that it can be confirmed, and a determination can be made regarding the applicability of the agreement to the material that will be discussed during the meeting. The minimum information provided should include information regarding the date of the agreement, the scope of material included in the agreement, the project or projects involved, and the names and titles of the persons signing the agreement. Additional information may be requested to identify the specific agreement involved. A copy of the executed agreement should be provided to the DFO prior to the beginning of the meeting for admittance to the closed session.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Notice of availability.
Jenny M. Johansen, Nuclear Materials Safety Branch 2, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406, telephone (610) 337-5071, fax (610) 337-5269; or by e-mail:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a license amendment to Shaw Environmental, Inc. for Materials License No. 29-28575-01, to authorize release of its facility in Lawrenceville, New Jersey for unrestricted use. NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this action in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. The amendment will be issued following the publication of this Notice.
The purpose of the action is to authorize the release of the licensee's Lawrenceville, New Jersey facility for unrestricted use. Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw) was authorized by NRC from August 14, 2003 to use radioactive materials for research and development purposes at the site. Shaw assumed responsibility for License 29-28575-01 from Envirogen, Inc., who was authorized by the NRC from January 29, 1991 to use radioactive materials for research and development purposes at the site until its assets were acquired and the license transferred to Shaw on August 14, 2003, by Amendment No. 8 of the license. On July 12, 2004, Shaw requested that NRC release the facility for unrestricted use. Shaw has conducted surveys of the facility and provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that the site meets the license termination criteria in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release. Shaw will continue licensed activities at another location, as authorized by the license.
The NRC staff has prepared an EA in support of the license amendment. The facility was remediated and surveyed prior to the licensee requesting the license amendment. The NRC staff has reviewed the information and final status survey submitted by Shaw. Based on the its reviews, the staff has determined that there are no additional remediation activities necessary to complete the proposed action. Therefore, the staff considered the impact of the residual radioactivity at the facility and concluded that since the residual radioactivity meets the requirements in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20, a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate.
The staff has prepared the EA (summarized above) in support of the license amendment to release the facility for unrestricted use. The NRC staff has evaluated Shaw Environmental, Inc.”s request and the results of the surveys and has concluded that the completed action complies with the criteria in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20. The staff has found that the environmental impacts from the action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by NUREG-1496, Volumes 1-3, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Facilities'' (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385). On the basis of the EA, the NRC has concluded that the environmental impacts from the action are expected to be insignificant and has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the action.
Documents related to this action, including the application for the license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at
These documents may be viewed electronically at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. The PDR is open from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will hold its 154th meeting on October 19-21, 2004, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The Working Group Meeting scheduled for October 19, 2004 will be held in the NRC Auditorium.
The Working Group Chairman will state the Working Group Meeting (WGM) objectives and provide a technical session overview. Invited experts will also be introduced at this time. The purposes of the WGM are: (1) To develop the information necessary to provide a letter report to the Commission; (2) to understand the technical bases for the draft June 2004 ICRP recommendations; (3) to review these recommendations against current NRC regulations and practice; and (4) to identify aspects of the ICRP recommendations that may warrant further study.
The schedule for this meeting is as follows:
Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACNW meetings were published in the
Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and the time allotted, therefore can be obtained by contacting Mr. Howard J. Larson.
ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at
Video Teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use this service for observing ACNW meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACNW Audiovisual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. e.t., at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not guaranteed.
The ACNW will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on October 20, 2004, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Howard J. Larson (Telephone: 301/415-6805) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public.
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
Notice of availability of “EPRI/NRC-RES Fire PRA Methodology for Nuclear Power Facilities, Draft Report for Comment,” and request for public comment.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing the availability of NUREG/CR-6850, “EPRI/NRC-RES Fire PRA Methodology for Nuclear Power Facilities Volume 1 and 2, Draft for Public Comment.”
Comments on this document should be submitted by December 17, 2004. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable. To ensure efficient and complete comment resolution, comments should include references to the section, page, and line numbers of the document to which the comment applies, if possible.
Members of the public are invited and encouraged to submit written comments to Michael Lesar, Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand-deliver comments attention to Michael Lesar, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Comments may also be sent electronically to
This document is available at the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site at
J.S. Hyslop, Probability Risk Assessment Branch, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, telephone (301) 415-6354, e-mail
The purpose of EPRI/NRC-RES Fire PRA Methodology for Nuclear Power Facilities Draft Report for Comment (NUREG/CR-6850) is to provide state-of-the-art methods, tools, and data for the conduct of fire Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). This methodology was developed under the program, the Fire Risk Requantification Study, which was conducted as a joint activity between EPRI and RES under the terms of an EPRI/RES Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperative Nuclear Safety Research and accompanying Fire Risk Addendum. Licensee applications and U.S. NRC review guidance with respect to many regulatory activities such as the risk-informed, performance-based fire protection rule (endorsing NFPA 805) will benefit for more robust methods. This research addresses the full breadth of FRA technical issues for power operations, and includes consideration of large early release frequency. The current scope excludes low power/shutdown operations, spent fuel pool accidents, sabotage, and PRA level 3 estimates of consequence. While the primary objective of the project was to consolidate existing research from EPRI and NRC in state-of-the-art methods, the newly documented methods represent a significant advancement in many areas over previously documented methods.
The NRC is seeking public comment in order to receive feedback from the widest range of interested parties and to ensure that all information relevant to developing this document is available to the NRC staff. This document is issued for comment only and is not intended for interim use. The NRC will review public comments received on the document, incorporate suggested changes as necessary, and issue the final NUREG/CR-6850 for use.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Postal Rate Commission.
Notice of Commission visit.
Postal Rate Commissioners and staff members will tour mail preparation facilities located in the vicinity of East Hartford, Connecticut on November 4 and 5, 2004. The purpose is to familiarize attendees with various postal-related operations, including those related to barcoding and sorting First-Class Mail.
1. November 4, 2004 (afternoon): PSI presentation/facility tour. 2. November 5, 2004 (morning): Pitney Bowes Tech Center tour; (afternoon): Pitney Bowes Management Services Mail Recovery Center tour.
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 202-789-6818.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Sections 32 and 33 of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended (“Act”), and rules 53, 54, and 57(b) under the Act, permit, among other things, utility holding companies registered under the Act to make direct or indirect investments in exempt wholesale generators (“EWGs”) and foreign utility companies (“FUCOs”), as defined in sections 32 and 33 of the Act, respectively, without the prior approval of the Commission, if certain conditions are met. Rules 53 and 54 do not create a reporting burden for respondents. These rules do, however, contain recordkeeping and retention requirements. As required by Congress, the Commission mandates the maintenance of certain books and records identifying investments in and earnings from all subsidiary EWGs or FUCOs in order to measure their financial effect on the registered systems.
The Commission estimates that the total annual recordkeeping and record retention burden under rules 53 will be a total of 290 hours (10 hours per respondent x 29 respondents = 290 burden hours). It is estimated that there will be no burden hours associated with rule 54.
Under rule 57(b) there is an annual requirement for any public utility company that owns one or more FUCOs to file Form U-33-S. The information contained in Form U-33-S allows the Commission to monitor overseas investments by public utility companies.
The Commission estimates that the total annual reporting burden under rule 57(b) will be 18 hours (3 hours per respondent x 6 filings = 18 hours).
These estimates of average burden hours are made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and are not derived from a comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of SEC rules and forms.
Rules 53, 54, 57(b) each impose a mandatory recordkeeping requirement of this information collection. It is mandatory that qualifying companies provide the information required by rules 53, 54 and 57(b). There is no requirement to keep the information confidential because it is public information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number.
General comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or e-mail to:
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Amex proposes to amend Amex Rule 1000, Commentary .03 and Amex Rule 1000A, Commentary .02.
Proposed new language is
(a)-(b) No change
* * * Commentary
.01—.02 No change
.03 The Exchange may approve a series of Portfolio Depositary Receipts for listing and trading pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 provided each of the following criteria is satisfied:
(a) No change
(b) Index Methodology and Calculation. (i) The index underlying a series of Portfolio Depositary Receipts will be calculated based on either the market capitalization, modified market capitalization, price, equal-dollar or modified equal-dollar weighting methodology; (ii) If the index is maintained by a broker-dealer, the broker-dealer shall erect a “fire wall” around the personnel who have access to information concerning changes and adjustments to the index and the index shall be calculated by a third party who is not a broker-dealer, and (iii) The current index value will be disseminated every 15 seconds over the
(c)-(h) No change
.04-.08 No change
(a)-(b) No change
* * * Commentary
.01 No change
.02 The Exchange may approve a series of Index Fund Shares for listing pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 provided each of the following criteria is satisfied:
(a) No change
(b) Index Methodology and Calculation. (i) The index underlying a series of Index Fund Shares will be calculated based on either the market capitalization, modified market capitalization, price, equal-dollar or modified equal-dollar weighting methodology; (ii) If the index is maintained by a broker-dealer, the broker-dealer shall erect a “fire wall” around the personnel who have access to information concerning changes and adjustments to the index and the index shall be calculated by a third party who is not a broker-dealer, and (iii) The current index value will be disseminated every 15 seconds over the
(c)-(i) No change
.03-.09 No change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. The Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
Amex Rule 1000, Commentary .02 and Amex Rule 1000A, Commentary .03 provide generic listing standards for Portfolio Depositary Receipts (“PDRs”) and Index Fund Shares (“IFSs”), respectively, to permit listing and trading of these securities pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an e-mail to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2004-83. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (
The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
The Commission notes that the proposed rule change is similar to another proposed rule change that previously has been subject of a full comment period pursuant to Section 19b of the Act.
Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The MSRB proposes to offer a new transparency product containing historical trade data obtained through the MSRB's Transaction Reporting System (the “Historical Data Product”). The Historical Data Product will include information for each inter-dealer trade reported since January 24, 1995, and for
In its filing with the Commission, the MSRB included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The MSRB has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
In October 2000, the MSRB began offering its Comprehensive Transaction Report to provide historical information on all municipal securities transactions that were effected from August 2000 forward. The information in the CT Report is a comprehensive listing of trades derived from information that dealers are required to submit to the MSRB pursuant to Rule G-14, on reports of sales and purchases.
The current CT Report is made available as a one-year subscription whereby data is delivered daily (with a one-week delay). The MSRB will continue to produce the CT Report on a one-week delayed basis with details about all transactions traded one-week prior, and will continue to offer it under its current subscription terms and rate. The proposed Historical Data Product would provide the same data as the CT Report but would make it available in another package; rather than having to subscribe to the CT Report, the Historical Data Product will enable a data user to make a one-time purchase of all available trade data for a specified time period in one-year increments. In contrast to the CT Report, the Historical Data Product will not provide a continuous (daily) stream of data and will not be available on a subscription basis. The MSRB proposes to charge $600 for a one-year collection of historical data to cover the administrative costs associated with providing this data. The Historical Data Product will be available, at the purchaser's option, either on CD-ROM or by download over the Internet.
The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act,
The MSRB does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form
• Send an e-mail to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2004-05. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The proposed rule change amends the definition of the term “approved depositories”
In its filing with the Commission, OCC included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to permit the Chairman, the Management Vice Chairman, or the President of OCC to approve depositories which may hold Government or other securities pledged by clearing members to meet their clearing fund and margin requirements. The rule change will avoid unnecessarily burdening the Board of Directors in the future and will permit more timely decisionmaking on whether a new depository should be an approved depository in response to requests by clearing members or prospective depositories.
OCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the purposes and requirements of Section 17A of the Act, as amended, because they are designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of OCC or for which it is responsible.
OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competition.
Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change and none have been received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an e-mail to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2004-16. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet web site (
For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The PCX is proposing to amend PCX Rule 4.5(a) to require all financial/operations principals of PCX OTP Firms to successfully complete the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.'s Limited Principal—Financial and Operations examination (“Series 27 Examination”). The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.
3723 Reports To Be Filed by Certain OTP Holders and OTP Firms
Rule 4.5(a). Unless the Exchange determines otherwise, every OTP Holder or OTP Firm, except as otherwise provided in Rule 4.7, shall file with the Exchange the reports prescribed by this Section.
Rule 4.5(b)-(f)-No Change.
In its filing with the Commission, the PCX included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for its proposal and discussed any comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The PCX has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange is proposing to amend PCX Rule 4.5(a) to require all financial/operations principals of PCX OTP Firms to successfully complete the Series 27 Examination. PCX believes that requiring these individuals to successfully complete the Series 27 Examination will ensure that those individuals who prepare the financial statements for PCX OTP Firms will be sufficiently qualified to prepare such statements. PCX also believes that it will also bring the PCX qualifications to perform such functions up to date with
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
(i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and
(iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an e-mail to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2004-86. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
In accordance with a notice received from the Department of Homeland Security—Federal Emergency Management Agency—effective October 4, 2004, the above numbered declaration is hereby amended to extend the deadline for filing applications for physical damages as a result of this disaster to December 11, 2004.
All other information remains the same,
In accordance with a notice received from the Department of Homeland Security—Federal Emergency Management Agency—effective October 3, 2004, the above numbered declaration is hereby amended to extend the deadline for filing applications for physical damages as a result of this disaster to December 11, 2004.
All other information remains the same,
As a result of the President's major disaster declaration for Public Assistance on September 30, 2004, the U.S. Small Business Administration is activating its disaster loan program only for private non-profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature. I find that Douglas and Wyandotte Counties in the State of Kansas constitute a disaster area due to damages caused by severe storms, flooding and tornadoes occurring on August 27-30, 2004. Applications for loans for physical damage as a result of this disaster may be filed until the close of business on November 29, 2004 at the address listed below or other locally announced locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 3 Office, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155-2243.
The interest rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is P06406.
As a result of the President's major disaster declaration on October 7, 2004, I find that Dodge, Faribault, Freeborn, Mower, and Steele Counties in the State of Minnesota constitute a disaster area due to damages caused by severe storms and flooding occurring on September 14, 2004, and continuing. Applications for loans for physical damage as a result of this disaster may be filed until the close of business on December 6, 2004 and for economic injury until the close of business on July 7, 2005 at the address listed below or other locally announced locations: Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 2 Office, One Baltimore Place, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30308.
In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small businesses located in the following contiguous counties may be filed until the specified date at the above location: Blue Earth, Fillmore, Goodhue, Martin, Olmstead, Rice, and Waseca in the State of Minnesota; and Howard, Kossuth, Mitchell, Winnebago, and Worth Counties in the State of Iowa.
Dodge, Faribault, Freeborn, Mower, and Steele Counties in the State of Minnesota are also eligible under Public Assistance and our disaster loan program is available for private non-profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature in those counties.
The interest rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 363906. For economic injury the number is 9AE800 for Minnesota; and 9AE900 for Iowa. The Public Assistance number assigned to Minnesota is P06606.
As a result of the President's major disaster declaration for Public Assistance on October 1, 2004 the U.S. Small Business Administration is activating its disaster loan program only for private non-profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature. I find that Allegany, Broome, Columbia, Delaware, Monroe, Onondaga, Steuben, Sullivan, Ulster, and Warren Counties in the State of New York constitute a disaster area due to damages caused by severe storms and flooding occurring on August 29, 2004 and continuing through September 16, 2004. Applications for loans for physical damage as a result of this disaster may be filed until the close of business on November 30, 2004 at the address listed below or other locally announced locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 1 Office, 360 Rainbow Blvd., South, 3rd Floor, Niagara Falls, NY 14303.
The interest rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is P06506.
As a result of the President's major disaster declaration on October 7, 2004, I find that Calhoun, Cherokee, Chester, Chesterfield, Clarendon, Darlington, Dillon, Fairfield, Florence, Greenville, Horry, Kershaw, Lancaster, Lee, Lexington, Marion, Marlboro, Newberry, Oconee, Pickens, Richland, Spartanburg, Sumter, Williamsburg, and York Counties in the State of South Carolina constitute a disaster area due to damages caused by Tropical Storm Frances occurring on September 6, 2004, and continuing. Applications for loans for physical damage as a result of this disaster may be filed until the close of business on December 6, 2004 and for economic injury until the close of business on July 7, 2005 at the address listed below or other locally announced locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 2 Office, One Baltimore Place, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30308.
In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small businesses located in the following contiguous counties may be filed until the specified date at the above location: Abbeville, Aiken, Anderson, Berkeley, Georgetown, Greenwood, Laurens, Orangeburg, Saluda and Union in the State of South Carolina; Franklin, Habersham, Hart, Rabun, and Stephens Counties in the State of Georgia; Anson, Brunswick, Cleveland, Columbus, Gaston, Henderson, Jackson, Macon, Mecklenburg, Polk, Richmond, Robeson, Rutherford, Scotland, Transylvania, and Union Counties in the State of North Carolina.
The interest rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 363808. For economic injury the number is 9AE500 for South Carolina; 9AE600 for Georgia; and 9AE700 for North Carolina.
Small Business Administration.
Notice of intent to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) is considering granting a waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing. The basis for waivers is that no small business manufacturers are supplying these classes of products to the Federal government. The effect of a waiver would be to allow otherwise qualified regular dealers to supply the products of any domestic manufacturer on a Federal contract set aside for small businesses or awarded through the SBA's 8(a) Business Development Program.
Comments and sources must be submitted on or before November 5, 2004.
Edith Butler, Program Analyst, by telephone at (202) 619-0422; by FAX at (202) 481-1788; or by e-mail at
Section 8(a)(17) of the Small Business Act, (Act) 15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17), requires that recipients of Federal contracts set aside for small businesses or SBA's 8(a) Business Development Program provide the product of a small business manufacturer or processor, if the recipient is other than the actual manufacturer or processor of the product.
This requirement is commonly referred to as the Nonmanufacturer Rule. The SBA regulations imposing this requirement are found at 13 CFR 121.406 (b). Section 8(a)(17)(b)(iv) of the Act authorizes SBA to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for any “class of products” for which there are no small business manufacturers or processors available to participate in the Federal market.
As implemented in SBA's regulations at 13 CFR 121.1204, in order to be considered available to participate in the Federal market for a class of products, a small business manufacturer must have submitted a proposal for a contract solicitation or received a contract from the Federal government within the last 24 months. The SBA defines “class of products” based on six digit coding systems. The first coding system is the Office of Management and Budget North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The second is the Product and Service Code established by the Federal Procurement Data System.
The SBA received a request on September 7, 2004 to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing. In response, SBA is currently processing a request to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 332992. The public is invited to comment or provide source information to SBA on the proposed waiver of the nonmanufacturer rule for this NAICS code.
15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17).
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice of intent to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for General Aviation Turboprop Aircraft With Six Or More Passenger Seats.
The U. S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is considering granting a waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for General Aviation Turboprop Aircraft With Six Or More Passenger Seats. The basis for waivers is that no small business manufacturers are supplying these classes of products to the Federal government. The effect of a waiver would be to allow otherwise qualified regular dealers to supply the products of any domestic manufacturer on a Federal contract set aside for small businesses or awarded through the SBA's 8(a) Business Development Program.
Comments and sources must be submitted on or before November 5, 2004.
Edith Butler, Program Analyst, by telephone at (202) 619-0422; by FAX at (202) 481-1788; or by email at
Section 8(a)(17) of the Small Business Act, (Act) 15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17), requires that recipients of Federal contracts set aside for small businesses or SBA's 8(a) Business Development Program provide the product of a small business manufacturer or processor, if the recipient is other than the actual manufacturer or processor of the product.
This requirement is commonly referred to as the Nonmanufacturer Rule. The SBA regulations imposing this requirement are found at 13 CFR 121.406(b). Section 8(a)(17)(b)(iv) of the Act authorizes SBA to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for any “class of products” for which there are no small business manufacturers or processors available to participate in the Federal market.
As implemented in SBA's regulations at 13 CFR 121.1204, in order to be considered available to participate in the Federal market for a class of products, a small business manufacturer must have submitted a proposal for a contract solicitation or received a contract from the Federal government within the last 24 months. The SBA defines “class of products” based on six digit coding systems. The first coding system is the Office of Management and Budget North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The second is the Product and Service Code established by the Federal Procurement Data System.
The SBA received a request on September 7, 2004 to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for General Aviation Turboprop Aircraft With Six Or More Passenger Seats. In response, SBA is currently processing a request to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for General Aviation Turboprop Aircraft With Six Or More Passenger Seats, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 336411. The public is invited to comment or provide source information to SBA on the proposed waiver of the nonmanufacturer rule for this NAICS code.
15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17).
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice of Waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Components Manufacturing.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is granting a waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Components Manufacturing. The basis for waivers is that no small business manufacturers are supplying these classes of products to the Federal government. The effect of a waiver would be to allow otherwise qualified regular dealers to supply the products of any domestic manufacturer on a Federal contract set aside for small businesses or awarded through the SBA's 8(a) Business Development Program.
This waiver is effective November 2, 2004.
Edith Butler, Program Analyst, by telephone at (202) 619-0422; by FAX at (202) 481-1788; or by email at
Section 8(a)(17) of the Small Business Act, (Act) 15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17), requires that recipients of Federal contracts set aside for small businesses or SBA's 8(a) Business Development Program provide the product of a small business manufacturer or processor, if the recipient is other than the actual manufacturer or processor of the product. This requirement is commonly referred to as the Nonmanufacturer Rule. The SBA regulations imposing this requirement are found at 13 CFR 121.406(b). Section 8(a)(17)(b)(iv) of the Act authorizes SBA to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for any “class of products” for which there are no small business manufacturers or processors available to participate in the Federal market.
As implemented in SBA's regulations at 13 CFR 121.1204, in order to be considered available to participate in the Federal market for a class of products, a small business manufacturer must have submitted a proposal for a contract solicitation or received a contract from the Federal government within the last 24 months. The SBA defines “class of products” based on six digit coding systems. The first coding system is the Office of Management and Budget North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The second is the Product and Service Code established by the Federal Procurement Data System.
The SBA received a request on June 29, 2004 to waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Components Manufacturing. In response, on July 28, 2004, SBA published in the
SBA explained in the notice that it was soliciting comments and sources of small business manufacturers of this class of products. In response to this notice, comments were received from interested parties. SBA has determined from these sources that there are no small business manufacturers of this class of products, and is therefore granting the waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Components Manufacturing, NAICS 335999.
15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17).
Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation.
Notice on the role of air charter brokers in arranging air transportation.
The Department is publishing the following notice to provide guidance to the aviation industry on the permissible role of air charter brokers in the provision of air transportation.
Dayton Lehman, Jr., Deputy Assistant General Counsel, or Jonathan Dols, Senior Attorney, Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (C-70), 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9349.
The purpose of this notice is to provide guidance regarding the lawful role of air charter brokers (
In order to hold out or otherwise engage in air transportation, either directly or indirectly, as a common carrier, a person is required to hold economic authority from the Department of Transportation pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 41101 or 41301, or an exemption from those provisions, such as that provided to air taxis under 14
The Enforcement Office has become aware that there are air charter brokers not holding economic authority from the Department who solicit and contract directly with a charter customer for air transportation and then solicit and separately contract directly with a direct air carrier to operate the air service promised to the charter customer under the charter broker's contract with that customer. With respect to payment for the proffered air transportation, two separate transactions commonly occur: (1) The air charter broker collects all of the monies paid by the charter customer pursuant to the broker's contract with the customer, and (2) the air charter broker then turns over a portion of these monies to the direct air carrier pursuant to the broker's separate contract with the carrier. In such instances, the air charter broker is not acting as an agent for the operating carrier or for the charter customer. Rather, the air charter broker is acting as a principal in both transactions, and, with respect to its relationship with the customer, is engaged in air transportation as an indirect air carrier without economic authority in contravention of the statutory and Department licensing requirements described above.
In addition, the Enforcement Office has recently learned that certain air charter brokers that lack economic authority have arrangements with licensed air carriers, in which the brokers hold out in their own right and, as principals, sell charter flights on aircraft that they own or lease and have had placed on the operating certificates of the licensed carriers. In such situations, the Department has found that, to the extent that a direct air carrier knows or has reason to know of the broker's unlawful conduct, the direct air carrier is also engaged in an unfair and deceptive practice or unfair method of competition in violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712.
The Enforcement Office is particularly concerned about the unlawful practices described above pertaining to brokers that lack economic authority because they bypass the protections put in place by the Department to afford the public a measure of financial protection where charter flights are involved. In this regard, with respect to traditional single-entity charters using large aircraft,
Moreover, such arrangements by air charter brokers that do not hold economic authority from the Department also violate specific Department regulations designed to protect the public in other respects from unfair and deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition in violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712. In this regard, air charter brokers are ticket agents pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(40), which defines a ticket agent as a person, other than a carrier or its employee, who, “as a principal or agent sells, offers for sale, negotiates for, or holds itself out as selling, providing, or arranging for air transportation.” Various provisions of 14 CFR part 399 state that the Department will regard it to be an unfair and deceptive practice or unfair method of competition for a ticket agent, among other things, to create the false impression that it is an air carrier, to advertise in certain ways that confuse the traveling public with respect to a ticket agent's status, and to enter into a contract for air transportation with a customer without first obtaining a binding commitment with an air carrier to perform the promised air transportation.
Although the proscriptions on deceptive and anticompetitive conduct found in Part 399 are written in general terms, at a minimum, air charter brokers without economic authority (or other ticket agents for that matter) should take care not to hold out as “airlines,” “air carriers,” “operators,” “airways,” or in any other way likely to create the false impression that they are direct air carriers in their own right. Toward this end, such entities should not refer to an aircraft used in the air services that they are marketing in a manner that conveys the false impression that they are an air carrier or the operator of the air transportation (
In the course of several recent enforcement investigations, the Enforcement Office has also become aware of the use of air charter brokers by operators of commercial service with large aircraft operated pursuant to 14 CFR part 125. Such operators may not hold out or provide air transportation to the public for compensation or hire, directly or indirectly through third parties.
Another area of interest regarding the relationship between Part 125 carriers and air charter brokers that has recently come to our attention involves the use of so-called Internet “bid bonds” The Enforcement Office understands that some air charter brokers, who often style themselves as “charter managers” or “logistics companies,” manage the transportation of cargo for the major auto manufacturers, as well as scores of other customers,
If there are any questions regarding this notice, please contact Dayton Lehman, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, or Jonathan Dols, Senior Attorney, Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (C-70), 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9349.
An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of dispositions of prior petitions.
Pursuant to FAA's rulemaking provisions governing the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for exemption part 11 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), this notice contains a summary of certain dispositions of certain petitions previously received. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of FAA's regulatory activities.
Tim Adams (202) 267-8033, or Sandy Buchanan-Sumter (202) 267-7271, Office of Rulemaking (ARM-1), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.
This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85 and 11.91.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation.
Request for public comment on proposed collection of information.
Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections.
This document describes one collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.
Comments must be received on or before December 17, 2004.
Comments must refer to the docket notice numbers cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the proposed collection of information for which a comment is provided, by referencing its OMB clearance Number. It is requested, but not required, that 2 copies of the comment be provided. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Dennis Flemons at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NPO-103), 202-366-5389, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 6213, Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control Number.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a document in the
(i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) how to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(iv) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public comments on the following proposed collections of information:
(1)
10 a.m., October 20, 2004.
The Board's Hearing Room, Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423.
The Board will meet to discuss among themselves the following agenda items. Although the conference is open for public observation, no public participation is permitted.
STB Docket No. 42069,
STB Docket No. 42070,
STB Docket No. 42072,
STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 91),
STB Finance Docket No. 34421,
STB Finance Docket No. 34462,
STB Finance Docket No. 30186 (Sub-No. 3),
STB Docket No. AB-68 (Sub-No. 4X),
A. Dennis Watson, Office of Congressional and Public Services, Telephone: (202) 565-1596 FIRS: 1-800-877-8339.
The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) has agreed to grant to Illinois Railnet, Inc. (Illinois): (1) limited local trackage rights for the purpose of servicing customers on BNSF in and around Oregon, IL, and (2) limited overhead trackage rights for the purpose of interchanging traffic between BNSF and Illinois and accommodating light power moving over BNSF's lines between milepost 98.49 near Oregon, and milepost 86.57 near Flag Center, IL, and between milepost 43.36 near Zearing, IL, and milepost 40.73 near Montgomery, IL.
Illinois indicates that it expected to consummate the transaction on October 8, 2004.
The transaction is related to STB Finance Docket No. 34549,
As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in
This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If the notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void
An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB Finance Docket No. 34559, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be served on John D. Heffner, 1920 N Street, NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20036.
Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at
By the Board David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings.
Illinois Railnet, Inc. (Illinois), a Class III rail carrier, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.41 to acquire from The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF), and operate two lines of railroad: (1) A portion of BNSF's Oregon Subdivision between milepost 98.75 at Oregon, IL, and milepost 105.78 at Mt. Morris, IL, and (2) a portion of BNSF's La Salle Subdivision between milepost 25.7 at La Salle, IL, and milepost 43.36 at Zearing, IL, a distance of approximately 24.7 miles in Ogle, La Salle, and Bureau Counties, IL.
The transaction is related to STB Finance Docket No. 34559,
Illinois certifies that its projected annual revenues as a result of this transaction will not result in the creation of a Class I or Class II rail carrier, and that its revenues will not exceed $5 million.
Illinois indicates that it expected to consummate the transaction on October 8, 2004.
If the notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void
An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB Finance Docket No. 34549, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one copy of each pleading must be served on John D. Heffner, 1920 N Street, NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20036.
Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at
By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings.
Stockton Terminal and Eastern Railroad (STE) has filed a notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1152 Subpart F—
STE has certified that: (1) No local traffic has moved over the line for at least 2 years; (2) any overhead traffic can be rerouted over other lines; (3) no formal complaint filed by a user of rail service on the line (or by a state or local government entity acting on behalf of such user) regarding cessation of service over the line either is pending with the Board or with any U.S. District Court or has been decided in favor of complainant within the 2-year period; and (4) the requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7 (environmental reports), 49 CFR 1105.8 (historic reports), 49 CFR 1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental agencies) have been met.
As a condition to this exemption, any employee adversely affected by the abandonment shall be protected under
A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to STE's representative: Thomas F. McFarland, 208 South LaSalle St., Suite 1890, Chicago, IL 60604-1112.
If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void
STE has filed an environmental report which addresses the effects, if any, of the abandonment on the environment and historic resources. SEA will issue an environmental assessment (EA) by October 22, 2004. Interested persons may obtain a copy of the EA by writing to SEA (Room 500, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, DC 20423-0001) or by calling SEA, at (202) 565-1539. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.] Comments on environmental and historic preservation matters must be filed within 15 days after the EA becomes available to the public.
Environmental, historic preservation, public use, or trail use/rail banking conditions will be imposed, where appropriate, in a subsequent decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR 1152.29(e)(2), STE shall file a notice of consummation with the Board to signify that it has exercised the authority granted and fully abandoned the line. If consummation has not been effected by STE's filing of a notice of consummation by October 18, 2005, and there are no legal or regulatory barriers to consummation, the authority to abandon will automatically expire.
Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at
By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings.
1. Public notice is hereby given that all outstanding 11
2. Full information regarding the presentation and surrender of such bonds held in coupon and registered form for redemption under this call will be found in Department of the Treasury Circular No. 300 dated March 4, 1973, as amended (31 CFR part 306), and from the Definitives Section of the Bureau of the Public Debt (telephone (304) 480-7936), and on the Bureau of the Public Debt's Web site,
3. Redemption payments for such bonds held in book-entry form, whether on the books of the Federal Reserve Banks or in
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning the Statistics of Income (SOI) Corporate Survey.
Written comments should be received on or before December 17, 2004 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Paul H. Finger, Internal Revenue Service, room 6512, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224.
Requests for additional information or copies of the survey should be directed to Carol Savage at Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, or at (202) 622-3945, or through the Internet at
The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Special Medical Advisory Group will meet on November 12, 2004. The meeting will be held in Room 830, at VA Central Office, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, from 9 a.m. until 3 p.m. The meeting is open to the public.
The purpose of the Group is to advise the Secretary and Under Secretary for Health on the care and treatment of disabled veterans, and other matters pertinent to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The agenda for the meeting will include discussions on electronic health records, research, recruitment and compensation of health care professionals, special programs, care coordination and VA's Care Model.
Any member of the public wishing to attend should contact Juanita Leslie, Office of Administrative Operations (10B2), Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs at (202) 273-5882. No time will be set aside at this meeting for receiving oral presentations from the public. Statements, in written form, may be submitted to Juanita Leslie before the meeting or within 10 days after the meeting.
By Direction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that a meeting of the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Rehabilitation (VACOR) will be held on November 8-10, 2004, at the Department of Veterans Affairs Washington Regional Office, 1722 I Street NW., Washington, DC, 20421. The meeting sessions will be held in the third floor training room and will begin at 1 p.m. on November 8 and 8:30 a.m. on November 9 and 10. The meeting sessions will end at 4:30 p.m. on November 8 and 9 and at noon on November 10. The meeting is open to the public.
The purpose of the Committee is to provide recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on the rehabilitation needs of veterans with disabilities and on the administration of VA's rehabilitation programs.
During the meeting, committee members will be briefed on various VA rehabilitation related initiatives. They will also receive updates on the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Task Force report and recommendations, the Spinal Cord Injury Research Project and Research Model, and other disability and rehabilitation issues related to veterans. Additionally, the Committee will receive a briefing from the Advisory Committee on Prosthetics and Special Disabilities. The Committee will also discuss recommendations for the 2004 report.
No time will be allocated at this meeting for oral presentations from the public. Any member of the public wishing to attend the meeting is requested to contact Ms. Carolyn Davis, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 273-7433. The Committee will accept written comments. Comments can be addressed to Ms. Davis at the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration (28), 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, or sent electronically to
By Direction of the Secretary.
In compliance with section 13 of Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) notice is hereby given that the 2004 Annual Report of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans has been issued. The report summarizes activities and recommendations of the Committee on matters relative to VA programs and policies affecting minority veterans. It is available for public inspection at two locations:
By Direction of the Secretary.
In rule document 04-21298 beginning on page 57622 in the issue of Friday, September 24, 2004, make the following correction:
On page 57626, in the third column, in Appendix A to Part 150, the heading “PART B—NOISE EXPOSURE MAY DEVELOPMENT” should read “PART B—NOISE EXPOSURE MAP DEVELOPMENT”.