USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) proposes to rename Privacy Act system of records USDA/OIG-5, change the description for “Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System,” and add one new routine use, pursuant to recent Office of Management and Budget (OMB) requirements.

In accordance with the Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(e)(11), USDA OIG proposes to revise its seven systems of records, USDA/OIG-1: Employee Records, USDA/OIG; USDA/OIG-2: Informant and Undercover Agent Records, USDA/OIG; USDA/OIG-3: Investigative Files and Automated Investigative Indices System; USDA/OIG-4: OIG Hotline Complaint Records, USDA/OIG; USDA/OIG-5: Consolidated Assignments Personnel Tracking Administrative Information Network (CAPTAIN), USDA/OIG; USDA/OIG-6: Training Tracking System, USDA/OIG; and USDA/OIG-7: Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Request Records, USDA/OIG. The full systems of records were last published in the Federal Register on pages 61262-61266, 62 FR 61262, et seq. , November 17, 1997; and they were last amended on pages 21389-21391, 70 FR 21389, et seq. , April 26, 2005.

OIG proposes to rename USDA/OIG-5 “Consolidated Assignments Personnel Tracking Administrative Information Network (CAPTAIN),” to USDA/OIG-5 “Automated Reporting and General Operations System (ARGOS).” The ARGOS system has information contained in it of OIG, and OIG has limited its usage to OIG employees on a need-to-know basis.

OIG further proposes to add an OMB-mandated New Disclosure Routine Use language in the OIG system of records notice (SORN) revisions, to be numbered “16,” which would allow disclosure to appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when the agency suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of information in the system of records has been compromised or to assist in connection with USDA's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and to prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm. Specifically the text will read:

16. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when (1) OIG suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of information in the system of records has been compromised; (2) USDA has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by USDA or another agency or entity) that rely upon the compromised information; and (3) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with USDA's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

OIG also proposes revising the description in the “Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System” for all seven of its Privacy Act systems of records to reflect that covered electronic information stored on OIG computers is now maintained in ARGOS, an application system built specifically by OIG to store information. The ARGOS system as an application system is stored on four servers: Two in Washington, DC and two in remote locations for backup purposes. The previous language was as follows: “Storage: Records are maintained on computers and automated image filing systems, and in file folders, notebooks, and card file boxes.” The new language will read as follows: “Storage: Records are maintained in software applications, and some information is also stored in file folders.”

All other aspects of OIG's systems of records remain unchanged and are as published. A “Report on New System,” required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), as implemented by OMB Circular A-130, was sent to the Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate; the Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives; and the Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.

CCC administers a loan program, including MAL and LDP, that provides short-term financing to allow farmers to pay their bills soon after harvest and to facilitate orderly marketing throughout the rest of the year. The loan program also provides significant income support when market prices are below statutory loan rates. Currently, regulations in 7 CFR parts 1421, 1425, and 1427 cover MAL and LDP provisions for the 2002 through 2007 crop years.

The 2008 Farm Bill (Pub. L. 110-246) authorizes the continuation of MAL and LDP for cotton and peanuts for the 2008 through 2012 crops.

With the pending harvest of 2008-crop cotton and peanuts, this notice announces that CCC will, with the exceptions noted below, immediately implement MAL and LDP provisions for 2008-crop cotton and peanuts based on the regulations that applied to the 2007 crop and appeared in:

• 7 CFR part 1421, Grains and Similarly Handled Commodities—Marketing Assistance Loans and Loan Deficiency Payments for the 2002 through 2007 Crop Years;

• 7 CFR part 1425, Cooperative Marketing Associations; and

• 7 CFR part 1427, Cotton.

To address the 2008 exceptions and for the 2009 through 2012 crops, CCC will amend the applicable regulations to reflect changes required by the 2008 Farm Bill including the fine count adjustment, storage credit rates, and transportation costs. The 2008 exceptions are as follows. For cotton, the calculation of the prevailing world market price, for repayment purposes, will continue to be calculated as specified in the current regulations. Also, for cotton, storage payments will be allowed to the extent permitted in the current regulations. For peanuts, handling and storage costs will be allowed to the extent permitted in the current regulations. These three 2008 exceptions will be changed later to implement the requirements of the 2008 Farm Bill through rulemaking instead of being made effective now because the software development required to implement the changes is not immediately available.

Additionally, CCC revised regulations, effective on May 23, 2008 (73 FR 30274-30277, final rule published May 27, 2008) providing that Far East prices will be used instead of Northern Europe prices in determining the upland cotton adjusted world price (AWP). The revised AWP calculation applies to the 2007 through the 2012 crops of upland cotton.

FSA has determined that these changes would not constitute a major Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 799), no environmental assessment or environmental impact statement will be prepared.

The Three Rivers District Ranger of the Kootenai National Forest has received a plan of operations proposing to access three (3) helicopter-supported drill sites on NFS lands in sections 7, 17, & 18, T28N, R33W, MT. P.M., southwest of Bull Lake, in Lincoln and Sanders Counties. These sites were previously drilled in 1999 and this additional exploration drilling is needed to further define ore reserves on the unpatented mining claims. The proposal is to drill 8 core holes from 3 separate locations, utilizing existing openings from previous helicopter drill sites. The holes will vary from 100′ to 1600′ in depth.

The Drilling Plan for the drill sites is to use a pre-constructed metal landing/drill platform (approx. 30′ long x 15′ wide). The platform will be flown to the sites in sections and assembled. The drill will be mounted on the drill platforms on the south side of Ross Creek.

A helicopter staging site will be located near the junction of FR 4628 and FR 4628A. Some site maintenance will be required. This work will include removal of brush and short trees.

Design features and mitigations to maintain and protect resource values would be included.

The proposed implementation period would be June 16, 2009, through November 15, 2009.

Montana Department of Environmental Quality, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, and Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, have either jurisdiction or interest and will participate as cooperating agencies or government entities in the preparation of this EIS. Other governmental agencies and any public that may be interested in or affected by the proposal are invited to participate in the scoping process, which is designed to obtain input and to identify potential issues relating to the proposed project.

As the District Ranger of the Three Rivers Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest, I am the Responsible Official. As the Responsible Official, I will decide if the proposed project will be implemented. I will document the decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of Decision.

The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of these will be the “no action” alternative in which none of the proposed activities will be implemented. Additional alternatives will examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues and other resource values.

The nature of the decision to be made is to select an action that meets the legal rights of the proponent, while protecting the environment in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policy. The District Ranger will use the EIS process to develop the necessary information to make an informed decision as required by 36 CFR 228 Subpart A. Based on the alternatives developed in the EIS, the following are possible decisions:

(1) An approval of the Plan of Operations as submitted;

(2) An approval of the Plan of Operations with changes, and the incorporation of mitigations and stipulations that meet the mandates of applicable laws, regulations, and policy;

(3) Denial of the Plan of Operations if no alternative can be developed that is in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policy.

Various permits and licenses are needed prior to implementation of this project. Permits or licenses required by the issuing agencies identified for this proposal are:

• Approval of Plan of Operations from the Kootenai National Forest

• Exploration License from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality

Public Involvement and Scoping: This Notice of Intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the EIS. At this stage of the planning process, site-specific public comments are being requested to determine the scope of the analysis, and identify significant issues and alternatives to the Proposed Action. Comments concerning the proposed action must be postmarked by August 25, 2008, to be considered in the draft EIS. The public is encouraged to take part in the process and to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, Tribal governments, and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed action. This input will be used in preparation of the draft and final EIS. The scoping process will include:

1. Identifying potential issues.

2. Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.

3. Identifying alternatives to the proposed action.

4. Exploring additional alternatives that will be derived from issues recognized during scoping activities.

5. Identifying potential environmental effects of this proposal (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and connected actions).

Estimated Dates for Filing: The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review in December 2008. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register . The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register . It is very important that those interested in the management of this area participate at that time.

The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in February 2009. In the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and responses received during the comment period that pertain to the environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and to applicable laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision regarding the proposal.

Reviewer's Obligations: The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NIRDC , 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel , 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris , 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45 day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider and respond to them in the final EIS.

To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merit of the alternatives discussed. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public cord on this proposal, and will be available for public inspection.

In addition to legislation and regulation passed prior to 1991, this directive incorporates laws, regulations, and Executive orders passed since 1991 that affect Heritage Program management, including:

1992—Amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

2000—E.O. 13175—Consultation with Indian Tribal Governments.

2003—43 CFR 10—Native American Graves and Repatriation Regulations.

2003—E.O. 13287—Preserve America

2004—Amendments to the 36 CFR 800 regulations implementing the National Historic Preservation Act.

2004—E.O. 13327—Federal Real Property Asset Management.

2004—Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act.

2005—Forest Service Facility Realignment and Enhancement Act.

The goals of the updated direction in Forest Service Manual 2360 are to:

1. Improve cultural resource stewardship on National Forest System lands.

2. Establish consistent Heritage program implementation across Forest Service units.

3. Increase efficiency in Heritage Program support to other Forest Service programs.

4. Improve and expand Forest Service partnerships with the public and with Indian tribal communities in the interest of historic preservation.

5. Improve and expand the delivery of Heritage programs and products to the American public.

2361—Consultation and Coordination describes consultation and coordination with State, Tribal, and local governments, other Federal agencies, and the public in all facets of Heritage Program management.

2362—Planning includes guidance on the integration of heritage issues in agency planning efforts and development of management plans for the Heritage Program and for individual historic properties.

2363—Identification, Evaluation, and Allocation to Management Categories describes the process to identify cultural resources that are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and recommend management that protects the value of cultural resources and maximizes their benefit to the agency and the public.

2364—Protection and Stewardship describes requirements to protect cultural resources from environmental damage, effects of agency or agency-authorized undertakings, and illegal activity or unauthorized use. It provides guidance on conservation, study, and formal designations of historic properties.

2365—Public Education and Outreach provides guidelines for the delivery of heritage values to the public through the Forest Service Windows on the Past program.

2366—Management of Heritage Collections describes types of collections and curation standards.

2367—Permits, Agreements, and Contracts provides guidance for the issuance of permits, agreements, and contracts for Heritage Program work.

2368—Information Management and Reporting identifies the importance of maintaining up-to-date electronic data for the Heritage Program and explains confidentiality options for sensitive cultural resource information.

Title: Milk and Milk Products Surveys.

OMB Control Number: 0535-0020.

Expiration Date of Approval: December 31, 2008.

Type of Request: Intent to Seek Approval to Revise and Extend an Information Collection.

Abstract: The primary objective of the National Agricultural Statistics Service is to prepare and issue State and national estimates of crop and livestock production. The Milk and Milk Products Surveys obtain basic agricultural statistics on milk production and manufactured dairy products from farmers and processing plants throughout the nation. Data are gathered for milk production, dairy products, evaporated and condensed milk, manufactured dry milk, and manufactured whey products. Milk production and manufactured dairy products statistics are used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to help administer federal programs and by the dairy industry in planning, pricing, and projecting supplies of milk and milk products.

Mandatory dairy product information reporting is based on the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended by the Dairy Market Enhancement Act of 2000 and the Farm Security and Rural Development Act of 2002 (U.S.C. 1637-1637b). This program requires each manufacturer to report to USDA the price, quantity, and moisture content of dairy products sold and each entity storing dairy products to report information on the quantity of dairy products stored. Any manufacturer that processes, markets, or stores less than 1,000,000 pounds of dairy products per year is exempt. USDA is required to maintain information, statistics, or documents obtained under these Acts in a manner that ensures that confidentiality is preserved regarding the identity of persons and proprietary business information, subject to verification by the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) under Public Law No. 106-532.

This Notice is submitted in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, codified at 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. ) and Office of Management and Budget regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29, 1995).

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8 minutes per response. This average is based on the 9 different surveys in the information collection: 4 weekly, 2 monthly, 1 quarterly, and 2 annual. Total annual response is estimated to be 95,000 with an average annual frequency of 3.65 responses per respondent.

Respondents: Farms and businesses.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 26,000.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 12,500 hours. Copies of this information collection and related instructions can be obtained without charge from David Hancock, the Agency Clearance Officer, at (202) 690-2388, or at OMBofficer@nass.usda.gov .

Comments: 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 will have practical utility; (b) 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; (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 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.

All responses to this notice will become a matter of public record and be summarized in the request for OMB approval.

This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice for each product or service will be required to procure the product(s) and/or service(s) listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. If approved, the action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the product(s) and/or service(s) to the Government.

2. If approved, the action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the product(s) and/or service(s) to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the product(s) and/or service(s) proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they are providing additional information.

The following product(s) and/or service(s) are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

On May 30 and June 6, 2008, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice (73 FR 31056; 31057; 32287) of proposed additions to the Procurement List.

After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the products and services and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the products and services listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46-48c and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the products and services to the Government.

2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the products and services proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

Accordingly, the following products and services are added to the Procurement List:

This action does not affect current contracts awarded prior to the effective date of this addition or options that may be exercised under those contracts.

The 2010 Census Coverage Measurement (CCM) Independent Listing Operation will be conducted in the U.S. (excluding remote Alaska) and in Puerto Rico in select CCM sampled areas. The primary sampling unit is a block cluster, which consists of one or more geographically contiguous census blocks. As in the past, the CCM operations and activities will be conducted separate from and independent of the 2010 Census operations.

CCM will be conducted to provide estimates of net coverage error and coverage error components (omissions and erroneous enumerations) for housing units and persons in housing units (see Definition of Terms) to improve future censuses. The data collection and matching methodologies for previous coverage measurement programs were designed only to measure net coverage error, which reflects the difference between omissions and erroneous inclusions.

The Independent Listing Operation is the first step in the CCM process. It will be conducted to obtain a complete housing unit inventory of all the addresses within the CCM sample block clusters before the 2010 Census enumeration commences. Enumerators will canvass every street, road, or other place where people might live in their assigned block clusters and construct a list of housing units. Enumerators will contact a member (or proxy) of each housing unit to ensure all units at a given address are identified. They also will identify the location of each housing unit by assigning map spots on block maps provided with their assignment materials. Following the completion of each block cluster, the listing books are keyed for matching against the census Decennial Master Address File (DMAF) for the same areas.

Completed Independent Listing Books are subject to a Dependent Quality Check (DQC) wherein DQC listers return to the field to check 12 units per cluster to ensure that the work performed is of acceptable quality and to verify that the correct blocks were visited. If the cluster fails the DQC, then the DQC lister reworks the entire cluster.

The Independent Listing results will be computer and clerically matched to the DMAF from the census in the same areas. There will be two Independent Listing Forms, D-1302 and D-1302PR. The D-1302 is the English language version of the listing form and will be used both to list and to conduct DQC for addresses in CCM stateside sample areas. The D-1302PR is the Spanish language version of the listing form, which will be used for the same purposes in the CCM sample areas of Puerto Rico.

The addresses that remain unmatched or unresolved after matching will be sent to the field during the next field operation of the CCM (Initial Housing Unit Followup), to collect additional information that might allow a resolution of any differences between the independent listing results and the census DMAF. Cases also will be sent to resolve potential duplicates and unresolved housing unit status. The forms and procedures to be used in the Initial Housing Unit Followup phase of the CCM in the 2010 Census and all subsequent CCM phases will be the subject of a separate Federal Register Notice.

The Independent Listing operation will be conducted using person-to-person interviews.

Components of Coverage Error —The two components of census coverage error are census omissions (missed persons or housing units) and erroneous inclusions (persons or housing units enumerated in the census that should not have been). Examples of erroneous inclusions are: Persons or housing units enumerated in the census that should not have been enumerated at all, persons or housing units enumerated in an incorrect location, and persons or housing units enumerated more than once (duplicates).

Net Coverage Error —Reflects the difference between census omissions and erroneous inclusions. A positive net error indicates an undercount, while a negative net error indicates an overcount.

For more information about the Census 2010 Coverage Measurement Program, please visit the following page of the Census Bureau's Web site: http://www.census.gov/cac/www/pdf/coverage-measurement-program.pdf.

OMB Control Number: None.

Form Number: D-1302, D-1302PR.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,000,000 Housing Units (HUs) for Independent Listing and 157,000 HUs for Independent Listing DQC.

Estimated Time per Response: 2 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 38,567.

Estimated Total Annual Cost: $0.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: Title 13, U.S. Code, Section 141, 193, and 221.

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.

Public Law 97-446, as amended by Public Law 103-465, Public Law 106-36, and Public Law 108-429, requires the Departments of Commerce and the Interior (Departments) to administer the distribution of watch duty-exemptions and watch and jewelry duty-refunds to program producers in the U.S. insular possessions and the Northern Mariana Islands. The primary consideration in collecting information is the enforcement of the law and the information gathered is limited to that necessary to prevent abuse of the program and to permit a fair and equitable distribution of its benefits. The ITA-334P is the principal program form used for recording operational data on the basis of which program entitlements are distributed among the producers. This form also serves as the producer's application to the Departments for these entitlements and is completed biannually by watch and jewelry assemblers and manufacturers. A proposed modification to form ITA-334P is planned, by dividing it into four forms, so that there is an annual and mid-year application for watch producers and an annual and mid-year application for jewelry producers. This would not involve any increase in the amount of information collected.

The form is sent to each watch and jewelry producer biannually. The form is also available at http://ita-web.ita.doc.gov/doc/eFormsPub.nsf and may be completed online and printed, and submitted via mail.

OMB Control Number: 0625-0040.

Form Number: ITA-334P.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 5.

Estimated Time per Response: 3 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 30.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $600.

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 costs) 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 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.

Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. Sections 4001-21) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. The regulations implementing Title III are found at 15 CFR Part 325 (2007).

Export Trading Company Affairs (“ETCA”) is issuing this notice pursuant to 15 CFR section 325.6(b), which requires the U.S. Department of Commerce to publish a summary of the certification in the Federal Register . Under Section 305(a) of the Act and 15 CFR section 325.11(a), any person aggrieved by the Secretary's determination may, within 30 days of the date of this notice, bring an action in any appropriate district court of the United States to set aside the determination on the ground that the determination is erroneous.

1. Products

All Products.

2. Services

All Services.

3. Technology Rights

Technology rights that relate to Products and Services, including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets.

4. Export Trade Facilitation Services (As They Relate to the Export of Products, Services, and Technology Rights)

Export Trade Facilitation Services, including, but not limited to, professional services in the areas of government relations and assistance with state and federal programs; foreign trade and business protocol; consulting; market research and analysis; collection of information on trade opportunities; marketing; negotiations; joint ventures; shipping; export management; export licensing; advertising; documentation and services related to compliance with customs requirements; insurance and financing; trade show exhibitions; organizational development; management and labor strategies; transfer of technology; transportation services; and facilitating the formation of shippers' associations.

The Export Markets include all parts of the world except the United States (the fifty states of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands).

1. With respect to the sale of Products and Services, licensing of Technology Rights, and provision of Export Trade Facilitation Services, GTI may:

a. Provide and arrange for the provision of Export Trade Facilitation Services;

b. Engage in promotional and marketing activities and collect information on trade opportunities in the Export Markets and distribute such information to clients;

c. Enter into exclusive and non-exclusive licensing and sales agreements with Suppliers for the export of Products, Services, and Technology Rights to Export Markets;

d. Enter into exclusive and non-exclusive arrangements with distributors and sales representatives in Export Markets;

e. Allocate export sales or divide Export Markets among Suppliers for the sale and licensing of Products, Services, and Technology Rights;

f. Allocate export orders among Suppliers;

g. Establish the price of Products, Services, and Technology Rights for sales and licensing in Export Markets;

h. Negotiate, enter into, and manage licensing agreements for the export of Technology Rights; and

i. Enter into contracts for shipping of Products to Export Markets.

2. GTI may exchange information on a one-to-one basis with individual Suppliers regarding that Supplier's inventories and near-term production schedules for the purpose of determining the availability of Products for export and coordinating export with distributors.

1. GTI, including its officers, employees, and agents, shall not intentionally disclose, directly or indirectly, to any Supplier (including parent companies, subsidiaries, or other entities related to any Supplier) any information about any other Supplier's costs, production, capacity, inventories, domestic prices, domestic sales, terms of domestic marketing or sale, or U.S. business plans, strategies, or methods unless such information is already generally available to the trade or public.

2. GTI will comply with requests made by the Secretary of Commerce on behalf of the Secretary or the Attorney General for information or documents relevant to conduct under the Certificate. The Secretary of Commerce will request such information or documents when either the Attorney General or the Secretary believes that the information or documents are required to determine that the Export Trade, Export Trade Activities and Methods of Operation of a person protected by this Certificate of Review continue to comply with the standard of Section 303(a) of the Act.

“Supplier” means a person who produces, provides, or sells Products, Services and/or Technology Rights.

This Certificate protects GTI and its directors, officers, and employees acting on its behalf, from private treble damage actions and government criminal and civil suits under U.S. federal and state antitrust laws for the export conduct specified in the Certificate and carried out during its effective period in compliance with its terms and conditions.

This Certificate continues in effect from the date indicated below until it is relinquished, modified, or revoked as provided in the Act and the Regulations.

Nothing in this Certificate prohibits GTI from engaging in conduct not specified in this Certificate, but such conduct is subject to the normal application of the antitrust laws.

The issuance of this Certificate of Review to GTI by the Secretary of Commerce with the concurrence of the Attorney General under the provisions of the Act does not constitute, explicitly or implicitly, an endorsement or opinion of the Secretary of Commerce or the Attorney General concerning either (a) the viability or quality of the business plans of GTI or (b) the legality of such business plans of GTI under the laws of the United States (other than as provided in the Act) or under the laws of any foreign country.

The application of this Certificate to conduct in Export Trade where the U.S. Government is the buyer or where the U.S. Government bears more than half the cost of the transaction is subject to the limitations set forth in Section V.(D.) of the “Guidelines for the Issuance of Export Trade Certificates of Review (Second Edition),” 50 FR 1786 (January 11, 1985).

A copy of the certificate will be kept in the International Trade Administration's Freedom of Information Records Inspection Facility, Room 4100, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

On May 22, 2008, the Department initiated a new shipper review for Longkou Zhonghai and indicated that the POR for this new shipper review was April 1, 2007, through March 31, 2008. See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review , 73 FR 31065 (May 30, 2008).

On May 29, 2008, the International Trade Commission (ITC) determined, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the PRC would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. The ITC notified the Department of its decision on June 12, 2008, and published its decision on June 18, 2008. 1 Based on the ITC's decision, the Department subsequently revoked the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the PRC, effective August 14, 2007. 2

On July 14, 2008, Longkou Zhongkai withdrew its new shipper review request.

Longkou Zhongkai's POR U.S. entry occurred after the effective date of revocation of the order, which is August 14, 2007. The Department has already issued its revocation instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which will liquidate this entry without regard to antidumping duties ( i.e. , release all bonds and refund all cash deposits, with interest). See Revocation Notice . Because Longkou Zhongkai has no additional U.S. entries to review during the POR, we are rescinding this new shipper review. Furthermore, Longkou Zhongkai has withdrawn its review request in a timely manner. In addition, because this order is now revoked, no cash deposit instructions are necessary.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

This notice is published in accordance with section 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(f)(3).

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Northeast Region manages the Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Northeastern United States through the Atlantic Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fishery Management Plan (FMP). The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council prepared the FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The regulations implementing the FMP are specified at 50 CFR 648.70.

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements at § 648.70 and § 648.74 form the basis for this collection of information. NMFS Northeast Region requests information from Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog individual transferable quota (ITQ) allocation holders in order to process and track requests from the allocation holders to transfer quota allocation to another entity. NMFS Northeast Region also requests information from Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog permit holders in order to track and properly account for Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog harvest that is shucked at-sea. Because there is not a standard conversion factor for estimating unshucked product from shucked product, NMFS requires vessels that choose to shuck product at-sea to carry on board the vessel a NMFS-approved observer to certify the amount of Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog harvested. This information, upon receipt, results in an increasingly more efficient and accurate database for management and monitoring of fisheries of the Northeastern U.S. EEZ.

Paper applications are used to process requests.

OMB Number: 0648-0240.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 205.

Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes for the application to transfer quota, and 30 minutes for the application to shuck surfclams and ocean quahogs at-sea.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 45.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $219,765.

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.

A copy of the USAF's application may be obtained by writing to the address specified above (see ADDRESSES ), telephoning the contact listed above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ), or visiting the internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications .

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) direct the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) if certain findings are made and regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review.

Authorization for incidental takings may be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for certain subsistence uses, and that the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking are set forth.

NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as:

With respect to military readiness activities, the MMPA defines “harassment” as:

On March 21, 2008, NMFS received an application from the USAF requesting authorization for the take of four species of marine mammals incidental to space vehicle and test flight activities from VAFB, which would impact pinnipeds on VAFB and the Northern Channel Islands, over the course of 5 years. These training activities are classified as military readiness activities. Marine mammals may be exposed to continuous noise due mostly to combustion effects of aircraft and launch vehicles and impulsive noise due to sonic boom effects. The USAF requests authorization to take four pinniped species by Level B Harassment.

There are currently six active space launch vehicle facilities at VAFB used to launch satellites into polar orbit. These facilities support the launch programs for space vehicles, including the Atlas V, Delta IV, Falcon, Minotaur, and Taurus. There are also a variety of small missiles launched from North VAFB, including the Minuteman III and several types of interceptor and target vehicles for the Missile Defense Agency program. The VAFB runway, located on north VAFB, supports various aircraft operations. A full description of the activities to be conducted by the USAF at VAFB, including descriptions of the different space vehicles and missiles, are described in the USAF's application.

Interested persons may submit information, suggestions, and comments concerning the USAF's request (see ADDRESSES ). All information, suggestions, and comments related to the USAF's request and NMFS' potential development and implementation of regulations governing the incidental taking of marine mammals by the USAF on and around VAFB will be considered by NMFS in developing, if appropriate, regulations governing the issuance of letters of authorization.

The National Security Agency's record system notices for records systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendment is not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The Department of Army proposes to five delete system of records notices from its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The proposed deletion is not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of new or altered systems reports.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The proposed system report, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on July 17, 2008, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, ‘Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals’, dated February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427).

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The proposed system report, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on July 18, 2008, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, ‘Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals’, dated February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427).

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

The Department of the Army systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

Construction of a replacement lock at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sault Locks Complex on the St. Mary's River, Michigan was proposed following a 1976 resolution of the Senate Public Works Committee to determine the advisability of providing additional lockage facilities. It was recommended that a lock of greater dimensions replace two smaller locks, the Davis and Sabin Locks, which were constructed during World War I. The proposed lock would be capable of handling the Great Lakes System's largest vessels (Class C) which account for more than half of the potential carrying capacity of the Great Lakes fleet and currently are limited to lockage through the Poe Lock. A disruption of the Poe Lock would result in significant national economic consequences therefore a second lock of the Poe Lock dimensions is needed. Congress has provided, in the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 that such a lock be constructed at Federal expense and funding has been appropriated to initiate construction.

The Nebraska Department Roads (NDOR) is responsible for providing a safe, efficient, affordable, environmentally compatible and coordinated statewide transportation system for the movement of people and goods. NDOR has identified two segments of Nebraska Highway 12 that have experienced flooding and damage due to high water levels associated with the Missouri River. Segment 1 is approximately 6.4 miles long and extends from just east of Verdel on the west end to 2 miles west of the bridge over the Niobrara River. Segment 2 is approximately 6 miles long and extends from just east of Spruce Avenue in Niobrara to approximately 1 mile east of S-54D. Problems associated with this portion of Nebraska Highway 12 include high maintenance, driver safety, and disruption in use. The following summarizes the issues that create these problems:

Roadway Stability: Due to high water levels and overtopping of Nebraska Highway 12 in the project area, the stability of the roadway is threatened. Gavin's Point Dam on the Missouri River was built in the 1950's near Yankton, South Dakota, creating Lewis and Clark Lake (lake). The lake has caused the water table adjacent to the Missouri River to rise. Nebraska Highway 12, which runs parallel to the Missouri River, is affected where it crosses into the Missouri River floodplain east and west of Niobrara, Nebraska. About eight miles of Nebraska Highway 12 runs through the floodplain. About half of this length is located to the east and half to the west of Niobrara, in Knox County, Nebraska. The distance between Nebraska Highway 12 and the Missouri River bank differs, but some areas are as close as two to three thousand feet. Due to the location of Nebraska Highway 12, the following road related issues are present:

(1) Roadway inundation: When high water events occur on the Missouri River, portions of Nebraska Highway 12 are under water. This jeopardizes the integrity of the roadway due to saturation of the roadway bed. This can create roadway sloughing and potential for failure. Bazile Creek enters the river east of Niobrara, NE where it intersects Nebraska Highway 12. During high water events on Bazile Creek, Nebraska Highway 12 becomes flooded. The flooding has occurred numerous times in the past.

(2) Roadway saturation: High water levels adjacent to Nebraska Highway 12 are the result of the lake. The lake is a man-made reservoir located behind Gavin's Point dam. The lake has contributed to the rising water table throughout the floodplain where Nebraska Highway 12 is located. In addition, system releases from upstream reservoirs as part of the Missouri River mainstem system, can provide constant water levels. Additionally, large releases of water can sometimes last for many months causing roadway saturation. The increased silt load coming into the lake from the Missouri River tributaries, primarily the Niobrara River and Bazile Creek also contributes to roadway saturation. The confluence of the Niobrara River and the Missouri River is just west of the town of Niobrara. The water from these tributaries slows as they enter the Missouri River and sediment is deposited creating a fill area that restricts the channel and raises the bed of the river. This causes the area of the lake to increase in dimension as well as raising the water table. High water levels create conditions of long-term saturation of the roadway embankment, thus creating the potential for roadway embankment erosion.

Driver Safety: Portion of Nebraska Highway 12 are exposed to regular flooding. Roadway flooding is a concern for driver safety because even if the road is marked closed, motorists may choose to drive through flooded roadways. Nebraska Highway 12 in this location does not have lighting and the inherent dangers of driving through flooded roadways exist. In 1995, the Corps implemented an interim fix by raising the gradeline of Nebraska Highway 12 by several feet on two short highway segments to alleviate the immediate flooding problems. The resultant roadway is narrow with shoulders that are not adequate in width, and steep foreslopes. Cable guardrail was installed to help protect vehicles from running off the road and into the water. Due to the narrow roadway, the cable guardrail is close to the edge of the driving lane.

A public scoping meeting will be held (see DATES ) to describe why the project is needed, preliminary alternatives, the NEPA compliance process and to solicit input on the issues and alternatives to be evaluated and other related matters. Written comments will also be requested. The Corps has invited the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Knox County to be cooperating agencies in the formulation of the EIS.

1. Project Description. The fill placement area will occur between Godwin Avenue on the south to a point 2,000 feet northeast of Topsail Beach/Surf City town limits, a total ocean shoreline length of approximately 25,000 feet. The fill would consist of three sections, a 1,000-foot transition on the south beginning at a point opposite Godwin Avenue, a 22,000-foot main fill section that would extend to the Topsail Beach/Surf City town limits, and a 2,000-foot northern transition (Figure 1). The beach fill would have a variable width berm constructed to an elevation of +6.0 feet NAVD. The volume of material for the emergency project is based on providing erosion protection until such time a federal storm damage reduction project is implemented.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment.

Type of Review: New.

Title: Foreign Language Assistance Program for Local Educational Agencies: Annual Performance Report.

Frequency: Semi-Annually.

Affected Public: Individuals or household; State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden

Responses: 127.

Burden Hours: 6,350.

Abstract: The purpose is to implement a data collection process for a new semi-annual reporting for Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) purposes for the Foreign Language Assistance Program (FLAP) for Local Educational Agencies (LEAs). These data are necessary to assess the performance of the FLAP for LEAs in meeting its stated goals and objectives and report to ED's Budget Service.

Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3021. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request.

Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. Acting Leader, Information Collection Clearance Division, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment.

Type of Review: Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired.

Title: Application Package for Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) Program (1894-0001) (KM).

Frequency: Annually.

Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:

 Responses: 325;

 Burden Hours: 13432.

Abstract: This information collection provides the U.S. Department of Education with information needed to evaluate, score, and rank the quality of the projects proposed by institutions of higher education applying for a grant. Title VII, Part A of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, requires the collection of specific data that are necessary for applicant institutions to receive an initial competitive grant and non-competing continuations grants for the second and third years.

This information collection is being submitted under the Streamlined Clearance Process for Discretionary Grant Information Collections (1890-0001). Therefore, the 30-day public comment period notice will be the only public comment notice published for this information collection.

Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3762. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request.

Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

The Environmental Protection Agency will receive written comments relating to this settlement for thirty (30) days from the date of publication of this Notice. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

A copy of the Proposed AOC can be obtained from Joan A. Johnson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, Office of Regional Counsel, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029, or by contacting Joan A. Johnson at (215) 814-2619.

EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On May 15, 2008 (73 FR 28112), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments during the comment period. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice.

EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0393 which is available for online viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-566-1742.

Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “docket search,” then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

Title: National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings (Renewal).

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1750.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0393.

ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2008. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. 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 OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

Abstract: The information collection includes initial reports and periodic recordkeeping necessary for EPA to ensure compliance with Federal standards for volatile organic compounds in architectural coatings. Respondents are manufacturers, distributors, and importers of consumer products. Responses to the collection are mandatory under 40 CFR part 59, subpart D—National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings. All information submitted to the EPA for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B—Confidentiality of Business Information.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 33 hours per respondent. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: Manufacturers and importers of architectural coatings.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 500.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 16,641 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,224,507. This includes $1,224,507 in labor costs and no capital or O&M costs.

Changes in Estimates: There is a reduction of 6,120 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. This reduction is a result of revised estimates of number of exceedance fee reports and tonnage exemption reports to be submitted. These revised estimates were updated based on actual reports received in 2007 and 2008 in accordance with OMB's terms of clearance when the existing ICR was previously renewed in 2005. The estimated total annual costs decrease by $375,200 as a result.

The subject notice and associated documents may be viewed and downloaded from EPA's homepage, http://www.epa.gov/owm/mab/owm0331.pdf and http://www.epa.gov/owm/mab/owm0332.pdf.

On May 22, 2008, EPA published a notice that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had petitioned the Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, to determine that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the state waters of Cape Cod Bay in the municipalities of Provincetown, Truro, Wellfleet, Eastham, Orleans, Brewster, Dennis, Yarmouth, Barnstable, Sandwich and Bourne. Two comments were received on this petition.

The petition was filed pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law 92-500, as amended by Public Laws 95-217 and 100-4, for the purpose of declaring these waters a No Discharge Area (NDA).

Section 312(f)(3) states: After the effective date of the initial standards and regulations promulgated under this section, if any State determines that the protection and enhancement of the quality of some or all of the waters within such States require greater environmental protection, such State may completely prohibit the discharge from all vessels of any sewage, whether treated or not, into such waters, except that no such prohibition shall apply until the Administrator determines that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for such water to which such prohibition would apply.

This Notice of Determination is for the state waters of Provincetown, Truro, Wellfleet, Eastham, Orleans, Brewster, Dennis, Yarmouth, Barnstable, Sandwich and Bourne, collectively referred to as Cape Cod Bay. The NDA includes:

The NDA boundary includes the municipal waters of Provincetown, Truro, Wellfleet, Eastham, Orleans, Brewster, Dennis, Yarmouth, Barnstable, Sandwich and Bourne and extends to the boundary between state and federal waters. Cape Cod Bay is bordered on three sides by the geographic landforms of Cape Cod and the South Shore of Massachusetts.

The information submitted to EPA by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts certifies that there are eight pumpout facilities located within this area. A list of the facilities, with phone numbers, locations, and hours of operation is appended at the end of this determination.

Based on the examination of the petition, its supporting documentation, and information from site visits conducted by EPA New England staff, EPA has determined that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the area covered under this determination.

This determination is made pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law 92-500, as amended by Public Laws 95-217 and 100-4.

This draft report describes the modeling methodology used to create scenarios of housing density changes across the contiguous United States for each decade from the year 2000 to 2100 that are consistent with socio-economic storylines used by climate change modelers. The method consists of adapting the four main storylines used in the reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to the United States, then running a demographic model for the United States at the county level that is consistent with these storylines, and distributing new housing at a 100-meter scale using a spatial allocation model that translates the population projections to housing.

The scenarios not only reflect different assumptions about fertility rates and domestic and international migration, but also assumptions about the allocation of housing on the landscape from more compact to less compact forms of growth. The draft report also describes the methods used to convert housing density into impervious surface cover—an output that will facilitate future assessments of changes in water quality, aquatic ecosystems, air quality, and human health. The draft report concludes with recommendations for future modifications to the model to integrate climate change variables and for further analyses using the present results.

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD 2008-0543, by one of the following methods:

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

• E-mail: ORD.Docket@epa.gov .

• Fax: 202-566-1753.

• Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket (Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-566-1752.

• Hand Delivery: The OEI Docket is located in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center, Room 3334 EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is 202-566-1744. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

If you provide comments by mail or hand delivery, please submit three copies of the comments. For attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies.

Instructions : Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2008-0543. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will be marked “late,” and may only be considered if time permits. It is EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket without change and to make the comments available online at http://www.regulations.gov , including any personal information provided, unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov , your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm .

Docket : Documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials, such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center.

Background: The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) was established under section 109(d)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) (42 U.S.C. 7409) as an independent scientific advisory committee. CASAC provides advice, information and recommendations on the scientific and technical aspects of air quality criteria and national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) under sections 108 and 109 of the Act. The CASAC is a Federal advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The Panel will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies.

Section 109(d)(1) of the CAA requires that the Agency periodically review and revise, as appropriate, the air quality criteria and the NAAQS for the six “criteria” air pollutants, including oxides of nitrogen (NO X ). EPA is in the process of reviewing the primary NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) as an indicator for NO X . Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including the health of “sensitive” populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly.

CASAC has previously provided consultative advice on EPA's Integrated Review Plan for the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide (August 2007) and conducted peer review of the first and second drafts of EPA's Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen—Health Criteria. CASAC also provided consultative advice on EPA's Nitrogen Dioxide Health Assessment Plan: Scope and Methods for Exposure and Risk Assessment and conducted peer review of EPA's Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of the NO 2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard: First Draft. The CASAC advisory reports are available on the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/casac. The purpose of this meeting is for CASAC to conduct a peer review of the Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of the NO 2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Second Draft.

Technical Contact: Any questions concerning EPA's Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of the NO 2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Second Draft should be directed to Dr. Scott Jenkins, OAR (by telephone (919) 541-1167, or e-mail jenkins.scott@epa.gov.

Availability of Meeting Materials: EPA-OAR's Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of the NO 2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Second Draft will be accessible via the Agency's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_cr_rea.html on or about August 12, 2008. Agendas and materials supporting the meeting will be placed on the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/casac before the meeting.

Procedures for Providing Public Input: Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information for the CASAC Panel to consider during the advisory process. Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a public meeting will be limited to five minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of one hour for all speakers. Interested parties should contact Dr. Angela Nugent, DFO, in writing (preferably via e-mail) by September 2, 2008 at the contact information noted above to be placed on the public speaker list for this meeting.

Written Statements: Written statements for the public meeting should be received by Dr. Angela Nugent at the contact information above by September 2, 2008, so that the information may be made available to the Panel for their consideration prior to this meeting. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO in the following formats: one hard copy with original signature (optional), and one electronic copy via e-mail (acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format).

Accessibility: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Dr. Nugent at the phone number or e-mail address noted above, preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

A notice that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) would be submitting the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP or Uniform Guidelines) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for a three-year approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), was published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2008, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. 73 FR 15754 (Mar. 25, 2008). At that time, the EEOC announced that it would submit the Uniform Guidelines without change from its original form as adopted in 1978, and without change in the original interpretive Qs & As adopted in 1979 and 1980. The Uniform Guidelines continue to provide fundamental and consistent federal guidance for all Title VII-covered employers about the use of employment selection procedures.

Nine parties submitted written comments in response to the March 2008 notice: five federal agencies (including two sister UGESP agencies concurring with the proposal) and four other parties, including representatives of federal contractors and businesses generally, a civil rights organization, and an economic consultant. Three parties focused their comments on responding to the PRA's mandatory questions about data utility and burden. Of these parties, two agreed that the UGESP recordkeeping requirements were necessary and useful for the EEOC's performance of its enforcement responsibilities and also accepted the EEOC's burden estimate. One commenter found the data collection was unnecessary and burdensome, and disagreed with the EEOC's burden estimate. The EEOC's burden calculation is based on contemporary, publicly-available data. It reflects the ongoing burden of collecting and storing demographic data for job applicants. Because UGESP remains unchanged, the burden estimate does not reflect the cost of new information systems or software.

Five commenters agreed with the EEOC's decision to submit UGESP for PRA authorization without change, including the Department of Labor and the Office of Personnel Management, sister UGESP agencies. The reasons include preserving consistency in regulation, preserving a necessary data tool, and not disturbing the now-standard business practice of collecting demographic data from applicants. As an enforcement agency, the EEOC believes that UGESP is a necessary recordkeeping tool, which also provides fundamental and consistent federal guidance for all Title VII-covered employers about the use of employment selection procedures.

Most commenters supported the decision not to finalize the UGESP agencies' proposed March 2004 subregulatory Qs and As. These proposed Qs and As defined electronic applicant for purposes of implementing the Uniform Guidelines. 69 FR 10152 (Mar. 4, 2004). Several parties cited the 2005 internet applicant regulation issued by Department of Labor's (DOL) OFCCP, the agency responsible for enforcement of Executive Order 11246, and two parties urged the Commission to consider alternative guidance after further study of the issues. Another party stated that UGESP and its existing Qs and As, without change, were sufficient. DOL's OFCCP concurred in the decision not to finalize the proposed Qs and As, and to submit UGESP without change to OMB. Maintaining UGESP in its current form is the appropriate course at this time.

Collection Title: Recordkeeping Requirements of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, 29 CFR part 1607, 41 CFR part 60-3, 28 CFR part 50, 5 CFR part 300.

OMB Number: 3046-0017.

Form Number: None.

Frequency of Report: None.

Type of Respondent: Businesses or other institutions; federal government; state or local governments and farms.

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code: Multiple.

Standard Industrial Classification Code (SIC): Multiple.

Description of Affected Public: Any employer, government contractor, labor organization, or employment agency covered by the federal equal employment opportunity laws.

Respondents: 846,156.

Responses: 846,156.

Cost to Respondents: $182,164,775.20.

Recordkeeping Hours: 14,822,194.89.

Number of Forms: None.

Federal Cost: 0.

Abstract: The records addressed by UGESP are used by respondents to assure that they are complying with Title VII and Executive Order 11246; by the Federal agencies that enforce Title VII and/or Executive Order 11246 to investigate, conciliate and litigate charges of employment discrimination; and by complainants to establish violations of Federal equal employment opportunity laws.

Burden Statement: There are no reporting requirements associated with UGESP. The burden being estimated is the cost of collecting and storing a job applicant's gender, race and ethnicity data. The only paperwork burden derives from this recordkeeping.

Only employers covered by Title VII and Executive Order 11246 are subject to UGESP. For the purpose of burden calculation, employers with 15 or more employees are counted. The number of such employers is estimated at 846,156, which combines estimates from private employment, the public sector, colleges and universities, and referral unions.

This burden assessment is based on an estimate of the total number of job applications submitted to all Title VII- covered employers in one year, including both paper-based and electronic applications. The total number of job applications submitted every year to covered employers is estimated to be 1,778,663,387, which is based on a National Organizations Survey average of 35.225 applications for every hire and a Bureau of Labor Statistics data estimate of 50,490,000 annual hires. It also includes 153,137 applicants for union membership reported on the EEO-3 form for 2006.

The employer burden associated with collecting and storing applicant demographic data is based on the following assumptions: applicants would need to be asked to provide three pieces of information—sex, race/ethnicity, and an identification number (a total of approximately 13 keystrokes); the employer would need to transfer information received to a data base either manually or electronically; and the employer would need to store the 13 characters of information for each applicant. Recordkeeping costs and burden are assumed to be the cost of entering 13 keystrokes.

Assuming that the required recordkeeping takes 30 seconds per record, and assuming a total of 1,778,663,387 paper and electronic applications per year, the resulting UGESP burden hours would be 14,822,194.89. Based on a wage rate of $12.29 per hour for the individuals entering the data, the collection and storage of applicant demographic data would come to approximately $182,164,775.20 per year for Title VII-covered employers.

OMB Control Number: 3060-1094.

Title: Licensing, Operation, and Transition of the 2500-2690 MHz Band.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents: 2,500 respondents; 12,726 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .25-5 hours average burden per response.

Frequency of Response: On occasion and one-time reporting requirements, recordkeeping requirement, and third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

Total Annual Burden: 8,457 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $266,666.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The revised information collection requirements provides that information provided pursuant to the new requirement shall not be disclosed to additional parties except to the extent necessary to ensure compliance with the rule.

Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this information collection (IC) to the OMB as a revision during this comment period to obtain the full three-year clearance from them.The FCC adopted and released a Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order ( 2008 Order ) in FCC 08-83, which proposes to extend and modify existing reporting and third party disclosure requirements such that licensees will, pursuant to Section 27.1221(f) of the Commission's rules, be required to provide the geographic coordinates, the height above ground level of the center of radiation for each transmit and receive antenna, and the date transmissions commenced for each of the base stations in its Geographic Service Area (GSA) within 30 days of receipt of a request from a co-channel, neighboring Broadband Radio Service/Educational Broadband Service (BRS/EBS) licensee. This information will be used to prevent harmful interference to licensees' BRS/EBS operations. Since BRS/EBS licensees will be providing this technical information to a third party, the information will not be used by the Commission unless submitted by the parties pursuant to an interference complaint. This additional requirement will add an additional .50 hours per licensee for reporting and recordkeeping requirements with an average of up to 250 responses to the current information collection burden for wireless service providers. Finally, the Commission is removing the requirement for the MVPD Opt Out (Waiver Request) provision that was approved by OMB the last time this collection was submitted to the OMB for approval. This voluntary deadline for filing waiver requests ended on April 30, 2007. Therefore, the Commission is reporting −3 hours in annual burden and −$6,668 in annual costs (program change reductions) to remove this requirement from this information collection.

OMB Control Number: 3060-1039.

Title: Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Regarding the Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act—Review Process, WT Docket No. 03-128.

Form Nos.: FCC Forms 620 and 621.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions, and state, local or tribal government.

Number of Respondents: 12,000 respondents; 12,000 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .50-10 hours average burden per response.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement, recordkeeping requirement, and third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

Total Annual Burden: 123,888 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $9,253,296.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: This information collection in general requires no need for confidentiality. On a case by case basis, the Commission may be required to withhold from disclosure certain information about the location, character, or ownership of a historic property, including traditional religious sites. ( See 16 U.S.C. Section 470w-3.)

Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this information collection (IC) to the OMB as a revision during this comment period to obtain the full three-year clearance from them. There has been no change in the estimated number of respondents/responses, burden hours or annual costs.

The Commission is currently revising this form to make it available in electronic format or developing a means of filing these forms electronically via the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The Commission has conducted extensive public outreach sessions for the revised forms and screen designs. While the outreach did not result in specific changes to the forms, we did streamline some of our screen design and add clarifications to the forms. In this latest revision, to alleviate numerous attachments, the Commission is adding the following data elements to the FCC Form 620:

• Consultant FCC Registration Number (FRN).

• TCNS Notification Number.

• Site Name of Structure.

• Tribal/NHO Involvement.

• Historic Properties.

• Local Government Involvement.

• Other Consulting Parties.

• Designation of SHPO/THPO.

The following data elements are being added to the FCC Form 621:

• Consultant FCC Registration Number (FRN).

• TCNS Notification Number.

• Secondary TCNS Notification Number.

• Site Name of Structure.

• Tribal/NHO Involvement.

• Historic Properties.

• Local Government Involvement.

• Other Consulting Parties.

• Designation of SHPO/THPO.

The data is used by FCC staff, State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO), Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) to take such action as may be necessary to ascertain whether a proposed action may affect historic properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the National Register as directed by Section 106 of the NHPA and the Commission's rules.

The Secretary is required by section 1833(t)(9)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act), as amended and redesignated by sections 201(h) and 202(a)(2) of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (BBRA) (Pub. L. 106-113), to consult with an expert outside advisory Panel regarding the clinical integrity of the APC groups and relative payment weights that are components of the Medicare hospital OPPS.

The APC Panel meets up to three times annually. The Charter requires that the Panel must be fairly balanced in its membership in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed. The Panel consists of up to 15 members, who are representatives of providers, and a Chair. Each Panel member must be employed full-time by a hospital, hospital system, or other Medicare provider subject to payment under the OPPS. The Secretary or Administrator selects the Panel membership based upon either self-nominations or nominations submitted by Medicare providers and other interested organizations. All members must have technical expertise to enable them to participate fully in the work of the Panel. This expertise encompasses hospital payment systems; hospital medical-care delivery systems; provider billing systems; APC groups, Current Procedural Terminology codes, and alpha-numeric Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes; and the use and payment of drugs and medical devices in the outpatient setting, as well as other forms of relevant expertise.

The Charter requires that all members have a minimum of 5 years experience in their area(s) of expertise, but it is not necessary that any member be an expert in all of the areas listed above. For purposes of this Panel, consultants, independent contractors, and individuals in private practice are not considered as being full-time employees of hospitals, hospital systems, or other Medicare providers that are paid under the Medicare hospital OPPS. Panel members serve up to 4-year terms. A member may serve after the expiration of his or her term until a successor has been sworn in. All terms are contingent upon the renewal of the Panel's Charter by appropriate action before its termination. The Secretary re-chartered the APC Panel effective November 21, 2006.

The Panel may consist of a Chair and up to 15 Panel members who serve without compensation, according to an advance written agreement. Travel, meals, lodging, and related expenses for the meeting are reimbursed in accordance with standard Government travel regulations. We have a special interest in ensuring that women, minorities, representatives from various geographical locations, and the physically challenged are adequately represented on the Panel.

The Secretary, or his designee, appoints new members to the Panel from among those candidates determined to have the required expertise. New appointments are made in a manner that ensures a balanced membership.

The Panel presently consists of the following 15 members and a Chair: (The asterisk [*] indicates a Panel member whose term expires on 06/30/2008, and the double asterisk [**] indicates Panel members whose terms expire on 09/30/2008.)

• Edith Hambrick, M.D., J.D., Chair

• Gloryanne Bryant, B.S., R.H.I.A., R.H.I.T., C.C.S.

• Patrick Grusenmeyer, Sc.D., M.P.A., F.A.C.H.

• Hazel Kimmel, R.N., C.C.S., C.P.C.*

• Michael D. Mills, Ph.D., M.S.P.H.

• Thomas M. Munger, M.D., F.A.C.C.

• Agatha L. Nolen, D.Ph., M.S.

• Beverly Khnie Philip, M.D.

• Louis Potters, M.D., F.A.C.R.**

• Russ Ranallo, M.S.

• James V. Rawson, M.D.

• Michael A. Ross, M.D., F.A.C.E.P.

• Judie S. Snipes, R.N., M.B.A., F.A.C.H.E.**

• Patricia Spencer-Cisek, M.S., A.P.R.N.-BC, A.O.C.N.®

• Kim Allan Williams, M.D., F.A.C.C., F.A.B.C.

• Robert Matthew Zwolak, M.D., Ph.D., F.A.C.S.

On February 22, 2008, we published the notice titled “Request for Nominations to the Advisory Panel on Ambulatory Payment Classification Groups” (CMS-1395-N) in the Federal Register (FR) requesting nominations to the Panel replacing Panel members whose terms would expire prior to or on September 30, 2008. As a result of that FR notice, we are announcing three new members to the Panel. One new 4-year appointment commences on August 1, 2008, and two new 4-year appointments commence on October 1, 2008, as indicated below:

In accordance with section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this notice announces the quarterly meeting of the Practicing Physicians Advisory Council (the Council). The Secretary is mandated by section 1868(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (the Act) to appoint a Practicing Physicians Advisory Council based on nominations submitted by medical organizations representing physicians. The Council meets quarterly to discuss certain proposed changes in regulations and manual instructions related to physician services, as identified by the Secretary. To the extent feasible and consistent with statutory deadlines, the Council's consultation must occur before Federal Register publication of the proposed changes. The Council submits an annual report on its recommendations to the Secretary and the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) not later than December 31 of each year.

The Council consists of 15 physicians, including the Chair. Members of the Council include both participating and nonparticipating physicians, and physicians practicing in rural and underserved urban areas. At least 11 members of the Council must be physicians as described in section 1861(r)(1) of the Act; that is, State-licensed doctors of medicine or osteopathy. The remaining 4 members may include dentists, podiatrists, optometrists, and chiropractors. Members serve for overlapping 4-year terms.

Section 1868(a)(2) of the Act provides that the Council meet quarterly to discuss certain proposed changes in regulations and manual issuances that relate to physicians' services, identified by the Secretary. Section 1868(a)(3) of the Act provides for payment of expenses and per diem for Council members in the same manner as members of other advisory committees appointed by the Secretary. In addition to making these payments, the Department of Health and Human Services and CMS provide management and support services to the Council. The Secretary will appoint new members to the Council from among those candidates determined to have the expertise required to meet specific agency needs in a manner to ensure appropriate balance of the Council's membership.

The Council held its first meeting on May 11, 1992. The current members are: Vincent J. Bufalino, M.D., Chairperson; M. Leroy Sprang, M.D.; Karen S. Williams, M.D.; Joseph A. Giaimo, D.O.; Jonathan E. Siff, M.D., MBA; John E. Arradondo, M.D., MPH; Fredrica E. Smith, M.D.; Pamela A. Howard, M.D.; Tye J. Ouzounian, M.D.; Christopher J. Standaert, M.D.; Arthur D. Snow, Jr., M.D.; Gregory J. Przybylski, M.D.; Jeffrey A. Ross, DPM, M.D.; Roger L. Jordan, O.D.; and Janice A. Kirsch, M.D.

Nominations must be submitted by medical organizations representing physicians. Nominees must have submitted at least 250 claims for physician services under the Medicare program in the previous year. Each nomination must state that the nominee has expressed a willingness to serve as a Council member and must be accompanied by a short resume or description of the nominee's experience. All candidates are advised to consider the time commitment of 1 full-day meeting, quarterly. If a candidate's current responsibilities preclude this level of commitment, we urge the individual to reconsider his or her nomination.

To permit an evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest, potential candidates will be asked to provide detailed information concerning financial holdings, consultant positions, research grants, and contracts. Consideration will be given to each nominee with regard to his or her leadership credentials, geographic and demographic factors, and projected PPAC needs. Final selections will incorporate these criteria to maintain a committee membership that is fairly balanced in terms of points of view represented and the committee's function. Selections will be made by February 2009 with new members sworn in during the May 2009 meeting.

Nominations to fill vacancies on the Council will be considered if received at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of the notice, no later than the date listed in the DATES section of this notice. All nominating organizations will be notified in writing of those candidates selected for committee membership.

The meeting will commence with the Council's Executive Director providing a status report, and the CMS responses to the recommendations made by the Council at the May 19, 2008 meeting, as well as prior meeting recommendations. Additionally, an update will be provided on the Physician Regulatory Issues Team. In accordance with the Council charter, we are requesting assistance with the following agenda topics:

• Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule

• Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) Update

• Demonstration Projects

• DME Update

• Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Proposed Rules

• Medicare Contractor Provider Satisfaction Survey (MCPSS)

For additional information and clarification on these topics, contact the DFO as provided in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. Individual physicians or medical organizations that represent physicians wishing to present a 5-minute oral testimony on agenda issues must register with the DFO by the date listed in the DATES section of this notice. Testimony is limited to agenda topics only. The number of oral testimonies may be limited by the time available. A written copy of the presenter's oral remarks must be submitted to the DFO for distribution to Council members for review before the meeting by the date listed in the DATES section of this notice. Physicians and medical organizations not scheduled to speak may also submit written comments to the DFO for distribution by the date listed in the DATES section of this notice.

The meeting is open to the public, but attendance is limited to the space available. Persons wishing to attend this meeting must register by contacting the DFO at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice or by telephone at (410) 786-6132 by the date specified in the DATES section of this notice.

Since this meeting will be held in a Federal Government Building, the CMS Central Office, Federal security measures are applicable. In planning your arrival time, we recommend allowing additional time to clear security. To gain access to the building, participants will be required to show a government-issued photo identification (for example, driver's license, or passport), and must be listed on an approved security list before persons are permitted entrance. Persons not registered in advance will not be permitted into the CMS Central Office and will not be permitted to attend the Council meeting.

All persons entering the building must pass through a metal detector. In addition, all items brought to the CMS Central Office, whether personal or for the purpose of presentation, are subject to inspection. We cannot assume responsibility for coordinating the receipt, transfer, transport, storage, set-up, safety, or timely arrival of any personal belongings or items used for the purpose of presentation.

Individuals requiring sign language interpretation or other special accommodation must contact the DFO via the contact information specified in the FOR FUTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice by the date listed in the DATES section of this notice.

The priority mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is to prevent terrorists and terrorists' weapons from entering the country while facilitating legitimate travel and trade. BCI will maintain border crossing information on travelers who are admitted or paroled into the United States, this information includes: Certain biographical information; a photograph (if available); certain itinerary information provided by air and sea carriers and any other forms of passenger transportation, including rail, which is or may subsequently be mandated, or is or may be provided on a voluntary basis; and the time and location of the border crossing. Previously, maintenance of this information was covered by the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) “system of records notice.” See 66 FR 52984, dated October 18, 2001. As part of DHS's ongoing effort to increase transparency regarding the collection of information at the Department, as well as its efforts to specifically review the personally identifiable information maintained on the TECS information technology platform, DHS and CBP have identified different data sets that call for individual notices so as to provide appropriate routine uses, retention, and exemptions to the Privacy Act.

This system of records notice does not identify or create any new collection of information; rather, the Department is providing additional notice and transparency with respect to the handling of an existing collection of information, by separately noticing it as a distinct system of records.

CBP is the agency responsible for collecting and reviewing border crossing information from travelers entering and departing the United States. This is consistent with CBP's overall border security and enforcement missions. Upon arrival in the United States, all individuals crossing the border are subject to CBP processing. As part of this clearance process, each traveler entering the United States must first establish his or her identity, nationality, and admissibility to the satisfaction of a CBP officer. Additionally, CBP creates a record of the fact that the individual has been admitted or paroled into the United States at a particular time and port of entry. This record was previously covered by TECS system of records notice and will now be maintained in accordance with the privacy rules of this newly created Privacy Act System of Records Notice, BCI.

The border crossing information identified below may be collected in a number of different ways. For example, information may be collected: (1) From the travel documents presented by the individual at CBP Ports of Entry, such as foreign passports, where no advance notice of the border crossing has been provided to CBP; (2) from carriers who submit information in advance of travel, through the Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) (See DHS/CBP-005, August 23, 2007, 72 FR 48346); (3) from a DHS system that validates a Trusted Traveler Program card, I-551 Permanent Resident Card, or immigration document; (4) from non-federal governmental authorities that have issued valid travel documents approved by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, such as an Enhanced Driver's License (EDL); or (5) from another Federal Agency that has issued a valid travel document, such as Department of State Visa, Passport including Passport Card, or Border Crossing Card data. When a traveler is admitted or paroled into the U.S., a traveler's biographical information, photograph, where available, and crossing details (time and location) will be maintained in accordance with this BCI system of records. The information collected in BCI is authorized pursuant to the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reform Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-173), Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 (Pub. L. 107-71), the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-458), the Immigration and Naturalization Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 215), and the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 66, 1433, 1454, 1485, 1624 and 2071) and much of the information can be found on routine travel documents that persons, passengers, and crewmembers currently provide to CBP when entering and departing the United States.

BCI shall contain border crossing information, as that term is explained above, for all individuals who are admitted or paroled into the United States, regardless of method or conveyance, and information for all individuals who depart the United States by air or sea and, in certain circumstances, by land. In certain circumstances in the land environment, CBP will collect the individual's biographic data, either directly from an approved travel document presented by the traveler and/or by verifying the traveler's border crossing information against electronic records supporting certain documents, such as EDLs, determined by the Secretary of DHS to denote citizenship and identity in conformance with IRTPA. For certain air and sea carriers and any other forms of passenger transportation, including rail, which are or may subsequently be mandated to provide APIS, or provide such information on a voluntary basis, CBP will confirm the individual's data against such information previously submitted by carriers.

For information collected from certain travel documents, for example a foreign or U.S. Passport, the CBP Officer will swipe the Machine Readable Zone (MRZ) to populate the border crossing record for an individual.

For records first collected through APIS, the BCI record will contain all the data of the APIS record (including complete name, date of birth, travel document type (e.g., passport), travel document number and travel document country of issuance) as well as information pertaining to the instance of the border crossing (for example, airport or place of embarkation, where the person began their travel to the United States; for persons destined for the U.S., the location where the person underwent CBP clearance). Such data will also be maintained in accordance with the APIS SORN, DHS/CBP-005 August 23, 2007 72 FR 48349.

For records first collected through the Non-Federal Entity Data System (NEDS), a new system of records being published concurrently in today's Federal Register , biographic data elements and photographs collected by the authority issuing the travel document will be transferred from NEDS, displayed in TECS, and then recorded in BCI as border crossing information at the time an individual is admitted or paroled into the United States. In the instance of data being transferred from NEDS, the biographical data and photograph will be first collected from the traveler by the issuing authority of the respective travel document and then provided to CBP, which will store a copy of that data in the system of records described by the NEDS SORN. At the time of arrival at the border, the travel document, either through a CBP Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Reader reading a unique RFID number from the RFID chip contained in the travel document, or through the CBP Machine Reader reading the MRZ of the travel document, will be used to retrieve the biographical data and photograph associated with the travel document from NEDS and populate a record in BCI, following admission/parole, to permit CBP to electronically verify identity and citizenship, to perform law enforcement queries to identify security risks to the United States and to expedite CBP processing upon arrival in and prior to departure from the United States. Upon admission/parole of the individual by CBP at the United States border or its functional equivalent, a record of the crossing will be created in BCI. Prior to admission/parole and during the process of inspecting the individual, information relating to identity and citizenship is compiled by the CBP in TECS, as part of the screening process to determine admissibility.

For records where traveler-specific information is accessed from a non-federal authority's travel document database at the time of the traveler's crossing, the biographical data and photograph will be first collected from the traveler by the issuing authority of the respective travel document and the issuing authority will maintain its own travel document database; the data from such issuing authorities will not reside in NEDS. At the time of arrival at the border, the travel document, either through a CBP RFID Reader reading the RFID number from the RFID chip contained in the travel document, or through the CBP Machine Reader reading the MRZ of the travel document, will be used to access that traveler's biographic data and photograph, displaying it in TECS; upon admission to the United States, that data will be recorded in BCI. CBP also uses this information to perform law enforcement queries to identify security risks to the United States and to expedite CBP border processing.

For records where the information is provided by another component of DHS or another federal government authority, such as the State Department's Visa and Passport database or USCIS Permanent Resident Card data, the information will be transferred from the federal authority's or DHS's system of records, displayed in TECS, and then used to create a record in BCI at the time of admission or parole into the United States. Technically, in the case of information obtained from the Department of State and Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), the information is maintained on the TECS IT Platform to improve the efficiency of the processing time at the border, but the information follows the State Department's or USCIS's system of records notices until the individual is admitted or paroled into the United States, at which point the information will by handled consistent with the BCI system of records notice, or that of any other DHS systems (such as TECS) in which it may be recorded.

BCI does not constitute a new collection of biographic information by DHS or CBP. DHS and CBP are providing additional notice and transparency with respect to the functionality of an existing operational process. The information storage functions of BCI were previously handled as a sub-module within TECS and covered by the TECS “system of records notice.” See 66 FR 52984.

The Privacy Act embodies fair information principles in a statutory framework governing the means by which the United States Government collects, maintains, uses and disseminates personally identifiable information. The Privacy Act applies to information that is maintained in a “system of records.” A “system of records” is a group of any records under the control of an agency from which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual. In the Privacy Act, an individual is defined to encompass United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. DHS extends administrative Privacy Act protections to all persons where information is maintained in the same system on U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, and non-immigrant aliens. BCI involves the collection of information that will be maintained in a system of records.

The Privacy Act requires each agency to publish in the Federal Register a description denoting the type and character of each system of records that the agency maintains, and the routine uses that apply to each system to make agency recordkeeping practices transparent, to notify individuals regarding the uses to which personally identifiable information is put, and to assist the individual to more easily find such files within the agency.

DHS is hereby publishing a description of the Border Crossing Information, system of records. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), a report concerning this record system has been sent to the Office of Management and Budget and to the Congress.

I. Background

The priority mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the country while facilitating legitimate travel and trade. In response to this mission, Congressionally mandated, and as part of its efforts to secure the border, CBP and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plan to implement the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), which eliminates a historical exemption that allowed certain travelers, notably U.S. and Canadian citizens, to enter the United States from within the Western Hemisphere without presenting a valid passport or other approved travel document. In advance of full WHTI implementation, DHS is working to close existing security gaps at the earliest possible opportunity, such as the implementation of new procedures for U.S. and Canadian citizens entering the U.S. that became effective January 31, 2008, and to prepare new secure travel document requirements that are expected to go into effect upon full WHTI implementation on June 1, 2009.

To facilitate border crossing for their citizens, certain states, Native American tribes, Canadian provinces and territories and other non-federal governmental authorities may make available to CBP biographical information and photographs associated with travel documents, such as Enhanced Driver's Licenses (EDLs). EDLs utilize facilitative technology such as RFID and contain a Machine Readable Zone (MRZ) using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology; they denote both identity and citizenship for border-crossing purposes. In certain instances, non-federal governmental authorities are choosing to provide to CBP biographical information and photographs that applicants for EDLs or similar travel documents have provided voluntarily to the issuing entity, with the understanding that such information will be stored by CBP for purposes of facilitating the document holder's crossing of the border. When a traveler presents such a document for purposes of entering the United States, CBP may validate this document and the information provided by the traveler, against the information provided to CBP by the issuing authority. Therefore, in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, proposes to add the following system of records to its inventory of records systems, the Non-Federal Entity Data System (NEDS).

Upon arrival, all individuals crossing the border are required to submit to inspection and be cleared for admission by CBP. As part of this clearance process, each traveler entering the United States must first establish his or her identity, nationality/citizenship, and admissibility to the satisfaction of a CBP officer. Additionally, CBP records the fact that the individual has been admitted or paroled into the United States. This record is maintained in a newly created Privacy Act System of Records, Border Crossing Information (BCI), which is being concurrently published in today's Federal Register . DHS has determined that certain border crossing travel documents enabled with RFID, MRZ and OCR technology will be accepted as proof of identity and citizenship and, further, may be accepted as WHTI-compliant travel documents upon implementation of WHTI.

The purpose of the Non-Federal Entity Data System (NEDS) is to have available to the CBP officer at the border the data related to certain border crossing travel documents. This will enable the CBP officer to quickly access the traveler's biographic information and photograph, when the traveler presents his or her border crossing travel document, to validate the authenticity of the travel document. Certain non-federal governmental authorities will choose to provide CBP with a copy of information derived from their EDL (or other traveler document) database, that denotes identity and citizenship, and can be used by CBP to validate the travel document. The datasets from each issuing authority will be kept separately such that information from one issuing authority is not commingled with another's information.

CBP may electronically validate the following information, where available, and record this information as part of the traveler's border crossing record: Full name (first, middle, and last), date of birth, gender, travel document type (e.g., EDL) and number or identifier, expiration date, issuing country or jurisdiction, country of citizenship, and photograph (when available). Where the issuing entity provides CBP with an advance copy of information from their travel document database, that data will be maintained in NEDS.

Upon arrival at the border, a person presenting proof of identity or citizenship issued by a non-federal governmental authority will have the identifier associated with her or his border crossing travel document read by the appropriate technology, such as an RFID reader, or the document information will be read using the MRZ or will be entered manually by the CBP officer. The identifier associated with this travel document will be transmitted through secure CBP computer networks to NEDS, where the unique number will be associated with the respective biographic information and photograph held in that system. The associated biographic information and photograph is then transmitted back through secure CBP computer networks to the port of entry and inspection terminal where the border crossing travel document was first read for confirmation that the document is a valid document and belongs to the person presenting the document to the CBP officer.

In cases where a traveler presents a federally issued travel document, such as a Visa, Passport or Passport card, or Border Crossing Card (BCC) issued by Department of State, or an I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), DHS will validate the travel document through the use of systems or databases other than NEDS. NEDS is only employed when the travel document is issued by a non-federal government authority and that authority has provided CBP with advance information for purposes of validating such documents at the time of a U.S. border crossing. The data housed in NEDS is then used to populate biographical data fields contained in two other CBP systems, BCI (to record the entry of a traveler into the United States) and, where applicable, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) (in the event some enforcement action is taken with regard to that traveler).

The traveler information held in NEDS is used by CBP to facilitate implementation of its mandates pursuant to the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reform Act of 2002, Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 66, 1433, 1459, 1624, and 2071), and the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1185).

The information held within NEDS will be maintained and used in accordance with the individual memorandum of understanding/agreement with each issuing authority.

The Privacy Act embodies fair information principles in a statutory framework governing the means by which the United States Government collects, maintains, uses and disseminates personally identifiable information. The Privacy Act applies to information that is maintained in a “system of records.” A “system of records” is a group of any records under the control of an agency from which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual. In the Privacy Act, an individual is defined to encompass United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. DHS extends administrative Privacy Act protections to all persons, whether they are U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, or non-immigrant aliens. The Non-Federal Entity Data System involves the collection of information that will be maintained in a system of records.

The Privacy Act requires each agency to publish in the Federal Register a description denoting the type and character of each system of records that the agency maintains, and the routine uses that are applicable to each system to make agency recordkeeping practices transparent, to notify individuals regarding the uses to which personally identifiable information is put, and to assist the individual to more easily find such files within the agency.

In consideration of privacy, CBP has limited the sharing of NEDS data to the statutory disclosures permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, and has chosen not to publish any routine uses pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3). This provides an individual possessing an approved travel document, such as EDL, whose data is shared with CBP prior to crossing the border with a similar level of privacy as the individual whose data is shared at the time of crossing with CBP.

DHS is hereby publishing a description of the Non-Federal Entity Data System, system of records. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), a report concerning this record system has been sent to the Office of Management and Budget and to the Congress.