Title: ARS Animal Health National Program Assessment Evaluation Form.

OMB Number: 0518-0042.

Expiration Date: February 28, 2013.

Type of Request: Approval to seek reinstatement of the ARS Animal Health National Program Assessment Survey, which seeks input from the beneficiaries of research conducted by ARS for program planning and ensures alignment of the Animal Health National Program with the needs of our customers, partners, and stakeholders.

Abstract: This voluntary electronic evaluation form will give the beneficiaries of ARS research the opportunity to provide input on the impact of the national program on animal agriculture. For the purpose of this National Program Assessment, impact is defined as research that has influenced or will significantly influence the animal sciences and animal health, has created or will create economic opportunities for producers and farmers, or has enabled or will enable action and regulatory agencies to formulate policies and regulations to support American agriculture. The report and evaluation form will be available on-line through a dedicated URL. The input provided through the completion of the evaluation form will be shared with customers, partners, and stakeholders through webinars, conference calls and/or meetings, which will be held during the input stage of the program planning cycle.

ARS National Program Assessments are conducted every 5 years, through the organization of webinars, conference calls and/or meetings. These input sessions allow ARS to periodically update the vision and rationale of each National Program and assess the relevancy, effectiveness, and responsiveness of ARS research. In addition, these input sessions facilitate the review and simultaneously provide an opportunity for customers, stakeholders, and partners to assess the progress made through the National Program and provide input for future modifications to the National Program or the National Program's research agenda.

In the case of the ARS Animal Health National Program, the beneficiaries of the research are numerous, including the majority of the livestock and poultry industries, trade associations, Federal and State government agencies, and research partners in universities and the private sector. The electronic evaluation form will allow ARS to outreach to its many customers, partners, and stakeholders that are unable to attend the webinars, conference calls and/or meetings and also ensure an efficient means of obtaining the greatest amount of input on the impact and direction of the ARS Animal Health National Research Program.

Estimate of Burden: Completing the electronic evaluation form is estimated to average 15 minutes per response.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 400.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 100 hours.

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 the assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the input provided by a wide array of customers, and; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technology. Comments should be sent to the address in the preamble. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) is responsible for maintaining the Swine Contract Library, which is authorized by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) Act of 1999, and requires that certain packers submit hog procurement contracts and delivery estimates to GIPSA. The Swine Contract Library was reauthorized by Congress on October 5, 2006 through 2010. On September 28, 2010, the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010 reauthorized LMR for an additional 5 years.

Title: Swine Contract Library.

OMB Number: 0580-0021.

Expiration Date of Approval: March 31, 2013.

Type of Request: Extension and revision of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: The information collection and recordkeeping requirements for the Swine Contract Library are essential to maintaining the mandatory library of swine marketing contracts and reporting the number of swine contracted for delivery. There are currently 30 packers that are required to file contracts and report certain information on deliveries for a total of 43 plants that they either operate or at which they have swine slaughtered. We expect the overall number of plants and packers to remain relatively constant, but the specific packers required to report will vary with consolidation and construction in the industry.

Packers are required to report information for individual plants even in instances when a given packer owned or used more than one plant. The information collection burden estimate provided below is based on time and cost requirements at the plant level. Consequently, packers that report for more than one plant would bear a cost that would be a multiple of the per-plant estimates.

We understand from discussions with packers complying with current reporting requirements that reporting packers have adapted pre-existing data and information systems to provide the required information.

There are two types of information collections required for the Swine Contract Library.

The first information collection requirement consists of submitting example contracts. Initially, a packer submits example contracts currently in effect or available for each swine processing plant that is subject to the regulations. Subsequently, a packer submits example contracts for any offered, new, or amended contracts that vary from previously submitted contracts in regard to the base price determination, the application of a ledger or accrual account, carcass merit premium and discount schedules (including the determination of the lean percent or other merits of the carcass that is used to determine the amount of the premiums and discounts and how those premiums and discounts are applied), or the use and amount of noncarcass merit premiums or discounts. The initial submission of example contracts requires more time than subsequent filings of new contracts or changes, as packers initially need to review all their contracts to identify the unique types that need to be represented by an example submitted to GIPSA.

Thereafter, subsequent filings require a minimal amount of effort on the part of packers, as only example contracts that represent a new or different type need to be filed with GIPSA. P&SP-342 must accompany each contract submission to identify the contract, the plan for which the contract is valid, and the contact person.

The required submission of contracts includes both written and verbal contracts. Packers have added documentation of verbal contracts to their existing recordkeeping systems in order to comply with this requirement. The optional form that is available, but not required, for reporting verbal contracts is used by 10 packers; 2 packers that rely heavily on verbal contracts use this optional form exclusively to document their verbal contracts. Of 1,022 contracts files on file, the optional verbal contract sheet was used to document 245 verbal contracts.

The second information collection requirement is a monthly filing of summary information on form P&SP 341, Monthly Report: Estimates of Swine To Be Delivered Under Contract. The form for the monthly filing is simple and brief. For new packers required to start reporting, this data should be available in the packers' existing record system. Electronic submission is encouraged and we provide the necessary information on procedures to submit data to GIPSA electronically. In 2011, 50 percent of monthly reports were submitted through the Web site, with the remaining 50 percent submitted by facsimile or mail.

The estimates of time requirements used for the burden estimates below were developed in consultation with GIPSA personnel knowledgeable of the industry's recordkeeping practices. The estimates also reflect our experience in assembling large amount of data during the course of numerous investigations involving use of data collected from the industry. Estimates of time requirements and hourly wage costs for developing electronic recordkeeping and reporting systems are based on our experience in developing similar systems in consultation with our automated information systems staff.

Estimate of Burden: Reporting burden for submission of contracts is estimated to include 4 hours per plant for an initial review of all contracts to categorize them into types and identify unique examples, plus an additional 0.25 hours per unique contract identified during the initial review to submit an example of that contract. After the initial filing, the reporting burden is estimated to include 0.25 hours per plant to submit an example of each new or amended contract.

Respondents: Packers required to report information for the Swine Contract Library.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 30 packers (total of 43 plants).

Estimated Number of Responses per Plant: Number of responses per plant varies. Some plants would have no contracts, while other could have up to 80 contracts. We receive an average of six example contracts per plant per year for offered contracts and for amended existing or available contracts.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: Initial filing: 5.5 total hours for the initial filing of examples of existing contracts by all plants newly subject to the regulations combined. Based on changes in the industry, we anticipate one new plant to become subject to the regulations each year. Calculated as follows: 4 hours per plant for initial review × 1 new plant = 4 hours for initial review; 0.25 hours per contract × 6 example contracts per plant × 1 new plant = 1.5 hours; 4 hours + 1.5 hours = 5.5 total hours.

Thereafter, 64.5 total hours annually for all subsequent filing of examples for offered contracts and for amended existing or available contracts by all plants combines, based on an average of 6 offered or amended existing or available contracts annually. Calculated as follows: 0.25 hours per contract × 6 example contracts per plant × 43 plants = 64.5 hours.

Total Cost: Initial filing $138 for all plants combined. Calculated as follows: 5.5 hours × $25 per hour = $138.

Thereafter, $1,613 annually for all plants combined for submission of subsequent filings. Calculated as follows: 64.5 hours × $25 per hour = $1,613.

Estimate of Burden: The reporting burden for compiling data, completing and submitting the form is estimated to average 2 hours per manually prepared and submitted (by mail or facsimile) report and 1 hour per electronically prepared and submitted report. There would be an estimated additional one-time set up burden of 1 hour at a cost of $60 per plant for a packer that chose to create a spreadsheet or database for recordkeeping and preparation of monthly estimates. There would be an estimated additional 2 hour burden at a cost of $60 per hour or $120 per plant for a packer to develop procedures to extract and format the required information and to develop an interface between the packer's electronic recordkeeping system and GIPSA's system. The hourly rate for the development of electronic tools is assumed to be high due to the need to use personnel with specialized computer skills.

Respondents: Packers required to report information for the Swine Contract Library.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 30 packers (total of 43 plants).

Estimated Number of Responses per Plant: 12 (1 per month for 12 months).

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,032 hours for all plants combined provided all plants used manual compiling, preparation, and submission. Calculated as follows: 2 hours per response × 43 plants × 12 responses per plant = 1,032.

516 hours for all plants combined provided all plants use electronic compiling, preparation, and submission. Calculated as follows: 1 hour per response × 43 plants × 12 responses per plant = 516 hours.

Total Cost: $25,800 annually for all plants combined provided all use manual submission. Calculated as follows: 1,032 × $25 per hour = $25,800.

$12,900 annually for all plants combined provided all were to completely utilize electronic preparation and submission. Calculated as follows: 516 hours × $25 per hour = $12,900.

Additional $180 one-time set-up cost provided all plants newly subject to the Regulations were to completely utilize electronic systems for preparation and submission.

Calculated as follows: 1 hour build spreadsheet/database + 2 hours develop electronic interface = 3 hours. 3 hours total development × $60 per hour × 1 new plant = $180.

The Paperwork Reduction Act also requires GIPSA to measure the recordkeeping burden. Under the Packers and Stockyards Act and its existing regulations, each packer is required to maintain and make available upon request any records necessary to verify information on all transactions between the packer and producers from whom the packer obtains swine for slaughter. Records that packers are required to maintain under existing regulations would meet the requirements for verifying the accuracy of information required to be reported for the Swine Contract Library. These records include original contracts, agreements, receipts, schedules, and other records associated with any transaction related to the purchase, pricing, and delivery of swine for slaughter under the terms of marketing contracts. Additional annual costs of maintaining records would be nominal since packers are required to store and maintain such records as a matter of normal business practice and in conformity with existing regulations.

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) and its implementing regulations (5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1)), we specifically request comment to:

(a) Evaluate 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) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(d) Minimize the burden on 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 be summarized and included in the request for the Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

In 7 CFR part 1737, Pre-Loan Policies and Procedures Common to Insured and Guaranteed Telecommunications Loans, § 1737.70(e) explains the depreciation rates that are used by RUS in its feasibility studies. § 1737.70(e)(2) refers to median depreciation rates published by RUS for all borrowers. The following chart provides those rates, compiled by RUS, for the reporting period ending December 31, 2011:

The antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC published in the Federal Register on September 15, 1997. 1 On September 28, 2012, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Act”), we received a timely request for an NSR of the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC from Deyan Aquatic Products and Food Co., Ltd. (“Deyan Aquatic”). 2 Deyan Aquatic certified that it is both the producer and exporter of the subject merchandise upon which the request was based. 3

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), Deyan Aquatic certified that it did not export subject merchandise to the United States during the period of investigation (“POI”). 4 In addition, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), Deyan Aquatic certified that, since the initiation of the investigation, it has never been affiliated with any exporter or producer who exported subject merchandise to the United States during the POI, including those respondents not individually examined during the POI. 5 As required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), Deyan Aquatic also certified that its export activities were not controlled by the government of the PRC. 6

In addition to the certifications described above, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2), Deyan Aquatic submitted documentation establishing the following: (1) The date on which Deyan Aquatic first shipped subject merchandise for export to the United States; (2) the volume of its first shipment; and (3) the date of its first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States. 7

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), the Department finds that Deyan Aquatic's request meets the threshold requirements for initiation of an NSR for the shipment of freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC produced and exported by Deyan Aquatic. 8

The POR for this NSR is September 1, 2011, through August 31, 2012. See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(A). The Department intends to issue the preliminary results of this review no later than 180 days from the date of initiation and final results of this review no later than 270 days from the date of initiation. See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act.

It is the Department's usual practice, in cases involving non-market economy countries, to require that a company seeking to establish eligibility for an antidumping duty rate separate from the country-wide rate provide evidence of de jure and de facto absence of government control over the company's export activities. Accordingly, we will issue a questionnaire to Deyan Aquatic, which will include a section requesting information concerning Deyan Aquatic's eligibility for a separate rate. The review will proceed if the response provides sufficient indication that Deyan Aquatic is not subject to either de jure or de facto government control with respect to its export of subject merchandise.

We will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to allow, at the option of the importer, the posting, until the completion of the review, of a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for each entry of the subject merchandise from Deyan Aquatic in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(e). Because Deyan Aquatic certified that it produced and exported the subject merchandise, the sale of which is the basis for this NSR request, we will apply the bonding privilege to Deyan Aquatic only for subject merchandise which Deyan Aquatic both produced and exported.

To assist in its analysis of the bona fides of Deyan Aquatic's sales, upon initiation of this NSR, the Department will require Deyan Aquatic to submit on an ongoing basis complete transaction information concerning any sales of subject merchandise to the United States that were made subsequent to the POR.

Interested parties requiring access to proprietary information in this NSR should submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306. This initiation and notice are published in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i).

We published the Preliminary Results for this NSR on June 1, 2012. In the Preliminary Results, the Department stated that interested parties were to submit case briefs within 30 days of publication of the Preliminary Results and rebuttal briefs within five days after the due date for filing case briefs. On June 27, 2012, the Department extended the deadlines for the case briefs and rebuttal briefs until July 10, 2012 and July 16, 2012, respectively. 2 On July 10, 2012, the Department received case briefs from Petitioner and GGB. On July 16, 2012, the Department received rebuttal briefs from Petitioner and GGB.

The POR is June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011.

Imports covered by the order are shipments of tapered roller bearings and parts thereof, finished and unfinished, from the PRC; flange, take up cartridge, and hanger units incorporating tapered roller bearings; and tapered roller housings (except pillow blocks) incorporating tapered rollers, with or without spindles, whether or not for automotive use. These products are currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) item numbers 8482.20.00, 8482.91.00.50, 8482.99.15, 8482.99.45, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 8483.30.80, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.80, 8708.99.80.15  3 and 8708.99.80.80. 4 Although the HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

All issues raised in the post-preliminary comments by parties in these reviews are addressed in the memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from the People's Republic of China,” dated October 19, 2012 (“Issues and Decision Memorandum”), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that parties raised and to which the Department responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit in room 7046 in the main Commerce Department building, and is also accessible on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the memorandum are identical in content.

Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made the following changes to our Preliminary Results:

• The normal value that was compared to U.S. price was calculated using certain factors of production that were reported on a per-kilogram basis while U.S. price was reported on a per-piece basis. In the final results, we corrected the dumping analysis to accurately reflect GGB's reported consumption of its inputs on a per-piece basis. 5

• We used the incorrect variable name for the entered value of the TRBs sold by GGB during the POR. In the final results, we corrected the variable name in the margin program to accurately reflect the reported variable name for entered value and corrected the assessment rate programming language. 6

• GGB reported a steel scrap by-product. We intended to grant an offset for this byproduct but made a clerical error in the Preliminary Results by not granting an offset for the steel scrap but rather, adding it to direct materials in the calculation of normal value. In the final results, we corrected the normal value calculation to include steel scrap as a by-product offset. 7

• We have recalculated surrogate financial ratios using different financial statements from those used in the Preliminary Results. 8

No party has contested the bona fide nature of GGB's sales during the POR. Therefore, for these final results, we find, as in the Preliminary Results, that the sales made by GGB during the POR of this NSR were made on a bona fide basis.

Since the Preliminary Results, no interested party has commented on the selection of Thailand as the primary surrogate country. Therefore, we continue to determine that Thailand is the appropriate primary surrogate country for the final results of this NSR.

The Department found in the Preliminary Results that GGB was wholly foreign-owned, and, therefore, further analysis was not necessary to determine whether GGB's export activities are independent from government control. 9 No party has contested the separate rate status of GGB during the POR. Therefore, for the final results, we continue to determine that GGB is eligible for a separate rate.

The Department has determined that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for GGB for the period June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011:

The Department will disclose the calculations performed for these final results to the parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review. Because GGB's weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis, we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem antidumping duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). In accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties the appropriate entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis.

Consistent with Departmental practice in new shipper reviews, the Department has established a combination cash deposit rate for GGB as described below. The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this NSR for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”): (1) For subject merchandise exported and produced by GGB, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of this review; (2) for subject merchandise exported by GGB but not produced by GGB, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 92.84 percent; (3) for subject merchandise produced by GGB but not exported by GGB, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the exporter; (4) for other previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (5) for all other PRC exporters of subject merchandise, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 92.84 percent; and (6) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

The Department is issuing and publishing this determination in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.214(h) and 351.221(b)(4).

Background

On March 29, 1995, the Department published the antidumping duty order on glycine from the PRC. See Order. Thus, the antidumping duty order on glycine from the PRC has a March anniversary month. On September 28, 2012, the Department received a timely filed request for a new shipper review from Donghua Fine Chemical and Hebei Donghua Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. (Donghua Chemical). In its request for a review, Donghua Fine Chemical identified itself as both a producer and exporter of the subject merchandise and Donghua Chemical as a producer who provided the input product that was further processed by Donghua Fine Chemical to produce the subject merchandise that was exported to the United States. Both Donghua Fine Chemical and Donghua Chemical state that they are affiliates within the meaning of the Department's affiliation rules. 1

Pursuant to the requirements set forth in section 751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2), Donghua Fine Chemical certified that (1) it did not export subject merchandise to the United States during the period of investigation (POI) ( see section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i)); and (2) since the initiation of the investigation, it has never been affiliated with any company that exported subject merchandise to the United States during the POI, including those companies not individually examined during the investigation ( see section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A)). Furthermore, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2), Donghua Fine Chemical's supplier, Donghua Chemical, provided certifications that (1) it did not export the subject merchandise to the United States during the POI or at any time following the POI and (2) since the initiation of the investigation, they have never been affiliated with any company that exported subject merchandise to the United States during the POI, including those companies not individually examined during the investigation. Additionally, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), Donghua Fine Chemical submitted documentation establishing the following: (1) the date on which it first shipped subject merchandise to the United States; (2) the volume of its first shipment; and (3) the date of its first sale to an unaffiliated purchaser for exportation to the United States.

Based on information on the record and in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.214(d), we find that the request meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for initiation of a new shipper review. See Memorandum to the File, through Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Office 7, regarding “Initiation of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review: Glycine from the People's Republic of China,” dated October 23, 2012 (NSR Initiation Checklist). Accordingly, we are initiating a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from the PRC exported by Donghua Fine Chemical, for the period March 1, 2012, through August 31, 2012.

However, the Department has concerns with certain other information contained within the entry data received from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Due to the business proprietary nature of this information, please refer to the NSR Initiation Checklist for further discussion. The Department intends to address this issue after initiation of the new shipper review. If the Department subsequently determines, based on information collected, that a new shipper review for Donghua Fine Chemical is not warranted, the Department expects to rescind the review or apply facts available pursuant to section 776 of the Act, as appropriate.

We intend to issue the preliminary results of this review no later than 180 days after the date on which this review is initiated, and the final results within 90 days after the date on which we issue the preliminary results. See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h)(i).

We will instruct CBP to allow, at the option of the importer, the posting, until the completion of the review, of a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for certain entries of the subject merchandise exported and produced by Donghua Fine Chemical in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(e). Because Donghua Fine Chemical certified that it exports the subject merchandise, the sale of which forms the basis for its new shipper review request, we will instruct CBP to permit the use of a bond only for entries of subject merchandise which Donghua Fine Chemical exported.

Interested parties may submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306.

This initiation and this notice are issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i).

Background

We published the notice of preliminary rescission of this new shipper review on July 31, 2012. 2 In the Preliminary Rescission, the Department found that Danangie, based on the company's own submission to the Department, did make a sale of subject merchandise which was shipped to the United States prior to the current new shipper period, and therefore, did not qualify for a NSR. 3 The complete discussion of the Department's decision to preliminarily rescind the NSR was set forth in its preliminary analysis memorandum, dated July 31, 2012. 4 We invited interested parties to comment on our preliminary rescission of this NSR. No party submitted comments.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(g), the period of review (“POR”) for this NSR is the annual period of December 1, 2010, through November 30, 2011.

The merchandise covered by the order is honey from Argentina. The products covered are natural honey, artificial honey containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, preparations of natural honey containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, and flavored honey. The subject merchandise includes all grades and colors of honey whether in liquid, creamed, comb, cut comb, or chunk form, and whether packaged for retail or in bulk form. The merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings 0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, and 2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise under the order is dispositive.

The NSR provisions of the Department's regulations require that the entity making a request for an NSR must document and certify, among other things: (1) The date on which subject merchandise of the exporter or producer making the request was first entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, or, if it cannot establish the date of first entry, the date on which the exporter or producer first shipped the merchandise for export to the United States; (2) the volume of that and subsequent shipments; and (3) the date of the first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States. 5 The Department has not acquired nor received any additional information that would alter our preliminary determination that Danangie, having sold subject merchandise prior to the new shipper review period, does not qualify for a NSR in accordance with 19 CFR 351.241(c), as Danangie failed to certify to and document its first entry of subject merchandise (honey) into the United States. Furthermore, since the publication of the Preliminary Rescission, the Department solicited comments from interested parties regarding the intended rescission of the NSR for Danangie; the Department received no comments.

Because we find Danagie did not have a qualifying, first entry during the new shipper period, we find that there is no qualifying sale to review. As such, we are rescinding this NSR. Accordingly, the all-others antidumping duty margin of 30.24 percent still applies for shipments of honey exported by Danangie for the period December 1, 2010, through November 30, 2011. We note that the Department revoked the antidumping duty order on honey from Argentina on September 21, 2012, with revocation effective August 2, 2012. 6 Therefore, and as discussed below, we are rescinding this NSR and terminating suspension and the collection of cash deposits.

The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Because we are rescinding this NSR, the all others rate of 30.24 percent applies to all exports of honey exported by Danangie. The assessment rate for Danangie's shipments, however, could change as the Department is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on honey from Argentina covering Danangie and the period of December 1, 2010, through November 30, 2011. Thus, we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend entries during the period December 1, 2010, through November 30, 2011, of subject merchandise exported by Danangie until CBP receives instructions relating to the administrative review of the honey antidumping order covering the period December 1, 2010, through November 30, 2011.

As noted above, the Department revoked the antidumping duty order on honey from Argentina effective August 2, 2012. See Revocation. Pursuant to revocation of the order, the Department instructed CBP, on October 9, 2012, to terminate suspension of liquidation and collection of cash deposits on entries of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after August 2, 2012. Accordingly, entries of subject merchandise on or after August 2, 2012, are not subject to suspension of liquidation or antidumping duty deposit requirements.

This notice serves as a reminder to the importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

The NSR and rescission notice are published in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act, as amended and 19 CFR 351.214(f).

On May 1, 2012, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on aluminum extrusions from the People's Republic of China (PRC). 1 Pursuant to requests from interested parties, the Department published in the Federal Register the notice of initiation of this antidumping duty administrative review with respect to 67 companies for the period September 7, 2010, through December 31, 2011. 2

Between June and October 2012, numerous review requests were withdrawn. 3

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The Department initiated the instant review on July 10, 2012. 4 As noted above, withdrawals of review requests were filed with regard to the following companies: GFT, Activa, Zhejiang Zhengte, Hongjia, Tianjin Ganglv, MYB, Alnan, Clear Sky, Midea, Nidec Sankyo Zhejang, Nidec Sankyo Sinapore, Ningbo Coaster, Guangya Aluminum, Zhongya, Shanghai Dongshen, Shanghai Shen Hang, and Sihui Shi Guo Yao. The withdrawals of review requests were submitted within the 90-day deadline set forth under 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1). Further, no other party requested an administrative review of these particular companies. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), and consistent with our practice, we are rescinding this review of the countervailing duty order on aluminum extrusions from the PRC with respect to the companies listed above. 5 The instant review will continue with respect to all other firms for which a review was requested and initiated.

The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries. For the companies for which this review is rescinded  6 countervailing duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period September 7, 2010, through December 31, 2011, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i).

The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice.

This notice serves as a final reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under an APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

On August 21, 2012, the U.S. Trade Representative instructed the Department to implement its determinations under section 129 of the URAA regarding the antidumping duty investigation on CWP from the PRC, which renders them not inconsistent with the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) dispute settlement findings in United States—Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China, WT/DS379/AB/R (March 11, 2011) (“DS 379”). The Department issued its final determinations in these section 129 proceedings on July 31, 2012. 2 On August 30, 2012, the Department published its notice of implementation of determinations under section 129 of the URAA in the antidumping duty investigation on CWP from the PRC. 3

Subsequent to publication, we identified a clerical error in Implementation of Section 129 Determinations as published in the Federal Register . One of the CWP exporter/producer chain rates was inadvertently omitted from the chart under the section entitled, “Final Determinations: Recalculated Antidumping Duty Cash Deposit Rates.” The Department is now correcting this inadvertent error. The names of the exporter and producer are listed below:

All recalculated countervailing duty rates and antidumping duty cash deposit rates as published in Implementation of Section 129 Determinations remain unchanged.

With respect to this proceeding, the cash deposit rate for the above-named exporter/producer combination has not been superseded by intervening administrative reviews. Therefore, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to require a cash deposit for estimated antidumping duties at the appropriate rate for the exporter/producer combination specified above, for entries of subject merchandise, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after August 21, 2012.

This correction of the notice of implementation of this section 129 determination is published in accordance with section 129(c)(2)(A) of the URAA.

The prospective exclusive license will be royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen days from the date of this published Notice, NIST receives written evidence and argument which establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

U.S. Patent Application No. 61/625,511 is co-owned by the U.S. government, as represented by the Secretary of Commerce, George Washington University and the University of Maryland. Alcohol sensors using gallium nitride (GaN) nanowires (NWs) functionalized with zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles have been demonstrated. These sensors operate at room temperature, are fully recoverable and demonstrate a response and recovery time of the order of 100 s. The sensing is assisted by UV light within the 215 nm-400 nm band and with the intensity of 375 nW/cm2 measured at 365 nm. The ability to functionalize an inactive nanowire surface, with analyte specific active metal oxide nanoparticles makes this sensor technique suitable for fabricating multi-analyte sensor arrays.

The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226).

The Riverbanks Zoo and Garden is requesting a permit to continue enhancement activities previously authorized under Permit No. 1589. Activities would include the care and maintenance of two captive-bred, non-releasable shortnose sturgeon. The display would be used to increase public awareness of the shortnose sturgeon and its status by educating the public on shortnose sturgeon life history and the reasons for the species decline. The proposed project to display endangered cultured shortnose sturgeon responds directly to a recommendation from the NMFS recovery plan outline for this species. The permit would not authorize any takes from the wild, nor would it authorize any release of captive sturgeon into the wild. The permit is requested for a duration of five years.

Under the PRA, federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) for each collection of information they collect or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) as “the obtaining, causing to be obtained, soliciting * * * facts or opinions by or for any agency, regardless of form or format [from] ten or more persons.” An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requires federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register for each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. Under OMB regulations, which implement provisions of the PRA, certain “facts or opinions that are submitted in response to a general solicitation of comments from the public, published in the Federal Register or other publications,” 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4), or “facts or opinions obtained or solicited at or in connection with public hearings or meetings,” 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(8), are excluded from the OMB approval process. The Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on August 16, 2012 (77 FR 49428). The Commission received no comments on this collection of information.

In accordance with 7 U.S.C. 26, the CFTC is posing survey questions to the public. Questions included in the survey will inquire as to how often the respondents would like to receive content from CFTC, the format in which the respondents would like to receive information, and the topics the information should cover.

The Office of Consumer Outreach develops campaigns to change consumer behaviors, so that consumers can better avoid fraud as defined under the Commodities Exchange Act. The first campaign from the Office of Consumer Outreach involves utilizing government and non-profit agency distribution methods to provide anti-fraud information to consumers. This survey will assist the Office of Consumer Outreach in determining how the government and non-profit agencies would like to receive the anti-fraud information from the CFTC. The respondent burden for this collection is estimated to be 10 minutes per response. This estimate includes the time to prepare the written or electronic survey and transmit it to the Commission. The Commission estimates the average burden of this collection of information as follows:

Additional information, including the agenda and electronic registration are available at the DHB Web site, http://www.health.mil/dhb/default.cfm. Anyone intending to attend is encouraged to register to ensure that adequate seating is available.

Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of the meeting is to address and deliberate pending and new issues before the Board.

Agenda: On November 27, 2012, the Board will receive briefings regarding the following: Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury; DoD Suicide Prevention Office; psychological health issues facing DoD; North Atlantic Treaty Organization Medical Systems Collaboration; the United Kingdom Military Health System; and the Canadian Forces Health Services Group. In addition, the DHB will report on the progress of its ongoing review of the effects of the obesity epidemic on the department and its effort to capture lessons learned in trauma in theater for the Department. Finally, the DHB will vote on proposed recommendations regarding its review of the U.S. Army report, “Categorizing Biological Agents In Post Mortem Risk Groups” and Battlefield Research, Development, Test & Evaluation Priorities.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165 and subject to availability of space, the DHB meeting on November 27, 2012 will be open to the public from 9:00 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. On November 28, 2012, the Board will be conducting an administrative working session.

Written Statements: Any member of the public wishing to provide comments to the DHB may do so in accordance with 41 CFR 102-3.140(c) and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and the procedures described in this notice.

Individuals desiring to provide comments to the DHB may do so by submitting a written statement to the DHB Designated Federal Officer (DFO) (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). Written statements should address the following details: the issue, discussion, and a recommended course of action. Supporting documentation may also be included, as needed, to establish the appropriate historical context and to provide any necessary background information.

If the written statement is not received at least 10 calendar days prior to the meeting, the DFO may choose to postpone consideration of the statement until the next open meeting.

The DFO will review all timely submissions with the DHB President and ensure they are provided to members of the DHB before the meeting that is subject to this notice. After reviewing the written comments, the Chairperson and the DFO may choose to invite the submitter to orally present their issue during an open portion of this meeting or at a future meeting. The DFO, in consultation with the DHB Chairperson, may allot time for members of the public to present their issues for review and discussion by the Defense Health Board.

Special Accommodations: If special accommodations are required to attend (sign language, wheelchair accessibility) please contact Ms. Elizabeth MacKenzie at (703) 681-8254 by Wednesday, November 14, 2012.

The BCP was authorized by the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928 (Act) (43 U.S.C. 617). Under Section 5 of the Act, the Secretary of the Interior marketed the capacity and energy from the BCP under electric service contracts effective through May 31, 1987. In 1977 the power marketing functions of the Secretary of Interior were transferred to Western by Section 302 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7152). Thereafter, on December 28, 1984, Western published the Conformed General Consolidated Criteria or Regulations for Boulder City Area Projects (1984 Conformed Criteria) (49 FR 50582) to implement applicable provisions of the Hoover Power Plant Act of 1984 (43 U.S.C. 619) for the marketing of BCP power through September 30, 2017.

On December 20, 2011, Congress enacted the Hoover Power Allocation Act of 2011 (Pub. L. 112-72) (HPAA), which provides direction and guidance in marketing BCP power after the existing contracts expire September 30, 2017. On June 14, 2012, Western published the 2012 Conformed Criteria (77 FR 35671) to implement applicable provisions of the HPAA for the marketing of BCP power from October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2067. The 2012 Conformed Criteria formally established a resource pool defined as “Schedule D” to be allocated to new allottees. In accordance with the HPAA, Western allocated portions of Schedule D to the Arizona Power Authority (APA) and the Colorado River Commission of Nevada (CRC), respectively, as described in the June 14, 2012, FRN. Of the remaining portions of Schedule D, Western is to allocate 11,510 kilowatts (kW) of contingent capacity and associated firm energy to new allottees within the State of California, and 69,170 kW of contingent capacity and associated firm energy to new allottees within the Boulder City Area marketing area.

Western proposes to apply the following general marketing criteria to applicants seeking an allocation of power from the Post-2017 Resource Pool. This includes all prescribed portions of Schedule D power to be allocated by Western as described above.

A. Allocations of power will be made in amounts determined solely by Western in exercise of its discretion under Reclamation Law, including the HPAA.

B. An allottee may purchase power only upon the execution of an electric service contract and satisfaction of all conditions stated within that contract.

C. Eligible applicants, except Native American tribes, must be ready, willing, and able to receive and distribute or use power from Western. Ready, willing, and able means the eligible applicant has the facilities needed for the receipt of power or has made the necessary arrangements for transmission and/or distribution service, and its power supply contracts with third parties permit the delivery of Western's power. Eligible applicants must have the necessary arrangements for transmission and/or distribution service in place by October 1, 2016.

D. An eligible Native American applicant must be an Indian tribe as defined in the Indian Self Determination Act of 1975, 25 U.S.C. 450b, as amended.

E. In determining allocations, Western will give priority consideration in the following order to entities satisfying these marketing criteria:

1. Federally recognized Native American tribes.

2. Municipal corporations and political subdivisions including irrigation or other districts, municipalities, and other governmental organizations; that have electric utility status by April 1, 2014. “Electric utility status” means that the entity has responsibility to meet load growth, has a distribution system, and is ready, willing, and able to purchase Federal power from Western on a wholesale basis.

3. Electric cooperatives and public utilities other than electric utilities that are recognized as utilities by their applicable legal authorities, are nonprofit in nature, have electrical facilities, and are independently governed and financed.

4. Other eligible applicants.

F. In determining allocations, Western will consider existing Federal power resource allocations of the applicants.

G. Western will base allocations to Native American tribes on actual loads experienced in the most recent calendar year. Western may use estimated load values if actual load data is not available. Western will evaluate and may adjust inconsistent estimates during the allocation process. Western is available to assist tribes in developing load estimates.

H. Western will base allocations to eligible applicants on the actual loads experienced in the most recent calendar year and will apply current marketing criteria to these loads.

I. The minimum allocation will be 1,000 kW. Applicants will be allowed to aggregate their loads to meet minimum requirements provided Western is able to schedule power deliveries in quantities of 1,000 kW or greater to the aggregated group. Western will consider making allocations under the 1,000 kW minimum conditioned upon an applicant's ability to aggregate to 1,000 kW or greater for scheduling purposes prior to final allocation determinations.

J. Applicants seeking an allocation as an aggregated group must demonstrate to Western's satisfaction the existence of a contractual aggregation arrangement prior to final allocation determinations. Each member of an aggregated group must meet all eligibility requirements.

K. Contractors must execute electric service contracts within six months of receiving a contract offer from Western, unless Western agrees otherwise in writing.

L. If unanticipated obstacles to the delivery of electric service to a Native American tribe arise, Western retains the right to provide the economic benefit of the resource directly to the tribe.

Western has an exemption from centralized regulatory review under Executive Order 12866; accordingly, no clearance of this notice by the Office of Management and Budget is required.

In accordance with the DOE National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021), Western has determined that these actions fit within a class of action B4.1 Contracts, policies, and marketing and allocation plans for electric power, in Appendix B to Subpart D to Part 1021—Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Specific Agency Actions.

EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On August 9, 2012 (77 FR 47640), EPA sought comments on this renewal pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d), and the ICR submitted to OMB includes EPA's responses to the four comments that were received. Any additional comments on the revised 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 EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0966, which is available online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person at the OPPT Docket in the 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 OPPT Docket is 202-566-0280. Use www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified for this ICR. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in 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 docket, go to www.regulations.gov.

Title: Tier 1 Screening of Certain Chemicals Under the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) (Renewal).

ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 2249.03, OMB Control No. 2070-0176.

ICR Status: This is a request to renew an existing approved collection. This ICR is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2012. 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 , are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable.

Abstract: This is a renewal of an existing ICR covering the information collection activities associated with Tier 1 screening of chemicals under EPA's EDSP. The EDSP is established under section 408(p) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 346a(p)), which requires EPA to develop a chemical screening program using appropriate validated test systems and other scientifically relevant information to determine whether certain substances may have hormonal effects. The EDSP consists of a two-tiered approach to screen chemicals for potential endocrine disrupting effects. The purpose of Tier 1 screening is to identify substances that have the potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, or thyroid hormone systems using a battery of assays. Substances that have the potential to interact with estrogen, androgen or thyroid systems may proceed to Tier 2, which is designed to identify any adverse endocrine-related effects caused by the substance, and establish a quantitative relationship between the dose and that endocrine effect. Additional information about the EDSP is available at http://www.epa.gov/endo.

This ICR addresses the information collection activities for the initial list of chemicals screened under Tier 1 of the EDSP, and covers the full range of information collection activities associated with the issuance of and response to Tier 1 EDSP orders issued by EPA. The initial list was established in 2009, and consists of 67 pesticide active ingredients (PAIs) and pesticide inerts. As the renewal of an ongoing information collection activity approved under the PRA, this ICR addresses the paperwork burden associated with the continuation of the activities over the next three years. As such, the paperwork burdens are adjusted to reflect the planned progression associated with the information collection activities covered by the ICR. In addition, EPA has restructured the ICR to incorporate a presentation of the activities and related burden in a way that would match what is used in the ICR submission system.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to range between 204 and 4,919 hours per response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this ICR are those that receive an EDSP test order issued by the Agency. Under FFDCA section 408(p)(5)(A), EPA “shall issue” EDSP test orders “to a registrant of a substance for which testing is required * * * or to a person who manufactures or imports a substance for which testing is required.”

Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

Estimated No. of Respondents: 385.

Estimated Total Annualized Burden: 98,414 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost: $6,301,807.

Changes in Burden Estimates: There is a decrease of 63,011 hours in the total estimated annualized burden compared with that currently approved by OMB (i.e., from 161,415 hours to 98,404 hours). This is an adjustment that reflects the planned progression of the collection activities associated with the initial chemicals to be screened under Tier 1 of the EDSP.

EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.10. On January 13, 2012 (77 FR 2058), EPA sought comments on this proposed information collection pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received one supportive comment during the comment period. Any comments related to 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 EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0858, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person inspection at the OPPT Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is 202-566-0280. Use www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified above.

EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in 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. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in www.regulations.gov. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the official public docket, and will not be available for public viewing in www.regulations.gov. For further information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.

Title: EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) Partner of the Year Awards Program.

ICR Status: This is a request to establish a new information collection activity.

Abstract: EPA has developed the Partner of the Year Awards to recognize DfE stakeholders who have furthered the goals of DfE through active and exemplary participation in and promotion of the DfE program. Making DfE's mission known to the widest possible audience, through its safer product label and in other forms of communication, is critical to fully realizing the program's goals of protecting human health and the environment, promoting a sustainable economy, and creating green jobs, especially in the small business sector.

The Partner of the Year Awards will be an annual event, with recognition for DfE stakeholder organizations from five broad categories: (1) Formulators/product manufacturers (of both consumer and institutional/industrial (I/I) products), (2) purchasers and distributors, (3) retailers, (4) influencers (e.g., non-governmental organizations, including environmental and health advocates, trade associations, academia, sports teams, and others), and (5) innovators (e.g., chemical manufacturers, technology developers, and others). Within these categories and based on the criteria, DfE may elect to give additional awards in the subcategories of “small business” and “sustained excellence.” This information collection activity addresses the reporting burden associated with making application to EPA for recognition in the Partner of the Year Awards program.

Responses to this information collection are voluntary. Respondents may claim all or part of a notice as CBI. EPA will disclose information that is covered by a CBI claim only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures in 40 CFR part 2.

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.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average about 15 hours per response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are establishments engaged in the production, use, and/or advancement of safer chemicals, that have furthered the goals of DfE through active and exemplary participation in and promotion of the program, and that wish to receive recognition for their achievements.

Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

Estimated average number of responses for each respondent: 1.

Estimated No. of Respondents: 110.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,650 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Costs: $69,790.

Changes in Burden Estimates: Since this is a new ICR, change in respondent burden is not applicable.

The proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club seeking to compel the Administrator to take final action under sections 110(k)(2) and (3) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(2) and (3), on a SIP submission made by Oklahoma on July 16, 2010, regarding Excess Emissions Reporting Requirements. The proposed consent decree requires EPA to sign for publication in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to act on the OK SIP no later than May 31, 2013, and requires EPA to sign for publication in the Federal Register a notice of final rulemaking acting on the OK SIP no later than January 31, 2014. Following signature of the proposed and final rule described in the proposed consent decree, EPA is required to send the notice to the Office of the Federal Register within fifteen business days for review and publication in the Federal Register . The proposed consent decree also states that after EPA fulfills its obligations under the consent decree, this case shall be dismissed with prejudice.

For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines, based on any comment submitted, that consent to this consent decree should be withdrawn, the terms of the decree will be affirmed.

The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2012-0824) contains a copy of the proposed consent decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 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, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is (202) 566-1752.

An electronic version of the public docket is available through www.regulations.gov. You may use the www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select “search”.

It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official public docket or in the electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center.

You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments.

If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.

Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The electronic public docket system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail (email) system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send an email comment directly to the Docket without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

Section 4314(c)(1) through (5) of Title 5, U.S.C., requires each agency to establish in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more SES performance review boards. This board shall review and evaluate the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor, along with any recommendations to the appointment authority relative to the performance of the senior executive.

Members of the 2012 EPA Performance Review Board are:

Section 10(g)(1) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank Act) requires FHFA to promulgate regulations establishing standards of community investment or service that Federal Home Loan Bank (Bank) member institutions must meet in order to maintain access to long-term advances. Section 10(g)(2) of the Bank Act requires that, in establishing these community support requirements for Bank members, FHFA take into account factors such as the Bank member's performance under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA) and record of lending to first-time homebuyers.

Part 1290 of FHFA's regulations implements the statutory requirements by providing uniform community support standards that all Bank members must meet, as well as review criteria that FHFA staff must apply to determine compliance with section 10(g) of the Bank Act. Section 1290.2 of the regulations requires that each Bank member submit to FHFA biennially a completed Community Support Statement (Form 60), which contains several short questions the answers to which are used by FHFA to assess the responding member's compliance with the CRA and first time homebuyer performance standards. In section I of the form, a member that is subject to the CRA must record its current CRA rating and the date of its most recent CRA evaluation. Section II of the form addresses a member's efforts to assist first time homebuyers—a member may either record the amount of loans made to first time homebuyers (in dollars and as a percentage of total mortgage loans) in the previous year, indicate the types of programs it has undertaken to assist first time home buyers (by checking selections from a list) or do both. If a member has received a CRA rating of “outstanding,” it need not complete section II of the form. A copy of Form 60 is available at http://www.fhfa.gov/webfiles/2924/FHFAForm060.pdf.

Section 1290.5 describes the circumstances under which FHFA will restrict a member's access to long-term Bank advances for failure to meet the community support requirements. It also permits Bank members whose access to long-term advances has been restricted to apply directly to FHFA to remove the restriction under certain circumstances.

The information collection contained in Form 60 and part 1290 are necessary to enable and are used by FHFA to determine whether Bank members satisfy the statutory and regulatory community support requirements. Only Bank members that meet these requirements may maintain continued access to long-term Bank advances. See 12 U.S.C. 1430(g).

The OMB number for the information collection is 2590-0005. The OMB clearance for the information collection expires on October 31, 2012. The likely respondents are institutions that are Bank members.

The FHFA estimates the total annual average number of respondents that must complete Form 60 at 3,900 Bank members (half of all Bank members each year), with one response per member and an average burden per response of one hour. In addition, FHFA estimates the total annual average number of Bank members whose access to long-term advances has been restricted that will apply to FHFA to remove the restriction at 14 Bank members, with one response per member and an average burden per response of one hour. Thus, the estimate for the total annual hour burden is 3,914 hours.

In accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8(d), FHFA published a request for public comments regarding this information collection in the Federal Register on August 3, 2012. See 77 FR 46436. The 60-day comment period closed on October 2, 2012. FHFA received no public comments.

FHFA requests written comments on the following: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FHFA functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the FHFA estimates of the burdens of the collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

A. Need For and Use of the Information Collection

The Federal Home Loan Banks (Banks) are authorized under 12 CFR part 955 to acquire from their member financial institutions and non-member housing associates certain home mortgage loans and related assets, which are referred to as “Acquired Member Assets” or “AMA.” In conjunction with this authority, each Bank that acquires AMA is required by regulation to report to FHFA certain data regarding each loan acquired, as specified in FHFA's Data Reporting Manual (DRM). The DRM specifies 87 data elements that must be reported semi-annually for each new loan acquired, as well as 22 additional data elements that must be reported semi-annually for existing AMA loans or loan participations held in the Bank's portfolio. The DRM also requires that the Banks report aggregated AMA loan data on a quarterly basis. FHFA uses the collected loan-level and aggregated AMA data to monitor the safety and soundness of the Banks and the extent to which the Banks are fulfilling their statutory housing finance mission through their AMA programs. 1

Since 2010, FHFA has also published the previous calendar year's loan-level AMA data in an online public use database. 2 The agency maintains this public use database in order to fulfill its duties under section 10(k) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank Act), which requires that the Banks report to FHFA specified census tract-level data relating to purchased mortgages and that the agency make this data available to the public in a useful form. 3 At the time that Congress enacted section 10(k) in 2008, the Banks were already reporting most of the data referenced in that provision pursuant to the existing requirements of part 955 and the DRM. In order to implement fully the new statutory requirements, FHFA amended the DRM in September 2009 to require the Banks to report to FHFA six additional data elements relating to newly-acquired AMA loans (in addition to then-existing 81 data elements) beginning in February 2010.

While each Bank that acquires or holds AMA loans must report both loan-level and aggregated AMA data directly to FHFA, the Bank initially must collect some of the underlying loan-level data from the member institution or housing associate from which the Bank acquires the loan (this is usually, but not always, the originator of the loan). The Bank typically collects the data for a particular AMA loan from the seller at the time the Bank agrees to acquire the loan. The Bank then uses this loan-level data to derive many of the other data elements that it is required to report to FHFA. For example, from the address of the property that secures the loan, a Bank is able to determine from publicly-available information the census tract code (and other similar geographic codes) for the property, as well as the median family income, and other data regarding the census tract or other defined geographic area. With this additional information, the Bank is also able to calculate various ratios, such as the ratio of the borrower's income to the area median family income, which it is required to report under the DRM. Finally, some of the loan-level data originates with the Bank itself, such as the name of the acquiring Bank, the unique loan number assigned to the acquired loan, and the AMA program under which the loan was acquired.

All but 8 to 10 of the data elements provided by the seller to the acquiring Bank are information that any purchaser of mortgage loans would require a seller to furnish in the ordinary course of business, even in the absence of any statutory or regulatory requirements. For example, the Bank must report, and the seller must therefore initially provide, data on: the location and type of the residential property securing the loan; the annual income and the debt-to-income ratio of the borrower and any co-borrowers; and the unpaid principal balance, term-to-maturity, interest rate, and type ( i.e., fixed- or adjustable-rate) of the loan. The remaining data that would not normally be exchanged in the ordinary course of business comprises information identifying the race, ethnicity, and gender of the borrower and any co-borrowers, which are items that the Banks are required to aggregate and report by census-tract to FHFA under section 10(k) of the Bank Act. It is these few items that comprise the actual information collection requirement to which Bank members and housing associates may be required to respond.

The OMB control number for the information collection, which expires on October 31, 2012, is 2590-0008. The likely respondents are member and non-member financial institutions that sell AMA assets to Banks.

FHFA estimates that the hour burden associated with the AMA collection will be lower than that estimated when the agency last requested clearance for this control number. FHFA estimates that the total annual average number of AMA loans acquired by all Banks will be 48,000 (640 member respondents x 75 loans per respondent). The estimate average time needed for a respondent to record and transmit the relevant data to the acquiring Bank will be 5 minutes per loan. Accordingly, the estimate for the total annual hour burden on respondents is 4,000 hours (640 x 75 x 5 minutes per loan).

In accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8(d), FHFA published a request for public comments regarding this information collection in the Federal Register on August 7, 2012. See 77 FR 47069. The 60-day comment period closed on October 9, 2012. FHFA received no public comments.

FHFA requests written comments on the following: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FHFA functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the FHFA estimates of the burdens of the collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

In the Federal Register of October 17, 2012, FDA announced that a meeting of the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee would be held on November 29, 2012. On page 63841, in the first column, the Date and Time portion of the document is changed to read as follows:

The teleconference meeting will be held on November 29, 2012 from 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Eastern Time.

On page 63841, in the first column, last paragraph, the Agenda portion is changed to read as follows:

On November 29, 2012 the committee will meet in open session to hear updates of research programs in the Gene Transfer and Immunogenicity Branch, Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA.

On page 63841, second column, second paragraph, first sentence, the Procedure portion is changed to read as follows:

On November 29, 2012, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (Eastern Time) the meeting is open to the public.

On page 63841, second column, second paragraph, fourth sentence, the Procedure portion is changed to read as follows:

Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m.

On page 63841, second column, third paragraph, first sentence, the Closed Committee Deliberations portion is changed to read as follows:

On November 29, 2012 from approximately 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., the meeting will be closed to permit discussion where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)).

This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to the advisory committees.

Beginning in FY 2013, HRSA will use the U.S. Census Bureau's ACS 3-year rolling average data to determine the annual poverty-based allocations to states under Section 502 of Title V of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 702). The Census Bureau produces annual state-level poverty estimates based on the most recent 1, 3, and 5 years of ACS data, as well as annual model-based Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE). Based on a thorough review, HRSA determined that the 3-year time frame strikes an appropriate balance between reliability (strength of 5-year estimates) and currency (strength of 1-year estimates). The 3-year estimates provide necessary stability in annual poverty-based allocation changes for all states, regardless of size, while still allowing the allocations to be responsive to changes in the distribution of children in poverty across states. With the 3-year estimates for FY 2013 already available, states have been informed of the proposed changes and need for adjustment from the existing allocation proportions based on the 2000 Census data. The ACS data are released annually by the U.S. Census Bureau in October which will allow states to be aware of the poverty-based allocation proportions close to a year in advance of each subsequent fiscal year.

The proposed change in State Title V MCH Block Grant allocations was announced in the Federal Register at 77 FR 42749 on July 20, 2012. A comment period of 60 days was established to allow interested parties to submit comments. HRSA received three responses. The responses included two comments that specifically discussed the potential impacts of the proposed change in State MCH Block Grant formula allocations using the 3-year ACS child poverty estimates. Responses to these comments are provided below.

The remaining comments did not specifically address the proposed changes in State Title V MCH Block Grant allocation, but instead expressed concern with the size of the federal government; accuracy of Census data, generally; and equity of the statutorily-mandated Title V funding formula. These issues were not addressed in greater detail because they are beyond the scope of this notice.

Comment: Timing of the proposed change is inopportune in light of the potential for significant reductions in State MCH Block Grant allocations as a result of sequestration.

Response: The timing of the proposed changes to the state formula allocations is consistent with the 10-year interval for updating formula allocations based on the U.S. Census Bureau's Decennial Census. Current formula allocations are based on 2000 U.S. Census child poverty data. Use of a 3-year rolling average of the ACS child poverty data will allow for annual updates to the State MCH Block Grant formula allocations and greater responsiveness to changes in the distribution of children in poverty across states.

Comment: If the new methodology is implemented and will use the ACS, the 5-year rather than the 3-year estimate should be used.

Response: Researchers in MCHB's Office of Epidemiology and Research evaluated the impact of using 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year ACS data, and the single-year SAIPE on annual poverty-based allocation changes as well as overall allocation changes. Consistent with the documentation and guidelines provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the poverty data are the most current and least precise through the use of 1-year data and least current but most precise through the use of 5-year data. Using the 3-year ACS poverty data achieves a reasonable balance between reliability and currency.

The technologies covered under the present inventions relate to (1) apoptosis-modifying fusion proteins with at least two domains, one of which targets the fusion proteins to a target cell, and another of which modifies an apoptotic response of the target cell. For example, fusing various cell-binding domains to Bcl-X L and Bad allows targeting to specific subsets of cells in vivo, permitting treatment and/or prevention of cell-death related consequences of various diseases and injuries. This technology could be used to minimize or prevent apoptotic damage that can be caused by neurodegenerative disorders, e.g., Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease or spinal-muscular atrophy, stroke episodes or transient ischemic neuronal injury, e.g., spinal cord injuries. Additionally, apoptotic-enhancing fusion proteins of the current invention could be used to inhibit cell growth, e.g., uncontrolled cellular proliferation and (2) a platform technology using ubiquitin to improve the delivery and efficacy of cytosolic targeted toxins. This invention describes generation of fusion proteins via the introduction of the protein ubiquitin, a small protein in eukaryotic cells that plays a role in protein recycling, in between a targeting moiety and a catalytic moiety. Ubiquitin contains a cleavable motif at its C-terminus, which can help in the decoupling of the two moieties. Decoupling of the two moieties would increase the cytotoxicity of the treatment, since the catalytic domain of a Targeted Toxin (TT) remains longer in the cytosol. This method of generating fusion proteins would be highly useful for all TT and immunotoxins that access the cytosol to either affect cytosolic targets or traffic to further sites of action.

The prospective exclusive evaluation option license is being considered under the small business initiative launched on October 1, 2011 and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR Part 404.7. The prospective exclusive evaluation option license, and a subsequent exclusive patent commercialization license, may be granted unless within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, the NIH receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR Part 404.7.

Any additional, properly filed, and complete applications for a license in the field of use filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive evaluation option license. Comments and objections submitted to this notice will not be made available for public inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

In head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), a cancer occurring mostly in the mouth, it is frequently observed that the Akt/mTOR pathway is abnormally activated. Therefore, inhibiting this signaling pathway may help in treating this disease. Rapamycin and its analogs are known to inhibit the activity of mTOR so in principle they could serve as therapeutics for treating HNSCC.

This technology describes a method of potentially preventing or treating HNSCC through the inhibition of mTOR activity. The proof of this principle was demonstrated by rapid regression of mouth tumors in mice afflicted with Cowden syndrome with the administration of rapamycin. Like HNSCC, development of this disease is linked to over activation of the Akt/mTOR pathway. Furthermore, the therapeutic potential of rapamycin was demonstrated using mice in experiments that model chronic exposure to tobacco, which promotes the development of HNSCC. Therefore, inhibitors of mTOR have considerable potential in the prevention and treatment of HNSCC. Moreover, using a local, sustained-release oral drug delivery system for early intervention to prevent potentially malignant or premalignant lesions developing into HNSCC, could deliver the inhibitors of mTOR with reduced systemic side effects and a lower required drug dose.

The prospective exclusive license and any further license applications received as objections to this Notice of Intent to Grant an Exclusive License, will be royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive evaluation option license is being considered under the small business initiative launched on 1 October 2011, and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive evaluation option license, and a subsequent exclusive commercialization license, may be granted unless the NIH receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7 within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice. A previous Notice of Intent to Grant an Exclusive License for the instant technology was published in 77 FR 28614, Tuesday, May 15, 2012.

Complete applications for a license in the field of use filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive evaluation option license. Comments and objections submitted to this notice will not be made available for public inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

FEMA, working with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), is soliciting comments from stakeholders and interested members of the public on the scope of future revisions to “Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1. The document is available online at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID FEMA-2012-0026).

NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 is a joint FEMA/NRC policy document that provides guidance on the sixteen Planning Standards referenced in FEMA's regulations at 44 CFR 350.5 and the NRC's regulations at 10 CFR part 50. Both agencies use these Planning Standards to evaluate the adequacy of the emergency plans of commercial nuclear power plant owners and operators (NRC), and the emergency plans and preparedness of State and local governments within the Emergency Planning Zones surrounding commercial nuclear power plants (FEMA).

Since the publication of NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 in November 1980, four supplementary documents and one addendum have been issued that update and modify specific planning and procedural elements. These documents are available online at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID FEMA-2012-0026). FEMA and the NRC are considering revising NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 to address stakeholder interest and the various emergency planning and preparedness lessons learned since its initial publication.

FEMA and the NRC held two public meetings on August 22, 2012 and September 13, 2012. (77 FR 46766, August 6, 2012). The purpose of these public meetings was to: (1) Solicit input from stakeholders and interested members of the public on the scope of future revisions to NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1; (2) describe the proposed timeline for the revisions to NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1; and (3) promote transparency, public participation, and collaboration during the NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 revision process. All of the presentation material and meeting notes are available to review online at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID FEMA-2012-0026).

Through this Notice, we are soliciting comments from stakeholders and interested members of the public on the scope of future revisions to NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1. While not limited to these specific areas, we are soliciting comments on the following issues related to NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 revision:

• Format and Terminology: various e-formats, clean-up edits, and web-based software.

• Policy and Legal Frameworks: National Response Frameworks, National Incident Management System (NIMS), emergency preparedness (EP) rulemaking issues, NRC Commission papers, lessons learned from the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant accident, and Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8).

• Engineering: evacuation time estimates (ETEs), Alert and Notification Systems (ANS), State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA), Joint Information Centers (JICs), Joint Information Systems (JIS), messaging (including risk communication), social media, expanding emergency planning zones (EPZs).

• Health Physics: protective action recommendations (PARs), radiological laboratories, monitoring/decontamination, dose assessment, recovery/re-entry/return, portal monitors, potassium iodide (KI), and monitoring and decontamination of household pets.

• Operational: letters of agreement (LOAs), mobilization, memorandums of understandings (MOUs), staffing, authorities, protective action decisions (PADs).

• Training and Implementation: implementation timeline, deadlines, updating courses, credentialing.

• Assessments: exercises, plan reviews, inspections, call-in drills, report-in drills.

• Miscellaneous: additional items that are not defined in any of the specified category areas.

Comments Invited

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The ICR documentation is available at http://www.reginfo.gov. Therefore, in preparation for OMB review and approval of the following information collection, TSA is soliciting comments to—

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Title: Office of Law Enforcement/Federal Air Marshal Service Mental Health Certification.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

OMB Control Number: 1652-0043.

Forms(s): TSA Form 1164.

Affected Public: Law Enforcement Officers/Air Marshal Applicants.

Abstract: TSA policy requires that applicants for Federal Air Marshal (FAM) positions meet certain medical standards, including whether the individual has an established medical history or clinical diagnosis of psychosis, neurosis, or any other personality or mental disorder that clearly demonstrates a potential hazard to the performance of FAM duties or the safety of self or others.

Number of Respondents: 600.

Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 600 hours annually.

This notice informs the public that the Department of Housing and Urban Development has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the Information collection described below. This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

This notice also lists the following information:

Title of Proposed: Indian Housing Block Grants (IHBG) Program Reporting.

OMB Approval Number: 2577-0218.

Form Numbers: HUD 4117, HUD 4117, HUD-4119, HUD 52737 (Excel), HUD 52737 (EPIC).

Description of the need for the information and proposed use:

Indian tribes, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, or tribally designated housing entities that receive IHBG funds are required annually to submit HUD-52737 that consists of two components: the Indian Housing Plan (IHP) component and the Annual Performance Report (APR) component.

The IHP is required by Section 102 of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) and describes the eligible IHBG-funded, affordable housing activities the recipient plans to conduct for the benefit of low and moderate income tribal members and identifies the intended outcomes and outputs for the upcoming 12-month year. The recipient submits the IHP at least 75 days prior to the beginning of its 12-month program year. HUD conducts a limited review of the IHP to determine that the planned activities are in compliance with NAHASDA requirements, as defined at 24 CFR Part 1000.

At the end of the 12-month period, the recipient submits the APR that is required by Section 404 of NAHASDA and describes (1) the use of grant funds during the prior 12-month period; (2) the actual outcomes and outputs achieved; (3) program accomplishments; and (4) jobs supported by IHBG-funded activities. HUD uses the information in the APR to review the recipient's progress in implementing the IHP, verify whether the activities are eligible and to determine if the recipient has the capacity to continue implementing the activities described in the IHP in a timely manner. The information in the APR also will be used to provide Congress, stakeholders, and other interested parties with information on how the IHBG funds are being used to meet affordable housing needs within Native American communities.

The IHP/APR is currently available in a Word version. With this submission HUD intends to make available a revised Word version, an Excel version, and a version on HUD's Energy and Performance Information Center (EPIC) Web site. All three versions of the IHP/APR request the same information and a recipient may elect to submit to HUD either the Word, Excel, or EPIC versions; however, the Excel and EPIC versions are preferred because of their automated capabilities and reduced burden. The Word, Excel, and EPIC versions differ from the current version of HUD-52737 with the elimination of Line 1 (Planned Grant-Based Budget for Eligible Programs) in Section 5 (Budgets) because collection of this information served no valid purpose.

Participants in the IHBG program are responsible for notifying HUD of changes to the Formula Current Assisted Stock (FCAS) component of the IHBG formula. HUD is notified of changes in the FCAS through a Formula Response Form (HUD-4117), as defined at 24 CFR § 1000.302. A tribe, TDHE, or HUD may challenge the data from the U.S. Decennial Census or provide an alternative source of data by submitting the Guidelines for Challenging U.S. Decennial Census Data Document (HUD-4119). Census challenges are due March 30th of each fiscal year, as defined at 24 CFR 1000.336. This information collection is required of participants in the IHBG program to demonstrate compliance with eligibility and other requirements of NAHASDA; provision of correction or challenge documentation of the formula calculation; and provision of data for HUD's annual report to Congress. The information gathered will be used to allocate funds under the IHBG program. The quality assurance of data reported is a very important issue in maintaining HUD's databases used to monitor participant's proposed plans, accomplishments, determine program compliance, and to ensure fair and equitable allocations. In some cases, the FCAS information addressing the conveyances and conversions of units has resulted in the recouping of funds. The information collected will allow HUD to accurately audit the program.

On October 14, 2011, the United States and the Osage Nation (formerly known as the Osage Tribe) signed a Settlement Agreement to resolve litigation regarding alleged mismanagement of the Osage Nation's oil and gas mineral estate, among other claims. As part of the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed that it would be mutually beneficial “to address means of improving the trust management of the Osage Mineral Estate, the Osage Tribal Trust Account, and Other Osage Accounts.” Settlement Agreement, Paragraph 1.i. The parties agreed that a review and revision of the existing regulations is warranted to better assist the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) in managing the Osage Mineral Estate. The parties agreed to engage in a negotiated rulemaking for this purpose. Settlement Agreement, Paragraph 9.b. After the Committee submits its report, BIA will develop a proposed rule to be published in the Federal Register .

Meeting Agenda: The meeting agenda will include (1) Welcome and Introduction; (2) Overview of prior meeting and action tracking; (3) Members' round robin to share information and identify key issues to be addressed; (4) Committee Members' review and discussion of subcommittee activities; (5) Future Committee activities; (6) Public comments which will be scheduled for 45 minutes in the morning and again in the afternoon; and (7) closing remarks. The final agenda will be posted on www.bia.gov/osagenegreg prior to each meeting.

Public Input: All Committee meetings are open to the public. Interested members of the public may present, either orally or through written comments, information for the Committee to consider during the public meeting. Written comments should be submitted, prior to, during, or after the meeting, to Mr. Eddie Streater, Designated Federal Officer, preferably via email, at osagenegneg@bia.gov, or by U.S. mail to: Mr. Eddie Streater, Designated Federal Officer, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Wewoka Agency, P.O. Box 1540, Seminole, OK 74818. Due to time constraints during the meeting, the Committee is not able to read written public comments submitted into the record.

Individuals or groups requesting to make oral comments at the public Committee meeting will be limited to 5 minutes per speaker. Speakers who wish to expand their oral statements, or those who had wished to speak, but could not be accommodated during the public comment period, are encouraged to submit their comments in written form to the Committee after the meeting at the address provided above. There will be a sign-up sheet at the meeting for those wishing to speak during the public comment period.

The meeting location is open to the public. Space is limited, however, so we strongly encourage all interested in attending to preregister by submitting your name and contact information via email to Mr. Eddie Streater at osageregneg@bia.gov. Persons with disabilities requiring special services, such as an interpreter for the hearing impaired, should contact Mr. Streater at (405) 257-6250 at least seven calendar days prior to the meeting. We will do our best to accommodate those who are unable to meet this deadline.

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) requires the Secretary of Labor to certify, among other things, that any foreign worker seeking to enter the United States (U.S.) to perform certain skilled or unskilled labor will not, by doing so, adversely affect wages and working conditions of U.S. workers similarly employed. The Secretary must also certify that there are not sufficient U.S. workers able, willing, and qualified to perform such skilled or unskilled labor. Before any employer may petition for any temporary skilled or unskilled foreign workers, it must submit a request for certification to the Secretary containing the elements prescribed by the INA and regulations. See 8 U.S.C. 1011(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a), 1011(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b), 1184(c), and 1188 and 8 CFR 214.2(h).

The DOL currently obtains OMB approval for the subject information collections under Control Numbers 1205-0466, Foreign Labor Certification Instruments, and 1205-0404, Labor Certification Letter for H-2A Agricultural Foreign Workers. In order to improve internal administration of the information collection requirements, the DOL is taking this opportunity to rename OMB Control Number 1205-0466 and to separate out the three different sets of information collection requirements under three unique Control Numbers. While the Department believes it must now submit the information collections approved under Control Number 1205-0404 and 1205-0466 as separate ICRs, in order to maintain OMB clearance for the existing requirements, the DOL intends to merge the ICRs via a non-material change request to the 1205-0466 ICR. Such a request would be made upon receiving OMB approval of the current actions and would not change the information collection requirements in any way; the DOL would simultaneously seek to discontinue Control Number 1205-0404.

The first of current actions being submitted for OMB approval is revised Control Number 1205-0466 that will contain Form ETA-9142A, H-2A Application for Temporary Employment Certification and Appendix A; and most regulatory information collection requirements applicable to the H-2A program. The H-2A program enables employers to bring nonimmigrant foreign workers to the U.S. to perform agricultural work of a temporary or seasonal nature as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a). Information obtained on Form ETA-9142A provides the basis for the Secretary's determination whether no U.S. workers are available. Form ETA-9142A, collects information to permit the Department to meet its statutory responsibilities for administering the H-2A temporary labor certification program.

The second current ICR being submitted for OMB approval is Control Number 1205-0404, which specifically has to do with the notification requirements of the 50 percent rule in the H-2A program and is being submitted without changes. Regulations 20 CFR 655.135(d) stipulates that an employer must continue to provide employment to any qualified and eligible U.S. worker who applies to the employer until 50 percent of the work contract period, under which the foreign worker is in the job, has elapsed. The notification required under the regulations at 20 CFR 655.135(c) is written by the employer and sent to the applicable State Workforce Agency (SWA), if the foreign worker begins traveling to the employer's place of work any time after the three days prior to the first date of need specified in the work contract. The SWA uses the information to calculate the end of the 50 percent rule referral requirements. The regulations also specify other notifications the employer must make (e.g., remind the worker of the requirement to leave the U.S. at the end of the certified period for work or upon separation from the employer, unless the worker is being sponsored by a subsequent employer; and informing the DOL of H-2A workers who have abandoned their jobs or been terminated). The ETA uses Form ETA-9144 to inform employers of these obligations.

The first new ICR the DOL is currently submitting has been issued ICR Reference Number 201210-1205-001, H-2B Foreign Labor Certification Program. This new ICR will contain forms and most regulatory information collection requirements applicable to the H-2B program. Specifically, it will contain Form ETA 9142B, H-2B Application for Temporary Employment Certification and Appendix B.

The second new ICR the DOL is submitting has been assigned ICR Reference Number 201210-1205-002, Application for Prevailing Wage Determination, will contain Form ETA- 9141, Application for Prevailing Wage Determination. That form is applicable to the H-2B, H-1B, H-1B1, E-3, and PERM programs.

On April 8, 2012, the OMB approved changes to the information collected under Control Number 1205-0466, in accordance with the 2012 H-2B final rule published on February 21, 2012 (77 FR 10038). On April 27, 2012, the DOL received from the OMB a six-month approval to revert to the old information collection requirements. The approval allowed the ETA to comply with a Federal Court for the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola Division, injunction preventing the DOL from implementing the 2012 H-2B Final Rule. ( Bayou Lawn & Landscape Services, et al. v. Hilda L. Solis, et al., 12-cv-00183-RV-CJK.). With minor format changes (e.g., form names), these ICRs maintain the existing requirements.

The information collections covered in this notice are subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if the collection of information does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The current approval for both existing Control Numbers is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2012; however, it should be noted that existing information collections submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. Changes only take effect upon OMB authorization. For additional information, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on August 15, 2012 (77 FR 49025).

Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention the applicable OMB Control Number or ICR Reference Number as shown in the information collection listing at the end of this notice. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

The ICRs are summarized as follows:

Agency: DOL-ETA.

Title of Collection: Labor Certification Letter for H-2A Agricultural Foreign Workers.

OMB Control Number: 1205-0404.

ICR Type: Extension without changes of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits, farms, and not-for-profit institutions.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 361.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 361.

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 90.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

Title of Collection: H-2A Foreign Labor Certification Program.

OMB Control Number: 1205-0466.

ICR Type: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits, farms, and not-for-profit institutions.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 7,218.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 147,856.

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 44,084.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $1,529,370.

Title of Collection: H-2B Foreign Labor Certification Program.

ICR Reference Number: 201210-1205-001.

ICR Type: Request for new OMB Control Number.

Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits, farms, and not-for-profit institutions.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,387.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 32,686.

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 15,333.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: 0.

Title of Collection: Application for Prevailing Wage Determination.

ICR Reference Number: 201210-1205-002.

ICR Type: Request for new OMB Control Number.

Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits, farms, and not-for-profit institutions.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 461,177.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 890,501.

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 398,833.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $29,776,872.

The Social Security Act authorizes the DOL to prescribe standard definitions, methods and procedures, and reporting requirements for the collection of information on benefit payment accuracy and the reemployment of unemployment insurance benefit recipients to ensure the verification of these data. The DOL uses information collected on Forms ETA-9128, 9128U, and ETA-9129 to evaluate State performance in terms of service delivery and to report on the REAs, including the number of scheduled in-person reemployment and eligibility assessments, the number of individuals who failed to appear for scheduled assessments, actions taken as a result of individuals not appearing for an assessment (e.g., benefits termination), results of assessments (e.g., referral to reemployment services, found in compliance with program requirements), estimated savings resulting from cessation of benefits, and estimated savings as a result of accelerated reemployment. Information collected on Form ETA-9128U is required by the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public Law 112-96.

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1205-0456. The current approval is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2012; however, it should be noted that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional information, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on August 13, 2012 (77 FR 48172).

Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1205-0456. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;