Information Collection Renewal To Be Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval Under the Paperwork Reduction Act; OMB Control Number 1018-0119; Policy for Evaluating Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions, 47845-47846 [05-16086]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 156 / Monday, August 15, 2005 / Notices alterations in expression of the TGFb receptors I and II (TbRI and TbRII) are also observed during pancreatic cancer progression. These observations are consistent with an integral role of the TGFb pathway components in pancreas biology and disease progression. However, the molecular details and the target cell population of TGFb signals during pancreas development and disease are not known. SMAD proteins are downstream mediators of signals from TGFb 1,2,3 and activin, and SMAD proteins have been implicated as important factors in cellular proliferation, differentiation and migration. This invention identifies another important regulatory role for the TGFb-signaling pathway in insulin production. The inventors have shown that low levels of TGFb can suppress insulin production through the actions of the SMAD signaling proteins. Small molecule regulators of SMADdependent signaling may lead to better insulin production and allow better glucose regulation. Thus, controlled administration of TGFb signaling regulators may be useful in the treatment of diabetes, hyperglycemia and related complications. In addition to licensing, the technology is available for further development through collaborative research opportunities with the inventors. Anti-Marinobufagenin Antibodies and Methods for Their Use Alexei Bagrov et al. (NIA). U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ 694,733 filed 27 Jun 2005 (HHS Reference No. E–092–2004/0–US–01). Licensing Contact: Fatima Sayyid; 301– 435–4521; sayyidf@mail.nih.gov. Pre-eclampsia is associated with increased blood levels of marinobufagenin (MBG), a steroid that increases blood pressure by inhibiting a membrane enzyme, Na/K ATPase, in the vascular wall. Pre-eclampsia complicates up to 10% of pregnancies in the U.S. and is a significant factor in causing maternal and fetal mortality and morbidity worldwide. The present invention relates to compositions and methods for detecting the presence of MBG in a biological sample. It also relates to methods for the use of monoclonal antibodies or antigen binding fragments as prophylactic, therapeutic, and diagnostic agents for the detection, inhibition and treatment of hypertension. In addition to licensing, the technology is available for further development through collaborative research opportunities with the inventors. VerDate jul<14>2003 13:17 Aug 12, 2005 Jkt 205001 Dated: August 5, 2005. Steven M. Ferguson, Director, Division of Technology Development and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, National Institutes of Health. [FR Doc. 05–16138 Filed 8–12–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Substance Abuse Treatment; Notice of Meeting Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, notice is hereby given of a Teleconference Meeting of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) National Advisory Council to be held August 15, 2005. The meeting will include the review, discussion and evaluation of grant applications reviewed by Initial Review Groups. Therefore, the meeting will be closed to the public as determined by the SAMHSA Administrator, in accordance with Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6) and 5 U.S.C. App. 2, 10(d). Substantive program information and a roster of Council members may be obtained by accessing the SAMHSA Advisory Council Web site (https:// www.samhsa.gov) as soon as possible after the meeting, or by communicating with the contact whose name and telephone number are listed below. Committee Name: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment National Advisory Council. Meeting Date: August 15, 2005. Place: 1 Choke Cherry Road, 5th Floor Conference Room, Rockville, MD 20857. Type: Closed: August 15, 2005–11 a.m.–12 p.m. Contact: Cynthia Graham, M.S., NAC Executive Secretary, SAMHSA/CSAT National Advisory Council, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Room 5–1036, Rockville, MD 20857. Telephone: (240) 276–1692. FAX: (240) 276– 1690. E-mail: cynthia.graham@samhsa.hhs.gov. This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by the Department and the review and funding cycle. Dated: August 10, 2005. Toian Vaughn, Committee Management Officer, Substance Abuse and Mental Health, Services Administration. [FR Doc. 05–16164 Filed 8–12–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162–20–P PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 47845 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Information Collection Renewal To Be Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval Under the Paperwork Reduction Act; OMB Control Number 1018–0119; Policy for Evaluating Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: We (Fish and Wildlife Service, Service) plan to send OMB a request to renew approval for information collections associated with our Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions (PECE). We use the information that we collect as part of the basis for identifying conservation efforts that can contribute to a decision to not list a species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or to list a species as threatened rather than endangered. DATES: You must submit comments on or before October 14, 2005. ADDRESSES: Send your comments on this information collection to Hope Grey, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 222–ARLSQ, 4401 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, Virginia 22203 (mail); hope_grey@fws.gov (e-mail); or (703) 358–2269 (fax). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request a copy of the information collection requirements or explanatory material, contact Hope Grey, Information Collection Clearance Officer, at the above addresses or by telephone at (703) 358–2482. For information related to the Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions, please visit our Web site at https:// www.fws.gov/endangered/listing/pecefinal.pdf. The OMB regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which implement provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), require that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). We will ask OMB to renew approval of the collection of information for certain types of conservation agreements, conservation plans, and similar documents in relation to PECE (68 FR 15100, March 28, 2003). The current OMB control number for this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM 15AUN1 47846 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 156 / Monday, August 15, 2005 / Notices collection of information is 1018–0119, which expires on December 31, 2005. We will request a 3-year term of approval for this information collection activity. Federal agencies 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 ESA specifies the process by which we can list species as threatened or endangered. When we consider whether or not to list a species, the ESA requires us to take into account ‘‘those efforts, if any, being made by any State * * * or any political subdivision of a State * * * to protect such species * * *.’’ States or other entities often formalize conservation efforts in conservation agreements, conservation plans, management plans, or similar documents. The actions proposed in conservation plans could prevent some species under the ESA. The development of such agreements or plans is voluntary, and there is no requirement that the agreement or plans, or the individual conservation efforts they include, be designed to meet the criteria in PECE. However, PECE encourages the development of conservation agreements/plans and provides certainty about the standard that individual conservation efforts contained in an agreement/plan must meet so that we can consider that such efforts contribute to forming a basis for a listing determination. PECE applies to formal conservation efforts developed regardless of intent to influence a listing decision or involvement of the Service. Only those agreements/plans developed with the intent of influencing a listing decision and with involvement of the Service constitute an information collection that requires OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act. PECE specifies that to consider that a conservation effort contributes to forming a basis for not listing a species or listing a species as threatened rather than endangered, the Service must find the effort is sufficiently certain to be implemented and effective so as to have contributed to the elimination or adequate reduction of one or more threats to the species. To gauge whether or not this standard has been met, PECE includes criteria for evaluating the certainty of implementation and the certainty of effectiveness of individual conservation efforts. One criterion for evaluating the certainty of effectiveness of a conservation effort is that the agreement/plan contains provisions for monitoring and reporting progress on implementation and effectiveness of the effort. The nature of the monitoring and VerDate jul<14>2003 13:17 Aug 12, 2005 Jkt 205001 reporting will vary according to the species addressed, land ownership, specific conservation efforts, expertise of participants, and other factors. The information collected through monitoring is invaluable to the Service, the States, and other entities implementing agreements and plans, and to others concerned about the welfare of the species covered by the agreements/plans. Estimating the amount of work associated with developing a conservation agreement or plan is difficult because: (1) The development and associated monitoring of conservation efforts are completely voluntary, and we cannot predict who will decide to develop these efforts, (2) We cannot predict which species will become the subjects of conservation efforts, and, therefore, cannot predict the nature and extent of conservation efforts and monitoring that might be included in conservation agreements/ plans designed with the intent of influencing a decision regarding listing a species; and (3) Many agreements/plans, such as agency land management plans, are developed to satisfy requirements of other laws or for other purposes, and we cannot predict whether or the extent to which some of these plans may be expanded to attempt to make listing unnecessary. Consequently, we must base our estimate of the amount of work associated with developing conservation agreements or plans and monitoring and reporting of conservation efforts on information from conservation agreements developed in the past. We estimate the public reporting burden for the information collection covered by this renewal to average 2,500 hours for developing one agreement with the intent to preclude a listing, 320 hours for annual monitoring under one agreement, and 80 hours for one annual report. We expect that six agreements with the intent of making listing unnecessary will be developed in 1 year and that four of these will be successful in making listing unnecessary, and therefore, the entities that develop these four agreements will carry through with their monitoring and reporting commitments. Title: Policy for Evaluating Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions. Approval Number: 1018–0119. Form Numbers: None. Frequency of Collection: Occasional. Description of Respondents: Federal agencies, states, tribes, local governments, individuals, not-for-profit institutions. PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Total Annual Burden Hours: 16,600 hours. Total Annual Responses: 6. We invite your comments on: (1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions, including the opinion of the respondent regarding the practical utility of the information; (2) the accuracy of our estimate of the annual hour burden of information requested; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents. The information collections in this program will be part of a system of records covered by the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552(a)). Dated: August 3, 2005. Hope Grey, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 05–16086 Filed 8–12–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish & Wildlife Service Notice of Intent To Conduct Restoration Planning: M/V Citrus Natural Resource Damage Assessment Fish & Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to conduct restoration planning. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The United States Department of the Interior, trustee for the incident involving the discharge of oil from the M/V Citrus, has chosen to enter into the restoration planning phase of a Natural Resource Damage Assessment. The purpose of this phase is to prepare a plan for the restoration, rehabilitation, replacement, or the acquisition of the natural resources injured, destroyed or lost, or the uses which were lost, as a result of this discharge. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Siekaniec, Refuge Manager or Laurie Daniel, M/V Citrus Case Manager, Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (AMNWR), 95 Sterling Highway, Suite 1, Homer, AK 99603, or by phone at (907) 235–6546. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In midFebruary of 1996, a large number of various species of oiled migratory waterfowl and seabirds were discovered on the Bering Sea islands of St. Paul and St. George, in the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. Laboratory analysis of oil samples taken from vessels in the area E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM 15AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 156 (Monday, August 15, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47845-47846]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16086]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Information Collection Renewal To Be Sent to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval Under the Paperwork Reduction 
Act; OMB Control Number 1018-0119; Policy for Evaluating Conservation 
Efforts When Making Listing Decisions

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We (Fish and Wildlife Service, Service) plan to send OMB a 
request to renew approval for information collections associated with 
our Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing 
Decisions (PECE). We use the information that we collect as part of the 
basis for identifying conservation efforts that can contribute to a 
decision to not list a species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 
or to list a species as threatened rather than endangered.

DATES: You must submit comments on or before October 14, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send your comments on this information collection to Hope 
Grey, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife 
Service, MS 222-ARLSQ, 4401 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, Virginia 
22203 (mail); hope_grey@fws.gov (e-mail); or (703) 358-2269 (fax).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request a copy of the information 
collection requirements or explanatory material, contact Hope Grey, 
Information Collection Clearance Officer, at the above addresses or by 
telephone at (703) 358-2482. For information related to the Policy for 
Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions, 
please visit our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/listing/
pece-final.pdf.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which 
implement provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.), require that interested members of the public and 
affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information 
collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). We will 
ask OMB to renew approval of the collection of information for certain 
types of conservation agreements, conservation plans, and similar 
documents in relation to PECE (68 FR 15100, March 28, 2003). The 
current OMB control number for this

[[Page 47846]]

collection of information is 1018-0119, which expires on December 31, 
2005. We will request a 3-year term of approval for this information 
collection activity. Federal agencies 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 ESA specifies the process by which we can list species as 
threatened or endangered. When we consider whether or not to list a 
species, the ESA requires us to take into account ``those efforts, if 
any, being made by any State * * * or any political subdivision of a 
State * * * to protect such species * * *.'' States or other entities 
often formalize conservation efforts in conservation agreements, 
conservation plans, management plans, or similar documents. The actions 
proposed in conservation plans could prevent some species under the 
ESA. The development of such agreements or plans is voluntary, and 
there is no requirement that the agreement or plans, or the individual 
conservation efforts they include, be designed to meet the criteria in 
PECE. However, PECE encourages the development of conservation 
agreements/plans and provides certainty about the standard that 
individual conservation efforts contained in an agreement/plan must 
meet so that we can consider that such efforts contribute to forming a 
basis for a listing determination.
    PECE applies to formal conservation efforts developed regardless of 
intent to influence a listing decision or involvement of the Service. 
Only those agreements/plans developed with the intent of influencing a 
listing decision and with involvement of the Service constitute an 
information collection that requires OMB approval under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act.
    PECE specifies that to consider that a conservation effort 
contributes to forming a basis for not listing a species or listing a 
species as threatened rather than endangered, the Service must find the 
effort is sufficiently certain to be implemented and effective so as to 
have contributed to the elimination or adequate reduction of one or 
more threats to the species. To gauge whether or not this standard has 
been met, PECE includes criteria for evaluating the certainty of 
implementation and the certainty of effectiveness of individual 
conservation efforts. One criterion for evaluating the certainty of 
effectiveness of a conservation effort is that the agreement/plan 
contains provisions for monitoring and reporting progress on 
implementation and effectiveness of the effort. The nature of the 
monitoring and reporting will vary according to the species addressed, 
land ownership, specific conservation efforts, expertise of 
participants, and other factors. The information collected through 
monitoring is invaluable to the Service, the States, and other entities 
implementing agreements and plans, and to others concerned about the 
welfare of the species covered by the agreements/plans.
    Estimating the amount of work associated with developing a 
conservation agreement or plan is difficult because:
    (1) The development and associated monitoring of conservation 
efforts are completely voluntary, and we cannot predict who will decide 
to develop these efforts,
    (2) We cannot predict which species will become the subjects of 
conservation efforts, and, therefore, cannot predict the nature and 
extent of conservation efforts and monitoring that might be included in 
conservation agreements/plans designed with the intent of influencing a 
decision regarding listing a species; and
    (3) Many agreements/plans, such as agency land management plans, 
are developed to satisfy requirements of other laws or for other 
purposes, and we cannot predict whether or the extent to which some of 
these plans may be expanded to attempt to make listing unnecessary. 
Consequently, we must base our estimate of the amount of work 
associated with developing conservation agreements or plans and 
monitoring and reporting of conservation efforts on information from 
conservation agreements developed in the past.
    We estimate the public reporting burden for the information 
collection covered by this renewal to average 2,500 hours for 
developing one agreement with the intent to preclude a listing, 320 
hours for annual monitoring under one agreement, and 80 hours for one 
annual report. We expect that six agreements with the intent of making 
listing unnecessary will be developed in 1 year and that four of these 
will be successful in making listing unnecessary, and therefore, the 
entities that develop these four agreements will carry through with 
their monitoring and reporting commitments.
    Title: Policy for Evaluating Conservation Efforts When Making 
Listing Decisions.
    Approval Number: 1018-0119.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Frequency of Collection: Occasional.
    Description of Respondents: Federal agencies, states, tribes, local 
governments, individuals, not-for-profit institutions.
    Total Annual Burden Hours: 16,600 hours.
    Total Annual Responses: 6.
    We invite your comments on: (1) Whether or not the collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the Policy for 
Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions, 
including the opinion of the respondent regarding the practical utility 
of the information; (2) the accuracy of our estimate of the annual hour 
burden of information requested; (3) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways 
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents. 
The information collections in this program will be part of a system of 
records covered by the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552(a)).

    Dated: August 3, 2005.
Hope Grey,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 05-16086 Filed 8-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.