January 3, 2006 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) Office of the Science Advisor (OSA) is soliciting nominations of qualified individuals to serve on a proposed Human Studies Review Board (HSRB). The Agency anticipates establishment of such a board to provide advice and recommendations on issues related to the scientific and ethical review of human subjects research. EPA was directed to establish such a Board pursuant to the 2006 EPA Appropriations Act and included such a Board in a proposed rule for protection of subjects in human research. See: ``Department of Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006'', Public Law No. 109-54 and ``Protections for Subjects in Human Research: Proposed Rule,'' 70 FR 53,838; September 12, 2005.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has crafted a Web page for the rulemaking titled ``Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material,'' also known as the ``NARM rulemaking.'' The Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires the NRC to establish a regulatory framework for the expanded definition of byproduct material to include certain naturally occurring and accelerator-produced radioactive material through rulemaking. Documents in support of this rulemaking will be posted on the Web page via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at https:// ruleforum.llnl.gov as they become publicly available.

On September 7, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register the preliminary results and preliminary partial rescission of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Japan. This review covers four manufactures/exporters: JFE Steel Corporation (JFE), Nippon Steel Corporation (Nippon), NKK Tubes (NKK) and Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd. (SMI). The period of review (POR) covers sales of subject merchandise to the United States during the period of August 1, 2003, through July 31, 2004. We provided interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results of review. However, we received no comments from interested parties. Consequently, no changes have been made to the dumping margins set forth in the preliminary results of this administrative review. For the margins applicable to each respondent, see the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.

M.A. Notch Corporation (Notch) filed a request for a changed circumstances review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on certain cased pencils from the People's Republic of China (PRC). Specifically, Notch requests that the Department revoke the AD order with respect to a large novelty pencil, which is described below. Certain domestic interested parties have affirmatively expressed a lack of interest in the continuation of the order with respect to this product.\1\ In response to the request, the Department initiated a changed circumstances review of the AD order on certain cased pencils from the PRC. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.

On September 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') published a notice of initiation of the second sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on welded ASTM A-312 stainless steel pipe (``WSSP'') from South Korea (``Korea'') and Taiwan, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of a notice of intent to participate and adequate substantive responses from the domestic interested parties and no response from respondent interested parties, the Department has conducted expedited sunset reviews of these antidumping duty orders. As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the level indicated in the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.

Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) and the Acting Assistant Secretary for Health have taken final action in the following case: Hans E. Geisler, M.D., Saint Vincent Hospital and Health Care Center: Based on the report of an inquiry and investigation conducted by Saint Vincent Hospital (SVH) in Indianapolis, Indiana, and additional analysis conducted by ORI in its oversight review, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) found that Hans E. Geisler, M.D., former Staff Physician and Principal Investigator for SVH's studies under the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG), engaged in scientific misconduct by soliciting a pathologist to falsify the originally correct tissue-type on the pathology report (omentum) as being another type (ovary) and submitting the falsified report to the GOG group member at the University of Iowa, in order to justify enrollment of a patient in GOG clinical protocol 182. The questioned research was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds to the University of Iowa through the American Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology under National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), cooperative agreement U10 CA27469. Dr. Geisler has entered into a Voluntary Exclusion Agreement (Agreement ) in which he has voluntarily agreed, for a period of three (3) years, beginning on December 2, 2005: (1) To exclude himself from serving in any advisory capacity to PHS including but not limited to service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee, or as consultant; and (2) That any institution which uses the Respondent in any capacity on PHS-supported research, or that submits an application for PHS support for a research project on which the Respondent's participation is proposed or submits a report of PHS-funded research in which the Respondent's participation is continuing, must concurrently submit a plan for supervision of the Respondent's duties to the funding agency for approval. The supervisory plan must be designed to ensure the scientific integrity of the Respondent's research contribution. A copy of the supervisory plan must also be submitted to ORI by the institution. Respondent agrees that he will not participate in any PHS- supported research until such a supervision plan is submitted to ORI. Respondent disagrees with the ORI finding set forth herein but executes this Agreement to avoid further proceedings and bring this matter to a close. The execution of this Agreement shall not be deemed an admission to the charge of scientific misconduct by the Respondent.

The Coast Guard announces the availability of a draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) on its proposal to clarify, and set new response time requirements for salvage and marine firefighting requirements in the vessel response plans for oil. We request your comments on the draft PEA.

This notice announces that the Office of Indian Education Programs is seeking comments on the renewal of the Information Collection Request for the Tribal Colleges and Universities Application for Grants, OMB No. 1076-0018, and the Annual Report Form, OMB No. 1076-0105, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

The Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and notice of public meetings and hearings was published in the Federal Register on November 10, 2005 (70 FR 68475). The Bureau of Reclamation is correcting the public hearing dates from 2005 to 2006 and changing the dates, times, and locations.