Automated Commercial Environment (ACE): National Customs Automation Program Test Of Automated Truck Manifest for Truck Carrier Accounts; Deployment Schedule, 23941-23942 [E6-6188]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 25, 2006 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection
Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE): National Customs Automation
Program Test Of Automated Truck
Manifest for Truck Carrier Accounts;
Deployment Schedule
Customs and Border Protection;
Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: General notice.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection, in conjunction with
the Department of Transportation,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, is currently conducting
a National Customs Automation
Program (NCAP) test concerning the
transmission of automated truck
manifest data. This document
announces the next groups, or clusters,
of ports to be deployed for this test.
DATES: The cluster of ports identified
individually in this notice, deploying in
the states of Texas and New Mexico,
were deployed as of March 1, 2006. The
cluster encompassing Laredo, Texas,
and its bridges, is expected to deploy no
earlier than April 5, 2006. A third
cluster of ports, all in the State of
California and also identified
individually in this notice, are expected
to deploy no earlier than May 1, 2006.
Comments concerning this notice and
all aspects of the announced test may be
submitted at any time during the test
period.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
James Swanson via e-mail at
james.d.swanson@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Background
The National Customs Automation
Program (NCAP) test concerning the
transmission of automated truck
manifest data for truck carrier accounts
was announced in a General Notice
published in the Federal Register (69
FR 55167) on September 13, 2004. That
notice stated that the test of the
Automated Truck Manifest would be
conducted in a phased approach, with
primary deployment scheduled for no
earlier than November 29, 2004. The
document identified the ports of Blaine,
Washington, and Buffalo, New York, as
the original deployment sites.
The September 13, 2004, notice stated
that subsequent deployment of the test
would occur at Champlain, New York;
Detroit, Michigan; Laredo, Texas; Otay
Mesa, California; and Port Huron,
Michigan, on dates to be announced.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Apr 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
The notice stated that the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
would announce the implementation
and sequencing of truck manifest
functionality at these ports as they occur
and further stated that additional
participants and ports would be selected
throughout the duration of the test. The
test is to be expanded eventually to
include ACE Truck Carrier Account
participants at all land border ports, and
subsequent releases of ACE will include
all modes of transportation.
Implementation of the Test
The test commenced in Blaine,
Washington in December 2004, but not
at Buffalo, New York. In light of
experience with the implementation of
the test in Blaine, Washington, CBP
decided to change the implementation
schedule and published a General
Notice in the Federal Register (70 FR
30964) on May 31, 2005, announcing
the changes.
As noted in the May 31, 2005, General
Notice, CBP is phasing in the
deployment of the Automated Truck
Manifest test in clusters. In some
instances, one site in the cluster is
identified as the ‘‘model site’’ or ‘‘model
port’’ for the cluster. This deployment
strategy allows for more efficient
equipment set-up, site checkouts, port
briefings and central training.
The ports identified belonging to the
first cluster announced in the May 31,
2005, notice included the original port
of implementation: Blaine, Washington.
Sumas, Washington, was designated as
the model port. The other ports of
deployment in the cluster included the
following: Point Roberts, WA; Oroville,
WA (including sub ports); Boundary,
WA; Danville, WA; Ferry, WA; Frontier,
WA; Laurier, WA; Metaline Falls, WA;
Nighthawk, WA; and Lynden, WA.
In a notice published in the Federal
Register (70 FR 43892) on July 29, 2005,
CBP announced that the test was being
further deployed, in two clusters, at
ports in the States of Arizona and North
Dakota. CBP stated that the test would
be deployed at the following ports in
Arizona as of July 25, 2005: Douglas,
AZ; Naco, AZ; Lukeville, AZ; Sasabe,
AZ; and Nogales, AZ. Douglas, AZ was
designated as the model port. The test
was also to be deployed, according to
information provided in the notice, at
the following ports in North Dakota as
of August 15, 2005: Pembina, ND;
Neche, ND; Noyes, ND; Walhalla, ND;
Maida, ND; Hannah, ND; Sarles, ND;
and Hansboro, ND. Pembina, ND, was
designated as the model port.
In a General Notice published in the
Federal Register (70 FR 60096) on
October 14, 2005, CBP announced that
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23941
the test was to be further deployed in a
cluster of ports, in the State of
Michigan, no earlier than the dates
indicated as follows (all in the year
2005): Windsor Tunnel, October 4;
Barge Transport, October 5; Ambassador
Bridge, October 7; Port Huron, October
14; Marine City, October 18; Algonac,
October 18; and Sault St. Marie, October
28. No port in this cluster was
designated as a ‘‘model port.’’
CBP next announced, in a General
Notice published in the Federal
Register (71 FR 3875) on January 24,
2006, two additional clusters of ports to
be brought up for purposes of
implementation of the test. These ports
were all to be deployed no earlier than
January 2006, in one cluster at Eagle
Pass, Texas and Del Rio, Texas and in
another cluster at the following ports:
Brownsville, Texas; Pharr, Texas;
Progresso, Texas; Rio Grande City,
Texas; and Roma, Texas. No ports in
these clusters were designated as
‘‘model ports.’’
New Clusters
Through this notice, CBP announces
the next clusters of ports. The test was
deployed as of March 1, 2006 at the
following ports in the States of Texas
and New Mexico: El Paso, Texas;
Presidio, Texas; Columbus, New
Mexico; and Santa Teresa, New Mexico.
A cluster encompassing Laredo, Texas,
and its bridges, is expected to deploy no
earlier than April 5, 2006. The cluster of
ports in the State of California at which
the test is expected to deploy no earlier
than May 1, 2006, will consist of: Otay
Mesa, California; Calexico, California;
Andrade, California; Tecate, California;
and San Luis, California. No port in any
of the three new clusters has been
designated as a ‘‘model port.’’
Previous NCAP Notices Not Concerning
Deployment Schedules
On Monday, March 21, 2005, a
General Notice was published in the
Federal Register (70 FR 13514)
announcing a modification to the NCAP
test to clarify that all relevant data
elements are required to be submitted in
the automated truck manifest
submission. That notice did not
announce any change to the deployment
schedule and is not affected by
publication of this notice. All
requirements and aspects of the test, as
set forth in the September 13, 2004
notice, as modified by the March 21,
2005 notice, continue to be applicable.
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
23942
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 25, 2006 / Notices
Dated: April 20, 2006.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field
Operations.
[FR Doc. E6–6188 Filed 4–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Draft Recovery Plan for Two Plants
From Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and
Osmoxylon mariannense)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of document availability
for review and comment.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce the
availability of the Draft Recovery Plan
for Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes
rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense)
(no common names) for public review
and comment.
DATES: Comments on the draft recovery
plan must be received on or before June
26, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the draft recovery
plan are available by request from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific
Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300
Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3–122, Box
50088, Honolulu, Hawaii 96850
(telephone: 808–792–9400). An
electronic copy of the draft recovery
plan is also available at: https://
endangered.fws.gov/recovery/
index.html#plans.
SUMMARY:
The
Field Supervisor, at the above Pacific
Islands Fish and Wildlife Office.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Background
Restoring endangered or threatened
animals and plants to the point where
they are again secure, self-sustaining
members of their ecosystems is a
primary goal of our endangered species
program. The Endangered Species Act
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA) requires
the development of recovery plans for
listed species unless such a plan would
not promote the conservation of a
particular species. Recovery plans help
guide the recovery effort by describing
actions considered necessary for the
conservation of the species, establishing
criteria for downlisting or delisting
listed species, and estimating time and
cost for implementing the measures
needed for recovery.
Section 4(f) of the ESA requires that
public notice, and an opportunity for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Apr 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
public review and comment, be
provided during recovery plan
development. We will consider all
information presented during the public
comment period prior to approval of
each new or revised recovery plan.
Substantive comments on the recovery
needs of the species or other aspects of
recovery plan development may result
in changes to the recovery plan.
Substantive comments regarding
recovery plan implementation may not
necessarily result in changes to the
recovery plan, but will be forwarded to
appropriate Federal or other entities so
that they can take these comments into
account during the course of
implementing recovery actions.
Individual responses to comments will
not be provided.
Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon
mariannense are found only on the
island of Rota in the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).
Both species were federally listed as
endangered in 2004 (69 FR 18499), and
O. mariannense is also protected by the
government of the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).
Currently, there are 2 known
populations of N. rotensis consisting of
15 to 20 plants each. There are 10
known individuals of O. mariannense
scattered through the Sabana (the
cloudswept plateau that dominates the
western half of Rota), including 2
individuals outplanted from past
controlled propagation efforts.
Nesogenes rotensis is found on
exposed, raised limestone flats in nonforested strand habitat. Osmoxylon
mariannense is found in limestone
forests on the Sabana, a raised plateau
unique in the Mariana archipelago, that
are often shrouded in clouds and mist.
Human activities are believed to be
the primary factors leading to the small
population sizes and limited
distribution of Nesogenes rotensis and
Osmoxylon mariannense, and include:
agriculture, ranching, non-native plant
and animal introductions, resort and
beach park development in the coastal
habitat of N. rotensis, and road
construction and maintenance in the
Sabana habitat of O. mariannense. In
the last decade, several major typhoons
have made landfall on Rota, severely
impacting individuals of both species.
Another factor that may affect the
recovery of these two species is their
vulnerability to extinction from reduced
reproductive vigor due to their small
population sizes.
The objective of this recovery plan is
to restore and maintain multiple
naturally reproducing populations of
Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon
mariannense on the island of Rota. The
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
draft recovery plan for these two plants
focuses on the following actions: (1)
Coordinating and monitoring recovery
efforts; (2) addressing factors affecting
viability of the wild populations; (3)
monitoring N. rotensis and O.
mariannense populations, establishing
new populations, and augmenting
existing populations; and (4) providing
educational informational opportunities
to build public support for conservation.
Public Comments Solicited
We solicit written comments on the
draft recovery plan described. All
comments received by the date specified
above will be considered in the
finalization of this plan.
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16
U.S.C. 1533 (f).
Dated: February 17, 2006.
David J. Wesley,
Acting Regional Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E6–6143 Filed 4–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
U.S. Geological Survey
National Earthquake Prediction
Evaluation Council
U.S. Geological Survey,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Public Law 96–
472, the National Earthquake Prediction
Evaluation Council (NEPEC) will hold a
meeting. The meeting location is the
U.S. Geological Survey, Building 3,
Conference Room C, 345 Middlefield
Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025. The
Committee is comprised of members
from academia and the Federal
government. The Committee shall
advise the Director of the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) on proposed
earthquake predictions, on the
completeness and scientific validity of
the available data related to earthquake
predictions, and on related matters as
assigned by the Director.
The Committee, which was recently
reconstituted following a period of
dormancy, will review past findings
rendered by the NEPEC and by the
California Earthquake Prediction
Evaluation Council. They will also
discuss recent trends in earthquake
research that bear on the predictability
of earthquake occurrence.
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 25, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23941-23942]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6188]
[[Page 23941]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
Automated Commercial Environment (ACE): National Customs
Automation Program Test Of Automated Truck Manifest for Truck Carrier
Accounts; Deployment Schedule
AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection; Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: General notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, in conjunction
with the Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, is currently conducting a National Customs Automation
Program (NCAP) test concerning the transmission of automated truck
manifest data. This document announces the next groups, or clusters, of
ports to be deployed for this test.
DATES: The cluster of ports identified individually in this notice,
deploying in the states of Texas and New Mexico, were deployed as of
March 1, 2006. The cluster encompassing Laredo, Texas, and its bridges,
is expected to deploy no earlier than April 5, 2006. A third cluster of
ports, all in the State of California and also identified individually
in this notice, are expected to deploy no earlier than May 1, 2006.
Comments concerning this notice and all aspects of the announced test
may be submitted at any time during the test period.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James Swanson via e-mail at
james.d.swanson@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Customs Automation Program (NCAP) test concerning the
transmission of automated truck manifest data for truck carrier
accounts was announced in a General Notice published in the Federal
Register (69 FR 55167) on September 13, 2004. That notice stated that
the test of the Automated Truck Manifest would be conducted in a phased
approach, with primary deployment scheduled for no earlier than
November 29, 2004. The document identified the ports of Blaine,
Washington, and Buffalo, New York, as the original deployment sites.
The September 13, 2004, notice stated that subsequent deployment of
the test would occur at Champlain, New York; Detroit, Michigan; Laredo,
Texas; Otay Mesa, California; and Port Huron, Michigan, on dates to be
announced. The notice stated that the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) would announce the implementation and sequencing of
truck manifest functionality at these ports as they occur and further
stated that additional participants and ports would be selected
throughout the duration of the test. The test is to be expanded
eventually to include ACE Truck Carrier Account participants at all
land border ports, and subsequent releases of ACE will include all
modes of transportation.
Implementation of the Test
The test commenced in Blaine, Washington in December 2004, but not
at Buffalo, New York. In light of experience with the implementation of
the test in Blaine, Washington, CBP decided to change the
implementation schedule and published a General Notice in the Federal
Register (70 FR 30964) on May 31, 2005, announcing the changes.
As noted in the May 31, 2005, General Notice, CBP is phasing in the
deployment of the Automated Truck Manifest test in clusters. In some
instances, one site in the cluster is identified as the ``model site''
or ``model port'' for the cluster. This deployment strategy allows for
more efficient equipment set-up, site checkouts, port briefings and
central training.
The ports identified belonging to the first cluster announced in
the May 31, 2005, notice included the original port of implementation:
Blaine, Washington. Sumas, Washington, was designated as the model
port. The other ports of deployment in the cluster included the
following: Point Roberts, WA; Oroville, WA (including sub ports);
Boundary, WA; Danville, WA; Ferry, WA; Frontier, WA; Laurier, WA;
Metaline Falls, WA; Nighthawk, WA; and Lynden, WA.
In a notice published in the Federal Register (70 FR 43892) on July
29, 2005, CBP announced that the test was being further deployed, in
two clusters, at ports in the States of Arizona and North Dakota. CBP
stated that the test would be deployed at the following ports in
Arizona as of July 25, 2005: Douglas, AZ; Naco, AZ; Lukeville, AZ;
Sasabe, AZ; and Nogales, AZ. Douglas, AZ was designated as the model
port. The test was also to be deployed, according to information
provided in the notice, at the following ports in North Dakota as of
August 15, 2005: Pembina, ND; Neche, ND; Noyes, ND; Walhalla, ND;
Maida, ND; Hannah, ND; Sarles, ND; and Hansboro, ND. Pembina, ND, was
designated as the model port.
In a General Notice published in the Federal Register (70 FR 60096)
on October 14, 2005, CBP announced that the test was to be further
deployed in a cluster of ports, in the State of Michigan, no earlier
than the dates indicated as follows (all in the year 2005): Windsor
Tunnel, October 4; Barge Transport, October 5; Ambassador Bridge,
October 7; Port Huron, October 14; Marine City, October 18; Algonac,
October 18; and Sault St. Marie, October 28. No port in this cluster
was designated as a ``model port.''
CBP next announced, in a General Notice published in the Federal
Register (71 FR 3875) on January 24, 2006, two additional clusters of
ports to be brought up for purposes of implementation of the test.
These ports were all to be deployed no earlier than January 2006, in
one cluster at Eagle Pass, Texas and Del Rio, Texas and in another
cluster at the following ports: Brownsville, Texas; Pharr, Texas;
Progresso, Texas; Rio Grande City, Texas; and Roma, Texas. No ports in
these clusters were designated as ``model ports.''
New Clusters
Through this notice, CBP announces the next clusters of ports. The
test was deployed as of March 1, 2006 at the following ports in the
States of Texas and New Mexico: El Paso, Texas; Presidio, Texas;
Columbus, New Mexico; and Santa Teresa, New Mexico. A cluster
encompassing Laredo, Texas, and its bridges, is expected to deploy no
earlier than April 5, 2006. The cluster of ports in the State of
California at which the test is expected to deploy no earlier than May
1, 2006, will consist of: Otay Mesa, California; Calexico, California;
Andrade, California; Tecate, California; and San Luis, California. No
port in any of the three new clusters has been designated as a ``model
port.''
Previous NCAP Notices Not Concerning Deployment Schedules
On Monday, March 21, 2005, a General Notice was published in the
Federal Register (70 FR 13514) announcing a modification to the NCAP
test to clarify that all relevant data elements are required to be
submitted in the automated truck manifest submission. That notice did
not announce any change to the deployment schedule and is not affected
by publication of this notice. All requirements and aspects of the
test, as set forth in the September 13, 2004 notice, as modified by the
March 21, 2005 notice, continue to be applicable.
[[Page 23942]]
Dated: April 20, 2006.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations.
[FR Doc. E6-6188 Filed 4-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
