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 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: http:// 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