Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA)/Joint Planning Advisory Group (JPAG), 54101-54102 [E7-18571]

Download as PDF mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 183 / Friday, September 21, 2007 / Notices future station in Milpitas is also proposed. • Berryessa Extension Project Alternative. This alternative would begin at the planned BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceed on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to south of Mabury Road in San Jose. The total length of the alignment would be 9.3 miles. Two stations are proposed: Milpitas and Berryessa. Analytical Methodologies: FTA and VTA will collaborate with agencies and the public, as appropriate, on the methodologies to be used and the level of detail required in the analysis of proposed alternatives. Information on the methodologies for analysis will be sent to the appropriate agencies directly. Information will also be presented at the scoping meetings for public distribution. Both agencies and the public may comment, as described under DATES above. The EIS Process and the Role of Agencies and the Public: The purpose of the EIS process is to explore in a public setting, potentially significant effects of implementing the proposed Project and Project alternatives on the physical, human, and natural environment. The major areas of investigation include, but are not limited to, the effect on historic resources in downtown San Jose, the noise impacts of the BART trains outside of the planned tunnel, and the vibration impacts of the BART trains both inside and outside of tunnel. Regulations implementing NEPA, as well as provisions of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU), call for agency and public involvement in the EIS process. Section 6002 of SAFETEA–LU requires that FTA and VTA extend an invitation to other Federal and nonFederal agencies and Indian tribes that may have an interest in the proposed Project to become a participating agency, and establish a plan for coordinating public and agency participation in and comment on the environmental review. A cooperating agency is defined as ‘‘any Federal agency which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved in a proposal. Accordingly, an invitation to become a cooperating or participating agency, as appropriate, will be extended to agencies and Indian tribes known to have an interest in the proposed Project. It is possible that we may not be able to identify all Federal and non-Federal agencies and Indian tribes that may have such an interest. Any Federal or non-Federal agency or Indian tribe VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:17 Sep 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 interested in the proposed Project that does not receive an invitation to become a participating agency should notify, at the earliest opportunity, the Environmental Planning Resource Manager identified above under ADDRESSES above. Agency and Public Involvement: A comprehensive agency and public involvement program has been developed. The Policy Advisory Board consisting of county, city, BART, and VTA officials; City Partnership Teams consisting of VTA and city staff representatives; and the External Technical Advisory Committee consisting of staff representatives from state, regional, county, city, and transit agencies; were established in 2002 and continue to meet regularly to provide guidance, discuss the proposed Project, and for coordination and technical input. Community Working Groups consisting of the leaders of neighborhood and business associations, community organizations, advocacy groups, major property owners, and planning commissioners were also established in 2002 for cities and specific geographical areas to communicate Project information to key members of the community and facilitate community input and participation. These mechanisms will be developed into a formal coordination plan that covers both agency and public involvement. The coordination plan will be posted on the Project Web site at https://www.vtabart-vta.org. FTA Procedures: In accordance with 23 CFR 771.105(a) and 771.133, FTA will comply with all Federal environmental laws, regulations, and executive orders applicable to the proposed Project during the environmental review process to the maximum extent practical. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508 and 23 CFR part 771), the project-level air quality conformity regulation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (40 CFR part 93), section 404(b)(1) guidelines of EPA (40 CFR part 230), Executive Orders 11988, 11990, and 12898 regarding floodplains, wetlands, and environmental justice, respectively, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR part 800), Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR part 402), and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (23 CFR 771.135). Related Documents: The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor, Major Investment Study Final Report PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 54101 (November 2001), the 2004 Draft EIS, the Final Environmental Impact Report (November 2004), and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (June 2007) are available for public review at the following public libraries: • Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Main Library, 150 East San Fernando Street, San Jose, CA 95112. • Fremont Main Library, 2400 Stevenson Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94538. • Milpitas Library, 40 N. Milpitas Boulevard, Milpitas, CA 95035. • Central Park Library, 2635 Homestead Road, Santa Clara, CA 95051. The reports are also available by contacting Tom Fitzwater at the address and phone number given above. Issued on: September 14, 2007. Leslie Rogers, Regional Administrator. [FR Doc. 07–4666 Filed 9–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–57–M DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Maritime Administration Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA)/Joint Planning Advisory Group (JPAG) Maritime Administration, DOT. Synopsis of August 21–24, 2007 Meeting with VISA Participants AGENCY: ACTION: The VISA program requires that a notice of the time, place, and nature of each JPAG meeting be published in the Federal Register. The full text of the VISA program, including these requirements, is published in 70 FR 55947–55955, dated September 23, 2005. On August 21–24, 2007, the Maritime Administration and the U.S. Transportation Command co-hosted a JPAG meeting at the U.S. Transportation Command, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. Meeting attendance was by invitation only, due to the nature of the information discussed and the need for a government-issued security clearance. Of the 52 U.S.-flag carrier corporate participants enrolled in the VISA program, 18 companies and one representative from maritime labor participated in the JPAG meeting. In addition, representatives from the Maritime Administration and the Department of Defense (DOD) attended the meeting. Margaret Leclaire, Deputy Director Strategy, Plans, Policy & Programs, U.S. Transportation Command, and James E:\FR\FM\21SEN1.SGM 21SEN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 54102 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 183 / Friday, September 21, 2007 / Notices Caponiti, Associate Administrator for National Security, Maritime Administration, welcomed the participants. Ms. Leclaire thanked the industry participants for their continued support. She remarked that she was pleased with the large number of attendees at the JPAG meeting. Ms Leclaire noted that this JPAG was a follow-up to previous JPAG exercises including a table-top exercise conducted in July 2006. This exercise, she noted, was designed to go beyond the table-top exercise and test the industry’s ability to respond to what might occur during a VISA activation. The results of the JPAG would be used to validate the VISA activation battlebook. Mr. Caponiti remarked that the numerous assumptions in previous JPAG exercises did not always take into account events that could disrupt the industry’s ability to meet DOD requirements. Assumptions in previous exercises were made to minimize disruption of commercial and military activities, which may not be the case in an actual VISA activation. He expressed a hope that this JPAG exercise would add realism to what actually could occur during VISA activation. Further, both Mr. Caponiti and Ms. Leclaire requested that participants document concerns and issues that would be required to improve the VISA activation process. The purpose of the JPAG exercise was to review the processes of VISA activation using strategic sealift requirements to support two military contingencies simultaneously. The exercise also focused on the contractual processes required for VISA activation as well as the subsequent communications flow required to support the activation. The JPAG exercise was considered a success as industry participants were able to provide necessary capacity and resources to meet DOD requirements. However, the participants identified areas that needed clarity and further development to improve the VISA activation process. The Maritime Administration, U.S. Transportation Command and industry participants agreed to work on the issues identified in the JPAG exercise to assure that they are adequately addressed for the efficient coordination of VISA activation procedures and contractual processes. The following VISA companies participated in the August 21–24, 2007 JPAG meeting: American President Lines, Ltd.; American Roll-On Roll-Off Carrier, LLC; American Shipping Group; APL Marine Services, Ltd.; APL Maritime Ltd; Central Gulf Lines, Inc.; Farrell Lines Incorporated; Fidelio VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:17 Sep 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 Limited Partnership; Hapag-Lloyd USA, LLC; Horizon Lines, LLC; Liberty Global Logistics, LLC; Liberty Shipping Group Limited Partnership; Maersk Line, Limited; Pasha Hawaii Transport Lines LLC; Patriot Shipping, LLC; Patriot Titan, LLC; Sealift Inc. and Waterman Steamship Corporation. CONTACT PERSON FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Mr. Taylor E. Jones II, Director, Office of Sealift Support, (202) 366–2323. Authority: 49 CFR 1.66. By Order of the Maritime Administrator. Dated: September 13, 2007. Daron T. Threet, Secretary, Maritime Administration. [FR Doc. E7–18571 Filed 9–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–81–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8879–EX Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 8879–EX, IRS e-file Signature Authorization for Forms 720, 2290, and 8849. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before November 20, 2007 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Joe Durbala, Internal Revenue Service, room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for copies of the form and instructions should be directed to Allan Hopkins, at (202) 622–6665, or at Internal Revenue Service, room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet, at Allan.M.Hopkins@irs.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: IRS e-file Signature Authorization for Forms 720, 2290, and 8849. OMB Number: 1545–2081. PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Form Number: 8879–EX. Abstract: The Form 8879–EX, IRS efile Signature Authorization for Forms 720, 2990, and 8849, will be used in the Modernized e-File program. Form 8879– EX authorizes an a taxpayer and an electronic return originator (ERO) to use a personal identification number (PIN) to electronically sign an electronic excise tax return and, if applicable, authorize an electronic funds withdrawal. Current Actions: There are no changes being made to the form at this time. Type of Review: Extension of a previously approved collection. Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations. Estimated Number of Respondents: 10,000. Estimated Time Per Respondent: 4 hours, 41 minutes. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 46,800. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Request for Comments: Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: September 10, 2007. R. Joseph Durbala, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7–18599 Filed 9–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830–01–P E:\FR\FM\21SEN1.SGM 21SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 183 (Friday, September 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54101-54102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-18571]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Maritime Administration


Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA)/Joint Planning 
Advisory Group (JPAG)

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Synopsis of August 21-24, 2007 Meeting with VISA Participants

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

    The VISA program requires that a notice of the time, place, and 
nature of each JPAG meeting be published in the Federal Register. The 
full text of the VISA program, including these requirements, is 
published in 70 FR 55947-55955, dated September 23, 2005.
    On August 21-24, 2007, the Maritime Administration and the U.S. 
Transportation Command co-hosted a JPAG meeting at the U.S. 
Transportation Command, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. Meeting 
attendance was by invitation only, due to the nature of the information 
discussed and the need for a government-issued security clearance. Of 
the 52 U.S.-flag carrier corporate participants enrolled in the VISA 
program, 18 companies and one representative from maritime labor 
participated in the JPAG meeting. In addition, representatives from the 
Maritime Administration and the Department of Defense (DOD) attended 
the meeting.
    Margaret Leclaire, Deputy Director Strategy, Plans, Policy & 
Programs, U.S. Transportation Command, and James

[[Page 54102]]

Caponiti, Associate Administrator for National Security, Maritime 
Administration, welcomed the participants. Ms. Leclaire thanked the 
industry participants for their continued support. She remarked that 
she was pleased with the large number of attendees at the JPAG meeting. 
Ms Leclaire noted that this JPAG was a follow-up to previous JPAG 
exercises including a table-top exercise conducted in July 2006. This 
exercise, she noted, was designed to go beyond the table-top exercise 
and test the industry's ability to respond to what might occur during a 
VISA activation. The results of the JPAG would be used to validate the 
VISA activation battlebook.
    Mr. Caponiti remarked that the numerous assumptions in previous 
JPAG exercises did not always take into account events that could 
disrupt the industry's ability to meet DOD requirements. Assumptions in 
previous exercises were made to minimize disruption of commercial and 
military activities, which may not be the case in an actual VISA 
activation. He expressed a hope that this JPAG exercise would add 
realism to what actually could occur during VISA activation. Further, 
both Mr. Caponiti and Ms. Leclaire requested that participants document 
concerns and issues that would be required to improve the VISA 
activation process.
    The purpose of the JPAG exercise was to review the processes of 
VISA activation using strategic sealift requirements to support two 
military contingencies simultaneously. The exercise also focused on the 
contractual processes required for VISA activation as well as the 
subsequent communications flow required to support the activation. The 
JPAG exercise was considered a success as industry participants were 
able to provide necessary capacity and resources to meet DOD 
requirements. However, the participants identified areas that needed 
clarity and further development to improve the VISA activation process. 
The Maritime Administration, U.S. Transportation Command and industry 
participants agreed to work on the issues identified in the JPAG 
exercise to assure that they are adequately addressed for the efficient 
coordination of VISA activation procedures and contractual processes.
    The following VISA companies participated in the August 21-24, 2007 
JPAG meeting: American President Lines, Ltd.; American Roll-On Roll-Off 
Carrier, LLC; American Shipping Group; APL Marine Services, Ltd.; APL 
Maritime Ltd; Central Gulf Lines, Inc.; Farrell Lines Incorporated; 
Fidelio Limited Partnership; Hapag-Lloyd USA, LLC; Horizon Lines, LLC; 
Liberty Global Logistics, LLC; Liberty Shipping Group Limited 
Partnership; Maersk Line, Limited; Pasha Hawaii Transport Lines LLC; 
Patriot Shipping, LLC; Patriot Titan, LLC; Sealift Inc. and Waterman 
Steamship Corporation.

Contact Person for Additional Information: Mr. Taylor E. Jones II, 
Director, Office of Sealift Support, (202) 366-2323.

    Authority: 49 CFR 1.66.

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

    Dated: September 13, 2007.
Daron T. Threet,
Secretary, Maritime Administration.
 [FR Doc. E7-18571 Filed 9-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-81-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.