May 8, 2008 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

In compliance with the requirements of section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of this information collection requirement. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below. The Commission received no comments in response to an earlier Federal Register notice of February 7, 2008 (73 FR 8651-52) and has made this notation in its submission to OMB.

This document denies a petition for reconsideration regarding amendments to NHTSA's regulation on Confidential Business Information. The petition, by the American Association for Justice, sought the rescission of class determinations that provide confidential treatment for certain categories of information submitted to NHTSA pursuant to the Early Warning Reporting regulations.

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 an existing final regulation, REG-242282-97 (TD 8734), General Revision of Regulations Relating to Withholding of Tax on Certain U.S. Source Income Paid to Foreign Persons and Related Collection, Refunds and Credits; Revision of Information Reporting and Backup Withholding Regulations; and Removal of Regulations Under Part 35a and of Certain Regulations Under Income Tax Treaties (1.1441-1(e), 1.1441-4(a)(2), 1.1441-4(b)(1) and (2), 1.1441-4(c), (d), and (e), 1.1441-5(b)(2)(ii), 1.1441-5(c)(1), 1.1441-6(b) and (c), 1.1441-8(b), 1.1441-9(b), 1.1461- 1(b) and (c), 301.6114-1, 301.6402-3(e), and 31.3401(a)(6)-1(e)).

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on February 7, 2008 to designate VA as a Co-Sponsor of the Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), titled The Center for Enterprise Modernization (CEM). CEM is operated by The MITRE Corporation (MITRE). IRS remains the primary sponsor of this enterprise systems engineering and integration FFRDC; VA is a Co-Sponsor. VA has determined that it requires an FFRDC mission partner to assist in the achievement of its strategic and business enterprise modernization goals and the IRS FFRDC meets this need.

The proposed information collection requirement described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.

The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of the final phase of countervailing duty investigation No. 701-TA-452 (Final) under section 705(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)) (the Act) and the final phase of antidumping investigations Nos. 731- TA-1129 and 1130 (Final) under section 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) to determine whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of subsidized and less-than-fair-value imports from China and Taiwan of raw flexible magnets, provided for in subheadings 8505.19.10 and 8505.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.\1\

Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on April 4, 2008, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Ultra Products, Inc. of Fletcher, Ohio and Systemax Inc. of Port Washington, New York. A supplement to the complaint was filed on May 1, 2008. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain power supplies that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,133,293. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainants request that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue an exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

This document provides notice that the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of certain electric mini-trucks to be offered to the United States Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. Based on the facts presented, the final determination found that the United States is the country of origin of the electric mini- trucks for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.

In this document, the Commission seeks comment on whether to assign Educational Broadband Service (EBS) spectrum in the Gulf of Mexico. It also seeks comment on how to license unassigned and available EBS spectrum. Specifically, we seek comment on whether it would be in the public interest to develop a scheme for licensing unassigned EBS spectrum that avoids mutual exclusivity; we ask whether EBS eligible entities could participate fully in a spectrum auction; we seek comment on the use of small business size standards and bidding credits for EBS if we adopt a licensing scheme that could result in mutually exclusive applications; we seek comment on the proper market size and size of spectrum blocks for new EBS licenses; and we seek comment on issuing one license to a State agency designated by the Governor to be the spectrum manager, using frequency coordinators to avoid mutually exclusive EBS applications, as well as other alternative licensing schemes. The Commission must develop a new licensing scheme for EBS in order to achieve the Commission's goal of facilitating the development of new and innovative wireless services for the benefit of students throughout the nation.

EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plans (SIPs) submitted by the States of South Dakota and Wyoming that address interstate transport with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards. EPA has determined that the Interstate Transport declarations submitted by South Dakota on May 15, 2007, and by Wyoming on May 3, 2007, satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provisions, also known as the ``good neighbor'' provisions, that a state SIP contain adequate provisions prohibiting air pollutant emissions from sources or activities in the state from adversely affecting another state. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the States' SIP revisions as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views these as non- controversial SIP revisions and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the preamble to the direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse comments, EPA will not take further action on this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.