2008 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), this notice announces that the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), Department of Veterans Affairs, has submitted the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and includes the actual data collection instrument.

Notice is hereby given that the Department of State has terminated the statutory debarment of Interaero, Inc. pursuant to section 38(g)(4) of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) (22 U.S.C. 2778).

This interim rule lists communities where modification of the Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) is appropriate because of new scientific or technical data. New flood insurance premium rates will be calculated from the modified BFEs for new buildings and their contents.

United States cities and major resort/hotel destinations are invited to present proposals to hold the concluding series of meetings of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum scheduled for November 12-20, 2011. Over the course of nine days, the United States Government will organize various official and informal events, bilateral meetings, and media events that APEC member economies will attend. In total, up to 20,000 participants, including support staff, security, media, and businesspersons are expected to attend. Global media attention will focus on the APEC Leaders' Meetings and the city selected to host the event. The President of the United States, 18 other Heads of Government and representatives from Hong Kong and Taiwan are expected to attend. Each APEC delegation will likely come with its own advisors, security, and media. The APEC CEO Summit will also attract senior business executives from around the Asia-Pacific region. With this many high-profile visitors, security will be a major consideration for the selection of the city and conference venues. The following meetings are expected to be held from November 12-20, 2011: (1) Concluding Senior Officials Meeting (CSOM)2 days, approximately 200 delegates; (2) APEC Business Advisory Council Meeting (ABAC)4 days, approximately 200 delegates; (3) APEC Ministerial Meeting (AMM) 2 days, approximately 500 delegates; (4) APEC CEO Summit2 days, approximately 10,000 participants; (5) ABAC Dialogue with Leaders\1/ 2\ day, restricted attendance; (6) APEC Economic Leaders Meeting (AELM)2 days, restricted attendance, 10,000 participants. The minimum requirements are as follows: An international airport with good connections to and from APEC economies (further information on APEC can be found at www.APEC.org); 20,000 hotel rooms of international standard including 80 suites for Heads of Government and cabinet-level Ministers; Conference facilities for multiple meetings; Political, business, and civic support; Local security capable of supporting delegates and VIPs. Preparation of Proposals. Deadline is December 15, 2008. The city selection will be made by the new Administration. Proposals must be in one (1) three-inch binder with no loose inserts. A professional video presentation of the city or resort/hotel must be included on a DVD. Three copies of the proposals must be mailed to: U.S. Department of State, Attn: APEC 2011 Leaders' Meeting, 2201 C. Street, Washington, DC 20520. Proposals should be postmarked by December 15, 2008. Questions about the proposal can be directed to APEC2011@state.gov. Questions will be responded to in a timely manner. All information in the proposal, including prices, must be valid for 60 days after the due date. Binders must have the following sections: (1) One-page executive summary of what the city offers. (2) General city description including the following: (a) Letter of support from the mayor or city's senior elected official; (b) letter of support from the state governor; (c) letter of support from local chamber of commerce; (d) a past performance statement which indicates the city's experience in putting on large meetings and events of this scale; (e) history of the city; (f) manufacturing and trade with the Asian-Pacific region; (g) description of the city's population groups from the APEC economies; (h) cultural attractions and shopping; and (i) availability of special places of interest that could be used for formal receptions, official dinners, or other events (e.g. museums, parks, monuments, theatres, etc.). (3) Airport: (a) Airline connections with APEC economies; (b) immigration and customs facilities; facilitated and expedited immigration for delegates, if any; (c) ability to receive private airplanes of heads of government and VIPs; (d) ground transportation to conference hotels; (e) arrival welcome for delegates, if any; and (f) traveler assistance services. (4) Hotel rooms and prices: (a) Hotels within one mile of the conference center including facilities, such as wireless internet (WIFI), and restaurants; (b) Hotels farther than one mile from the conference center including facilities, such as WIFI and restaurants; (c) hotel rooms suitable for VIPs; (d) up-to-date safety/security systems; and (e) ability to comply with security checks on employees. (5) Conference facilities: (a) Catering, audio-visual, perimeter security, on-site maintenance, management, medical, and WIFI; (b) dedicated entrance for APEC delegates, if any; (c) meeting rooms; (d) transportation between hotels and conference facilities; (e) spreadsheet with costs of conference facilities for dates indicated; (f) Statement that the facilities are available for conference dates plus four weeks before those dates and one week after; and (g) Lunch facilities within a 15- minute walk of the conference facilities. (6) Letters of support from civic and business groups. (7) Letter of support from conference bureau. (8) Description of local transportation. (9) Security should address the AELM Leaders' conference facilities and hotels only. Please address the following questions: How will the city provide security for the delegates and VIPs including the U.S. President? Only the U.S. President and other Heads of Government will have United States Secret Service (USSS) protective details. Each Head of Government will receive protection and a limousine. The Secretary of State has 24/7 Diplomatic Security Service (DS) protection. Heads of delegations that are not Heads of Government would NOT receive USSS protection but, based on threat, might receive DS protection. Local Police Departments (PD) normally provide route, motorcade, and intelligence support to the USSS. Local PDs historically have the lead responsibility for providing crowd control, demonstration control and riot response. If required, will the city block off streets around the conference venue and hotels for Heads of Government? The conference facility would have tight perimeter and access controls. Security arrangements for hotels are based on threat information relating to the Heads of Government and will be determined on a case-by-case basis by the USSS and Local PD. Not every hotel would necessarily have total perimeter controls. Conversely, a central hotel might meet criteria for closed streets and public access. How will the city fund the extra security required for this conference? Cities that bid on such events must take into account and budget for the extensive costs of Security and Public Safety, as that responsibility lies solely with the host city. The USSS and DS do not reimburse local police for costs of supporting visiting foreign dignitaries. Some cities in the past have been able to obtain funding to offset security costs through Congress when requests for funding support have been initiated by their congressional representatives. This event would likely receive a Department of Homeland Security, Special Event Activity Report (SEAR) Level One. It could possibly receive designation as a National Security Special Event (NSSE) but that would not likely be determined until approximately one year or less prior to the event. The SEAR and NSSE designations are made based on certain criteria by either the DHS Special Event Working Group or the NSSE Working Group (Interagency Security groups that use methodology to determine an event's rating.) Neither designation provides funding to local public safety agencies, but the ultimate SEAR level and, if applicable, NSSE designation, does outline the level of support that Federal agencies can provide. What public safety infrastructure is available? Address the following: (1) Police: (a) Special operations capabilities; (b) VIP protection; (c) riot and crowd control response to incidents; (d) explosive detection and disposal; (e) traffic controls; (f) Intelligence Division; (g) mutual aid agreements/memorandum of understanding with surrounding jurisdictions/ state police; (h) communication center and procedures; and (i) current emergency plan. (2) Fire/emergency medical service: (a) Chemical Biological Radiological and Nuclear detection/procedures; (b) first responders; (c) equipment/training and trained staff on hand. (3) Emergency Management: (a) Mass casualty; (b) terrorist attack; and (c) natural disaster. (4) Emergency Facilities: (a) Hospital/Medical Centers; (b) emergency backup communications; (c) emergency supplies; and (d) evacuation plans.

The Homeland Security Information Network Advisory Committee will hold a conference call on December 3, 2008, to discuss implementation efforts associated with the Next Generation of the Homeland Security Information Network.

This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide petition proposing the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of acetic acid in or on various commodities.

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the permitting of new or modified sources. We are proposing to approve local rules to regulate these procedures under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the importation of baby corn and baby carrots from Zambia.

NMFS is opening directed fishing for groundfish by vessels using trawl gear in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA), effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time, November 16, 2008. This action is necessary to fully use the 2008 Pacific halibut prohibited species catch (PSC) limit specified for vessels using trawl gear in the GOA.

Comments are requested on the proposed Base (1 percent annual- chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed BFE modifications for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the proposed regulatory flood elevations for the reach described by the downstream and upstream locations in the table below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are a part of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, these elevations, once finalized, will be used by insurance agents, and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents in those buildings.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will begin to accept requests, from December 1, 2008 through January 31, 2009, for grants to supplement State and Tribal Response Programs. This notice provides guidance on eligibility for funding, use of funding, grant mechanisms and process for awarding funding, the allocation system for distribution of funding, and terms and reporting under these grants. EPA has consulted with state and tribal officials in developing this guidance. The primary goal of this funding is to ensure that state and tribal response programs include, or are taking reasonable steps to include, certain elements and a public record. Another goal is to provide funding for other activities that increase the number of response actions conducted or overseen by a state or tribal response program. This funding is not intended to supplant current state or tribal funding for their response programs. Instead, it is to supplement their funding to increase their response capacity. For fiscal year 2009, EPA will consider funding requests up to a maximum of $1.5 million per state or tribe. Subject to the availability of funds, EPA regional personnel will be available to provide technical assistance to states and tribes as they apply for and carry out these grants.

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of proposed and final documents that have been prepared by Study Group 1 of the Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF). These documents represent a harmonized proposal and recommendation from the GHTF Study Group that may be used by governments developing and updating their regulatory requirements for medical devices. These documents are intended to provide information only and do not describe FDA's current regulatory requirements; elements of these documents may not be consistent with current U.S. regulatory requirements. In particular, FDA seeks comments on the advantages and disadvantages of the approaches in the GHTF documents, particularly where they are not consistent with current practices for the manufacture of products in the United States.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is making available preliminary draft proposed rule language to amend its regulations to add a new part 37 to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This new Part 37 will contain the security (physical protection) requirements that are designed to provide reasonable assurance of preventing the theft or diversion of Category 1 and Category 2 quantities of radioactive material as designated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The new provisions will address background checks, fingerprinting, access control, physical security during use, and physical security during any transport of category 1 and category 2 quantities of material. At this time, the staff is only posting the preliminary draft language for the physical protection of the material while it is being transported. These requirements will be contained in subpart D of the new part 37. Draft preliminary language for other aspects of the proposed new part 37 will be posted and noticed in the future. The availability of the preliminary draft rule language is intended to inform stakeholders of the current status of the NRC's activities and solicit public comments on the information at this time. Comments may be provided as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading. The NRC may post updates periodically under Docket NRC-2008-0120 on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov that may be of interest to stakeholders.

This notice announces a meeting to hold a demonstration of the allocation method that the Federal Aviation Administration will use to allocate limited slots for its congestion management rules for John F. Kennedy International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, and LaGuardia Airport (Final Congestion Rules). [Docket No. FAA-2008- 0517, Notice No. 08-05 and Docket No. FAA-2006-25709, Notice No. 93- 87].

The FAA is amending the regulations governing the packing interval for certain types of parachutes. Currently, the FAA prohibits most parachutes from being used or carried aboard an aircraft and available for emergency use unless they have been packed within the previous 120 days. New reliability data from the parachute industry and other sources indicate that the packing interval should be increased; therefore, we are lengthening the interval from 120 to 180 days. This final rule revises the parachute packing interval and ensures safe use.

This document contains a minor correction to the final rulemaking that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published at 73 FR 54693 on September 23, 2008. The rulemaking relates to a revision of the portion of VA's Schedule for Rating Disabilities that addresses neurological conditions and convulsive disorders to provide detailed and updated criteria for evaluating residuals of traumatic brain injury (TBI).

In accordance with section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 43 CFR Part 3809, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Elko Field Office has prepared with the assistance of a third party contractor, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on Newmont Mining Corporation's proposed Emigrant Project Plan of Operations. The project area is located in Elko County about ten miles south of Carlin, Nevada. The DEIS analyzes potential environmental impacts that could result from the open pit mine project during the projected 10-year operating period. This is the second DEIS issued for this project. The original DEIS was issued March 25, 2005.

Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770, 5 U.S.C. App 1, section 10), of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth meetings of the Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Off-Road Vehicle Management at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. (See DATES section.)

We, the Fish and Wildlife Service, published a notice requesting public comments on a right-of-way (ROW) permit application we received from Texas Gas Transmission, LLC (Texas Gas), to install a natural gas pipeline under lands within Hillside National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in Holmes County, MS. The company chose an alternate route that bypasses Hillside NWR and no longer seeks a ROW permit from us, and has withdrawn its application. Therefore, we are not seeking comments on the application.