Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2004 / Notices 75939

In order to phase in the new program, 

the proposed rule sets forth one timeline 

for approvals that expire before October 

1, 2005 and another for approvals that 

expire on or after October 1, 2005. 

Approvals expiring before October 1, 

2005 are proposed to be 

administratively continued pending 

issuance of a docket renewal when the 

docket holder or permittee submits a 

complete application within 90 calendar 

days after receipt of a written notice 

from the Executive Director or by 

September 30, 2005, whichever is 

earlier. The Executive Director may 

extend the deadline for good cause 

shown in the event a substantially 

complete application, along with the 

full fee, is submitted by the deadline. 

The fee of $1,000, payable in addition 

to the ordinary fee, is proposed to be 

charged for renewal applications 

submitted after September 30, 2005. 

Approvals expiring after September 

30, 2005 are proposed to be 

administratively continued pending 

issuance of a docket renewal when the 

docket holder or permittee submits a 

complete application at least 120 

calendar days in advance of the 

expiration date. If the approval 

establishes a different application 

submission date, the docket or permit is 

controlling. Again, the Executive 

Director may extend the deadline for 

good cause shown, in the event a 

substantially complete application, 

along with the full fee, is submitted by 

the deadline. A fee of $1,000 above the 

ordinary fee is proposed to be charged 

for renewal applications submitted 

fewer than 120 calendar days before the 

approval’s expiration date. 

The amendment provides for the 

Executive Director to implement 

procedures to furnish written notice to 

docket holders and permittees in 

advance of their approval expiration 

dates, reminding them to file a timely 

renewal application. However, failure of 

the Executive Director to send such 

notice or lack of receipt of the notice by 

the docket holder or permittee will not 

relieve the docket holder or permittee of 

any obligation or condition or create any 

defense.

Dated: December 13, 2004. 

Pamela M. Bush, 

Commission Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–27703 Filed 12–17–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6360–01–P

DELAWARE RIVER BASIN 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 

Proposed Amendments to the 

Comprehensive Plan and Water Code 

Relating to the Coordinated Operation 

of Lower Basin and Hydroelectric 

Reservoirs During a Basinwide 

Drought

AGENCY: Delaware River Basin 

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Delaware River Basin 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or 

‘‘DRBC’’) will hold a public hearing to 

receive comments on proposed 

amendments to Section 2.5.5 of the 

Water Code, relating to the Coordinated 

Operation of Lower Basin and 

Hydroelectric Reservoirs During a 

Basinwide Drought. The Commission 

proposes to amend and codify changes 

to the Comprehensive Plan and Water 

Code effected by Resolution No. 2002–

33, approved in November 2002 by the 

Commission and the parties to the U.S. 

Supreme Court Decree in New Jersey v. 

New York, 347 U.S. 995 (1954) (‘‘Decree 

Parties’’). The amendments are for 

purposes of clarification and accuracy 

and to better ensure that the benefits of 

the changes effected by Resolution No. 

2002–33 are achieved without 

compromising habitat protection goals. 

Resolution No. 2002–33, which was not 

codified, in part amended the 

Comprehensive Plan and Water Code 

relating to the utilization of Lake 

Wallenpaupack during drought watch, 

drought warning and drought 

operations. The proposed changes are as 

follows: First, numbered paragraph 1 of 

Resolution No. 2002–33 provides that 

‘‘any and all provisions pertaining to the 

operation of Lake Wallenpaupack 

during basinwide drought warning also 

apply to basinwide drought watch as 

temporarily defined by the Commission 

in Docket No. D–77–20 CP.’’ The 

proposed amendment adds the 

parenthetical ‘‘(Revision 7 and 

following)’’ at the end of this sentence 

to make clear that the most current 

applicable revision of Docket No. D–77–

20 CP is intended to apply. Second, the 

inclusion of the term ‘‘drought watch’’

in brackets following every mention of 

‘‘drought warning’’ in the November 

2002 amendments is proposed to be 

deleted, because the Commission makes 

clear in numbered Paragraph 1 of the 

Resolution that provisions in Section 

2.5.5 of the Water Code pertaining to the 

operation of Lake Wallenpaupack 

during drought warning also are 

intended to apply to drought watch as 

defined by Docket No. D–77–20 CP 

(Revision 7 and following). Third, 

throughout the language added by 

Resolution No. 2002–33, the terms 

‘‘drought conditions’’ and ‘‘drought 

warning conditions’’ are replaced by 

‘‘drought operations’’ and ‘‘drought 

warning operations,’’ respectively, to 

more accurately reflect the fact that the 

reservoir management activities 

described are triggered by a set of 

reservoir drought operating rules 

established by the Commission and the 

Decree Parties, rather than by 

hydrologic conditions. Fourth, the 

November 2002 amendments inserted 

language at Section 2.5.5 of the Water 

Code stating that ‘‘[d]uring ‘drought’

and ‘drought warning’ operations * * *, 

‘‘the power companies shall release 

water only in accordance with 

Commission direction.’’ This statement 

is proposed to be changed to reflect the 

Commission’s intention that ‘‘[d]uring 

‘drought’ and ‘drought warning’

operations as defined in Figure 1 of 

Section 2.5.3.A. of the Water Code, 

releases from Lake Wallenpaupack shall 

be made only in accordance with 

Commission direction.’’ In a related 

amendment, a new sentence is proposed 

to be added to Section 2.5.5 addressing 

operation of the Mongaup reservoir 

system by the Commission, which may 

take place only under more limited 

circumstances. The proposed provision 

reads, ‘‘After issuance of a Conservation 

Order by the Commission, power 

generation releases from the Mongaup 

reservoir system shall be made only in 

accordance with Commission 

direction.’’ This statement restores the 

rule governing drought operation of the 

Mongaup system reservoirs to the rule 

in effect before the November 2002 

amendments. Fifth, the Commission 

proposes to add a clause providing that 

when it directs releases from Lake 

Wallenpaupack during drought watch 

(including warning) and drought 

operations, it must give consideration to 

any flow and temperature targets 

established by the Commission and the 

Decree Parties in the upper Delaware 

River and in the West Branch Delaware, 

East Branch Delaware, and Neversink 

rivers for the protection of the cold 

water fisheries in these streams.

DATES: The public hearing will be held 

during the Commission’s regularly 

scheduled business meeting on January 

19, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. Persons wishing to 

testify at the hearing are asked to 

register in advance with the 

Commission by phoning 609–883–9500, 

ext. 224. Submission of written 

comments by January 14, 2005 would be 

appreciated, but written comments will 

75940 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2004 / Notices 

be accepted through the close of the 

public hearing on Wednesday, January 

19, 2005.

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be 

held in the Goddard Room of the 

Commission’s office building at 25 State 

Police Drive in West Trenton, New 

Jersey. Written comments should be 

addressed to the Commission Secretary 

as follows: by e-mail to 

paula.schmitt@drbc.state.nj.us; by fax to 

609–883–9522; by U.S. Mail to 

Commission Secretary, DRBC, P.O. Box 

7360, West Trenton, NJ 08628–0360; or 

by overnight mail to Commission 

Secretary, DRBC, 25 State Police Drive, 

West Trenton, NJ 08628–0360.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

full text of the proposed resolution, the 

text of Resolution No. 2002–33, and the 

text of the sections of the Water Code as 

amended by both Resolution No. 2002–

33 and the proposed resolution, are 

posted on the Commission’s Web site, 

http://www.drbc.net. Please contact 

Commission Secretary Pamela Bush, 

609–883–9500 ext. 203, with questions 

about the proposed action.

Dated: December 13, 2004. 

Pamela M. Bush, 

Commission Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–27704 Filed 12–17–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6360–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection Requests

AGENCY: Department of Education.

SUMMARY: The Leader, Information 

Management Case Services Team, 

Regulatory Information Management 

Services, Office of the Chief Information 

Officer, invites comments on the 

proposed information collection 

requests as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before February 

18, 2005.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) provide interested 

Federal agencies and the public an early 

opportunity to comment on information 

collection requests. OMB may amend or 

waive the requirement for public 

consultation to the extent that public 

participation in the approval process 

would defeat the purpose of the 

information collection, violate State or 

Federal law, or substantially interfere 

with any agency’s ability to perform its 

statutory obligations. The Leader, 

Information Management Case Services 

Team, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of the 

Chief Information Officer, publishes that 

notice containing proposed information 

collection requests prior to submission 

of these requests to OMB. Each 

proposed information collection, 

grouped by office, contains the 

following: (1) Type of review requested, 

e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or 

reinstatement; (2) title; (3) summary of 

the collection; (4) description of the 

need for, and proposed use of, the 

information; (5) respondents and 

frequency of collection; and (6) 

reporting and/or recordkeeping burden. 

OMB invites public comment. 

The Department of Education is 

especially interested in public comment 

addressing the following issues: (1) Is 

this collection necessary to the proper 

functions of the Department; (2) will 

this information be processed and used 

in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate 

of burden accurate; (4) how might the 

Department enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (5) how might the 

Department minimize the burden of this 

collection on the respondents, including 

through the use of information 

technology.

Dated: December 14, 2004. 

Angela C. Arrington, 

Leader, Information Management Case 

Services Team, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer.

Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services 

Type of Review: Reinstatement. 

Title: OSERS Peer Review Data Form. 

Frequency: Biennially. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

household. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: Responses—2,500. Burden 

Hours—1,250. 

Abstract: OSERS Peer Review Data 

Form will be used to evaluate 

applications submitted under Part D of 

the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 

H.R. 1350); the law indicates that ‘‘peer 

review panels shall include, to the 

extent practicable, parents of children 

with disabilities, individuals with 

disabilities, and persons from diverse 

backgrounds.’’

Requests for copies of the proposed 

information collection request may be 

accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov,

by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending 

Collections’’ link and by clicking on 

link number 2650. When you access the 

information collection, click on 

‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. 

Written requests for information should 

be addressed to U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, 

DC 20202–4700. Requests may also be 

electronically mailed to the Internet 

address OCIO_RIMG@ed.gov or faxed to 

(202) 245–6621. Please specify the 

complete title of the information 

collection when making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be directed to Sheila Carey at her 

e-mail address Sheila.Carey@ed.gov.

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the dear 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–

8339. 

[FR Doc. 04–27726 Filed 12–17–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Regional Advisory Committees

AGENCY: Regional Advisory Committees, 

Office of Elementary and Secondary 

Education, ED.

ACTION: Notice of real-time online 

conference meetings. 

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the 

schedule and agendas of forthcoming 

live, real-time online conferencing 

meetings of each of the 10 Regional 

Advisory Committees (RACs). Notice of 

RAC meetings is required under Section 

10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act and is intended to notify 

the public of their opportunity to 

observe the meeting proceedings and to 

submit comment. 

Meeting Format: All meetings will be 

conducted via online conference and 

will be available to the public online. 

Meeting Purposes (Agendas): Each 

RAC will conduct three, 2-hour 

meetings to deliberate on findings and 

prepare their region’s education needs 

assessment report: 

Meeting 1—The RACs will: (1) Review 

input received from stakeholders and 

other relevant information and, based 

on the information received, deliberate 

about the critical education needs of 

State and school district policymakers 

and practitioners in the region that, if 

met, would help them to improve 

student achievement and meet the 

purposes of the No Child Left Behind 

Act, and (2) assess the extent of current 

resources and technical assistance 

opportunities available in the region to 

meet those needs. 

Meeting 2—The Racs will deliberate 

about input received from stakeholders