Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Notices 39211 

by the Council in its 2010 Annual 

Report to Congress. 

III. Brief Descriptions of Priority Issues 

1. Education and At-Risk Youth 

The best way to keep young people 

out of trouble is to keep them in school. 

Without structure and supervision that 

school provides, young people often 

turn to delinquent or criminal behavior 

during school hours and end up in the 

juvenile justice system, with most not 

completing high school. A number of 

factors contribute to the failure of young 

people to complete schooling including: 

Chronic truancy, educational instability, 

‘‘push out,’’ issues of access, co-occuring 

factors, school connectedness, and the 

absences of positive activities for 

afterschool times. 

2. Juvenile Reentry and Transitions to 

Adulthood 

Young people reentering the 

community from juvenile residential 

facilities often lack the support they 

need to change the course of their lives 

and avoid the destructive cycle of 

recidivism. The multiple needs of these 

young people (schooling, stable 

housing, skills to obtain meaningful 

employment, physical and mental 

health problems, etc.) require 

coordination of services, supervision, 

and support at the local level to help 

ensure each youth a successful 

transition back home and to adulthood. 

Youth aging out of foster care and youth 

who are homeless have similar needs for 

transitional support. A number of 

Federal policies, practices, programs, 

and legislation affect local and state 

capacity to provide solid support 

through transition. 

3. Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the 

Juvenile Justice and Related Systems 

Disproportionate contact of minorities 

(DMC) in juvenile justice has been a 

challenge for policymakers for decades. 

DMC is not an issue specific to the 

justice system; it is connected with 

inequities in other youth-serving 

systems and requires exploration of the 

relationship between child welfare, 

education, and youth’s socioeconomic 

status. The team seeks to identify 

Federal legislation and practices that 

both assist States and those that 

function as barriers in reducing 

disparities in juvenile justice, child 

welfare, and education. 

4. Tribal Youth and Juvenile Justice 

Tribal youth face a host of 

challenges—poverty, child abuse and 

neglect, exposure to family violence, 

substance abuse, the highest rate of 

suicides among all youth, and a weak 

educational system. Without 

intervention and remediation these 

issues can lead to additional negative 

outcomes including delinquency. 

Multiple Federal agencies have specific 

responsibility for working with Indian 

Country, notably, the Departments of 

Agriculture, Justice, Health and Human 

Services, Housing and Urban 

Development, and Interior. The 

overlapping mosaic of policies, 

regulations, guidelines and programs 

can challenge achievement of desired 

results. 

IV. Guiding Questions for Commenters 

The Council’s issue teams have 

identified a number of questions to 

focus their examination, and the 

Council is particularly interested in 

receiving comments addressing some or 

all of these questions. The first question 

for three of the topic areas is listed by 

topic as follows: 

Education and At-Risk Youth: What is 

the Federal role in preventing youth 

from entering the juvenile justice system 

and successfully graduating from high 

school prepared for adulthood? 

Juvenile Reentry and Transitions to 

Adulthood: What is the Federal role in 

helping ensure youth graduate and 

successfully transition back home and 

into adulthood (from juvenile facilities, 

out of the foster care system, and in 

returning home and to their 

communities from runaway/thrown 

away/homeless status)? 

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the 

Juvenile Justice and Related Systems: 

How do you view the Federal role with 

regard to racial and ethnic disparities? 

For these first three topic areas, all of 

the questions below also apply: 

a. What does the Federal government 

do well? What needs to be changed? 

b. Are there Federal practices, 

policies, legislation, and/or regulations 

that support or restrict the successful 

education of youth; reentry and/or 

transitions to adulthood; or addressing 

of racial/ethnic disparities in the 

juvenile justice and related systems? 

What role does technical/training 

support have in redressing restrictions? 

c. Are there legislative challenges 

affecting this issue that should be 

brought to the attention of the Federal 

agencies? What ought Federal agencies 

do about them? 

d. What results and/or consequences 

might occur from the enacted 

recommendations? 

e. Is there anything else the Federal 

government should be aware of 

concerning this topic? 

The Council’s Tribal Youth issue team 

requests public comments addressing 

the following questions: 

a. How do you view the Federal role 

with regard to tribal youth and their 

families? 

b. What does the Federal government 

do well for tribal youth? What needs to 

be changed? 

c. Describe what Federal practices, 

policies, or regulations support or fail to 

support Tribal youth and their families. 

What comes to mind when you think of 

barriers? Alternatively, areas of good 

practice (to meeting the needs for 

belonging, mastery, independence and 

generosity)? 

d. Are there legislative challenges 

affecting issues related to Tribal youth 

and juvenile justice that should be 

brought to the attention of the Federal 

agencies? What ought Federal agencies 

do about them? Who are the key people 

to help with this issue? 

e. What results and/or consequences 

might occur in Indian Country from 

enacted recommendations? Are there 

individuals, agencies or systems that 

might not welcome the 

recommendations or changes in policies 

(Tribal Youth, Tribes, and Agencies)? 

f. Is there anything else the Federal 

government should be aware of 

concerning tribal youth justice, 

specifically in the areas of youth 

prevention, intervention, detention and 

reentry? 

Robin Delany-Shabazz, 

Designated Federal Official, Coordinating 

Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2010–16696 Filed 7–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

Information Collection; Submission for 

OMB Review, Comment Request 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service (hereinafter the 

‘‘Corporation’’), has submitted a public 

information collection request (ICR) 

entitled the Peer Reviewer Application 

Instructions to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval in accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 

35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable 

supporting documentation, may be 

obtained by calling the Corporation for 

National and Community Service, James 

Willie at (202) 606–6845. Individuals 

who use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TTY–TDD) may call (202) 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
39212 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Notices 

606–3472 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. 

eastern time, Monday through Friday. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted, identified by the title of the 

information collection activity, to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB 

Desk Officer for the Corporation for 

National and Community Service, by 

any of the following two methods 

within 30 days from the date of 

publication in this Federal Register. 

(1) By fax to: (202) 395–6974, 

Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk 

Officer for the Corporation for National 

and Community Service; and 

(2) Electronically by e-mail to: 

smar@omb.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB 

is particularly interested in comments 

which: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Corporation, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

• Propose ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and 

• Propose ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology, e.g., permitting electronic 

submissions of responses. 

Comments 

A 60-day public comment Notice was 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 28, 2010. This comment period 

ended June 29, 2010. No public 

comments were received from this 

Notice. 

Description: The Corporation seeks to 

renew the current information 

collection. Minor revisions are proposed 

to clarify eGrants instructions and 

reflect adjustments to the Corporation 

for National and Community Service 

eGrants system. 

The information collection will 

otherwise be used in the same manner 

as the existing application. The 

Corporation also seeks to continue using 

the current application until the revised 

application is approved by OMB. The 

current application is due to expire on 

October 31, 2010. 

Type of Review: Renewal. 

Agency: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

Title: Peer Reviewer Application 

Instructions. 

OMB Number: 3045–0090. 

Agency Number: None. 

Affected Public: Individuals who are 

interested in serving as peer reviewers 

and peer review panel facilitators for the 

Corporation. 

Total Respondents: 2,500 responses 

annually. 

Frequency: One time to complete. 

Average Time per Response: Averages 

40 minutes. 

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,666 

hours. 

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): 

None. 

Total Burden Cost (operating/ 

maintenance): None. 

Dated: June 30, 2010. 

Vielka Garibaldi, 

Director, Office of Grants Policy and 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2010–16575 Filed 7–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6050–$$–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Establishment of Department of 

Defense Federal Advisory Committee; 

Independent Panel Review of Judge 

Advocate Requirements of the 

Department of the Navy 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Establishment of Federal 

advisory committee. 

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of 

section 506 of Public Law 111–84, the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972, (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), 

the Government in the Sunshine Act of 

1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 

41 CFR 102–3.50, the Department of 

Defense gives notice that it is 

establishing the charter for the 

Independent Panel Review of Judge 

Advocate Requirements of the 

Department of the Navy (hereafter 

referred to as the Panel). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Freeman, Deputy Committee 

Management Officer for the Department 

of Defense, 703–601–6128. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Panel 

is a non-discretionary Federal advisory 

committee established to review the 

judge advocate requirement of the 

Department of the Navy. The Panel 

shall: 

a. Carry out a study of the policies 

and management and organizational 

practices of the U.S. Navy and the U.S. 

Marine Corps with respect to the 

responsibilities, assignment, and career 

development of judge advocates for 

purposes of determining the number of 

judge advocates required to fulfill the 

legal mission of the Department of the 

Navy. 

b. In carrying out the study, the Panel 

shall review the following: 

i. The emergent operational law 

requirements of the U.S. Navy and the 

U.S. Marine Corps, including 

requirements for judge advocates on 

joint task forces, in support of rule of 

law objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan, 

and in operational units; 

ii. New requirements to support the 

Office of Military Commissions and to 

support the disability evaluation system 

for members of the U.S. Armed Forces; 

iii. The judge advocate requirements 

of the Department of the Navy for the 

military justice mission, including 

assignment policies, training and 

education, increasing complexity of 

court-martial litigation, and the 

performance of the U.S. Navy and U.S. 

Marine Corps in providing legally 

sufficient post-trial processing of cases 

in general courts-martial and special 

courts-martial. 

iv. The role of the Judge Advocate 

General of the Navy, as the senior 

uniformed legal officer of the 

Department of the Navy, to determine 

whether additional authority for the 

Judge Advocate General over manpower 

policies and assignments of judge 

advocates in the U.S. Navy and U.S. 

Marine Corps is warranted; 

v. Directives issued by the U.S. Navy 

and the U.S. Marine Corps pertaining to 

jointly-shared missions requiring legal 

support; 

vi. Career patterns for U.S. Marine 

Corps judge advocates in order to 

identify and validate assignments to 

non-legal billets required for 

professional development and 

promotion; and 

In addition, the Panel will review, 

evaluate and assess such other matters 

and materials as the Panel considers 

appropriate for purposes of the study. 

In carrying out its study the Panel 

may review, and incorporate as 

appropriate, the findings of applicable 

on-going and completed studies in 

future manpower requirements, 

including the two-part study by CNA 

Analysis and Solutions® entitled, ‘‘An 

Analysis of Navy JAG Corps Future 

Manpower Requirements’’. 

The Panel, no later than 120 days after 

its first meeting, shall submit a report of 

its study. The report, as a minimum, 

shall include the following: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES