41432 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices 

and nongovernmental decision-makers, 

at all levels, in planning and executing 

activities required for response and 

recovery from a biological incident in a 

domestic, civilian setting. The objective 

of this guidance is to provide federal, 

state, local, and tribal decision makers 

with uniform federal guidance to protect 

the public, emergency responders, and 

surrounding environments and to 

ensure that local and federal first 

responders can prepare for an incident 

involving biological contamination. 

This document follows principles 

developed within the context of 

Planning Guidance for Protection and 

Recovery Following Radiological 

Dispersal Device (RDD) and Improvised 

Nuclear Device (IND) Incidents—which 

was published by the U.S. Department 

of Homeland Security (DHS) on August 

1, 2008. The RDD/IND document 

introduced the overarching concept of 

optimization. Optimization is a flexible, 

multi-attribute decision process that 

seeks to weigh many factors. 

Optimization analyses are qualitative 

and quantitative assessments applied at 

each stage of decision-making process 

from evaluation of decontamination 

options to implementation of the chosen 

alternative. 

The subject draft guidance applies to 

characterization, decontamination, 

clearance, and potential reoccupancy of 

a variety of public facilities, drinking 

water infrastructure, and open areas. 

Principal topics include the unique 

characteristics and hazards of biological 

agents, a risk management framework 

for responding to a biological incident, 

and implications for remediation 

activities. A process is provided for 

making timely and effective decisions 

despite incomplete data and 

uncertainties associated with potential 

risks posed by biological agents. This 

decision process includes all actions 

required during response to a biological 

incident beginning with notification, 

screening, and environmental sampling. 

Each step in the decision-making 

process is described, and the various 

actions are explicitly linked to 

numbered boxes in a five-page decisiontree flowchart. 

An important step in the decision 

process is setting clearance (or cleanup) 

goals for determining whether a 

remediation is successful and how the 

treated area may be used. No formula is 

available for setting clearance goals for 

biological agents. The collective, 

professional judgment of experts, 

considered within the context of the 

concerns of a broad range of local, 

regional, and federal stakeholders 

should be used to set a clearance goal 

appropriate to the site-specific 

circumstances. A practical clearance 

goal is to reduce residual risk to levels 

acceptable by employing an 

optimization process. The aim of such a 

process is to reduce exposure levels as 

low as is reasonable while considering 

potential future land uses, technical 

feasibility, costs and cost effectiveness, 

and public acceptability. After the 

remediation is carried out, a clearance 

decision is made based on a judgment 

whether the decontamination 

verification criteria and the clearance 

goals have been met. This judgment is 

based on a thorough analysis of all 

sampling, processes, and other pertinent 

data. 

This draft document focuses on the 

decision making framework in response 

to a biological event. It is designed to be 

consistent with the National Response 

Framework (Department of Homeland 

Security, January 2008) and our 

scientific understanding of the 

characteristics of biological agents. 

Neither of these areas is static. We 

expect both our response planning and 

our scientific understanding of the 

characteristics of biological agents to 

evolve over time. 

Response to Comments 

Comments will be reviewed by the 

White House National Science and 

Technology Council before this 

guidance is republished. 

Availability of the Draft Guidance 

Copies of the draft guidance are 

available for review through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, Docket number: 

EPA–HQ–ORD–2009–0331. 

Dated: July 27, 2009. 

James Kohlenberger, 

Chief of Staff, Office of Science and 

Technology Policy, Executive Office of the 

President. 

Bradley I. Buswell, 

Undersecretary for Science and Technology 

(Acting), U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security. 

Lek G. Kadeli, 

Acting Assistant Administrator for Research 

and Development, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

[FR Doc. E9–19688 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S. 

[Public Notice 123] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request Marketing Fax Back 

Response Form 

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank 

invites the general public and other 

Federal Agencies to comment on the 

proposed information collection, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995. The Marketing Fax Back 

Response Form will be used to collect 

basic trade information about United 

States companies. This information will 

be provided to the Export Import Bank’s 

finance consultants nationwide to assist 

in providing counsel to exporters. 

DATES: Electronic comments may be 

submitted through Regulations.Gov. 

Comments must be received on or 

before September 16, 2009 to be 

considered. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments and 

requests for additional information to 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20038. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title and Form Number: Marketing 

Fax Back Response Form EIB 05–01. 

OMB Number: 3048-. 

Type of Review: Regular. 

Need and Use: This form will provide 

basic trade information about U.S. 

Companies and will provide the Export 

Import Bank’s trade finance consultants 

nationwide the ability to provide 

counsel to exporters. 

Affected Public: The form affects 

entities involved in the export of U.S. 

goods and services. 

Estimated Annual Respondents: 

1,500. 

Estimated Time per Respondent: 5 

minutes. 

Estimated Annual Burden: 125 hours. 

Frequency of Reporting or Use: One 

time for registration 

Sharon A. Whitt, 

Agency Clearance Officer. 

BILLING CODE 6690–01–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices 41433 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICESEN17AU09.012</GPH>
41434 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices 

[FR Doc. E9–19699 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6690–01–C 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Public Information 

Collections Being Submitted for 

Review to the Office of Management 

and Budget, Comments Requested 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commision. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burden 

invites the general public and other 

Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection(s), as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. An 

agency may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 

does not display a valid control number. 

Comments are requested concerning (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

DATES: Persons wishing to comments on 

this information collection should 

submit comments on September 16, 

2009. If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the contact listed below as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to 

Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), (202) 

395–5887, or via fax at (202) 395–5167, 

or via the Internet at 

Nocholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov and 

to Cathy Williams, Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC), 

Room 1–C823, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, D.C. 20554. To submit your 

comments by e–mail send them to: 

PRA@fcc.gov and to 

Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. To view a copy 

of this information collection request 

(ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to web 

page: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the 

web page called ’’Currently Under 

Review’’, (3) click on the downward– 

pointing arrow in the ’’Select Agency’’ 

box below the ’’Currently Under 

Review’’ heading, (4) select ’’Federal 

Communications Commission’’ from the 

list of agencies presented in the ’’Select 

Agency’’ box, (5) click the ’’Submit’’ 

button to the right of the ’’Select 

Agency’’ box, and (6) when the FCC list 

appears, look for the title of this ICR (or 

its OMB Control Number, if there is one) 

and then click on the ICR. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information about the 

information collection(s) send an e–mail 

to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Cathy 

Williams on (202) 418–2918. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–1115. 

Title: DTV Consumer Education 

Initiative; Section 73.674; FCC Form 

388. 

Form Number: FCC Form 388. 

Type of Review: Revision of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Business or other for– 

profit entities; Not–for–profit 

institutions; State, local or tribal 

governments. 

Number of Respondent and 

Responses: 200 respondents; 1,800 

responses. 

Estimated time per Response: 0.50 

hours – 85 hours. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion 

reporting requirement; Quarterly 

reporting requirement; Third party 

disclosure requirement. 

Obligation to Respond: Required to 

obtain benefits. The statutory authority 

for this collection of information is 

contained in Sections 4(i), 303(r), 335, 

and 336 of the Communications Act of 

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 

303(r), 335, and 336. 

Total Annual Burden: 10,940 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: None. 

Confidentiality: No need for 

confidentiality required with this 

collection of information. 

Privacy Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Needs and Uses: After the nationwide 

DTV transition date of June 12, 2009, 

full–power television broadcast stations 

must transmit only digital signals, and 

may no longer transmit analog signals, 

except for limited analog ‘‘nightlight’’ 

service. The DTV Delay Act directs the 

Commission to take any actions 

‘‘necessary or appropriate to implement 

the provisions, and carry out the 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICESEN17AU09.013</GPH>