52694 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Notices 

II. Review Focus 

The Department of Labor is 

particularly interested in comments 

which: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, 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; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• 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. 

III. Current Actions 

The DOL seeks approval for the 

extension of this currently approved 

information collection in order to carry 

out its responsibility to ensure 

compliance with the youth employment 

provisions of the FLSA and its 

regulations. Without this information, 

the Administrator would have no means 

to determine if the proposed program 

meets the regulatory requirements. 

Type of Review: Extension. 

Agency: Wage and Hour Division. 

Titles: Work Experience and Career 

Exploration Programs (WECEP) 

Regulations, 29 CFR 570.35a. 

OMB Number: 1235–0011. 

Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal 

Government. 

Frequency: Biennially. 

Total Respondents: 37. 

Total Annual Responses: 14,287. 

Average Time per Response: 

Reporting: 

WECEP Application—2 hours. 

Written Training Agreement—1 

hour. 

Recordkeeping: 

WECEP Program Information—1 

hour. 

Filing of WECEP Record and 

Training Agreement—One-half minute. 

Total Burden Hours: 14,145. 

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): 

$0. 

Total Burden Cost (operating/ 

maintenance): $3.29. 

Dated: July 20, 2011. 

Mary Ziegler, 

Director, Division of Regulations, Legislation, 

and Interpretations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21529 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–27–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[Notice (11–076)] 

National Environmental Policy Act: 

Launch of NASA Routine Payloads on 

Expendable Launch Vehicles 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

request for comments on the draft 

environmental assessment (‘‘Draft EA’’) 

for launch of NASA routine payloads on 

expendable launch vehicles. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.), the Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) Regulations for 

Implementing the Procedural Provisions 

of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), and 

NASA NEPA policy and procedures 

(14 CFR part 1216 subpart 1216.3), 

NASA has prepared a Draft EA for 

launch of NASA routine payloads on 

expendable launch vehicles. For 

purposes of this Draft EA, NASA routine 

payloads include science instruments, 

spacecraft or technology 

demonstrations. This EA updates the 

Final Environmental Assessment for 

Launch of NASA Routine Payloads on 

Expendable Launch Vehicles from Cape 

Canaveral Air Force Station Florida and 

Vandenberg Air Force Base California 

published in June 2002. NASA missions 

covered by this Draft EA would be 

scheduled for launch at one of the 

proposed launch sites and would be 

within the total number of launch 

operations previously analyzed in 

launch vehicle and launch site NEPA 

documents. The proposed launches 

would occur from existing launch 

facilities at CCAFS, Florida, VAFB, 

California, the United States Army 

Kwajalein Atoll/Reagan Test Site 

(USAKA/RTS) in the Republic of the 

Marshall Islands (RMI), NASA’s 

Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), Virginia, 

and the Kodiak Launch Complex (KLC), 

Alaska. The Cooperating Agencies on 

this Draft EA include the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA), the Air 

Force Space and Missile Systems 

Center, the U.S. Army Space and 

Missile Defense Command, and the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA). 

The Draft EA analyzes the potential 

environmental impacts associated with 

preparing and implementing launches 

of missions that are designated NASA 

routine payloads on U.S. expendable 

launch vehicles from existing U.S. 

facilities using established procedures. 

The NASA routine payloads meet 

rigorously defined criteria ensuring that 

the spacecraft and their operation would 

not present any new or substantial 

environmental and safety concerns. A 

Routine Payload Checklist is used to 

exclude missions from consideration as 

routine payloads if they: (1) Include any 

extraterrestrial sample return; (2) would 

be launched on a vehicle or from a 

launch site for which NASA has not 

completed NEPA compliance; (3) carry 

radioactive sources that could not be 

approved by the NASA Office of Safety 

and Mission Assurance Nuclear Flight 

Safety Assurance Manager or designee; 

(4) cause the manifested launch rate (per 

year) for a particular launch vehicle to 

exceed the rate previously approved and 

permitted at the launch sites; (5) require 

the construction of any new facilities (or 

substantial modification of existing 

facilities); (6) utilize hazardous 

materials in quantities exceeding the 

Envelope Payload Characteristics 

(EPCs); (7) utilize potentially hazardous 

material whose type or amount would 

not be covered by new or existing local 

permits; (8) release material other than 

propulsion system exhaust or inert gases 

into the atmosphere; (9) suggest the 

potential for any substantial impact on 

public health and safety not covered by 

this Draft EA; (10) have the potential for 

substantial effects on the environment 

outside the United States; (11) utilize an 

Earth-pointing laser system that does 

not meet the requirements for safe 

operations according to American 

National Standards Institute analysis 

techniques; (12) carry live or inactive 

disease-causing biological agents 

beyond Biological Safety Level 1; or (13) 

have the potential to create substantial 

public controversy related to 

environmental issues. 

Payloads that fall within the Routine 

Payload Checklist would utilize 

materials, quantities of materials, 

launch vehicles, and operational 

characteristics that are consistent with 

normal and routine payload preparation 

and flight activities at these specified 

launch sites. Therefore, the 

environmental impacts of launching 

routine payloads would fall within the 

range of routine, ongoing, and 

previously documented impacts 

associated with approved programs that 

have been determined not to be 

significant. The purpose and need for 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Notices 52695 

this proposed action is to fulfill NASA’s 

mission for Earth exploration, space 

exploration, technology development, 

and scientific research. The scientific 

missions associated with NASA routine 

payloads could not be accomplished 

without launching orbital and 

interplanetary spacecraft. 

DATES: Interested parties are invited to 

submit comments on the Draft EA in 

writing no later than 45 days from the 

date of publication of this notice in the 

Federal Register. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

submitted via electronic mail to: 

routine-payload-ea@lists.nasa.gov. 

Comments may also be submitted via 

postal mail addressed to: George Tahu, 

NASA Program Executive, Science 

Mission Directorate, Planetary Science 

Division, Mail Stop 3V71, NASA 

Headquarters, 300 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20546. 

The Draft EA is available for review 

at http://www.nasa.gov/green/nepa/ 

routinepayloadea.html. 

The Draft EA may also be reviewed at 

the following locations: 

(a) NASA Headquarters, Library, 

Room 1J20, 300 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20546 (202–358–0167). 

(b) Central Brevard Library and 

Reference Center, 308 Forrest Ave., 

Cocoa, FL 32922 (321–633–1792). 

(c) Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Visitors 

Lobby, Building 249, 4800 Oak Grove 

Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109 (818–354– 

5179). 

(d) NASA, Goddard Space Flight 

Visitor’s Center, 8463 Greenbelt Road, 

Greenbelt, MD 20771 (301–286–8981). 

(e) Chincoteague Island Library, 4077 

Main Street, Chincoteague, VA 23336 

(757–336–3460). 

(f) NASA WFF Technical Library, 

Building E–105, Wallops Island, VA 

23337 (757–824–1065). 

(g) Eastern Shore Public Library, 

23610 Front Street, Accomac, VA 23301 

(757–787–3400). 

(h) Kodiak Library, 319 Lower Mill 

Bay Road, Kodiak, AK 99615 (907–486– 

8680). 

(i) NASA Ames Research Center, 

Moffett Field, CA 94035 (650–604– 

3273). 

(j) Grace Sherwood and Roi-Namur 

Libraries, P.O. Box 23, Kwajalein, 

Marshall Islands APO, A.P. 96555. 

(805–355–2015). 

(k) Alele Public Library, P.O. Box 629, 

Majuro, Republic of the Marshall 

Islands 96960. (692–625–3372). 

(l) Lompoc Public Library, 501 E. 

North Avenue, Lompoc, CA 93436 (850– 

875–8775). 

(m) Santa Maria Public Library, 420 

South Broadway, Santa Maria, CA 

93454–5199 (805–925–0994). 

(n) Government Information Center, 

Davidson Library, University of 

California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, 

CA 93106–9010 (805–893–8803). 

(o) Vandenberg Air Force Base 

Library, 100 Community Loop, Building 

10343A, Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437 

(805–606–6414). 

(p) Hampton Library, 4207 Victoria 

Blvd., Hampton, VA 23669 (757–727– 

1154). 

Limited hard copies of the Draft EA 

are available, on a first request basis, by 

contacting Mr. Tahu at the address or 

telephone number indicated herein. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

George Tahu, Program Executive at the 

Science Mission Directorate, NASA 

Headquarters, telephone 202–358–0723 

or via electronic mail at routinepayload-ea@lists.nasa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. space 

and Earth exploration is integral to 

NASA’s strategic plan for carrying out 

its mission. NASA is also committed to 

the further development of advanced, 

low-cost technologies for exploring and 

utilizing space. To fulfill these 

objectives, a continuing series of 

scientific spacecraft would need to be 

designed, built, and launched into Earth 

orbit or towards other bodies in the 

Solar System. These spacecraft would 

flyby, encounter, orbit about, land on, or 

impact with these Solar System bodies 

to collect various scientific data that 

would be transmitted to Earth via radio 

for analysis. The scientific missions 

associated with NASA routine payloads 

could not be accomplished without 

launching such scientific spacecraft. 

The proposed action is comprised of 

preparing and launching missions 

designated as NASA routine payloads. 

The design and operational 

characteristics and, therefore, the 

potential environmental impacts of 

routine payloads would be rigorously 

bounded. NASA routine payloads 

would utilize materials, launch 

vehicles, facilities, and operations that 

are normally and customarily used at all 

proposed launch sites. The routine 

payloads would use these materials, 

launch vehicles, facilities, and 

operations only within the scope of 

activities already approved or 

permitted. The scope of this Draft EA 

includes all spacecraft that would meet 

specific criteria on their construction 

and launch, would accomplish the 

requirements of NASA’s research 

objectives, and would not present new 

or substantial environmental impacts or 

hazards. These spacecraft would meet 

the limitations set forth in the Routine 

Payload Checklist, which was 

developed to delimit the characteristics 

and environmental impacts of this 

group of spacecraft. Preparation and 

launch of all spacecraft that are defined 

as routine payloads would have 

potential environmental impacts that 

fall within the range of routine, ongoing, 

and previously documented impacts 

associated with approved missions that 

have been determined not to be 

significant. Alternative spacecraft 

designs that exceed the limitations of 

the Routine Payload Checklist may have 

new or substantial environmental 

impacts or hazards and would be 

subjected to additional environmental 

analysis. Foreign launch vehicles would 

require individual consideration, 

review, and separate environmental 

analysis, and were not considered to be 

reasonable alternatives for the purpose 

of this NASA routine payload Draft EA. 

The No-Action Alternative would mean 

that specific criteria and thresholds 

presented in the 2002 Final 

Environmental Assessment for Launch 

of NASA Routine Payloads on 

Expendable Launch Vehicles from 

CCAFS Florida and VAFB California 

would be used to determine a 

spacecraft’s eligibility to be considered 

a NASA Routine Payload launching on 

the Pegasus, Taurus, Atlas and Delta 

families of the vehicles from CCAFS and 

VAFB. The No-Action alternative would 

mean that NASA would not launch 

scientific and technology demonstration 

spacecraft missions defined as routine 

payloads on the Falcon and Minotaur 

families of launch vehicles from any of 

the launch sites, nor would NASA 

launch payloads from USAKA, WFF, or 

KLC, without individual mission NEPA 

review and documentation. 

If the No-Action alternative were 

selected, NASA would revert to 

publishing individual NEPA 

documentation for each mission. 

Duplicate analyses and redundant 

documentation for spacecraft missions 

that meet the limitations of the Routine 

Payload Checklist, however, would not 

present any new information or identify 

any substantially different 

environmental impacts. 

The launch vehicles proposed for 

launching the routine payload 

spacecraft represent all presently or 

soon to be available domestic (U.S.) 

vehicles that would be suitable for 

launching the routine payloads, would 

likely be available, have documented 

environmental impacts demonstrating 

NEPA compliance, and would use either 

existing launch facilities or launch 

facilities for which environmental 

impacts have been examined in NEPA 

documents, or will be in the future. The 

expendable launch vehicles specifically 

included in this action include the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

52696 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Notices 

following: the Athena I and II, Atlas V 

family, the Delta family, the Falcon 

family, the Minotaur family, the Pegasus 

XL, and Taurus family. These launch 

vehicles would accommodate the 

desired range of payload masses, would 

provide the needed trajectory 

capabilities, and would provide highly 

reliable launch services. Individual 

launch vehicles would be carefully 

matched to the launch requirements of 

each particular NASA routine payload. 

In the event that other launch vehicles 

become available after final publication 

of this Draft EA, they could be NEPA 

compliant under this Draft EA if they 

meet the following criteria: (1) NASA 

has been a cooperating agency with the 

Department of Defense (DoD) or FAA on 

the launch vehicle for that given launch 

site; (2) NASA has published NEPA 

documentation for that specific launch 

vehicle at that specific launch site; or (3) 

NASA formally adopts another agency’s 

NEPA documentation. In addition, 

launch vehicles covered in this Draft EA 

could be eligible for launch from 

commercial spaceports or DoD 

installations not covered by this 

document if: (1) NASA is a cooperating 

agency on the NEPA documents 

developed by the DoD or FAA for that 

site; (2) NASA formally adopts those 

NEPA documents as its own pursuant to 

CEQ regulations; or (3) NASA completes 

its own NEPA documentation on a 

specific launch site. 

For the NASA routine payload 

missions, the potentially affected 

environment for normal launches 

includes the areas at and in the vicinity 

of the proposed launch sites, CCAFS, 

Florida, VAFB, California, USAKA/RTS, 

RMI, WFF, Virginia, and KLC, Alaska. 

Because propellants are typically the 

largest contributors to potential 

environmental impacts of a NASA 

Routine Payload launch, the total 

propellant load for a payload is 

considered in this Draft EA. If the 

payload propellant load exceeds the 

EPC defined in the Draft EA, then 

additional NEPA analysis and 

documentation would be required. For 

normal launches of NASA routine 

payloads under the proposed action, the 

environmental impacts would be 

associated principally with the exhaust 

emissions from the launch vehicles. 

These effects would include short-term 

impacts on air quality within the 

exhaust cloud and near the launch pads, 

and the potential for acidic deposition 

on the vegetation and surface water 

bodies at and near each launch 

complex, particularly if a rain storm 

occurred. NASA routine payload 

processing and launch activities would 

not require any additional permits or 

mitigation measures beyond those 

already existing, or in coordination, for 

launches. 

There are no direct or substantial 

environmental impacts, including 

cumulative impacts, associated with the 

proposed action that have not already 

been covered by NEPA documentation 

for the existing launch sites, launch 

vehicles, launch facilities, and payload 

processing facilities. 

Olga M. Dominguez, 

Assistant Administrator for Strategic 

Infrastructure. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21419 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[Notice (11–077)] 

Notice of Intent To Grant Partially 

Exclusive License 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to grant 

partially exclusive license. 

SUMMARY: This notice is issued in 

accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 

CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). NASA hereby gives 

notice of its intent to grant a partially 

exclusive license in the United States to 

practice the inventions described and 

claimed in USPN 6,133,036, 

Preservation of Liquid Biological 

Samples, NASA Case No. MSC- 22616– 

2 and USPN 6,716,392, Preservation of 

Liquid Biological Samples, NASA Case 

No. MSC- 22616–3 to Quest Diagnostics 

Incorporated having its principal place 

of business in Madison, New Jersey. The 

patent rights in these inventions have 

been assigned to the United States of 

America as represented by the 

Administrator of the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

The prospective partially exclusive 

license will comply with the terms and 

conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 

404.7. 

DATES: The prospective partially 

exclusive license may be granted unless 

within fifteen (15) days from the date of 

this published notice, NASA receives 

written objections including evidence 

and argument that establish that the 

grant of the license would not be 

consistent with the requirements of 

35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. 

Competing applications completed and 

received by NASA within fifteen (15) 

days of the date of this published notice 

will also be treated as objections to the 

grant of the contemplated partially 

exclusive license. 

Objections submitted in response to 

this notice will not be made available to 

the public for inspection and, to the 

extent permitted by law, will not be 

released under the Freedom of 

Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. 

ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the 

prospective license may be submitted to 

Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, 

NASA Johnson Space Center, 2101 

NASA Parkway, Houston, Texas 77058, 

Mail Code AL; Phone (281) 483–3021; 

Fax (281) 483–6936. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kurt 

G. Hammerle, Intellectual Property 

Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, 

NASA Johnson Space Center, 2101 

NASA Parkway, Houston, Texas 77058, 

Mail Code AL; Phone (281) 483–1001; 

Fax (281) 483–6936. Information about 

other NASA inventions available for 

licensing can be found online at 

http://technology.nasa.gov/. 

Dated: August 17, 2011. 

Richard W. Sherman, 

Deputy General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21417 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG 

CONTROL POLICY 

Paperwork Reduction Act; Proposed 

Collection; Comment Request 

AGENCY: Office of National Drug Control 

Policy. 

ACTION: 30-Day notice and request for 

comments. New Information Collection 

Request: Drug Free Communities 

Support Program National Evaluation. 

SUMMARY: The Office of National Drug 

Control Policy (ONDCP) intends to 

submit the following information 

collection request to the Office of 

Management and Budget for review and 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act. 

DATES: ONDCP encourages and will 

accept public comments until 

September 22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments in 

writing within 30 days to Mr. Patrick 

Fuchs. Facsimile and e-mail are the 

most reliable means of communication. 

Mr. Fuchs facsimile number is (202) 

395–5167, and his e-mail address is 

pfuchs@omb.eop.gov. Mailing address is 

725 17th Street, NW., Washington DC 

20503. For further information contact 

Mr. Fuchs at (202) 395–3897. 

Abstract: ONDCP directs the Drug 

Free Communities (DFC) Program in 

partnership with the Substance Abuse 

and Mental Health Services 

Administration’s Center for Substance 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES