Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Notices 36467

security systems, verification of the

company’s compliance with state and

local laws, and a review of the

company’s background and history.

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823

and 28 CFR 0.100 and 0.104, the Deputy

Assistant Administrator, Office of

Diversion Control, hereby orders that

the application submitted by the above

firm for registration as a bulk

manufacturer of the basic classes of

controlled substances listed above is

granted.

Dated: May 26, 2000.

John H. King,

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–14477 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–09–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

Manufacturer of Controlled

Substances; Notice of Application

Pursuant to § 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),

this is notice that on April 19, 2000, and

April 27, 2000, Organichem

Corporation, 33 Riverside Avenue,

Rensselaer, New York 12144, made

application by letters to the Drug

Enforcement Administration (DEA) for

registration as a bulk manufacturer of

the basic classes of controlled

substances listed below:

Drug Schedule

Amphetamine (1100) .................... II

Pentobarbital (2270) ..................... II

The firm plans to manufacture

amphetamine and pentobarbital as a

bulk product for distribution to its

customers.

Any other such applicant and any

person who is presently registered with

DEA to manufacture such substances

may file comments or objections to the

issuance of the proposed registration.

Any such comments or objections

may be addressed, in quintuplicate, to

the Deputy Assistant Administrator,

Office of Diversion Control, Drug

Enforcement Administration, United

States Department of Justice,

Washington, D.C. 20537, Attention: DEA

Federal Register Representative (CCR),

and must be filed no later than August

7, 2000.

Dated: May 25, 2000.

John H. King,

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–14479 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–09–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

ACTION: Notice of information collection

under review; new collection; Fiscal

Year 1999 State Domestic Preparedness

Equipment Program Needs Assessment.

The Department of Justice, Office of

Justice Programs (OJP), Office for State

and Local Domestic Preparedness

(OSLDPS), has submitted the following

information collection request to the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and clearance in

accordance with emergency review

procedures of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995. OMB approval has been

requested by June 16, 2000. The

proposed information collection is

published to obtain comments from the

public and affected agencies. If granted,

the emergency approval is only valid for

180 days. Comments should be directed

to OMB, Office of Information

Regulation Affairs, Attention:

Department of Justice Desk Officer (202)

395–3122, Washington, DC 20530.

During the first 60 days of this same

review period, a regular review of this

information collection is also being

undertaken. All comments and

suggestions, or questions regarding

additional information, to include

obtaining a copy of the proposed

information collection instrument with

instructions, should be directed to

Frank Lepage, Chief, Grants

Management Operations Branch, Office

for State and Local Domestic

Preparedness, 810 7th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20531, or facsimile at

(202) 616–2922.

Request written comments and

suggestions from the public and affected

agencies concerning the proposed

collection of information. Your

comments should address one or more

of the following four points:

(1) 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;

(2) 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;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(4) 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 submission of

responses.

Overview of This Information

(1) Type of information collection:

New collection.

(2) The title of the form/collection:

Fiscal Year 1999 State Domestic

Preparedness Equipment Program Needs

Assessment.

(3) The agency form number, if any,

and the applicable component of the

Department sponsoring the collection:

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of

Justice Programs, Office for State and

Local Domestic Preparedness Support.

(4) Affected Public who will be asked

or required to respond, as well as a brief

abstract:

Primary: Federal, State, and Local

Government.

Abstract: Section 1404 of the Defense

Against Weapons of Mass Destruction

Act of 1998 (Title XIV of Public Law

105–261; 50 U.S.C. 2301) as amended by

Section 1064 of the National Defense

Authorization Act of 2000 (Title X of

Public law 106–65; 50 U.S.C. 2301)

authorizes the Department of Justice to

collect information from state and local

jurisdictions to assess the threat and risk

of terrorist employment of weapons of

mass destruction against cities and other

local areas. This data collection is a onetime event that will allow states to: (1)

Report current jurisdictional needs for

equipment, training, exercises, and

technical assistance; (2) forecast

projected needs for this support; and, (3)

identify the gaps that exist at the

jurisdictional level in equipment,

training, exercises, and technical

assistance that OJP/OSLDPS funding

will be used to address. Additionally,

the information collected will guide

OJP/OSLDPS in the formulation of

domestic preparedness policies and

with the development of OSLDPS

programs to enhance state and local first

responder capabilities.

(5) An estimate of the total number of

respondents and the amount of time

estimated for an average respondent to

respond/reply: The data collection being

36468 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Notices

proposed is a one-time effort

incorporating three main components: A

terrorist threat and risk assessment, a

public health capabilities assessment,

and an equipment needs and

capabilities assessment. Information

will be collected by approximately

9,000 local law enforcement, public

health, and emergency management

agencies. In addition, a state

administrative agency in each state will

roll-up the local data and submit this

information to OJP/OSLDPS. Collection

and tabulation of the raw data at the

local level may take up to one month.

Jurisdictions using the OJP data

collection tool designed for this exercise

may experience burdens ranging from

4–8 hours to collect tabulate and input

data. In addition, roll-up of the data at

the state level and electronic submission

to OJP may take up to 4 hours.

(6) An estimate of the total public

burden (in hours) associated with the

collection: The total public burden

associated with this one-time data

collection will be approximately 66,200

hours.

If additional information is required,

contact: Ms. Brenda E. Dyer, Deputy

Clearance Officer, United States

Department of Justice, Information

Management and Security Staff, Justice

Management Division, Suite 1220,

National Place Building, 1331

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington,

DC 20530.

Dated: June 2, 2000.

Brenda E. Dyer,

Department Deputy Clearance Officer, United

States Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 00–14421 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

National Institute of Justice

[OJP(NIJ)–1279]

National Institute of Justice

Announcement of the Tenth Meeting of

the National Commission on the Future

of DNA Evidence

AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs,

National Institute of Justice, Justice.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: Announcement of the tenth

meeting of the National Commission on

the Future of DNA Evidence.

DATES: The tenth meeting of the

National Commission on the Future of

DNA Evidence will take place on

Sunday, July 9, 2000 from 1 p.m. to 5

p.m.,EST, and on Monday, July 10, 2000

from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place

at the Grand Hyatt Hotel, 1000 H Street,

N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone:

(202) 584–1234.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher H. Asplen, AUSA,

Executive Director. Phone: (202) 616–

8123. [This is not a toll-free number].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority

This action is authorized under the

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets

Act of 1968, Sections 201–03, as

amended, 42 U.S.C. 3721–23 (1994).

Background

The National Commission on the

Future of DNA Evidence, established

pursuant to Section 3(2)A of the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5

U.S.C. App. 2, will meet to carry out its

advisory functions under Sections 201–

202 of the Omnibus Crime Control and

Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended.

This meeting will be open to the public.

The purpose of the National

Commission on the Future of DNA

Evidence is to provide the Attorney

General with recommendations on the

use of current and future DNA methods,

applications and technologies in the

operation of the criminal justice system,

from the crime scene to the courtroom.

Over the course of its Charter, the

Commission will review critical policy

issues regarding DNA evidence and

provide recommended courses of action

to improve its use as a tool of

investigation and adjudication in

criminal cases.

The Commission will address issues

in five specific areas: (1) The use of

DNA in postconviction relief cases, (2)

legal concerns including Daubert

challenges and the scope of discovery in

DNA cases, (3) criteria for training and

technical assistance for criminal justice

professionals involved in the

identification, collection and

preservation of DNA evidence at the

crime scene, (4) essential laboratory

capabilities in the face of emerging

technologies, and (5) the impact of

future technological developments in

the use of DNA in the criminal justice

system. Each topic will be the focus of

the in-depth analysis by separate

working groups comprised of prominent

professionals who will report back to

the Commission.

Dated: June 2, 2000.

Doug Horner,

Acting Director, National Institute of Justice.

[FR Doc. 00–14442 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

[TA–W–37,011]

Cooper Energy Services, Grove City,

Pennsylvania; Notice of Revised

Determination on Reconsideration

On April 27, 200, the Department

issued an Affirmative Determination

Regarding Application for

Reconsideration for the workers and

former worker of the subject firm. The

notice was published in the Federal

Register on May 4, 2000 (65 FR 25947).

Investigation findings show that the

workers are primarily engaged in the

production of castings and machined

components. The worker were denied

TAA because the ‘‘contributed

importantly’’ test of the Group

Eligibility Requirements of the Trade

Act was not met. The workers were

denied NAFTA–TAA on the basis that

there was no shift in production to

Mexico or Canada, nor were there

company or customer imports of

castings or machined components from

Mexico or Canada.

The petitioners presented evidence

that some of the production of pistons

was shifted to Canada and is being

returned to the United States.

New information obtained from the

subject firm on reconsideration reveal

that for a short period of time during

which the machining centers were being

transferred from Grove City,

Pennsylvania, to another domestic

location, the company source machined

components from a Canadian firm.

Other findings on reconsideration show

that the company is increasing its

reliance on castings from Mexico.

Conclusion

After careful consideration of the new

facts obtained on reconsideration, it is

concluded that the workers of Cooper

Energy Services, Grove City,

Pennsylvania, were adversely affected

by increased imports, including those

from Canada and Mexico, of articles like

or directly competitive with castings

and machined components produced at

the subject firm.

‘‘All workers of Cooper Energy Services,

Grove City, Pennsylvania, who became

totally or partially separated from

employment on or after October 13, 1998,

through two years from the date of this

issuance, are eligible to apply for adjustment

assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act

of 1974;’’ and

‘‘All workers of Cooper Energy Services,

Grove City, Pennsylvania, who became

totally or partially separated from

employment on or after October 13, 1998,