Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 54001 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 99 

[Public Notice 5539] 

RIN: 1400–AC–20 

Intercountry Adoption—Reporting on 

Non-Convention and Convention 

Adoptions of Emigrating Children 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of State (the 

Department), with the joint review and 

approval of the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), is proposing 

a new rule to implement the 

requirement in the Intercountry 

Adoption Act of 2000 (the IAA) to 

establish a Case Registry for, inter alia, 

emigrating children. This proposed rule 

would impose reporting requirements 

on adoption service providers, 

including governmental authorities who 

provide adoption services, in cases 

involving adoptions of children who 

will emigrate from the United States. 

These reporting obligations apply to all 

intercountry adoptions, regardless of 

whether they are covered under the 

1993 Hague Convention on Protection of 

Children and Co-operation in Respect of 

Intercountry Adoption (the Convention). 

This proposed rule, although issued 

with the joint review and approval of 

DHS pursuant to section 303(d) of the 

IAA, only adds a new section to the 

Department’s Convention regulations; 

no amendments or additions are made 

to DHS regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 13, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number State/AR–

01/99, by one of the following methods 

(no duplicates, please): 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Electronically: You may submit 

electronic comments to 

adoptionregs@state.gov. Attachments 

must be in Microsoft Word. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of State, CA/ 

OCS/PRI, Adoption Regulations Docket 

Room, (SA–29), 2201 C Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20520. 

• Courier: U.S. Department of State, 

CA/OCS/PRI, Adoption Regulations 

Docket Room, (SA–29), 2201 C Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20520. (Because 

access to the Department of State is not 

readily available to private individuals 

without Federal Government 

identification, do not personally deliver 

comments to the Department). 

Docket: Comments received before the 

close of the comment period will be 

available to the public, including any 

personally identifiable information that 

is included in a comment. The 

Department posts comments on its 

public Web site at: http://travel.state.gov 

or they are available for public 

inspection by calling Delilia GibsonMartin at 202–736–9105 for an 

appointment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anna Mary Coburn at 202–736–9081. 

Hearing- or speech-impaired persons 

may use the Telecommunications 

Devices for the Deaf (TDD) by contacting 

the Federal Information Relay Service at 

1–800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Legal Authority 

The Hague Convention on Protection 

of Children and Co-operation in Respect 

of Intercountry Adoption, May 29, 1993, 

S. Treaty Doc. 105–51 (1998); 1870 

U.N.T.S. 167 (Reg. No. 31922 (1993)), 32 

I.L.M. 1134 (1993); Intercountry 

Adoption Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. 14901–

14954. 

II. Introduction 

The Convention is a multilateral 

treaty that provides a framework for the 

adoption of children habitually resident 

in one country that is a party to the 

Convention by persons habitually 

resident in another country that is also 

a party to the Convention. The 

Convention establishes procedures to be 

followed in these intercountry adoption 

cases and imposes safeguards to protect 

the best interests of children. It applies 

to the United States as both a country 

of origin (outgoing cases, i.e., where 

children are emigrating from the United 

States to a foreign country) and a 

receiving country (incoming cases, i.e., 

where children are immigrating to the 

United States from a foreign country). 

The implementing legislation for the 

Convention is the IAA. The IAA 

requires the Department and DHS to 

establish a Case Registry to track all 

intercountry adoption cases: Convention 

and non-Convention; emigrating and 

immigrating cases. It also requires the 

Department to report certain 

information about intercountry 

adoptions to Congress. To implement 

these responsibilities, the Department 

is, with the joint review and approval of 

DHS, promulgating this proposed rule to 

require adoption service providers who 

provide adoption services in 

intercountry adoption cases involving a 

child emigrating from the United States 

(including governmental authorities 

who provide such adoption services) to 

report certain information to the 

Department for incorporation into the 

Case Registry. These requirements 

would apply in both Convention and 

non-Convention cases involving 

emigrating children. No regulation is 

being proposed at this time to establish 

reporting requirements in cases 

involving children immigrating to the 

United States (incoming cases), because 

sufficient information can be collected 

through other means, primarily the DHS 

petition process and the immigration 

visa and issuance process. 

Separate regulations implement other 

aspects of the Convention and the IAA, 

such as regulations on the accreditation/ 

approval of adoption service providers 

(ASPs) to perform adoption services in 

cases covered by the Convention (22 

CFR part 96), preservation of 

Convention records (22 CFR part 98), 

visa procedures for Convention 

adoption cases involving immigrating 

children (regulations to appear at 22 

CFR part 42), and certification of 

Convention adoption proceedings done 

by U.S. courts (regulations to appear at 

22 CFR part 97). Further background on 

the Convention and the IAA is provided 

in the Preamble to the Final Rule on the 

Accreditation and Approval of Agencies 

and Persons under the IAA, Section I 

and II, 71 FR 8064–8066 (February 15, 

2006) and the Preamble to the Proposed 

Rule on the Accreditation of Agencies 

and Approval of Persons under the IAA, 

Section III and IV, 68 FR 54065–54073 

(September 15, 2003). 

III. The Proposed Rule 

This proposed rule establishes 

reporting requirements for all 

intercountry adoption cases in which a 

child is emigrating from the United 

States. There are three IAA sections 

relevant to the development of this 

proposed rule. Section 102(e) of the IAA 

requires the Department and DHS to 

establish a Case Registry of all adoptions 

involving the immigration of children to 

the United States and emigration of 

children from the United States 

regardless of whether the adoption 

occurs under the Convention. This Case 

Registry must permit tracking of 

pending cases and retrieval of 

information on both pending and closed 

cases. (As noted previously, this 

proposed regulation addresses only 

emigrating (outgoing) cases, and not 

immigrating (incoming) cases, because 

the Department can obtain sufficient 

data on immigrating cases through other 

means.) Section 303(d) of the IAA 

requires all adoption service providers, 

including governmental authorities, 

who provide adoption services in 

outgoing cases not subject to the 

Convention, to file information required 

under regulations issued to implement 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
54002 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

the Case Registry. In addition, section 

104 of the IAA requires the Department 

to submit annual reports to Congress on 

all intercountry adoptions, which must 

set forth, among other items, the total 

number of Convention and nonConvention outgoing cases, the country 

to which each child immigrated, and the 

State from which each child emigrated. 

In summary, these three sections of the 

IAA—section 102(a) (establishment of 

Case Registry), section 303(d)(filing with 

Case Registry regarding non-Convention 

adoptions), and section 104(b)(2) 

(annual reports to Congress)’provide the 

Department with the legal authority to 

collect the data outlined in the proposed 

rule. 

Although the main purpose of the 

IAA was to implement the Convention, 

Congress also sought to gather casespecific data on intercountry adoptions. 

Historically, children involved in 

outgoing cases did not require adoptionspecific Federal services in connection 

with their departure from the United 

States and therefore were not identified 

as such to the Federal government. As 

noted, in the IAA, Congress mandated 

the creation of Case Registry to monitor 

all intercountry adoption cases, 

including both Convention and nonConvention outgoing cases. The House 

Committee on International Relations 

stated in its report on the IAA that 

‘‘[T]his registry shall be for the purpose 

of easing administration of [the IAA] 

and the Convention so that Federal 

agencies and prospective adoptive 

parents can determine the status of a 

particular case and for the purpose of 

creating a system to track children who 

leave the United States to be adopted 

abroad.’’ (Report of the House 

Committee on International Relations on 

the Intercountry Adoption Act, 106th 

Cong. 2nd Sess., H.R. Rep. No 106–691 

(2000)). With this legislative history and 

the resulting statutory language in mind, 

the Department has devised a rule that 

requires reporting of certain casespecific information both to permit 

tracking and retrieval of information on 

outgoing cases and to enable the 

Department to complete its annual 

reports to Congress. The proposed rule 

is narrowly crafted to include only those 

basic items necessary to fulfill these 

case tracking and reporting functions. 

Moreover, in the interest of increasing 

compliance, we have attempted to keep 

the requirements simple and the 

number of items to be reported very 

limited. 

Reporting Information on Convention 

and Non-Convention Outgoing Cases 

Section 99.1 of the proposed 

regulation defines the term 

‘‘Convention’’ and adopts by reference 

all other definitions established in 22 

CFR 96.2 (Hague accreditation and 

approval regulation). Section 99.2 of the 

proposed regulation sets forth the 

reporting requirements for providers of 

adoption services in outgoing 

(emigrating child) adoptions. Note that 

the term ‘‘adoption services’’ is a 

defined term in 22 CFR 96.2 and refers 

to the following six services: (1) 

Identifying a child for adoption and 

arranging an adoption; (2) securing the 

necessary consent to termination of 

parental rights and to adoption; (3) 

performing a background study on a 

child or a home study on a prospective 

adoptive parent(s), and reporting on 

such a study; (4) making non-judicial 

determinations of the best interests of a 

child and the appropriateness of an 

adoptive placement for the child; (5) 

monitoring a case after a child has been 

placed with prospective adoptive 

parent(s) until final adoption; (6) when 

necessary because of disruption before 

final adoption, assuming custody and 

providing (including facilitating the 

provision of) child care or any other 

social service pending an alternative 

placement. Post-adoption services are 

not included within the definition of 

‘‘adoption services.’’

Who Must Report? 

Section 99.2(a) makes clear that any 

entity that provides adoption services 

will be required to report under this rule 

if it is a ‘‘reporting provider’’ in the 

case, as identified in § 99.2(b). This 

means that all agencies (whether or not 

accredited or temporarily accredited), 

all persons (whether or not approved), 

all public domestic authorities (a 

defined term in 22 CFR 96.2 which 

means an authority operated by a State, 

local, or tribal government within the 

United States), and any other providers 

of adoption services in outgoing 

adoption cases are potentially required 

to report under this regulation. To avoid 

duplicative reporting, and to reduce the 

burden on all adoption service 

providers, including public domestic 

authorities, § 99.2(b) establishes a 

framework for determining which 

provider must report in a given case as 

follows: 

Convention cases. In an outgoing 

Convention adoption case involving at 

least one accredited, temporarily 

accredited, or approved provider, it is 

the primary provider, as described in 22 

CFR 96.14(a) that must report. In an 

outgoing Convention adoption in which 

there is no accredited, temporarily 

accredited, or approved provider 

involved, the public domestic authority 

performing adoption services in the case 

must report. 

Non-Convention cases. In an outgoing 

non-Convention adoption case, in 

which there is only one provider of 

adoption services, that provider must 

report. As noted above, this provider 

might be an agency (including an 

accredited agency or temporarily 

accredited agency), a person (including 

an approved person), a public domestic 

authority, or any other adoption service 

provider. In cases in which there are 

two or more providers of adoption 

services, the reporting provider is the 

provider that is responsible for child 

placement as determined by applying 

factors listed in § 99.2. When multiple 

providers are involved in a nonConvention case, each provider must 

use the factors in § 99.2 of the proposed 

rule to identify whether it is the 

provider with child placement 

responsibility and therefore must report 

the information listed in § 99.2(c) and 

(d). The language in § 99.2(b)(1) through 

(4) is similar to the language in 22 CFR 

96.14 on how to determine who is the 

primary provider; however, it has been 

adapted slightly to replace Convention 

specific terminology with language 

appropriate to non-Convention cases. 

This proposed rule does not require 

prospective adoptive parent(s) who are 

acting on their own behalf, as described 

in 22 CFR 96.13(d), to report 

information to the Department, even if 

they perform adoption services for 

themselves in an outgoing case. The 

Department is not including prospective 

adoptive parent(s) acting on their own 

behalf as potential reporters because, 

although they may perform adoption 

services on their own behalf, they are 

not providing adoption services to 

others, and thus section 303(d) of the 

IAA would not require them to report 

data to the Department. The Department 

believes that very few if any outgoing 

Convention adoption cases will be 

accomplished entirely by prospective 

adoptive parent(s) acting alone, since 

the requirements that must be met to 

achieve IAA and Convention 

compliance, as set forth in 22 CFR 97.3, 

will require the use of an adoption 

service provider. We also believe that, 

given the complexity of outgoing 

intercountry adoptions and the standard 

requirement of an independent home 

study, the number of non-Convention 

cases where there is no adoption service 

provider at all will be quite limited as 

well. 

What Information Must Be Reported? 

Section 99.2(c) and (d) lists the casespecific information that must be 

reported to the Department. The 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 54003 

Department has limited the data items 

to the minimum amount of information 

it believes necessary to carry out its 

statutory duties. The regulation divides 

required reporting into two basic 

categories: Identifying information that 

must be reported within 30 days of 

learning that the case involves 

emigration of a child from the United 

States to a foreign country, set forth in 

§ 99.2(c), and milestone information as 

well as changes to information 

previously provided that must be 

reported within 30 days of occurrence, 

as set forth in § 99.2(d). 

In accordance with § 99.2(c), the 

reporting provider, as identified in 

§ 99.2(b), must provide the following 

identifying information to the 

Department within 30 days of learning 

a case involves emigration of a child 

from the United States to a foreign 

country: 

• The name, date of birth of child, 

and place of birth of child; 

• The U.S. state from which the child 

is emigrating; 

• The foreign country to which the 

child is immigrating; 

• The U.S state where the final 

adoption is taking place, or 

alternatively, the U.S. State where legal 

custody for the purpose of adoption is 

being granted and the foreign country 

where the final adoption will take place; 

and 

• The name, address, phone number, 

and other contact information for the 

reporting provider. 

In addition, in accordance with 

§ 99.2(d), the reporting provider must 

provide any changes to information 

previously provided, as well as the 

following milestone information, to the 

Department within 30 days of 

occurrence: 

• Date on which the case was 

determined to involve emigration from 

the United States. (Generally, this date 

would be the time the U.S. child is 

matched with foreign adoptive parents.) 

• Date of the U.S. final adoption or, 

alternatively, the date on which custody 

for purpose of adoption was granted in 

the United States; 

• Date of foreign final adoption if 

custody for purpose of adoption was 

granted in the United States, to the 

extent practicable; and 

• Any additional information when 

requested by the Department in a 

particular case. 

The proposed rule mandates that an 

adoption service provider report the 

initial information to the Department 

within 30 days of identifying that the 

case involves the emigration of a child 

from the United States, and 

subsequently within 30 days of each 

milestone or change to previously 

reported information. The proposed rule 

does not include details on the 

mechanics of how and where to report 

the information listed in § 99.2. The 

Department plans to post on its Web site 

instructions to adoption service 

providers on how and where to send the 

required basic information on a 

particular case. 

The Department and DHS Role 

Section 303(d) of the IAA envisioned 

that DHS and the Department would 

agree on a rule on reporting 

requirements needed for the Case 

Registry. The Department is currently 

developing the Case Registry and 

coordinating with DHS on the casetracking functions for immigrating 

children. DHS has a substantial role in 

cases involving immigrating children. 

On the other hand, DHS is not directly 

involved in outgoing cases at all. 

Nevertheless, in keeping with section 

303(d) of the IAA, 22 CFR part 99 was 

jointly reviewed and approved by the 

Department and DHS. However, the 

regulation only adds a new part to the 

Department’s regulations at Title 22 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations. No 

changes are made to any DHS 

regulations, nor will the rule appear in 

Title 8 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

IV. Regulatory Review: 

A. Administrative Procedures Act 

In accordance with provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act governing 

rules promulgated by Federal agencies 

that affect the public (5 U.S.C. 533), the 

Department is publishing this proposed 

rule and inviting public comment. All 

comments received before the close of 

business on the comment closing date 

indicated above will be considered and 

will be available for examination in the 

docket. Comments received after the 

comment closing date will be filed in 

the docket and will be considered to the 

extent practicable. A final rule may be 

published at any time after close of the 

comment period. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive 

Order 13272: Small Business 

In accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612 and 

Executive Order 13272, section 3(b), the 

Department of State has evaluated the 

effects of this proposed action on small 

entities, and has determined, and 

hereby certifies, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

605(b), that it would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. As 

stated in the final rule for 22 CFR part 

96 (71 FR 8064, 8128), the Department 

estimates that overall there are between 

420 and 600 ASPs that may have to 

comply with the accreditation 

regulations, all of whom are likely to be 

small entities. However, overall, the 

number of outgoing intercountry 

adoption cases is expected to be very 

small in comparison with the number of 

incoming cases. Consequently, there 

will be very few ASPs who are small 

entities and who will also be involved 

in outgoing cases. The proposed rule 

requires only extremely limited 

reporting requirements for outgoing 

cases. Thus, the Department does not 

believe the economic impact on small 

entities will be significant; however, the 

Department welcomes public comment 

on the rule’s impact on small entities 

and the cost of reporting requirements 

mandated by the IAA. 

C. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 for purposes of 

congressional review of agency 

rulemaking under the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996, Public Law 104–121. The rule 

would not result in an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more, a 

major increase in costs or prices, or 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, or innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and 

export markets. 

D. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), 

Public Law 104–4; 109 Stat. 48; 2 U.S.C. 

1532, generally requires agencies to 

prepare a statement, including costbenefit and other analyses, before 

proposing any rule that may result in an 

annual expenditure of $100 million or 

more by State, local, or tribal 

governments, or by the private sector. 

This rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any year. Moreover, because this rule 

will not significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments, section 203 of the 

UFMA, 2 U.S.C. 1533, does not require 

preparation of a small government 

agency plan in connection with it. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

A rule has federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132 if it has 

substantial direct effects on the States, 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
54004 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. This regulation 

will not have such effects, and therefore 

does not have sufficient federalism 

implications to require consultations or 

to warrant the preparation of a 

federalism summary impact statement 

under section 6 of Executive Order 

13132. The Convention and the IAA do, 

however, address issues that previously 

had been regulated primarily at the 

State level, as discussed in the preamble 

to the proposed rule on accreditation 

and approval of agencies and persons, 

appearing at 68 FR 54064, 54069–54070. 

These regulations do not create new 

federalism implications beyond those 

created by the IAA, and the Department 

has been careful to limit reporting 

duties of State, local, and tribal 

authorities to those necessitated by the 

IAA. We believe the burden of reporting 

the proposed information to the 

Department will be minimal. As with 

the regulations on accreditation and 

approval, the Department welcomes 

comments from State and local agencies 

and tribal governments on the proposed 

regulations. We also envision significant 

outreach and consultation with 

appropriate State authorities in the 

ultimate implementation of any 

regulation on this topic. 

F. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Review 

The Department of State does not 

consider this rule to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ within the scope of 

section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866. 

Nonetheless, the Department has 

reviewed the rule to ensure its 

consistency with the regulatory 

philosophy and principles set forth in 

the Executive Order. 

G. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice 

Reform 

The Department has reviewed this 

rule in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate 

ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish 

clear legal standards, and reduce 

burden. The Department has made every 

reasonable effort to ensure compliance 

with the requirements in Executive 

Order 12988. 

H. The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

of 1995 

Under the PRA, 42 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq., agencies are generally required to 

submit to the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) for review and approval 

information collection requirements 

imposed on ‘‘persons’’ as defined in the 

PRA. Section 503(c) of the IAA exempts 

from the PRA information collection 

‘‘for purposes of sections 104, 202(b)(4), 

and 303(d)’’ of the IAA ‘‘or for use as a 

Convention record as defined’’ in the 

IAA. All information collections that 

relate to outgoing non-Convention cases 

will be collections made for the 

purposes of section 303(d) of the IAA, 

and thereby exempt. All information 

collections that relate to outgoing 

Convention cases will be Convention 

records as defined in and subject to the 

preservation requirements of 22 CFR 98, 

which implements section 401(a) of the 

IAA. Additionally, the majority of 

information collection imposed on 

persons pursuant to this rule, with 

respect to both Convention and nonConvention cases, will be for the 

purposes of obtaining information for 

congressional reports required under 

section 104 of the IAA. Accordingly, the 

Department has concluded that the PRA 

does not apply to information collected 

from the public under this rule. 

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 99 

Adoption and foster care; 

International agreements; Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, the Department 

proposes to add new part 99 to title 22 

of the CFR, chapter I, subchapter J, to 

read as follows: 

PART 99—REPORTING ON 

CONVENTION AND NON-CONVENTION 

ADOPTIONS OF EMIGRATING 

CHILDREN 

Sec. 

99.1 Definitions. 

99.2 Reporting requirements for adoptions 

involving emigrating U.S. children. 

99.3 [Reserved]. 

Authority: The Convention on Protection 

of Children and Co-operation in Respect of 

Intercountry Adoption (done at The Hague, 

May 29, 1993), S. Treaty Doc. 105–51 (1998); 

1870 U.N.T.S. 167 (Reg. No. 31922 (1993)); 

The Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000, 42 

U.S.C. 14901–14954. 

§ 99.1 Definitions. 

As used in this part, the term: 

(a) Convention means the Convention 

on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry 

Adoption done at The Hague on May 29, 

1993. 

(b) Such other terms as are defined in 

22 CFR 96.2 shall have the meaning 

given to them therein. 

§ 99.2 Reporting requirements for 

adoption cases involving emigrating U.S. 

children. 

(a) An agency (including an 

accredited agency and temporarily 

accredited agency), person (including an 

approved person), public domestic 

authority, or other adoption service 

provider providing adoption services in 

a case involving the emigration of a 

child from the United States must report 

information to the Secretary in 

accordance with this section if it is 

identified as the reporting provider in 

accordance with paragraph (b) of this 

section. 

(b) In a Convention case in which an 

accredited agency, temporarily 

accredited agency, or approved person 

is providing adoption services, the 

primary provider is the reporting 

provider. In any other Convention case, 

or in a non-Convention case, the 

reporting provider is the agency, person, 

public domestic authority, or other 

adoption service provider that is 

providing adoption services in the case, 

if it is the only provider of adoption 

services. If there is more than one more 

provider of adoption services in a nonConvention case, the reporting provider 

is the one that has child placement 

responsibility, as evidenced by the 

following factors: 

(1) Entering into placement contracts 

with prospective adoptive parent(s) to 

provide child referral and placement; 

(2) Accepting custody from a 

birthparent or other legal guardian for 

the purpose of placement for adoption; 

(3) Assuming responsibility for liaison 

with a foreign government or its 

designees with regard to arranging an 

adoption; or 

(4) Receiving from or sending to a 

foreign country information about a 

child that is under consideration for 

adoption. 

(c) A reporting provider, as identified 

in paragraph (b) of this section, must 

report the following identifying 

information to the Secretary for each 

outgoing case within 30 days of learning 

that the case involves emigration of a 

child from the United States to a foreign 

country: 

(1) Name, date of birth of child, and 

place of birth of child; 

(2) The U.S. State from which the 

child is emigrating; 

(3) The country to which the child is 

immigrating; 

(4) The U.S. State where the final 

adoption is taking place, or the U.S. 

State where legal custody for the 

purpose of adoption is being granted 

and the country where the final 

adoption is taking place; and 

(5) Its name, address, phone number, 

and other contact information. 

(d) A reporting provider, as identified 

in paragraph (b) of this section, must 

report any changes to information 

previously provided as well as the 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 54005 

following milestone information to the 

Secretary for each outgoing case within 

30 days of occurrence: 

(1) Date case determined to involve 

emigration from the United States 

(generally the time the U.S. child is 

matched with foreign adoptive parents); 

(2) Date of U. S. final adoption or date 

on which custody for the purpose of 

adoption was granted in United States; 

(3) Date of foreign final adoption if 

custody for purpose of adoption was 

granted in the United States, to the 

extent practicable; and 

(4) Any additional information when 

requested by the Secretary in a 

particular case. 

§ 99.3 [Reserved] 

Dated: June 15, 2006. 

Maura Harty, 

Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Consular 

Affairs, Department of State. 

Dated: August 30, 2006. 

Michael Chertoff, 

Secretary of Homeland Security, Department 

of Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 06–7526 Filed 9–12–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–118788–06] 

RIN–1545–BF63 

Definition of Essential Governmental 

Function Under Section 7871 and 

Limitation to Activities Customarily 

Performed by States and Local 

Governments; Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correction to advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(REG–118788–06) that was published in 

the Federal Register on Wednesday, 

August 9, 2006 (71 FR 45474), that 

applies to Indian tribal governments and 

to State and local governments that 

issue bonds for the benefit of Indian 

tribal governments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Aviva M. Roth, (202) 622–4164 (not tollfree numbers). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking, (REG–118788–06) that is 

the subject of this correction is under 

section 7871 of the Internal Revenue 

Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published, REG–118788–06 

contains an error that may prove to be 

misleading and is in need of 

clarification. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the publication of the 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(REG–118788–06) that were the subject 

of FR. Doc. E6–12884, is corrected as 

follows: 

On page 45474, preamble, under the 

caption ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT:’’, line 4, the language ‘‘Aviva 

M. Roth, (202) 622–3980 (not toll-’’ is 

corrected to read ‘‘Aviva M. Roth, (202) 

622–4164 (not toll-’’. 

Guy R. Traynor, 

Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal 

Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel, 

(Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. E6–15119 Filed 9–12–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–118775–06] 

RIN 1545–BF64 

Revisions to Regulations Relating to 

Repeal of Tax on Interest of 

Nonresident Alien Individuals and 

Foreign Corporations Received From 

Certain Portfolio Debt Investments; 

Hearing Cancellation 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public 

hearing on proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document cancels a 

public hearing on proposed regulations 

under sections 871 and 881 of the 

Internal Revenue Code relating to the 

exclusion from gross income of portfolio 

interest paid to a nonresident alien 

individual or foreign corporation. 

DATES: The public hearing, originally 

scheduled for October 6, 2006, at 10 

a.m., is cancelled. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard A. Hurst of the Publications and 

Regulations Branch, Legal Processing 

Division, Associate Chief Counsel 

(Procedure and Administration), at 

Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice 

of public hearing that appeared in the 

Federal Register on Wednesday, August 

9, 2006 (71 FR 45474), announced that 

a public hearing was scheduled for 

October 6, 2006, at 10 a.m., in the IRS 

Auditorium (New Carrollton Federal 

Building), 5000 Ellin Road, Lanham, 

MD 20706. The subject of the public 

hearing is under sections 871 and 881 

of the Internal Revenue Code. 

The public comment period for these 

regulations expired on August 24, 2006. 

The notice of proposed rulemaking and 

notice of public hearing instructed those 

interested in testifying at the public 

hearing to submit a request to speak and 

an outline of the topics to be addressed. 

As of Thursday, August 31, 2006, no 

one has requested to speak. Therefore, 

the public hearing scheduled for 

October 6, 2006, is cancelled. 

Guy R. Traynor, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel (Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. E6–15127 Filed 9–12–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 300 

[REG–145154–05] 

RIN 1545–BF68 

User Fees Relating to Enrollment; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document contains a 

correction to a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (REG–145154–05) that was 

published in the Federal Register on 

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 (71 FR 51179) 

relating to user fees for the special 

enrollment examination to become an 

enrolled agent, the application for 

enrollment of enrolled agents, and the 

renewal of this enrollment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Cooper (202) 622–4940 (not a 

toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The correcting amendment that is the 

subject of this document is under 

section 9701 of Title 31 of the United 

States Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published, the notice of proposed 

rulemaking (REG–145154–05) contains 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS