546 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 3 / Friday, January 5, 2007 / Notices 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–6682–7] 

Environmental Impacts Statements; 

Notice of Availability 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 

Activities, General Information (202) 

564–7167 or http://www.epa.gov/ 

compliance/nepa/. 

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact 

Statements 

Filed 12/25/2006 through 12/29/2006 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. 

EIS No. 20060539, Draft Supplement, 

AFS, 00, Northern Spotted Owl 

Management Plan, Removal or the 

Modification to the Survey and 

Manage Mitigation Measures, 

Standards and Guidelines (to the 

Northwest Forest Plan), Addresses the 

Effects of an Additional No-Action 

Alternative to the (July 2006) Draft 

Supplement and to the (2004) Final 

Supplemental EIS, Northwest Forest 

Plan, OR, WA, and CA, Comment 

Period Ends: 04/05/2007, Contact: 

Carol Hughes 503–808–2661. 

EIS No. 20060540, Final EIS, NOA, LA, 

PROGRAMMATIC—The Louisiana 

Regional Restoration Planning 

Program, Establishing and 

Implementation of Natural Resource 

Trust Mandates, LA, Wait Period 

Ends: 02/20/2007, Contact: Tony 

Penn, 301–713–2990 Ext 197. 

EIS No. 20060541, Draft EIS, BLM, ID, 

Pocatello Resource Management Plan, 

To Provide Direction for Managing 

Public Lands in the Idaho Falls 

Districts, Pocatello Field Office (PFO), 

Implementation, Several Counties, ID, 

Comment Period Ends: 04/04/2007, 

Contact: Terry Lee Smith, 208–478–

6340. 

EIS No. 20060542, Draft EIS, FRC, 00, 

Spokane River and Post Falls 

Hydroelectric Project, Applications 

for two New Licenses for Existing 

14.75 (mw) Post Falls No. 12606 and 

122.9 (mw) Spokane River No. 2545, 

Kootenai and Benewah Counties, ID 

and Spokane, Lincoln and Stevens 

Counties, WA, Comment Period Ends: 

02/20/2007, Contact: John Blair, 202–

502–6092. 

EIS No. 20060543, Final EIS, COE, CA, 

San Juan Creek and Western San 

Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area 

Management Plan (SAMP), Proposed 

Watershed-Based SAMP to Balance 

Aquatic Resource Protection and 

Reasonable Economic Development, 

Southern Portion of Orange County, 

CA, Wait Period Ends: 02/05/2007, 

Contact: Jae Chung, 213–452–3292. 

EIS No. 20060544, Final EIS, FRC, NY, 

Niagara Project, Hydroelectric 

Relicensing Application FERC No. 

2216, Niagara River, Niagara County, 

NY, Wait Period Ends: 02/05/2007 

Contact: Steven Kartalia, 202–502–

6131. 

EIS No. 20060545, Final EIS, FTA, TX, 

Southeast Corridor Project, Proposed 

Fixed-Guideway Transit System, 

Funding, Metropolitan Transit 

Authority (METRO) of Harris County, 

Houston, Harris County, TX, Wait 

Period Ends: 02/05/2007, Contact: 

John Sweek, 817–978–0550. 

Amended Notices 

EIS No. 20060480, Draft EIS, BIA, NY, 

Oneida Nation of New York 

Conveyance of Lands into Trust, 

Proposes to Transfer 17,370 Acre of 

Fee Land into Federal Trust Status, 

Oneida, Madison and New York 

Counties, NY, Comment Period Ends: 

02/22/2007, Contact: Kurt G. 

Chandler, 615–564–6832. 

Revision of FR Notice Published 11/24/ 

2006: Extending Comment Period 

from 01/08/2007 to 02/22/2007. 

EIS No. 20060518, Draft EIS, FHW, IN, 

I–69 Evansville to Indianapolis 

Project, I–69 Tier 2 Section 1: 

Evansville to Oakland City, from 1–64 

to IN–64, Gibson and Warrick 

Counties, IN, Comment Period Ends: 

02/20/2007, Contact: Anthony 

DeSimone, 317–226–5307. 

Revision of FR Notice Published 12/22/ 

2006: Correction to Title. 

Dated: December 29, 2006. 

Clifford Rader, 

Environmental Protection Specialist, Office 

of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. E6–22604 Filed 1–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–8266–3] 

El Monte Operable Unit of San Gabriel 

Valley Superfund Site; Notice of 

Proposed CERCLA Administrative 

Settlement Under Section 122(h)(1) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice; request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 

122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act, as 

amended (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 

9622(h)(1), notice is hereby given of a 

proposed administrative settlement for 

recovery of past response costs 

concerning the El Monte Operable Unit 

of the San Gabriel Valley Superfund Site 

in El Monte, Los Angeles County, 

California with the City of El Monte, 

California. The settlement is entered 

into pursuant to Section 122(h)(1) of 

CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(h)(1) and it 

requires the City of El Monte to pay 

$160,000 to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). The settlement includes a 

covenant not to sue the City of El Monte 

pursuant to Sections 106 and 107(a) of 

CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607(a), 

and Section 7003 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 

6973. For thirty (30) days following the 

date of publication of this notice, the 

Agency will receive written comments 

relating to the settlement. The Agency 

will consider all comments received and 

may modify or withdraw its consent to 

the settlement if comments received 

disclose facts or considerations which 

indicate that the settlement is 

inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. 

The Agency’s response to any comments 

received will be available for public 

inspection at 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before February 5, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is 

available for public inspection at EPA 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, California. A copy of the 

proposed settlement may be obtained 

from James Collins, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, ORC–3, San 

Francisco, CA 94105, telephone number 

415–972–3894. Comments should 

reference the El Monte Operable Unit of 

the San Gabrile Valley Superfund Site 

in El Monte, California and EPA Docket 

No. 2006–24 and should be addressed to 

James Collins at the above address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Collins, Assistant Regional 

Counsel (ORC–3), Office of Regional 

Counsel, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105; phone: (415) 972–3894; fax: (415) 

947–3570; e-mail: collins.jim@epa.gov. 

Dated: December 21, 2006. 

Keith Takata, 

Director, Superfund Division, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E6–22636 Filed 1–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Submission for OMB 

Review; Comment Request 

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

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 3 / Friday, January 5, 2007 / Notices 547 

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank, as a 

part of its continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burden, 

invites the general public and other 

Federal Agencies to comment on the 

proposed information collection as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice is soliciting comments from the 

public concerning the proposed 

collection of information to (1) evaluate 

whether the proposed collection is 

necessary for the paper 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 information 

collection of information; (3) enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and 

minimize the burden of collection of 

information on those who are to 

respond, including through the use of 

appropriated automated collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology, e.g., permitting electronic 

submission of responses. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received on or before February 5, 2007 

to be assured of consideration. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to 

David Rostker, Office of Management 

and Budget, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, NEOB, Room 10202, 

Washington, DC 20503 (202) 395–3897. 

Titles and Form Numbers: ExportImport Bank of the United States 

Application for Long-Term Loan or 

Guarantee, EIB 95–10. 

OMB Number: 3048–0013. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Need and Use: The information 

requested enables the applicant to 

provide Ex-Im Bank, with the 

information necessary to determine 

eligibility for the loan and guarantee 

programs. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit. 

Respondents: Entities involved in the 

provision of financing or arranging of 

financing for foreign buyers of U.S. 

exports. 

Estimated Annual Respondents: 86 

(revised). 

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 2.0 

hours (revised). 

Estimated Annual Burden: 172 hours. 

Frequency of Response: When 

applying for a long-time preliminary or 

final commitment. 

Dated: December 27, 2006. 

Solomon Bush, 

Agency Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 06–9978 Filed 1–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6690–01–M 

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD 

[No. 2006–N–10] 

Examination Rating System for the 

Federal Home Loan Banks and the 

Office of Finance 

AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance 

Board. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance 

Board (Finance Board) is adopting an 

examination rating system known as the 

Federal Home Loan Bank Rating System 

(Rating System). 

DATES: The Finance Board will use the 

Rating System for all examinations that 

begin after December 31, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anthony Cornyn, Associate Director, 

Supervision and Examination, Office of 

Supervision, cornyna@fhfb.gov or 202–

408–2522, or Kari Walter, Associate 

Director, Supervisory and Regulatory 

Policy, Office of Supervision, 

walterk@fhfb.gov or 202–408–2829. You 

can send regular mail to the Federal 

Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye 

Street, NW., Washington DC 20006. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In September 2006, the Finance Board 

published a proposed Rating System for 

the Federal Home Loan Banks (Banks) 

and the Office of Finance (OF) in the 

Federal Register for public comment. 

See 71 FR 55181 (Sept. 21, 2006) 

(available at the Finance Board’s Web 

site: http://www.fhfb.gov/ 

Default.aspx?Page=59&

ListCategory=4#4). The 30-day comment 

period closed on October 23, 2006. The 

Finance Board received 7 comments 

(the comments are available at the 

Finance Board’s Web site: http:// 

www.fhfb.gov/ 

Default.aspx?Page=93&Top=93). Based 

on the comments, the Office of 

Supervision revised the Introduction 

and Overview to clarify that the 

composite rating will be based on the 

relative importance of each component 

as determined case-by-case within the 

parameters established by the Rating 

System. The proposal stated that the 

Finance Board would give special 

consideration to corporate governance 

in assigning a composite rating. 

Although the importance of corporate 

governance cannot be over-emphasized, 

our intent is not to weight the corporate 

governance component more heavily 

than other components. Rather than 

giving special consideration to any one 

component, examiners will use 

judgment and a case-by-case approach 

when assigning composite ratings. The 

Office of Supervision made no other 

significant changes to the Rating System 

as proposed. 

II. The Federal Home Loan Bank Rating 

System 

In 2005, the Office of Supervision 

began to provide an overall 

conclusion—Satisfactory, Fair, 

Marginal, or Unsatisfactory—as part of 

its Report of Examination. The Rating 

System, which is the next step in 

communicating exam results to the 

Banks, is a risk-focused system under 

which each Bank and the OF is assigned 

a composite rating from ‘‘1’’ to ‘‘4’’

based on an evaluation of various 

aspects of their operations. The 

composite rating of each Bank is based 

on an evaluation and rating of 5 key 

components: corporate governance, 

market risk, credit risk, operational risk, 

and financial condition and 

performance. The composite rating of 

the OF is based primarily on an 

evaluation of 2 components: corporate 

governance and operational risk. A ‘‘1’’

rating indicates the lowest degree of 

supervisory concern, while a ‘‘4’’ rating 

indicates the highest degree of 

supervisory concern. The composite 

rating is based on the ratings of the 

underlying components, which also are 

rated on a scale of ‘‘1’’ to ‘‘4.’’ The 

composite rating is not an arithmetic 

average of the component ratings. 

Instead, the relative importance of each 

component is determined case-by-case 

within the parameters established by the 

Rating System. 

Under the Rating System, examiners 

take administration of a Bank’s 

affordable housing and community 

investment activities into account in 

assigning component ratings for 

corporate governance and operational 

risk. Given the importance of affordable 

housing and community investment 

activities to the mission of the Bank 

System, the Office of Supervision may 

consider the need for a separate rating 

system or a separate ratings component 

to evaluate and rate the affordable 

housing and community investment 

programs of each Bank after gaining 

experience with the Rating System. 

The Rating System is intended to 

serve 2 purposes. First, it is designed to 

reflect in a comprehensive, systematic, 

and consistent fashion the overall 

condition and performance of an 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES