Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 12 / Friday, January 19, 2007 / Notices 2527 

24The Board considers self-assessments as only 

one resource for users and other persons to consider 

when evaluating any risks associated with a 

particular system. In order to effectively identify 

and manage risks, a user or other interested person 

may need to consider other relevant documentation 

such as the system’s rules, operating procedures, or 

organizational documents. These materials may be 

publicly available or may need to be requested from 

the system directly. 

25While the Board expects self-assessments to be 

robust, it does not expect payments and settlement 

systems to disclose publicly sensitive information 

that would expose system vulnerabilities or 

otherwise put the system at risk (e.g., specific 

business continuity plans). 

26The Core Principles include implementation 

guidelines and an implementation summary for 

each principle. The guidelines provide both 

detailed explanations of each principle and general 

examples of ways to interpret and implement them. 

27 In November 2002, CPSS–IOSCO published an 

Assessment Methodology for the Recommendations 

for SSS, which is available at http://www.bis.org/ 

publ/cpss51.htm. In November 2004, CPSS–IOSCO 

published the CCP Recommendations and an 

Assessment Methodology, which are available at 

http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss64.htm. These 

assessment methodologies for the CPSS–IOSCO 

Recommendations include key questions to assist 

an assessor in determining to what extent a system 

meets a particular minimum standard. 

28Any review of an assessment by the Federal 

Reserve should not be viewed as an approval or 

guarantee of the accuracy of a system’s selfassessment. Furthermore, the contents of a review 

of a self-assessment would be subject to the Board’s 

rules regarding disclosure of confidential 

supervisory information. Therefore, without the 

express approval of the Board, a system would not 

be allowed to state publicly that its self-assessment 

has been reviewed, endorsed, approved, or 

otherwise not objected to by the Federal Reserve. 

29 If the Federal Reserve materially disagrees with 

the content of a system’s self-assessment, it will 

communicate its concerns to the system’s senior 

management and possibly to its board of directors, 

as appropriate. The Federal Reserve may also 

discuss its concerns with other relevant financial 

system authorities, as appropriate. 

manage their risks. At this time, 

different disclosure practices and 

requirements for payments and 

settlement systems have resulted in 

varying levels of information being 

disseminated to users and others. Users 

and other persons may find it difficult 

to obtain access to sufficient 

information to understand and assess a 

particular system’s approach to risk 

management against internationally 

accepted principles and minimum 

standards. Broadening the availability of 

information concerning a system’s risk 

management controls, governance, and 

legal framework, for example, can 

facilitate this understanding and 

analysis and also assist those interested 

in a system in evaluating and managing 

any risk exposure.24

The Board believes that the 

implementation of the applicable 

principles and minimum standards by 

systemically important systems can 

foster greater financial stability in 

payments and settlement systems. The 

Board further believes that operators of 

systemically important systems are well 

positioned to assess and demonstrate 

the extent to which they have 

implemented the principles or 

minimum standards in this policy. 

Therefore, in furtherance of its policy 

objectives, the Board expects 

systemically important systems subject 

to its authority to complete 

comprehensive, objective selfassessments against the applicable 

principles or minimum standards in this 

policy and disclose publicly the results 

of these efforts. Adopting this selfassessment framework, however, does 

not preclude the Federal Reserve from 

independently assessing compliance of 

systemically important systems with 

relevant rules, regulations, and Federal 

Reserve policies. 

The Board expects systemically 

important systems subject to its 

authority to complete self-assessments 

based on the following guidelines. First, 

systemically important systems are 

expected to document the basis for their 

self-assessment and support any 

conclusions regarding the extent to 

which they meet a particular principle 

or minimum standard.25 System 

operators should use one of the 

following assessment categories to 

describe the extent to which the system 

meets a particular principle or 

minimum standard: Observed, broadly 

observed, partly observed, or nonobserved. The CPSS and CPSS–IOSCO 

have developed implementation 

guidelines and assessment 

methodologies that can assist system 

operators in structuring their selfassessments and assigning an 

assessment category. Accordingly, 

payment system operators are 

encouraged to consult Section 7 of the 

Core Principles for guidance when 

developing their self-assessments and in 

measuring the extent to which the 

system meets each principle.26 Likewise 

system operators for securities 

settlement systems and central 

counterparties are encouraged to consult 

the assessment methodology for the 

relevant minimum standards for further 

guidance on each minimum standard 

and are encouraged to respond to the 

key questions included therein.27 A 

system may consult the Board for 

assistance with respect to the principles 

and minimum standards and the 

completion of its assessment. Second, to 

further ensure system accountability for 

accuracy and completeness, the Board 

expects the system’s senior management 

and board of directors to review and 

approve self-assessments upon 

completion. Third, to achieve broad 

disclosure, the system is expected to 

make its self-assessments readily 

available to the public, such as by 

posting the self-assessment on the 

system’s public Web site. Finally, in 

order for self-assessments to reflect 

correctly the system’s current rules, 

procedures, and operations, the Board 

expects a systemically important system 

to update the relevant parts of its selfassessment following material changes 

to the system or its environment. At a 

minimum, a systemically important 

system would be expected to review its 

self-assessment every two years to 

ensure continued accuracy. 

As part of its ongoing oversight of 

systemically important payments and 

settlement systems, the Federal Reserve 

will review published self-assessments 

by systems subject to the Board’s 

authority to ensure the Board’s policy 

objectives and expectations are being 

met.28 Where necessary, the Federal 

Reserve will provide feedback to these 

systems regarding the content of their 

self-assessments and their effectiveness 

in achieving the policy objectives 

discussed above.29 The Board 

acknowledges that payments and 

settlement systems vary in terms of the 

scope of instruments they settle and 

markets they serve. It also recognizes 

that systems may operate under 

different legal and regulatory constraints 

and within particular market 

infrastructures or institutional 

frameworks. The Board will consider 

these factors when reviewing selfassessments and in evaluating how a 

systemically important system 

addresses a particular principle or 

minimum standard and complies with 

the policy generally. Where the Board 

does not have exclusive authority over 

a systemically important system, it will 

encourage appropriate domestic or 

foreign financial system authorities to 

promote self-assessments by 

systemically important systems as a 

means to achieve greater safety and 

efficiency in the financial system. 

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, January 11, 2007. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. E7–589 Filed 1–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT 

INVESTMENT BOARD 

Sunshine Act; Notice of Meeting 

TIME AND DATE: 8:30 a.m. (EST), January 

22, 2007. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
2528 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 12 / Friday, January 19, 2007 / Notices 

PLACE: 4th Floor Conference Room, 

1250 H Street, NW., Washington, DC. 

STATUS: Closed to the public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Personnel. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, Office of 

External Affairs, (202) 942–1640. 

Dated: January 16, 2007. 

Thomas K. Emswiler, 

Secretary to the Board, Federal Retirement 

Thrift Investment Board. 

[FR Doc. 07–220 Filed 1–16–07; 4:42 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6760–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health; Decision to 

Evaluate a Petition To Designate a 

Class of Employees at Hanford Nuclear 

Reservation, Richland, WA, To Be 

Included in the Special Exposure 

Cohort 

AGENCY: National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health 

(NIOSH), Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS) gives notice as 

required by 42 CFR 83.12(e) of a 

decision to evaluate a petition to 

designate a class of employees at the 

Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Richland, 

Washington, to be included in the 

Special Exposure Cohort under the 

Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act of 2000. The 

initial proposed definition for the class 

being evaluated, subject to revision as 

warranted by the evaluation, is as 

follows: 

Facility: Hanford Nuclear Reservation. 

Location: Richland,Washington. 

Job Title and/or Job Duties: All former 

Dupont production workers in the 100 

area and the 300 area and all 200 area 

production workers and all guards and 

construction workers. 

Period of Employment: January 1, 

1943 through September 1, 1946 for 

former Dupont production workers in 

the 100 and 300 areas and December 1, 

1944 through September 1, 1946 for all 

200 area production workers and all 

guards and construction workers. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Larry Elliott, Director, Office of 

Compensation Analysis and Support, 

National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 

Columbia Parkway, MS C–46, 

Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513–

533–6800 (this is not a toll-free 

number). Information requests can also 

be submitted by e-mail to 

OCAS@CDC.GOV. 

Dated: January 12, 2007. 

John Howard, 

Director, National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. 07–194 Filed 1–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–19–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

[30Day–07–0004] 

Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork 

Reduction Act Review 

The Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of 

information collection requests under 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) in compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). To request a copy of these 

requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance 

Officer at (404) 639–5960 or send an email to omb@cdc.gov. Send written 

comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of 

Management and Budget, Washington, 

DC or by fax to (202) 395–6974. Written 

comments should be received within 30 

days of this notice. 

Proposed Project 

National Disease Surveillance 

Program—II. Disease Summaries (0920–

0004)—Revision—National Center for 

Preparedness, Detection, and Control of 

Infectious Diseases (proposed) 

(NCPDCID), Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC). 

Background and Brief Description 

Surveillance of the incidence and 

distribution of disease has been an 

important function of the U.S. Public 

Health Service (PHS) since 1878. 

Through the years, PHS/CDC has 

formulated practical methods of disease 

control through field investigations. The 

CDC National Disease Surveillance 

Program is based on the premise that 

diseases cannot be diagnosed, 

prevented, or controlled until existing 

knowledge is expanded and new ideas 

developed and implemented. Over the 

years, the mandate of CDC has 

broadened to include preventive health 

activities and the surveillance systems 

maintained have expanded. 

CDC and the Council of State and 

Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) 

collect data on disease and preventable 

conditions in accordance with jointly 

approved plans. Changes in the 

surveillance program and in reporting 

methods are effected in the same 

manner. At the onset of this surveillance 

program in 1968, the CSTE and CDC 

decided on which diseases warranted 

surveillance. These diseases are 

reviewed and revised based on 

variations in the public’s health. 

Surveillance forms are distributed to the 

State and local health departments who 

voluntarily submit these reports to CDC 

at variable frequencies, either weekly or 

monthly. CDC then calculates and 

publishes weekly statistics via the 

Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 

(MMWR), providing the states with 

timely aggregates of their submissions. 

The following diseases/conditions are 

included in this program: Diarrheal 

disease surveillance (includes 

campylobacter, salmonella, and 

shigella), foodborne outbreaks, arboviral 

surveillance (ArboNet), Influenza virus 

(includes the annual survey and 

influenza-like illness), Respiratory and 

Enterovirus surveillance, rabies, 

waterborne diseases, cholera and other 

vibrio illnesses, calicivirus surveillance, 

and Listeria case form. These data are 

essential on the local, state, and Federal 

levels for measuring trends in diseases, 

evaluating the effectiveness of current 

prevention strategies, and determining 

the need for modifying current 

prevention measures. 

This request is for approval of the 

data collection for three years. Because 

of the distinct nature of each of the 

diseases, the number of cases reported 

annually is different for each. There is 

no cost to respondents other than their 

time. The total estimated annualized 

burden hours are 21,107. 

ESTIMATE OF ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Form Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses Avg. burden 

Diarrheal Disease Surveillance: 

—Campylobacter (electronic) ............................................................................................... 53 52 3/60 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES