29502 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 

influences PPE design. TIL testing is 

intended to quantify the ability of 

respirators to fit a range of individuals; 

however, it is not intended to replace 

individual fit testing as mandated by the 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA). 

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the 

public, limited only by the space 

available. The meeting room will 

accommodate approximately 75 people. 

Interested parties should make hotel 

reservations directly with the Embassy 

Suites Hotel at 412–269–9070 (ask for 

Lauren) before the cut-off date of June 

11, 2007. A special group rate of $100 

per night for meeting guests has been 

negotiated for this meeting. The 

NIOSH–NPPTL Public Meeting must be 

referenced to receive this rate. 

Interested parties should confirm 

their attendance to this meeting by 

completing a registration form and 

forwarding it by e-mail 

(npptlevents@cdc.gov) or fax (304–225–

2003) to the NPPTL Event Management 

Office. A registration form may be 

obtained from the NIOSH Homepage 

(http://www.cdc.gov/niosh) by selecting 

conferences and then the event. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the topics 

presented in this notice and at the 

meeting should be mailed to: NIOSH 

Docket Office, Robert A. Taft 

Laboratories, M/S C34, 4676 Columbia 

Parkway, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, 

telephone 513–533–8303, fax 513–533–

8285. Comments may also be submitted 

by e-mail to niocindocket@cdc.gov. Email attachments should be formatted in 

Microsoft Word. 

Comments regarding the TIL program 

should reference Docket Number 

NIOSH–036. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

NPPTL Event Management, 3604 Collins 

Ferry Road, Suite 100, Morgantown, 

West Virginia 26505–2353, Telephone 

304–225–5138, Fax 304–225–2003, Email npptlevents@cdc.gov. 

Dated: May 21, 2007. 

James D. Seligman, 

Chief Information Officer, Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. E7–10219 Filed 5–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

[CMS–2241–N] 

RIN 0938–AO28 

State Children’s Health Insurance 

Program (SCHIP); Redistribution of 

Unexpended SCHIP Funds From the 

Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2004 

and Fiscal Year 2005 To Eliminate 

SCHIP Fiscal Year 2007 Funding 

Shortfalls; and Provisions for 

Continued Authority for Qualifying 

States To Use a Portion of Certain 

SCHIP Funds for Medicaid 

Expenditures 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Notice 

SUMMARY: This notice describes, in 

accordance with the provisions of the 

National Institutes of Health Reform Act 

of 2006 (NIHRA), the methodology and 

process used for determining the 

amounts of unexpended Federal fiscal 

year (FY) 2004 SCHIP allotments 

remaining at the end of FY 2006, and 

the amounts of unexpended FY 2005 

SCHIP allotments available mid-FY 

2007, to be redistributed to certain 

States to eliminate these States’ SCHIP 

funding shortfalls in FY 2007. In 

accordance with this methodology, this 

notice also contains the amounts of 

States’ redistributed FY 2004 and FY 

2005 allotments. 

This notice also describes the 

amendments to the SCHIP statute, in 

accordance with the NIHRA, relating to 

the provisions for ‘‘qualifying States’’ to 

elect to receive a portion of their 

available SCHIP allotments as increased 

Federal matching funds for certain 

expenditures in their Medicaid 

programs. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Strauss, (410) 786–2019. 

I. Background 

A. Availability and Redistribution of 

SCHIP Fiscal Year Allotments 

Title XXI of the Social Security Act 

(the Act) sets forth the State Children’s 

Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to 

enable States, the District of Columbia, 

and specified Commonwealths and 

Territories to initiate and expand health 

insurance coverage to uninsured, lowincome children. The 50 States, the 

District of Columbia, and the 

Commonwealths and Territories may 

implement SCHIP through a separate 

child health program under title XXI of 

the Act, an expanded program under 

title XIX of the Act, or a combination of 

both. 

Section 2104(e) of the Act specifies 

that SCHIP allotments for a Federal 

fiscal year are available for payment to 

States’ for their expenditures under an 

approved State child health plan for an 

initial 3-fiscal year period of 

availability, including the fiscal year for 

which the allotment was provided. 

Section 2104(f) of the Act specifies that 

the amounts of States’ allotments, which 

are not expended during the initial 3- 

year period of availability, are to be 

redistributed to those States that have 

fully spent these fiscal year allotments 

during this period of availability in 

accordance with an appropriate 

procedure determined by the Secretary. 

Furthermore, section 2104(e) of the Act 

specifies that the amounts of the 

redistributed allotments continue to be 

available for expenditure by the States 

receiving these redistributions to the 

end of the fiscal year in which these 

funds are redistributed. 

B. Enactment of the NIHRA and 

Special Rules for Addressing FY 2007 

SCHIP Funding Shortfalls 

In general, under section 2104(e) and 

(f) of the Act, any unexpended SCHIP 

allotments remaining following the end 

of the initial 3-year period of availability 

would otherwise be redistributed in 

accordance with an appropriate 

procedure determined by the Secretary. 

However, section 201(a) of the recently 

enacted National Institutes of Health 

Reform Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–482) 

(NIHRA) amended the SCHIP statute to 

add a new section 2104(h) of the Act. 

This new subsection provides for 

special rules to address States’ FY 2007 

SCHIP funding shortfalls. Specifically, 

in order to address States’ FY 2007 

SCHIP funding shortfalls, section 

2104(h) of the Act provides for the 

redistribution in FY 2007 of the 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

remaining at the end of FY 2006, and 

the redistribution of certain amounts of 

unexpended FY 2005 allotments which 

are available for redistribution in 

months after March 31, 2007. This 

notice describes the implementation of 

section 201(a) of the NIHRA and 

contains the amounts of the States’

redistributed FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments determined in accordance 

with these provisions. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29503 

C. Expenditures, Authority for 

Qualifying States To Use Available 

SCHIP Allotments for Medicaid 

Expenditures 

Under section 2105(a)(1)(A) through 

(D) and (a)(2) of the Act, and before 

enactment of Public Law 108–74 

(Extension of Availability of SCHIP 

Allotment Act, enacted on August 15, 

2003), only Federal payments for the 

following Medicaid and SCHIP 

expenditures were applied against 

States’ available SCHIP allotments: (1) 

Medical assistance provided under title 

XIX (Medicaid) to targeted low-income 

children in a SCHIP-related Medicaid 

expansion, for which the enhanced 

SCHIP Federal Medical assistance 

program( FMAP) rate is available; (2) 

medical assistance provided on behalf 

of a child during a period of 

presumptive eligibility under section 

1920A of the Act (these funds are 

matched at the regular Medicaid FMAP 

rate); (3) child health assistance to 

targeted low income children that meets 

minimum benefit requirements under 

SCHIP; and (4) expenditures in the 

SCHIP that are subject to the 10-percent 

limit on non-primary expenditures 

(including other child health assistance 

for targeted low-income children, health 

services initiatives, outreach, and 

administrative costs). 

Section 1(b) of Public Law 108–74, as 

amended by Public Law 108–127 (Social 

Security Act, Technical corrections, 

enacted November 17, 2003), added new 

section 2105(g) to the Act under which 

certain ‘‘qualifying States’’ that met 

prescribed criteria could elect to use up 

to 20 percent of any of the States’

available SCHIP allotments for FY 1998, 

1999, 2000, or 2001 to increase the 

FMAP rate for regular Medicaid 

expenditures to the enhanced FMAP 

rate available under SCHIP. As 

described in the Federal Register 

published on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 

44013), if a qualified State submitted 

both 20 percent allowance expenditures 

and other ‘‘regular’’ SCHIP expenditures 

at the same time in a quarter, the 20 

percent allowance expenditures would 

be applied first against the available 

fiscal year reallotments. However, the 

20 percent allowance expenditures 

could be applied only against the 

specified fiscal year allotment funds 

(upon which the 20 percent allowances 

were based) and which would remain 

available. Under section 

2104(g)(1)(B)(iii) of the Act, the amounts 

of States’ FY 2001 reallotments would 

only be available through the end of FY 

2005; therefore, the FY 2001 20 percent 

allowances for the qualifying States are 

only available through the end of FY 

2005. 

Section 6103 of the Deficit Reduction 

Act of 2005 (Pub.L. 109—171, enacted 

on February 8, 2006) amended section 

2105(g) of the Act to provide for 

continued authority for qualifying States 

to use a portion of their available FY 

2004 and FY 2005 SCHIP allotments to 

allow the use of the enhanced (FMAP) 

rate (as determined under section 

2105(b) of the Act) for certain 

expenditures made under the Medicaid 

program. 

Section 201(b) of the NIHRA amended 

section 2105(g) of the Act to provide for 

continued authority for qualifying States 

to use a portion of their available FY 

2006 and FY 2007 SCHIP allotments to 

allow the use of the enhanced Federal 

Medical assistance percentage (FMAP) 

rate (as determined under section 

2105(b) of the Act) for certain 

expenditures made under the Medicaid 

program. 

II. Provisions of This Notice 

The purpose of this notice is to set 

forth our procedure for redistributing 

unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments in accordance with section 

2104(h) of the Act as added by the 

NIHRA. In this regard, this notice 

applies solely to the redistribution of 

unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments and does not describe the 

procedure for the redistribution of any 

other unexpended fiscal year 

allotments. This notice also implements 

the continued authority for ‘‘qualifying 

States’’ to elect to receive a portion of 

certain of their available FY 2006 and 

FY 2007 SCHIP allotments as increased 

Federal matching funds for certain 

expenditures in their Medicaid 

programs. 

A. Methodology for Redistribution of the 

FY 2004 SCHIP Allotments for the 

Period Ending March 2007 To Eliminate 

FY 2007 SCHIP Funding Shortfalls 

Section 2104(f) of the Act provides for 

the Secretary to determine an 

appropriate procedure to redistribute 

the entire amount of States’ unexpended 

SCHIP allotments following the end of 

the related initial 3-year period of 

availability only to those States that 

fully expended the allotments by the 

end of the initial 3-year period of 

availability. However, section 2104(h)(1) 

of the Act as added by section 201(a) of 

the NIHRA, specifies the application of 

special rules for the redistribution of the 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments in FY 

2007 with respect to certain ‘‘shortfall 

States.’’ As described below, the 

procedure for redistribution of States’

unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

remaining at the end of FY 2006 will be 

in accordance with the provisions of 

section 2104(h)(1) of the Act relating to 

the elimination of funding shortfalls in 

the SCHIP in FY 2007. 

Under section 2104(h)(7) of the Act as 

amended by the NIHRA, the special 

rules for the redistribution of the 

unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments in FY 2007 to address FY 

2007 SCHIP funding shortfalls apply 

only to the 50 States and the District of 

Columbia; that is, this provision refers 

only to States which received an 

allotment under section 2104(b) of the 

Act, and under this section a State 

means only the 50 States and the 

District of Columbia, as appropriate. 

Therefore, section 2104(h)(1) of the Act 

does not apply to the Commonwealths 

and Territories, which received SCHIP 

allotments for FY 2007 under the 

authority of section 2104(c) of the Act. 

Accordingly, unless otherwise indicated 

in this notice in referring to the 

redistribution of the FY 2004 allotments 

the term ‘‘State’’ means only the 50 

States and the District of Columbia, as 

applicable. 

Under section 2104(h)(1)(B) of the 

Act, a shortfall State is a State with an 

approved child health plan under title 

XXI of the Act, for which the Secretary 

estimates, on a monthly basis using the 

most recent data available to the 

Secretary, that the State’s projected FY 

2007 expenditures under this plan will 

exceed the sum of: 

i. The amount of the State’s 

allotments for each of FY’s 2005 and 

2006 that were not expended by the end 

of FY 2006; 

ii. The amount of the State’s allotment 

for FY 2007. 

Furthermore, in determining whether 

a States’ estimated FY 2007 

expenditures are in excess of the State’s 

available allotment funds specified 

above, these expenditures are 

determined subject to the provisions of 

section 2104(h)(4) of the Act. In the 

context of the FY 2004 redistributed 

allotments, section 2104(h)(4) of the Act 

indicates that these redistributed funds 

may only be used to make payments to 

States with respect to expenditures for 

(1) providing child health assistance or 

other health benefits coverage for 

populations eligible under the State 

child health plan (including under a 

waiver of this plan) on October 1, 2006; 

and (2) providing child health 

assistance or other health benefits 

coverage to an individual who is not a 

child or a pregnant woman at the 

regular FMAP only (not the enhanced 

FMAP). The redistributed FY 2004 

allotments would be available for 

making payments to States for 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
29504 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 

expenditures for a child or a pregnant 

woman at the enhanced FMAP rate. 

In determining the amount of any 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments that 

might be redistributed to address a 

State’s FY 2007 SCHIP funding shortfall, 

we first determined the amount, if any, 

of each State’s FY 2004 allotments that 

were not expended by the end of FY 

2006 based on States’ quarterly 

expenditure reports (Forms CMS–21 

and CMS–64) as submitted and certified 

by States through November 30, 2006. 

We also determined the amounts of each 

States’ unexpended FY 2005 and FY 

2006 allotments that were not expended 

by the end of FY 2006, also based on 

States’ quarterly expenditure reports 

(Forms CMS–21 and CMS–64) as 

submitted and certified by States 

through November 30, 2006. The 

amounts of the States’ allotments for FY 

2007 are as published in the Federal 

Register on July 28, 2006 (71 FR 42854). 

We then determined the amounts of 

States’ projected FY 2007 expenditures 

using the States’ most recent estimates. 

In that regard, the most recent estimates 

of States’ FY 2007 expenditures were 

obtained from the States’ certified 

submissions of their February 2007 

quarterly report forms CMS–21b and 

CMS–37. From these submissions we 

were able to determine States’ projected 

expenditures for FY 2007 on a yearly 

and quarterly basis. For those States that 

cover adults in their SCHIP programs, 

we also obtained further breakouts of 

these expenditures between children, 

pregnant women, and adults (other than 

pregnant women, that is, parents and 

childless adults). Using this 

information, we determined the States 

that met the definition of Shortfall State 

in section 2104(h)(1)(B) of the Act. 

The next step was to determine on a 

monthly basis, beginning with October 

2006, whether these shortfall States had 

sufficient allotment funds available to 

meet their estimated SCHIP 

expenditures. As indicated previously, 

this determination was made subject to 

the provisions of section 2104(h)(4)(B) 

of the Act, under which the FY 2004 

redistributed funds are only available 

for expenditures for populations eligible 

on October 1, 2006 and for an 

individual other than a child or 

pregnant woman at the regular FMAP 

rate. Under the standard operational 

procedures in the SCHIP program, 

States report their actual expenditures 

on a quarterly basis, and only after the 

end of the quarter. This process has 

been explicitly recognized in the SCHIP 

statute with respect to previous fiscal 

year reallotment determinations (for 

example, see section 2104(g)(3) of the 

Act, which references a November 30th 

date (that is, 2 months following the end 

of the associated fiscal year)). 

Accordingly, we have used 2 months as 

a reasonable time period for States to 

report their expenditures following the 

end of a fiscal year quarter. The most 

recent quarterly expenditure report 

submitted by States was for the fourth 

quarter of FY 2006, and as indicated 

previously, we obtained the final States’

submissions for this quarter/fiscal year 

by November 30, 2006. Using the 2 

month period, the next expenditure 

report for the first quarter of FY 2007 

(October 1, 2006 through December 31, 

2006) would be expected as of the end 

of February 2007. 

With respect to States’ estimated 

expenditures, a quarterly reporting 

process also applies. The most recent 

expenditure estimates for FY 2007 were 

submitted by States through their 

February 2007 submissions of the Forms 

CMS–37 and CMS–21B. Typically, the 

reports of States’ quarterly estimates are 

completed/certified by States before the 

beginning of the following quarter; for 

example, the States’ submissions of 

their February 2007 quarterly estimate 

reports were completed/certified by the 

end of March 2007. The next scheduled 

quarterly estimate reports due from 

States would be the May 2007 quarterly 

submission which would not be 

completed/certified by States until mid 

to late June 2007. 

Because of the timing and availability 

of the States’ quarterly expenditure 

reports and the States’ quarterly 

expenditure estimate reports, and in 

order to comply timely with the 

provisions of section 2104(h)(1) of the 

Act (which requires that States’ FY 2007 

SCHIP funding shortfalls be addressed 

on a monthly basis), we propose to use 

the States’ submissions of their February 

2007 quarterly expenditure estimate 

reports to determine and estimate the 

amounts of the States’ monthly SCHIP 

funding shortfalls through March 2007. 

That is, the February 2007 quarterly 

expenditure estimate reports submitted 

by States represent the most recent 

official/certified estimates that States 

have submitted and that were available 

through the end of March 2007. 

In order to determine States’ monthly 

SCHIP funding shortfalls, and in order 

to address the ‘‘varying FMAP’’

provision (in section 2104(h)(4)(B) of 

the Act), we used the States’

expenditure estimates for FY 2007 to 

determine an expenditure per diem 

amount for shortfall States; this was 

calculated by dividing the total 

projected expenditures for the first two 

quarters of FY 2007 by 182, the number 

of days in the period October 1, 2007 

through March 31, 2007, the period 

ending with the date specified in 

section 2104(h)(2) of the Act as 

amended by NIHRA, and which is the 

end of the second quarter FY 2007. 

Furthermore, in applying the States’

estimates for determining the monthly 

SCHIP funding shortfalls, we assumed 

that the expenditures represented by 

these fiscal year estimates would be 

presented for payment to the State in 

each quarter without regard to the type 

of individual the expenditure is 

associated with. Finally, we determined 

two different expenditure per diem 

amounts. The first expenditure per diem 

amount was determined as if payment 

for the entire amount of a State’s 

estimated expenditures for the first two 

quarters of FY 2007 were available at 

the enhanced FMAP rate, without 

regard to the type of populations 

(children/pregnant women or nonpregnant adults) such expenditures 

represented. Therefore, the first 

expenditure per diem amount was 

determined by dividing the States’

projected FY 2007 expenditures through 

March 31, 2007 (representing the first 

two quarters of FY 2007), with no 

adjustment for the type of individual 

(child/pregnant woman or non-pregnant 

adult) for whom the expenditure was 

associated, by 182. This expenditure per 

diem amount is applied under the 

premise that payment for a State’s 

expenditures prior to a SCHIP funding 

shortfall occurring (the point in time 

when all allotments have been 

exhausted) for the State would be made 

from the State’s other allotments 

available in FY 2007 (specifically, the 

States’ available FY 2005, 2006 and 

2007 allotments, not including any FY 

2004 redistribution). The varying FMAP 

provision is not applicable with respect 

to the other fiscal year allotment funds 

available to the State (the allotments 

other than the FY 2004 allotments). 

The second expenditure per diem 

amount is determined by adjusting the 

States’ projected expenditures for the 

first two quarters of FY 2007 to reflect 

the provision under section 2104(h)((4) 

of the Act, as amended by NIHRA, that 

payment for expenditures for an 

individual who is not a child or 

pregnant woman (that is, a non-pregnant 

adult) which is made from the FY 2004 

redistribution amounts available to the 

shortfall States would be at the regular 

FMAP rate. This reflects the premise 

that once a State experiences a SCHIP 

funding shortfall situation during a 

month, that is, the point in time when 

all other available allotments (other than 

the potential FY 2004 redistribution 

amounts) have been exhausted, payment 

for the State’s expenditures could only 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29505 

be made from the FY 2004 redistributed 

amounts that might be made available to 

the State. Since application of the FY 

2004 redistributed allotments are 

conditioned by the varying FMAP 

provision in section 2104(h)(4)(B) of the 

Act, the second expenditure per diem 

amount was determined by dividing the 

estimated expenditures for the period 

ending March 31, 2007 by 182, after 

these expenditures were adjusted to 

reflect that adult expenditures are only 

matched at the regular FMAP rate (for 

States that have expenditures affected 

by this provision). 

For each shortfall state, we then 

divided its total allotments available in 

FY 2007 (not including any FY 2004 

redistribution amounts) by the 

unadjusted expenditure per diem 

amount to determine the total number of 

days funded by the other allotments 

available to the State before it would 

experience a SCHIP funding shortfall. 

Again, in this regard, ‘‘other allotments’’

refers to the allotments available to the 

State not including any FY 2004 

redistributed allotments. Using this 

approach, we determined the month 

and the day on which each shortfall 

state would no longer have any other 

SCHIP allotment funds available during 

the period ending March 31, 2007. 

Then, for days in the month after the 

shortfall occurred, the State would be in 

a shortfall situation and as available, 

amounts of unexpended FY 2004 

allotment would be redistributed to 

these State(s) in amounts intended to 

eliminate this shortfall. Using this 

approach, on a month by month basis 

for the period ending March 31, 2007, 

we determined the FY 2004 

redistribution amounts for shortfall 

States for months in the first two 

quarters of FY 2007. This monthly 

amount is equal to the SCHIP funding 

shortfall amounts in the month, unless 

there were not sufficient FY 2004 

allotments remaining available to meet 

this monthly SCHIP funding shortfall. 

The SCHIP funding shortfall amount for 

a month is equal to the number of days 

in the month in which the State is 

estimated to experience a shortfall 

multiplied by the adjusted per diem 

rate. In a month when the amounts of 

the unexpended FY 2004 allotment 

available for redistribution is less than 

the total allotment funds needed by 

shortfall States, per section 

2104(h)(1)(D) of the Act, these amounts 

available for redistribution in this 

month would need to be prorated, based 

on the shortfall expenditures in this 

month for the identified shortfall States. 

Using the approach described above, 

we identified the shortfall States in FY 

2007, determined the amounts of these 

States’ monthly shortfalls through the 

end of March 2007, and the amounts of 

the redistributed unexpended FY 2004 

allotments determined to meet these 

shortfalls for the period ending March 

2007. The monthly amounts of the 

redistributed FY 2004 allotments are 

included in this notice. 

B. Methodology for Redistribution of the 

Remaining Unexpended FY 2004 

Allotments and Certain Amounts of 

Unexpended FY 2005 SCHIP Allotments 

to Eliminate FY 2007 SCHIP Funding 

Shortfalls in the Months After March 31, 

2007 

Under section 2104(f) of the Act, the 

Secretary is required to determine an 

appropriate procedure to redistribute 

the entire amount of States’ unexpended 

SCHIP allotments following the end of 

the associated initial 3-year period of 

availability only to those States that 

fully expended the allotments by the 

end of the initial 3-year period of 

availability. However, section 2104(h)(2) 

of the Act as amended by the NIHRA, 

provides for an earlier redistribution of 

certain amounts of States’ FY 2005 

allotments. Specifically, this section 

requires the redistribution in FY 2007 of 

certain amounts of States’ unexpended 

FY 2005 allotments estimated to be 

available in months following March 31, 

2007, in order to address and reduce 

certain identified States’ SCHIP funding 

shortfalls occurring in FY 2007. 

Under section 2104(h)(7) of the Act as 

amended by the NIHRA, the special 

rules for the redistribution of the 

unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments in FY 2007 to address FY 

2007 SCHIP funding shortfalls apply 

only to the 50 States and the District of 

Columbia. That is, this provision refers 

only to States which received an 

allotment under section 2104(b) of the 

Act, and under this section a State 

means only the 50 States and the 

District of Columbia, as appropriate. 

Therefore, section 2104(h)(2) of the Act 

does not apply to the Commonwealths 

and Territories, which received SCHIP 

allotments for FY 2007 under the 

authority of section 2104(c) of the Act. 

Accordingly, unless otherwise indicated 

in this notice in referring to the 

redistribution of the FY 2005 allotments 

the term ‘‘State’’ means only the 50 

States and the District of Columbia, as 

applicable. 

Under section 2104(h)(2)(B) of the 

Act, a shortfall State is a State with an 

approved child health plan under title 

XXI of the Act, for which the Secretary 

estimates, subject to paragraph (4)(B) 

and on a monthly basis using the most 

recent data available to the Secretary as 

of March 31, 2007, that its projected FY 

2007 expenditures under this plan will 

exceed the sum of: 

i. The amount of the State’s 

allotments for each of FYs 2005 and 

2006 that were not expended by the end 

of FY 2006; 

ii. The amount, if any, of the State’s 

FY 2004 redistribution, as determined 

above, in accordance with section 

2104(h)(1) of the Act; and 

iii. The amount of the State’s 

allotment for FY 2007. 

In determining whether a State’s 

estimated FY 2007 expenditures are in 

excess of the State’s allotment funds 

available in FY 2007, these expenditures 

are determined, in accordance with 

section 2104(h)(4) of the Act. Section 

2104(h) (4) of the Act indicates that 

Federal payments to a State from the FY 

2005 redistributed allotment amounts 

with respect to expenditures for 

providing child health assistance or 

other health benefits coverage is for 

populations eligible under the State 

child health plan (including under a 

waiver of this plan) on October 1, 2006 

and payment to an individual who is 

not a child or a pregnant woman, using 

the FY 2005 redistributed allotments 

may only be at the regular FMAP (not 

the enhanced FMAP). Federal payments 

from the FY 2005 redistributed 

allotments for expenditures for a child 

or a pregnant woman using the 

redistributed FY 2005 allotments would 

be available at the enhanced FMAP. 

Section 2104(h)(2) of the Act provides 

for a redistribution of States’

unexpended FY 2005 allotments in FY 

2007. However, section 2104(h)(3) of the 

Act limits the amounts and the States 

from which these unexpended FY 2005 

allotments would be redistributed. 

Specifically, the States from which 

these unexpended FY 2005 allotment 

funds would be redistributed are 

identified as follows, based on the most 

recent data as of March 31, 2007: 

i. The States have not expended all of 

their FY 2005 allotments by March 31, 

2007. 

ii. The total of these States’ estimated 

available allotments (as of March 31, 

2007) is at least equal to 200 percent of 

the States’ total projected SCHIP 

expenditures for FY 2007. 

In the case of States identified as 

meeting the above conditions, the 

amount of the FY 2005 allotments that 

would be redistributed from them is 

limited to the lesser of: 

i. 50 percent of their unexpended FY 

2005 allotments available as of March 

31, 2007, or 

ii. $20 million. 

By March 31, 2007, all States 

submitted their first quarter FY 2007 

expenditure reports; however, at that 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
29506 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 

time the second quarter of FY 2007 had 

only just ended, and the associated 

expenditure reports have not yet have 

been submitted by States. However, the 

States’ February 2007 quarterly 

submissions of estimated expenditure 

reports for FY 2007 were submitted by 

March 31, 2007. In that regard, in 

accordance with section 2104(h)(2) of 

the Act, we used the States’ submissions 

of their February 2007 quarterly 

expenditure estimate reports of their FY 

2007 expenditures in order to determine 

the following: 

• The amounts of SCHIP allotment 

funds (including the FY 2005 allotments 

and any redistributed amounts of 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments) that 

would be available as of March 31, 

2007; and 

• The amounts of States’ estimated 

expenditures for FY 2007 on an annual 

basis and for each quarter of the fiscal 

year. 

Using this information we were able 

to determine projected estimates of 

States’ SCHIP funding shortfalls for 

months after March 31, 2007, and the 

amount of the unexpended FY 2005 

allotments available as of that date to be 

used to address these SCHIP funding 

shortfalls. 

In order to determine States’ monthly 

SCHIP funding shortfalls after March 31, 

2007, and in order to address the 

‘‘varying FMAP’’ provision (referenced 

in section 2104(h)(4)(B) of the Act), we 

used the States’ expenditure estimates 

for FY 2007 obtained from the February 

2007 quarterly expenditure estimate 

reports to determine expenditure per 

diem amounts for the FY 2007 shortfall 

States, identified as discussed in section 

A above. The per diem amounts for the 

period after March 31, 2007 were 

calculated by dividing the total 

projected expenditures for the period 

April 1, 2007 through September 30, 

2007 (as provided by States’ February 

2007 submission) by 183, the number of 

days in that period. Furthermore, in 

applying the States’ estimates for 

determining the monthly SCHIP funding 

shortfalls after March 31, 2007, we 

assume that the expenditures 

represented by these estimates would be 

presented for payment to the State 

without regard to the type of individual 

(child/pregnant woman or non-pregnant 

adult) with which the expenditure is 

associated. Finally, we determined two 

different expenditure per diem amounts. 

The first per diem amount was 

determined as if payment for all of the 

State’s estimated expenditures for the 

period April 1, 2007 through September 

30, 2007 were available at the enhanced 

FMAP rate. Therefore, the first 

expenditure per diem amount is 

determined by dividing the States’

projected FY 2007 expenditures for the 

period after March 31, 2007, with no 

adjustment made for the type of 

individual (child/pregnant woman or 

adult) for whom the expenditure was 

associated, by 183. This first 

expenditure per diem amount is applied 

under the premise that a State’s 

expenditures prior to a shortfall 

occurring for the State (the point in time 

when all allotments have been 

exhausted) would be matched with the 

other (if any) fiscal year allotments 

available to the State in FY 2007 (that 

is, the States’ available FY 2005, 2006 

and 2007 allotments, and also including 

any FY 2004 redistribution amounts 

available to the State). The varying 

FMAP provision would not be 

applicable for these other allotment 

funds available to the State (not 

including the FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistributions). 

The second expenditure per diem 

amount is determined by adjusting the 

States’ projected FY 2007 expenditures 

to reflect the condition that payment for 

expenditures for an individual who is 

not a child or pregnant woman would 

be made at the regular FMAP rate using 

any FY 2005 redistribution amounts 

available to the shortfall State. This 

reflects the premise that once a State 

reaches a shortfall situation during a 

month (that is, all other available 

allotments, other than the FY 2005 

redistribution amounts have been 

exhausted), payment for the FY 2007 

shortfall State’s expenditures would 

only be made from the FY 2005 

redistributed amounts that might be 

made available. Since application of the 

FY 2005 redistributed allotments is 

conditioned by the varying FMAP 

provision (refer to section 2104(h)(4)(B) 

of the Act), the second expenditure per 

diem amount is determined by dividing 

the estimated expenditures for FY 2007 

for the period after March 31, 2007 (as 

adjusted to reflect the adult 

expenditures affected by the varying 

FMAP provision for States that have 

these expenditures) by 183. 

For each shortfall state, we divided its 

total available allotments (other than the 

potential FY 2005 redistributed 

amounts, if any) by the unadjusted 

expenditure per diem amount to 

determine the total number of funded 

days the State had before it was in a 

shortfall situation. This would 

determine the month and the day on 

which the shortfall State would no 

longer have any (other) allotment funds 

available. For days in the month 

beginning with the day the SCHIP 

funding shortfall occurs, the State is in 

shortfall and as available, amounts of 

the unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

(remaining after the redistributions for 

the months prior to April 2007) and the 

unexpended FY 2005 allotments 

(estimated to be unexpended at the end 

of March 2007 and available for 

redistribution on April 1, 2007) would 

be redistributed to these State(s). On a 

month by month basis, we determined 

the FY 2004 and FY 2005 redistribution 

amounts to be provided to shortfall 

States for months after March 31, 2007. 

In particular, beginning with April 1, 

2007, we determined the amount of the 

remaining unexpended FY 2004 

allotments to be redistributed to each 

shortfall state with a shortfall projected 

for April by determining the April 2007 

shortfall amount. The April shortfall 

amount for each shortfall State was 

determined by multiplying the State’s 

number of shortfall days in April by the 

adjusted expenditure per diem amount. 

The remaining unexpended FY 2004 

allotments were then prorated by the 

April shortfall amounts for each State 

(since the amounts of the remaining 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments were 

not sufficient to meet the entire April 

shortfall). That is, per section 

2104(h)(1)(D) of the Act, unexpended 

FY 2004 allotment amounts available for 

redistribution in a month must be 

prorated or reduced proportionally, 

based on the shortfall expenditures in 

the month. From the unexpended FY 

2005 allotments determined to be 

available as of April 1, 2005 to meet the 

remaining April shortfall, we then 

redistributed to each shortfall state with 

a projected April shortfall an amount 

equal to the remaining April shortfall 

after the provision of the FY 2004 

redistribution for April. 

Finally, we determined the 

redistribution of FY 2005 allotments for 

May 2007. This was determined by 

multiplying the number of shortfall days 

in May for each shortfall State by the 

adjusted per diem amount. Since the 

remaining unexpended FY 2005 

allotments available for redistribution in 

May 2007 (after the April redistribution) 

were projected to be insufficient to meet 

the total projected May 2007 shortfall, 

the final FY 2005 redistribution 

amounts for May were prorated, based 

on the total shortfall for the month. That 

is, per section 2104(h)(2)(D) of the Act, 

FY 2005 allotment amounts available for 

redistribution in a month must be 

prorated or reduced proportionally, 

based on the shortfall expenditures in 

the month. 

C. Retrospective Adjustment 

Section 2104(h)(5) of the Act provides 

discretion for the Secretary to adjust the 

estimates and determinations of FY 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29507 

2004 and FY 2005 redistributions 

following the end of FY 2007 under 

sections 2104(h)(1), (2) and (3) of the 

Act, on the basis of the actual 

expenditures reported by States no later 

than November 30, 2007. However, in 

no case may the amounts of the FY 2005 

allotments redistributed from States 

exceed the amounts that were 

determined based on the most recent 

data available as of March 31, 2007. As 

described, above, these amounts were 

determined based on the States’

submissions of the February 2007 

quarterly estimate reports of their FY 

2007 expenditures, and using these 

estimates would not exceed the lesser of 

50 percent of the States’ available FY 

2005 allotments as would be available 

as of March 31, 2007 or $20 million. 

Furthermore, under section 

2104(h)(5)(B) of the Act, only the actual 

unexpended FY 2005 allotments 

remaining at the end of FY 2007 (as 

determined following the submission of 

States’ fourth quarter FY 2007 

expenditure reports submitted by 

November 30, 2007) may be available 

for any retrospective adjustments that 

may be made under this provision. 

Finally, under section 2104(h)(5)(C) of 

the Act, any retrospective adjustment 

may not provide for the reduction of any 

States’ FY 2006 or FY 2007 allotments. 

D. Ordering of Expenditures 

In applying State’s expenditures 

against their available SCHIP 

allotments, we follow the order of 

expenditures as provided under section 

2105(a)(1)(A) through (D) and (a)(2) of 

the Act as follows: 

(i) Title XIX SCHIP-related 

expenditures for which payment is 

made at the enhanced FMAP (section 

2105(a)(1)(A) of the Act); 

(ii) Title XIX expenditures for medical 

assistance provided during a 

presumptive eligibility period under 

section 1920A of the Act (section 

2105(a)(1)(B) of the Act); 

(iii) Child health assistance for 

targeted low-income children in the 

form of providing health benefits 

coverage that meets the requirements of 

section 2103 (per section 2105(a)(1)(C) 

of the Act); 

(iv) Expenditures listed in section 

2105(a)(1)(D)(i) through (iv) of the Act, 

respectively: Other child health 

assistance for targeted low-income 

children; health services initiatives 

under the plan for improving the health 

of children (including targeted lowincome children and other low-income 

children); expenditures for outreach 

activities; and administration 

expenditures. 

As discussed previously, Public Law 

108–74, as amended by Public Law 108–

127, also added a new section 2105(g) 

to the Act, under which a ‘‘qualifying 

State’’ meeting specified criteria could, 

at its option, elect to use up to 20 

percent of any of the state’s available 

SCHIP allotments for FY 1998, 1999, 

2000, or 2001 for payments under the 

State’s Medicaid program, instead of 

expenditures under the State’s SCHIP. 

Furthermore, as amended by section 

6103 of the DRA, qualifying States may 

elect to use up to 20 percent of their 

available FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments for this purpose. Finally, as 

amended by section 201(b) of the 

NIHRA, qualifying States may elect to 

use up to 20 percent of their available 

FY 2006 and FY 2007 allotments. As 

described in the Federal Register 

published on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 

44026), if a qualified State submits both 

20 percent allowance expenditures and 

other ‘‘regular’’ SCHIP expenditures at 

the same time in a quarter (based on the 

allotment priority order they both must 

apply against any available fiscal year 

allotments), the 20 percent allowance 

expenditures will be applied first 

against any remaining 20 percent 

allowance allotments amounts. We will 

apply the same approach with respect to 

the FY 2006 and FY 2007 20 percent 

allowances determined in accordance 

with section 201(b) of the NIHRA. 

In general, in accordance with the 

ordering of allotments and expenditures 

provisions, the expenditures of States 

eligible for the FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistribution amounts will be applied 

against the FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistribution amounts. 

E. No Ordering Election for FY 2004 and 

FY 2005 Redistributed Amounts 

In the past, for purposes of applying 

States’ expenditures against the 

redistributed allotments, States 

receiving redistributed allotment 

amounts were given flexibility to decide 

the ordering of the redistributed 

allotments with respect to the States’

other available allotments. This allowed 

the redistribution States to optimize the 

use of these redistributed funds. 

However, because of the statutory 

provisions made by the NIHRA related 

to the determination of shortfall States 

and the amount of the funding shortfalls 

on a monthly basis, and the requirement 

that these redistributed allotments be 

available only after the States’ other 

SCHIP allotment funds have been 

exhausted, we believe that the FY 2004 

and FY 2005 redistributed allotments 

must be ordered after the States’ other 

available allotments are exhausted. 

Therefore, shortfall States must spend 

their available FY 2005, FY 2006 and FY 

2007 allotments first, before any 

redistributed FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotment amounts. Furthermore, since 

the unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

must be redistributed before any 

redistribution of the FY 2005 

allotments, the FY 2004 redistributed 

allotment amounts must be ordered 

prior to any FY 2005 redistributed 

allotment amounts. 

As specified in section 2104(h)(6) of 

the Act, as added by section 201(a) of 

the NIHRA, the amounts of the 

unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments redistributed to a State in FY 

2007 are only available for expenditure 

by the State through September 30, 

2007; and any amounts of these 

redistributed allotments remaining at 

the end of FY 2007, shall not be subject 

to redistribution under section 2104(f) 

of the Act. 

As part of the redistribution process, 

prior to making the FY 2004 and FY 

2005 redistribution funds actually 

available, we contacted all of the States 

we estimated to be eligible for these 

fiscal year redistributions and all of the 

States contributing towards the FY 2005 

redistribution (as identified in section 

2104(h)(3) of the Act) in order to explain 

the redistribution process and 

associated SCHIP allotment amounts as 

described in this notice. The amounts of 

such States’ FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistributed allotment amounts and the 

reduction of the FY 2005 allotments, 

will be incorporated into the Form 

CMS–21C (Allocation of Title XIX and 

Title XXI Expenditures to the SCHIP 

Fiscal Year Allotment). Form CMS–21C 

is used for tracking States’ expenditures 

against their available SCHIP 

allotments. The amounts of the FY 2004 

and the FY 2005 redistributed 

allotments and the reduction to the FY 

2005 allotments will be entered on this 

form, and the Medicaid and SCHIP 

expenditure system will automatically 

apply expenditures reported on the 

quarterly expenditure reports for FY 

2007 against the FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistributed amounts and the revised 

FY 2005 allotments available in FY 

2007, and the other SCHIP allotments 

available in FY 2007. 

F. Special Rule for Coverage for 

Populations Eligible on October 1, 2006 

Under section 2104(h)(4)(A) of the 

Act, as added by the NIHRA, a State 

may use amounts of FY 2004 allotments 

or FY 2005 allotments, redistributed 

under section 2104(h) of the Act, only 

for expenditures for providing child 

health assistance or other health 

benefits coverage for populations 

eligible for assistance or benefits under 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
29508 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 

its approved State child health 

assistance plan (including a waiver of 

this plan) as in effect on October 1, 

2006. During FY 2007, if a State which 

received amounts of redistributed FY 

2004 or FY 2005 allotments does not 

provide eligibility for any populations 

in addition to those eligible under its 

approved plan (including a waiver of 

this plan) as in effect on October 1, 

2006, we will deem this requirement to 

be met and no special/separate reporting 

of expenditures related to the 

populations eligible in accordance with 

the State’s plans (or waiver of this plan) 

as in effect on October 1, 2006 would be 

required . However, if a State receiving 

amounts of redistributed FY 2004 or FY 

2005 allotments does provide eligibility 

for any populations in addition to those 

eligible under its approved plan 

(including a waiver of this plan) as in 

effect on October 1, 2006, this State will 

need to separately report the FY 2007 

expenditures it reports to CMS for these 

additional populations, in accordance 

with reporting requirements determined 

by CMS. Separately reporting these 

expenditures will ensure that none of 

the FY 2007 expenditures for these 

additional populations will be applied 

against the FY 2004 or FY 2005 

redistributed allotments. 

G. Continued Authority for Qualifying 

States To Use Certain Funds for 

Medicaid Expenditures 

Section 1(b) of Public Law 108–74, as 

amended by Public Law 108–127, added 

new section 2105(g) to the Act under 

which certain ‘‘qualifying States’’ that 

met prescribed criteria could elect to 

use up to 20 percent of the States’

available SCHIP allotments for FY 1998, 

1999, 2000, or 2001 as additional 

Federal financial participation for 

expenditures under the State’s Medicaid 

program, instead of expenditures under 

the State’s SCHIP. The Federal Register 

published on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 

44026) described the definition of 

qualifying State and indicated how the 

20 percent allowances for these States 

would be calculated and applicable 

expenditures tracked against them. 

Section 6103 of the DRA amended 

section 2105(g)(1)(A) of the Act to 

provide for continued authority for 

qualifying States to use a portion of 

their available FY 2004 and FY 2005 

SCHIP allotments. Finally, section 

201(b) of the NIHRA amended section 

2105(g)(1)(A) of the Act to provide for 

continued authority for qualifying States 

to use a portion of their available FY 

2006 and FY 2007 SCHIP allotments. 

The 20 percent allowances for 

qualifying States associated with the FY 

2006 and FY 2007 allotments have been 

calculated in the same way as we 

determined and tracked the 20 percent 

allowances associated with the FY 1998 

through FY 2002 fiscal years. The 

availability of the 20 percent allowances 

for FY 2006 and FY 2007, and the 

application of expenditures against 

these allowances, will be in accordance 

with the same provisions as in the July 

23, 2004 Federal Register. 

H. Tables for FY 2004 Unexpended 

Allotments, Calculation of FY 2004 and 

FY 2005 Redistribution , and 

Determination of Available FY 2005 

Allotments for Redistribution 

In Table 1 of this notice we set forth 

the unexpended FY 2004 SCHIP 

allotments remaining at the end of FY 

2006. We established the amount of 

States’ unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

at the end of the initial 3-year period of 

availability, based on the SCHIP-related 

expenditures, as reported and certified 

by States to us on the quarterly 

expenditure reports (Form CMS–64 and/ 

or Form CMS–21) by November 30, 

2006. These expenditures are applied 

and tracked against the States’ FY 2004 

allotments (as published in the Federal 

Register on August 22, 2003 (68 FR 

50784)) and other available allotments, 

on Form CMS–21C, Allocation of the 

Title XIX and Title XXI Expenditures to 

SCHIP Fiscal Year Allotment. 

By November 30, 2006, all States 

reported and certified their FY 2006 

fourth quarter expenditures 

(representing the last quarter of the 3- 

year period of availability for FY 2004). 

Expenditures reflected in Table 1 below 

were taken from our Medicaid Budget 

and Expenditure System/State 

Children’s Health Program Budget and 

Expenditure System (MBES/CBES) 

‘‘master file,’’ which represents the 

State’s official certified SCHIP and 

Medicaid expenditure reporting system 

records related to the determination of 

the amounts of the unexpended FY 2004 

allotments. Based on States’ expenditure 

reports submitted and certified through 

November 30, 2006, the total amount of 

States’ FY 2004 SCHIP allotments that 

were unexpended at the end of the 3–

year period ending September 30, 2006, 

is $146,879,932. These amounts were 

used to determine the States’ FY 2004 

redistributed allotment amounts set 

forth in Table 3 of this notice. 

Tables for Calculating the SCHIP FY 

2004 Redistributed Allotments 

The following describes Tables 1 

through Table 3, which together 

presents the redistributed amounts of 

the unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

SCHIP allotments for purposes of 

eliminating FY 2007 SCHIP funding 

shortfalls. 

A total of $3,175,200,000 was allotted 

nationally for FY 2004, representing 

$3,142,125,000 in allotments to the 50 

States and the District of Columbia, and 

$33,075,000 in allotments to the 

Commonwealths and Territories. Based 

on the quarterly expenditure reports, 

submitted and certified by November 

30, 2006, 44 States and the District of 

Columbia fully expended their FY 2004 

allotments, 7 States did not fully expend 

their FY 2004 allotments, and all 5 of 

the Commonwealths and Territories 

fully expended their FY 2004 

allotments. For the 7 States that did not 

fully expend their FY 2004 allotments, 

the total unexpended FY 2004 

allotments is $146,879,932; this amount 

is available for redistribution to States 

with shortfalls in FY 2007, in 

accordance with the provisions of the 

NIHRA in FY 2007. The calculation of 

the total unexpended FY 2004 

allotments remaining at the end of FY 

2006 is detailed in Table 1 below. 

Based on the States’ February 2007 

projections of their FY 2007 SCHIP 

expenditures, there are 11 States 

projected to have a SCHIP shortfall in 

FY 2007 totaling about $932 million. 

However, only 5 of these States are 

projected to have a shortfall for the 

period October 1, 2006 through March 

31, 2007 (Illinois, Maryland, 

Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode 

Island); in particular, we projected that 

the shortfalls for these states begin in 

January 2007. In accordance with the 

provisions of section 2104(h)(1) of the 

Act, as amended by NIHRA, we 

estimated the shortfalls for the 5 States 

for the months of January through 

March 2007 total about $86.5 million. 

Since there is a total of about $146.9 

million in unexpended FY 2004 

allotments available for redistribution in 

FY 2007, the entire shortfall for months 

prior to April 2007 can be met, The 

redistribution of unexpended FY 2004 

allotments for the months of January 

through March 2007 shortfalls is 

included in Table 3 below. 

There were 13 States identified under 

section 2104(h)(3) of the Act, as 

amended by NIHRA, as having 

unexpended FY 2005 allotment 

amounts available as of March 31, 2007 

and that also had total available 

allotments equal to at least 200 percent 

of their projected FY 2007 expenditures 

available as of March 31, 2007. We 

determined this using the States’

February 2007 submissions of their FY 

2007 projected expenditures. For these 

States, the lesser of $20 million, or fifty 

percent of their unexpended FY 2005 

allotments, available as of March 31, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29509 

2007, is available for redistributions for 

states with FY 2007 shortfalls in months 

after March 2007. Based on this, we 

determined that a total of $137,832,296 

in unexpended FY 2005 allotments from 

theses 13 states is available for 

redistribution to the shortfall States in 

FY 2007 for months after March 2007. 

Table 3 below provides details regarding 

this determination. 

Of the 11 States projected to have 

shortfalls in FY 2007, 6 of them are 

projected to have shortfalls in April and 

May 2007 (Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, 

Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode 

Island). Based on the February 2007 

estimates of States’ projected FY 2007 

expenditures, the total shortfall for these 

6 States for the month of April is 

estimated at about $96.9 million. About 

$60.3 million in unexpended FY 2004 

allotments remained after the 

redistribution for the months prior to 

April 2007; therefore, this amount is 

available to meet the FY 2007 shortfall 

for the month of April. The remaining 

April shortfall after the FY 2004 

redistribution is about $36.6 million 

($96.9 million minus $60.3 million). 

This remaining April shortfall is fully 

covered by the $137.8 million in 

unexpended FY 2005 allotments 

available for redistribution for months 

after March 2007. The remaining $101.2 

million in unexpended FY 2005 

allotments is available to be applied to 

projected May 2007 shortfall amounts. 

The projected May 2007 shortfall for the 

6 states projected to have shortfalls in 

May is about $116.6 million; therefore, 

the remaining $101.2 million in FY 

2005 allotments available for 

redistribution to address May 2007 

shortfalls has been prorated among the 

6 May shortfall States, based on the May 

shortfall projections. The amounts of the 

remaining redistributed FY 2004 

allotments and the redistribution of the 

FY 2005 allotments for the April and 

May 2007 shortfalls is included in Table 

3 below. 

Key to Table 1-Unexpended SCHIP 

Allotments for Fiscal Year 2004 

Table 1 presents the amounts of the 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

remaining at the end of FY 2006 and 

available for redistribution in FY 2007 

to address the FY 2007 SCHIP funding 

shortfalls for the 50 States and the 

District of Columbia. 

Column/Description 

Column A = State. Name of State, 

District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth or Territory. 

Column B = FY 2004 Allotments. This 

column contains the FY 2004 SCHIP 

allotments for all States, which were 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 22, 2003 (68 FR 50784). 

Column C = Expenditures Applied 

Against FY 2004 Allotment. This 

column contains the cumulative 

expenditures applied against the FY 

2004 allotments, as reported and 

certified by all States through November 

30, 2006. 

Column D = Unexpended FY 2004 

Allotments or ‘‘None’’. This column 

contains the amounts of unexpended FY 

2004 SCHIP allotments for States that 

did not fully expend the allotments 

during the 3-year period of availability 

for FY 2004 (FYs 2004 through 2006), 

and is equal to the difference between 

the amounts in Column B and Column 

C. For States that did fully expend their 

FY 2004 allotments during the 3-year 

period of availability, the entry in this 

column is ‘‘None.’’ The total of the 

entries in Column D, $146,879,932, 

represents the total amount of 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

remaining at the end of FY 2006 and 

available for redistribution in FY 2007. 

Key to Table 2—Determination of 

Amounts of Unexpended FY 2005 

Allotments Available Mid-FY2007 for 

Redistribution 

Table 2 reflects the amounts of 

unexpended FY 2005 allotments 

determined to be available as of March 

31, 2007 based on the States’ February 

2007 submissions of their FY 2007 

estimated expenditures, determined in 

accordance with the provisions of 

section 2104(h)(3) of the Act, as 

amended by the NIHRA and as 

described in this Federal Register 

notice. These amounts will be used to 

eliminate the States’ FY 2007 SCHIP 

funding shortfalls occurring in the 

period beginning April 2007 through the 

redistribution process described in this 

Federal Register notice; the amounts of 

this FY 2005 redistribution is contained 

in Table 3 along with the redistributed 

amounts of the FY 2004 allotments. 

Column/Description 

Column A = STATE. Column A 

contains the name of the State or the 

District of Columbia. 

Column B = Total Allots. Remaining 

3/31/2007. Column B contains the total 

allotments remaining available to each 

State in FY 2007 as of March 31, 2007. 

These amounts were determining by 

applying the projected expenditures for 

each State for the first two quarters of 

FY 2007 (October 1, 2006 through 

March 31, 2007) against the State’s 

available allotments in that period 

(including the State’s unexpended FY 

2005 allotments carried over from FY 

2006, unexpended FY 2006 allotments 

carried over from FY 2006, and FY 2007 

allotments). 

Column C = FY 2005 Allots. 

Remaining 3/31/2007. Column C 

contains the total FY 2005 allotments 

remaining available to each State in FY 

2007 as of March 31, 2007. These 

amounts were determining by applying 

the projected expenditures for each 

State for the first two quarters of FY 

2007 (October 1, 2006 through March 

31, 2007) against the State’s available 

allotments in that period (including the 

State’s unexpended FY 2005 allotments 

carried over from FY 2006, unexpended 

FY 2006 allotments carried over from 

FY 2006, and FY 2007 allotments). 

Column D = Total Yearly Projected FY 

2007 Expenditures. Column D contains 

the total Federal share projected SCHIP 

expenditures for FY 2007, as projected 

by the State and submitted to CMS in its 

February 2007 submission. 

Column E = 200 Percent of FY 2007 

Proj. Expends, 2 x D. Column E contains 

200 percent of the amount of the State’s 

projected Federal share SCHIP FY 2007 

expenditures contained in Column D. 

Column F = 2104(h)(3)(B) Test, Tot. 

Mid-FY07 Est. Exp., B >= E. Column F 

contains the results of the test applied 

under section 2104(h)(3)(B) of the Act. 

That test, is whether the total available 

SCHIP allotments projected to be 

available as of March 31, 2007 

(indicated in Column B) is at least equal 

to 200 percent of the State’s projected 

FY 2007 SCHIP expenditures (indicated 

in Column E). If the amounts for the 

State meet this test, the entry in Column 

E will indicate ‘‘YES’’. If the amounts 

for the State do not meet this test, the 

entry in Column E will indicate ‘‘Not 

Met’’. 

Column G = Amount Contributed to 

FY 05 Redist., Min (.5xC, $20M). For the 

States that Column F indicates the test 

is met (Column F indicates ‘‘YES’’), 

Column G contains the portion of that 

State’s FY 2005 allotment that is 

available as of March 31, 2007 which 

will be adjusted applied to the FY 2007 

SCHIP funding shortfalls. For the States 

meeting the test, the amount in Column 

G is determined as the lesser of $20 

million, or 50 percent of the amount of 

the State’s available FY 2005 allotment 

as of March 31, 2007 (indicated in 

Column C). 

Key to Table 3—Amounts of 

Unexpended FY 2004 and FY 2005 

Allotments Redistributed in FY 2007 

Table 3 contains the redistributed 

amounts of unexpended FY 2004 

allotments and FY 2005 allotments for 

addressing States’ funding shortfalls in 

FY 2007, determined in accordance 

with section 2104(h) of the Act, as 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
29510 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 

amended by NIHRA. These amounts 

were determined using States’ SCHIP 

expenditure projections for FY 2007 as 

provided by the States in their February 

2007 CMS–37 and CMS–21B quarterly 

submissions. 

Column/Description 

Column A = STATE. Column A 

contains the name of the State or the 

District of Columbia. 

Column B = FY 2007 Tot. Avail. 

Allots NOT Including Redist. Amounts. 

Column B contains the total allotments 

available to each State in FY 2007, not 

including any potential unexpended 

fiscal year allotments a State may 

receive in FY 2007 as a redistribution 

such as the FY 2004 or FY 2005 

redistributed allotments. Specifically, 

this amount includes, if any, the sum of 

the amounts of each State’s: 

Unexpended FY 2005 allotments carried 

over from FY 2006, unexpended FY 

2006 allotments carried over from FY 

2006, and FY 2007 allotments. 

Column C = FY 2007 Projected Fed. 

Share Expenditures. Column C contains 

the Federal share amount of each State’s 

projected FY 2007 SCHIP expenditures, 

as contained in the February 2007 

States’ quarterly budget submissions of 

the CMS–37 and CMS–21B. These 

amounts reflect the availability of a 

Federal matching rate for the State’s 

expenditures equal to the full SCHIP 

enhanced FMAP rate for all individuals. 

Column D = FY 2007 Projected 

Shortfall. Col C—B. Column D contains 

the amount, if any, of the State’s 

shortfall for the entire FY 2007, 

calculated as the amount in Column C 

minus the amount in Column B. If the 

amount in Column B is greater than or 

equal to the amount in Column C, there 

would be no shortfall in FY 2007 and 

the entry in Column D is ‘‘No SF’’. 

Columns E Through L, General. 

Columns E through L contain the 

amounts of the unexpended FY 2004 

and FY 2005 allotments redistributed 

for States with projected shortfalls in FY 

2007, and in particular, with projected 

shortfalls for the indicated months of 

January through May 2007, determined 

in accordance with the methodology for 

such redistributions described in this 

Federal Register. Redistributed 

allotment amounts in these columns 

reflect the amounts of the estimated 

shortfalls; specifically, these amounts 

were determined based on the number 

of projected shortfall days in the 

indicated month funded at the 

‘‘adjusted per diem’’ expenditure 

amount (reflecting that non-pregnant 

adults may only be funded from the 

redistributed FY 2004 or FY 2005 

allotments at the regular FMAP rate), 

and proportionally prorated, if 

appropriate. For States not projected to 

have shortfalls in FY 2007, the entry in 

these columns is ‘‘na’’. For States that 

are projected to have a shortfall in FY 

2007 which occurs after May 2007, the 

entry in this column is also $0 since the 

FY 2004 and FY 2005 redistribution 

amounts are exhausted by May 2007. 

For States projected to have funding 

shortfalls through May 2007, but are not 

projected to experience a shortfall in the 

particular month, the entry in these 

columns would also be $0. 

Column E = FY 04 SF Redist. For JAN. 

2007. Column E contains the amount of 

the unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

redistributed to address estimated 

SCHIP funding shortfalls for the State 

for January 2007. 

Column F = FY 04 SF Redist. For FEB. 

2007. Column F contains the amount of 

the unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

redistributed to address estimated 

SCHIP funding shortfalls for the State 

for February 2007. 

Column G = FY 04 SF Redist. For 

Mar. 2007. Column G contains the 

amount of the unexpended FY 2004 

allotments redistributed to address 

estimated SCHIP funding shortfalls for 

the State for March 2007. 

Column H = FY 04 SF Redist. For 

Apr. 2007. Column H contains the 

amount of the unexpended FY 2004 

allotments redistributed to address 

estimated SCHIP funding shortfalls for 

the State for April 2007. 

Column I = Total FY 2004 Redist. 

E+F+G+H. Column I contains the total 

unexpended FY 2004 allotments 

redistributed to each State for January, 

February, March, and April 2007, 

respectively, calculated as the sum of 

the amounts in Column E, F, G, and H. 

With respect to States for which there is 

no redistribution of FY 2004 allotments 

for these months, the entry in Column 

I is $0. 

Column J = FY 05 SF Redist. For Apr. 

2007. Column J contains the amount of 

the estimated FY 2005 allotments 

available as of March 31, 2007 and 

redistributed to address estimated 

SCHIP funding shortfalls for the State 

for April 2007. 

Column K = FY 05 SF Redist. For May 

2007. Column K contains the amount of 

the estimated FY 2005 allotments 

available as of March 31, 2007 and 

redistributed to address estimated 

SCHIP funding shortfalls for the State 

for May 2007. 

Column L = Total FY 2005 Redist. J 

+ K. Column L contains the total 

estimated FY 2005 allotments available 

as of March 31, 2007 and redistributed 

to each State for April and May 2007, 

respectively, calculated as the sum of 

the amounts in Column J and K. With 

respect to States for which there is no 

redistribution of FY 2005 allotments for 

these months, the entry in Column L is 

$0. 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29511 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICESEN29MY07.005</GPH>
29512 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICESEN29MY07.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29513 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C 

III. Regulatory Impact Statement 

We have examined the impact of this 

rule as required by Executive Order 

12866 (September 1993, Regulatory 

Planning and Review), the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19, 

1980 Pub. L. 96–354), section 1102(b) of 

the Social Security Act, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) and Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12866 directs 

agencies to assess all costs and benefits 

of available regulatory alternatives and, 

if regulation is necessary, to select 

regulatory approaches that maximize 

net benefits (including potential 

economic, environmental, public health 

and safety effects, distributive impacts, 

and equity). A regulatory impact 

analysis (RIA) must be prepared for 

major rules with economically 

significant effects ($100 million or more 

in any one year). We have determined 

that with respect to the FY 2004 and FY 

2005 redistribution amounts, totaling 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICESEN29MY07.007</GPH>
29514 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 

about $146.9 million and $137.8 

million, respectively, this notice is 

economically significant. However, 

because this notice only announces the 

redistribution of funds based on the 

formulae specified in statute and does 

not put forward any administrative 

policies, we have not performed an 

analysis beyond that which is presented 

in section II. (H) above. The 50 States 

and the District of Columbia’s FY 2004 

SCHIP allotments (totaling 

$3,142,125,000) and FY 2005 allotments 

(totaling $4,039,875,000), were 

originally published in a notice in the 

Federal Register (68 FR 50784 and 69 

FR 52700, respectively) and allotted to 

States in FY 2004 and FY 2005, 

respectively. This notice does not revise 

the amounts of the FY 2004 and FY 

2005 allotments originally made 

available to the States, but rather, sets 

forth the procedure for redistributing 

the amounts of those FY 2004 and FY 

2005 allotments which were 

unexpended at the end of FY 2004 (the 

end of the 3-year period of availability 

referenced in section 2104(e) of the Act) 

or available mid FY 2007 (under the 

provision of section 2104(h) of the Act), 

and announces the amounts of the FY 

2004 and FY 2005 allotments to be 

redistributed to the redistribution 

States, the methodology for determining 

the amounts of the FY 2005 allotments 

to be redistributed in FY 2007 and 

announces these amounts determined in 

accordance with this methodology, and 

indicates the availability of these 

redistributed allotment amounts to the 

end of 2007, in accordance with SCHIP 

statute, as amended by the NIHRA. 

Because State participation in the 

SCHIP program is voluntary, any 

payments and expenditures States make 

or incur on behalf of the program that 

are not reimbursed by the Federal 

Government are made voluntarily. 

The RFA requires agencies to analyze 

options for regulatory relief of small 

businesses. For purposes of the RFA, 

small entities include small businesses, 

nonprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. Most 

hospitals and most other providers and 

suppliers are small entities, either by 

nonprofit status or by having revenues 

of $6 million to $29 million in any 1 

year. Individuals and States are not 

included in the definition of a small 

entity. We are not preparing an analysis 

for the RFA because we have 

determined that this notice will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act 

requires us to prepare a regulatory 

impact analysis if a rule may have a 

significant impact on the operations of 

a substantial number of small rural 

hospitals. This analysis must conform to 

the provisions of section 604 of the 

RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of 

the Act, we define a small rural hospital 

as a hospital that is located outside of 

a Core-Based Statistical Area and has 

fewer than 100 beds. We are not 

preparing an analysis for section 1102(b) 

of the Act because we have determined 

that this notice will not have a 

significant impact on the operations of 

a substantial number of small rural 

hospitals. 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also 

requires that agencies assess anticipated 

costs and benefits before issuing any 

rule whose mandates require spending 

in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995 

dollars, updated annually for inflation. 

That threshold level is currently 

approximately $120 million. This notice 

will not create an unfunded mandate on 

States, tribal, or local governments. 

Therefore, we are not required to 

perform an assessment of the costs and 

benefits of this notice. 

Executive Order 13132 establishes 

certain requirements that an agency 

must meet when it publishes a proposed 

rule (and subsequent final rule) that 

imposes substantial direct requirement 

costs on State and local governments, 

preempts State law, or otherwise has 

Federalism implications. We have 

reviewed this notice and have 

determined that it does not significantly 

affect States’ rights, roles, and 

responsibilities. 

Low-income children will benefit 

from payments under this program 

through increased opportunities for 

health insurance coverage. We believe 

this notice will have an overall positive 

impact by informing States, the District 

of Columbia, and Commonwealths and 

Territories of the extent to which they 

are permitted to expend funds under 

their child health plans using the FY 

2004 or FY 2005 allotment’s 

redistribution amounts. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Executive Order 12866, this notice was 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

IV. Waiver of Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and Delay in Effective Date 

We ordinarily publish a proposed 

notice in the Federal Register to provide 

a period of public comment before the 

provisions of a notice, such as this, are 

effective in accordance with section 

553(b) of the Administrative Procedure 

Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). We also 

ordinarily provide a 30-day delay in the 

effective date of the provisions of a 

notice in accordance with section 553(d) 

of the APA (5 U.S.C 553(d)). However, 

we can waive both the notice of 

proposed rulemaking and the 30-day 

delay in effective date if the Secretary 

finds, for good cause, that it is 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest, and incorporates 

a statement of the finding and the 

reasons in the notice. 

We find there is good cause to waive 

notice of proposed rulemaking and the 

delay in the effective date of this 

issuance of the FY 2004 redistributed 

allotments and the methodology for 

determining the FY 2005 redistributed 

allotment amounts to eliminate the FY 

2007 funding shortfalls in SCHIP 

because a comment period and delay in 

effective date are unnecessary because: 

(1) States were already given informal 

notice of proposed amounts; and (2) 

redistribution was carried out in 

accordance with a statutory formula that 

permitted limited discretion. 

We determined the amounts of the FY 

2004 redistributed allotments and the 

amounts of the FY 2005 redistributed 

allotments to eliminate the FY 2007 

SCHIP funding shortfall as 

expeditiously as possible in order to 

make them available to the States as 

soon as possible. To that end, all States 

had until November 30, 2006 to submit 

their required fourth quarter FY 2006 

expenditure reports. In determining 

both the FY 2004 redistributed amounts 

and the FY 2005 redistributed amounts 

we used State FY 2007 projected 

expenditures as contained in the most 

recent (February 2007) States’ quarterly 

budget report submissions. The 

redistributed FY 2004 and FY 2005 

allotments make available Federal funds 

to the recipient redistribution States, 

which is especially important for those 

redistribution States that may need 

these funds. 

Furthermore, under section 2104(h)(6) 

of the Act, the FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistributed allotments to eliminate the 

FY 2007 shortfalls in SCHIP funding, 

are only available through September 

30, 2007. We believe it is important that 

we issue these redistributed allotments 

and additional allotments as soon as 

possible. Delay in States receiving those 

funds could result in disruption of 

program operations. Therefore, in the 

interest of ensuring that the FY 2004 

and FY 2005 redistributed allotments to 

eliminate the FY 2007 shortfall in 

SCHIP funding are made available 

without delay to those States that need 

these funds, we are waiving notice of 

proposed rulemaking and the 30-day 

delay in effective date, and are 

publishing this issuance of the Federal 

Register as a notice. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 29, 2007 / Notices 29515 

In accordance with the provisions of 

this notice, we have determined the 

amounts of the FY 2004 and FY 2005 

redistributed allotment funds to 

eliminate the FY 2007 shortfalls in 

SCHIP funding available to shortfall 

States effective immediately upon 

publication of this notice. These FY 

2004 and FY 2005 redistributed 

allotment funds are subject to final 

adjustment based on comments received 

in response to this notice. 

Authority: (Section 1102 of the Social 

Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302) (Catalog of 

Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 

93.767, State Children’s Health Insurance 

Program)) 

Dated: February 16, 2007. 

Leslie V. Norwalk, 

Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare 

& Medicaid Services. 

Dated: February 26, 2007. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 07–2607 Filed 5–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

Proposed Information Collection 

Activity; Comment Request 

Proposed Projects: 

Title: Title V Section 510 Abstinence 

Education Grant Program-Annual 

Program Application and Annual 

Performance Progress Report. 

OMB No.: 0970–0271 (formerly 0915–

0291 when in HRSA). 

Description: The Title V Section 510 

Abstinence Education Grant Program 

(Section 510 program) is a formula block 

grant program, authorized through June 

30, 2007, by the Tax Relief and Health 

Care Act of 2006. 

The Section 510 Annual Program 

Application requires basic application 

information that will be used by the 

Administration for Children and 

Families (ACF) to establish applicant 

eligibility, determine each applicant’s 

compliance with Federal law, review 

and evaluate each applicant’s proposed 

plans, and to develop any conditions to 

be placed on grant awards. Projects 

must meet the legislative priorities as 

described in Section 510 of Title V of 

the Social Security Act. 

The Section 510 Annual Performance 

Progress Report includes four forms 

through which grantees report basic 

performance information, which is used 

by ACF to determine each grantee’s 

compliance with Federal law and to 

review and evaluate each applicant’s 

progress toward achieving its goals. 

Basic performance information includes 

the unduplicated count of clients 

served, hours of service received by 

clients, program completion data, and 

communities served. 

Respondents: The 50 States, the 

District of Columbia, and the following 

8 Territories: American Samoa, Guam, 

Republic of the Marshall Islands, 

Federated States of Micronesia, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands, Republic of Palau, 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands. 

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Instrument Number of respondents 

Number of responses per 

respondent 

Average burden hours per 

response 

Total burden 

hours 

Annual Program Application ............................................................................ 59 1 40 2,360 

Annual Performance Progress Report ............................................................. 59 1 130 7,670 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 10,030. 

In compliance with the requirements 

of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Administration for Children and 

Families is soliciting public comment 

on the specific aspects of the 

information collection described above. 

Copies of the proposed collection of 

information can be obtained and 

comments may be forwarded by writing 

to the Administration for Children and 

Families, Office of Administration, 

Office of Information Services, 370 

L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, 

DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance 

Officer. E-mail address: 

infocolleciotn@acf.hhs.gov. All requests 

should be identified by the title of the 

information collection. 

The Department specifically requests 

comments on: (a) Whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Consideration will be given to 

comments and suggestions submitted 

within 60 days of this publication. 

Dated: May 20, 2007. 

Robert Sargis, 

Reports Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 07–2628 Filed 5–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4184–01–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. 2006N–0420] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Orphan Drugs 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is announcing 

that a proposed collection of 

information has been submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and clearance under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Fax written comments on the 

collection of information by June 28, 

2007. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on 

the information collection are received, 

OMB recommends that written 

comments be faxed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES