Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 56 / Friday, March 23, 2007 / Notices 13737 

comments submitted in support of the 

conclusions drawn in the EA and seven 

comments opposed to the conclusions 

drawn in the EA. APHIS’ responses to 

these comments can be found in an 

attachment to the finding of no 

significant impact (FONSI). 

Determination 

Based on APHIS’ analysis of field, 

greenhouse, and laboratory data 

submitted by Syngenta, references 

provided in the petition, other relevant 

information described in the EA, and 

comments provided by the public, 

APHIS has determined that MIR604 will 

not pose a plant pest risk for the 

following reasons: (1) Gene 

introgression from MIR604 corn into 

wild relatives in the United States and 

its territories is extremely unlikely and 

is not likely to increase the weediness 

potential of any resulting progeny nor 

adversely affect genetic diversity of 

related plants any more than would 

introgression from traditional corn 

hybrids; (2) it exhibits no characteristics 

that would cause it to be weedier than 

the non-genetically engineered parent 

corn line or other cultivated corn; (3) it 

does not pose a risk to non-target 

organisms, including beneficial 

organisms and threatened or endangered 

species, because the insecticidal activity 

of the mCry3A protein is limited to 

target pest species, namely corn 

rootworm; (4) it does not pose a threat 

to biodiversity as it does not exhibit 

traits that increase its weediness and its 

unconfined cultivation should not lead 

to increased weediness of other 

cultivated corn, it exhibits no changes 

in disease susceptibility, and it is 

unlikely to harm non-target organisms 

common to the agricultural ecosystem 

or threatened or endangered species 

recognized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; (5) compared to current corn 

pest and weed management practices, 

cultivation of MIR604 corn should not 

impact standard agricultural practices in 

corn cultivation and controlling 

volunteer corn, including those for 

organic farmers; and (6) disease 

susceptibility and compositional 

profiles of MIR604 corn are similar to 

those of its parent variety and other corn 

cultivars grown in the United States, 

therefore no direct or indirect plant pest 

effects on raw or processed plant 

commodities are expected. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To provide the public with 

documentation of APHIS’ review and 

analysis of any potential environmental 

impacts associated with the 

determination of nonregulated status for 

MIR604, an EA was prepared. The EA 

was prepared in accordance with (1) 

The National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the 

Council on Environmental Quality for 

implementing the procedural provisions 

of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3) 

USDA regulations implementing NEPA 

(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA 

Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 

372). Based on that EA, APHIS has 

reached a FONSI with regard to the 

determination that Syngenta corn line 

MIR604 and lines developed from it are 

no longer regulated articles under its 

regulations in 7 CFR part 340. Copies of 

the EA and FONSI are available as 

indicated in the ADDRESSES and FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT sections 

of this notice. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–

7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 

371.3. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of 

March 2007. 

W. Ron DeHaven, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–5345 Filed 3–22–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Food and Nutrition Service 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Food Stamp 

Program Regulations, Part 275—

Quality Control 

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, this notice 

invites the general public and other 

public agencies to comment on the 

proposed information collection for 

Food Stamp Program Regulations, Part 

275—Quality Control. Specifically, this 

is the burden associated with the 

collection of information for the 

sampling plan, the arbitration process, 

and the good cause process. This 

proposed collection is a revision of a 

collection currently approved under 

OMB No. 0584–0303. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before May 22, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Comments are invited 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, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Send comments and requests for 

copies of this information collection to: 

Daniel Wilusz, Chief, Quality Control 

Branch, Program Accountability 

Division, Food and Nutrition Service, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 

Park Center Drive, Room 822, 

Alexandria, VA 22302. You may FAX 

comments on this notice to (703) 305–

0928. You may also download an 

electronic version of this notice at 

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/rules/ 

Regulations/default.htm and comment 

via e-mail at 

Daniel.Wilusz@fns.usda.gov. 

All responses to this notice will be 

included in the request for OMB 

approval. 

All comments will also become a 

matter of public record. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

should be directed to Daniel Wilusz at 

(703) 305–2460. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Food Stamp Program 

Regulations, Part 275—Quality Control. 

OMB Number: 0584–0303. 

Expiration Date: August 31, 2007. 

Type of Request: Revision of a 

currently approved collection of 

information. 

Abstract: There are three components 

of the Quality Control (QC) system that 

are covered in this proposed 

information collection. They are: (1) The 

sampling plan; (2) the arbitration 

process; and (3) the good cause process. 

Each State is required to develop a 

sampling plan that demonstrates the 

integrity of its case selection 

procedures. The QC system is designed 

to measure each State agency’s payment 

error rate based on a statistically valid 

sample of food stamp cases. A State 

agency’s payment error rate represents 

the proportion of cases that were 

reported through a QC review as being 

ineligible, overissued and underissued 

food stamp benefits. 

The QC system contains procedures 

for resolving differences in review 

findings between State agencies and 

FNS. This is referred to as the 

arbitration process. The QC system also 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
13738 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 56 / Friday, March 23, 2007 / Notices 

contains procedures that provide relief 

for State agencies from all or a part of 

a QC liability when a State agency can 

demonstrate that a part or all of an 

excessive error rate was due to an 

unusual event that had an 

uncontrollable impact on the State 

agency’s payment error rate. This is 

referred to as the good cause process. 

The approved burden for the QC 

system includes the burden for the QC 

sampling plan, the arbitration process, 

and the good cause process. The annual 

reporting burden associated with the QC 

sampling plan remains at 265 hours. We 

estimate the annual reporting burdens 

associated with arbitration and good 

cause processes to total 350 hours and 

160 hours respectively. The decrease in 

the proposed burden from the currently 

approved 1643 to 350 hours for the 

arbitration process is due to a redetermination in the number of State 

agencies estimated to respond from 53 

to 14 and to the estimated number of 

responses per State agency from 3.1 to 

2.5. These decreases are a result of State 

agencies more frequently agreeing with 

FNS’ findings. The proposed annual 

reporting burden for the good cause 

process is unchanged from the currently 

approved burden of 160 hours. 

The proposed annual recordkeeping 

burden associated with the QC sampling 

plan is 1.25 hours per year. The 

proposed annual recordkeeping burdens 

associated with arbitration and good 

cause processes are estimated to total 

.83 and .0236 hours respectively. The 

recordkeeping burden for the arbitration 

process decreased from 3.89 hours to .83 

hours due to a re-determination in the 

estimated number of affected State 

agencies from 53 to 14 and the 

estimated number of responses per State 

decreased from 3.1 to 2.5. The 

recordkeeping burden for the good 

cause process decreased from 1.25 to 

.0236 hours due to a re-determination in 

the estimated number of affected State 

agencies from 53 to 1 per year. The total 

annual burden for the QC system, as 

proposed by this notice, decreased from 

2074 to 777 hours. 

Quality Control System Reporting 

Burden Associated With the Sampling 

Plan, Arbitration, and Good Cause 

1. Sampling Plan 

Affected Public: State agencies. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

53. 

Estimated Number of Responses Per 

Respondent: 1. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 5 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 265. 

2. Arbitration Process 

Affected Public: State agencies. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

14. 

Estimated Number of Responses Per 

Respondent: 2.5. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 10 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 350. 

3. Good Cause Process 

Affected Public: State agencies. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1. 

Estimated Number of Responses: 1. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 160 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 160. 

Quality Control System Recordkeeping 

Burden Associated With the Sampling 

Plan, Arbitration, and Good Cause 

1. Sampling Plan 

Estimated Number of Recordkeepers: 

53. 

Estimated Number of Records Per 

Respondent: 1. 

Estimated Staff Hours Per 

Recordkeeping: .0236. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 1.25. 

2. Arbitration Process 

Estimated Number of Recordkeepers: 

14. 

Estimated Number of Records Per 

Respondent: 2.5 

Estimated Staff Hours Per 

Recordkeeping: .0236 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: .83 

3. Good Cause Process 

Estimated Number of Recordkeepers: 

1. 

Estimated Number of Records: 1. 

Estimated Staff Hours Per 

Recordkeeping: .0236. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: .0236. 

The Combined Quality Control 

System Burden (includes the burdens 

associated with the Sampling Plan, 

Arbitration and Good Cause): 777 hours. 

Dated: March 16, 2007. 

George A. Braley, 

Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–5333 Filed 3–22–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Foreign Agricultural Service 

WTO Agricultural Safeguard Trigger 

Levels 

AGENCY: Foreign Agricultural Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of product coverage and 

trigger levels for safeguard measures 

provides for in the World Trade 

Organization (WTO) Agreement on 

Agriculture. 

SUMMARY: This notice lists the updated 

quantity trigger levels for products, 

which may be subject to additional 

import duties under the safeguard 

provisions of the WTO Agreement on 

Agriculture. This notice also includes 

the relevant period applicable for the 

trigger levels on each of the listed 

products. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lana Bennett, Import and Trade Support 

Programs Division, Foreign Agricultural 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Stop 1047, 1400 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20250–1047, 

telephone at (202) 720–0638, or e-mail 

itspd@fas.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Article 5 

of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture 

provides that additional import duties 

may be imposed on imports of products 

subject to tariffication as a result of the 

Uruguay Round if certain conditions are 

met. The agreement permits additional 

duties to be charged if the price of an 

individual shipment of imported 

products falls below the average price 

for similar goods imported during the 

years 1986–88 by a specified percentage. 

It also permits additional duties to be 

imposed if the volume of imports of an 

article exceeds the average of the most 

recent 3 years for which data are 

available by 5, 10, or 25 percent, 

depending on the article. These 

additional duties may not be imposed 

on quantities for which minimum or 

current access commitments were made 

during the Uruguay Round negotiations, 

and only one type of safeguard, price or 

quantity, may be applied at any given 

time to an article. Section 405 of the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act 

requires that the President cause to be 

published in the Federal Register 

information regarding the price and 

quantity safeguards, including the 

quantity trigger levels, which must be 

updated annually based upon import 

levels during the most recent 3 years. 

The President delegated this duty to the 

Secretary of Agriculture in Presidential 

Proclamation No. 6763, dated December 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES