Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Notices 24279 

effort to reduce paperwork and 

respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to 

provide the general public and federal 

agencies with an opportunity to 

comment on proposed and/or 

continuing collections of information in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 

U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program 

helps to ensure that requested data can 

be provided in the desired format, 

reporting burden (time and financial 

resources) is minimized, collection 

instruments are clearly understood, and 

the impact of collection requirement on 

respondents can be properly assessed. 

Currently, the Corporation is 

soliciting comments concerning its 

proposed renewal of its Learn and Serve 

America Program and Performance 

Measurement Reports. These reports are 

used by current grantees, subgrantees 

and sub-subgrantees to report on Learn 

and Serve-funded service-learning 

programs. Data collected through the 

reports are utilized by the Corporation 

for Congressional reporting and program 

management. Completion of the 

Program and Performance Measurement 

Reports is a requirement of the Learn 

and Serve grant provisions. 

Copies of the information collection 

requests can be obtained by contacting 

the office listed in the addresses section 

of this notice. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted to the individual and office 

listed in the ADDRESSES section by July 

2, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the title of the information 

collection activity, by any of the 

following methods: 

(1) By mail sent to: Corporation for 

National and Community Service, 

Research and Policy Development; 

Attention Kimberly Spring, Policy 

Analyst, 10th Floor; 1201 New York 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525. 

(2) By hand delivery or by courier to 

the Corporation’s mailroom at Room 

8100 at the mail address given in 

paragraph (1) above, between 9 a.m. and 

4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

(3) By fax to: (202) 606–3464, 

Attention Kimberly Spring, Policy 

Analyst. 

(4) Electronically through the 

Corporation’s e-mail address system: 

kspring@cns.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Spring, (202) 606–6629, or by 

e-mail at kspring@cns.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Corporation is particularly interested in 

comments that: 

<bullet≤ Evaluate whether the 

proposed collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the Corporation, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; 

<bullet≤ Evaluate 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; 

<bullet≤ Enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

<bullet≤ Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are expected to respond, including the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology 

(e.g., permitting electronic submissions 

of responses). 

Background 

The Learn and Serve America 

Program was established by the National 

and Community Service Act of 1990, as 

amended, (42 U.S.C. 12501, et seq.) 

(Pub. L. 103–82) to support efforts in 

schools, higher education institutions, 

and community-based organizations to 

involve young people in meaningful 

service to their communities while 

improving academic, civic, social, and 

career-related skills. The Learn and 

Serve program is administered by the 

Corporation for National and 

Community Service and is funded 

through grants to states, national 

organizations, and institutions of higher 

education, and through them to 

individual schools and school districts, 

community-based organizations, and 

colleges or universities. Approximately 

100 grantees and 2,000 subgrantees and 

sub-subgrantees receive Learn and Serve 

funds each year. 

The Learn and Serve America 

Program and Performance Measurement 

Reports provide an annual program 

reporting process for Learn and Serve: 

Collecting program characteristics, 

output measurements, and institutionallevel service-learning policies and 

practices. The system is Web-based and 

allows for the electronic submission of 

reporting information and grantee and 

public-use access of data collected 

through the system. 

Current Action 

The Corporation seeks to renew the 

current reporting instruments, which 

are designed to collect information on 

(a) the characteristics of grantee and 

subgrantee organizations; (b) the scope 

and structure of service-learning 

activities in the funded organizations; 

(c) number of participants in servicelearning and the hours of service 

provided; and (d) institutional supports 

for service-learning. The Corporation 

maintains three versions of the reporting 

instrument to correspond to the three 

major funding streams under Learn and 

Serve America: K–12 School-Based, 

Higher Education, and CommunityBased. The Corporation also seeks to 

continue using the reporting 

instruments until the renewal of the 

instruments is approved by OMB. The 

current application is due to expire on 

September 30, 2007. 

Type of Review: Renewal. 

Agency: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

Title: Learn and Serve America 

Program and Performance Measurement 

Reports. 

OMB Number: 3045–0095. 

Agency Number: None. 

Affected Public: Learn and Serve 

America Grantees and Subgrantees. 

Total Respondents: 2,100. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Average Time Per Response: 1⁄4 hour 

for grantees and one hour for 

subgrantees. 

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 2,025 

hours. 

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): 

None. 

Total Burden Cost (operating/ 

maintenance): None. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for Office of 

Management and Budget approval of the 

information collection request; they will 

also become a matter of public record. 

Dated: April 24, 2007. 

Robert Grimm, Jr., 

Director, Office of Research and Policy 

Development. 

[FR Doc. E7–8350 Filed 5–1–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6050–$$–P 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES 

SAFETY BOARD 

[Recommendation 2007–1] 

Safety-Related In Situ Nondestructive 

Assay of Radioactive Materials 

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board. 

ACTION: Notice, recommendation. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear 

Facilities Safety Board has made a 

recommendation to the Secretary of 

Energy pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2286a(a)(5) 

which addresses the measuring of 

radioactive material holdup at defense 

nuclear facilities in the Department of 

Energy complex. 

mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB

24280 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Notices 

DATES: Comments, data, views, or 

arguments concerning the 

recommendation are due on or before 

June 1, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments, data, 

views, or arguments concerning this 

recommendation to: Defense Nuclear 

Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana 

Avenue., NW, Suite 700, Washington, 

DC 20004–2001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Grosner or Andrew L. Thibadeau 

at the address above or telephone (202) 

694–7000. 

Dated: April 27, 2006. 

A.J. Eggenberger, 

Chairman. 

Recommendation 2007–1 to the Secretary of 

Energy 

Safety-Related In Situ Nondestructive Assay 

of Radioactive Materials 

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2286(a)(5); Atomic 

Energy Act of 1954, As Amended 

Dated: April 25, 2007. 

Overview 

There are many situations in which the 

quantity and composition of radioactive 

material must be determined. In some 

instances, access to the material is impossible 

or undesirable, and consequently, weighing, 

laboratory analysis, and calorimetry are not 

viable options. In these cases, in situ 

nondestructive assay (NDA), based on the 

measurement of signature emissions from a 

specific isotope of interest, is used to provide 

an estimate of the type and quantity of 

radioactive material present. However, large 

uncertainties and inaccuracies have occurred 

in estimating the type and quantity of 

radioactive material using in situ NDA. These 

uncertainties and inaccuracies include 

incorrect assumptions about shielding and 

the spatial distribution of radioactive 

material, as well as poor measurement 

techniques. Measurement errors, in turn, lead 

to potential criticality accident conditions, 

unexpected radiation exposure to workers, 

and underestimation of radioactive material 

available for release in accident scenarios. 

In most nuclear safety areas, the 

Department of Energy (DOE) has captured 

required elements for robust site programs 

through its Directives system. These elements 

include requirements necessary for proper 

functioning of the program, training and 

qualification standards for personnel, 

assessment criteria to ensure proper 

implementation of requirements, and 

feedback mechanisms for lessons learned and 

continuous improvement. However, DOE has 

not established programmatic requirements 

for NDA, even though this method is heavily 

relied upon for nuclear safety throughout the 

complex and is key to many DOE activities. 

The capability to perform accurate 

measurements and use the results to 

determine compliance with nuclear safety 

limits is absolutely essential. 

Research and development efforts for NDA 

have historically focused on the areas of 

material control and accountability and 

nuclear material safeguards; advances in 

these areas have peripherally benefitted in 

situ NDA measurement capabilities. Current 

research and development efforts appear to 

hold little promise for addressing needed 

improvements for in situ NDA measurement. 

For example, development of 

instrumentation and measurement 

techniques is needed to reduce overall 

measurement uncertainties. 

Examples 

Three notable instances of recent errors 

associated with in situ NDA measurement of 

radioactive material holdup are discussed 

below. These errors resulted from the use of 

inaccurate correction factors regarding 

material geometry assumptions or failure to 

perform measurements at locations where the 

material was accumulating. In each of these 

cases, the amount of radioactive material was 

initially underestimated, resulting in a 

smaller-than-expected safety margin and 

violations of criticality safety limits. 

Material holdup in 6-inch diameter vacuum 

system pipe at the Hanford Site’s 

Plutonium Finishing Plant was assumed to 

be in the form of a 0.25 inch layer at the 

bottom of the pipe. Using a correction 

factor for this geometry, the initial estimate 

of material was about 1 kg. When workers 

then proceeded to remove the piping, it 

was found to be filled with a solid plug of 

material, and the actual amount of material 

present was nearly twice as high as the 

initial estimate. 

Measurement of an exhaust filter at the Y– 

12 National Security Complex assumed 

that fissionable material was loaded only 

on the face of the filter. An estimate of a 

few hundred grams of material was 

obtained using correction factors for this 

geometry. Subsequent investigation 

showed that material was loaded 

throughout the filter, and not just on the 

face. The actual amount of fissionable 

material present was several times the 

initial estimate. 

A second exhaust filter at the Y–12 National 

Security Complex was measured 

periodically using NDA, but the 

measurement point was not where the 

fissionable material was accumulating. 

Once this error was discovered, follow-up 

measurements showed significant material 

accumulation. 

In each of these instances, site-specific 

corrective actions were taken based on the 

specific problem encountered. Lessons 

learned from these events do not appear to 

have been shared within the DOE complex. 

Complex-wide corrective actions have not 

been identified to minimize the occurrence of 

similar events at other sites. The Board is 

concerned that undiscovered problems 

currently exist at other facilities within the 

DOE complex. It is incumbent upon DOE and 

its contractors to review current in situ NDA 

measurements to determine whether the 

assumptions used to derive results are 

sufficiently conservative to ensure 

compliance with nuclear safety limits. 

Issues 

Three main issues dominate the current 

technical and regulatory landscape regarding 

in situ NDA measurements: (1) Lack of 

standardized requirements for performing 

measurements, (2) lack of design 

requirements for new facilities that would 

facilitate accurate holdup measurement, and 

(3) lack of research and development 

activities for new instrumentation and/or 

measurement techniques. Each of these 

issues is discussed below. 

Lack of Standardization—DOE has not 

established requirements or guidance for 

performing in situ measurements in its 

Directives system. While the Board 

recognizes that measurement techniques can 

be highly location specific, a requirement to 

follow methods outlined in national 

consensus standards when performing in situ 

NDA measurements would reduce the errors 

and uncertainty of results. Commercial 

guidance for NDA is available in a series of 

standards published by the American Society 

for Testing and Materials (ASTM). This series 

addresses good practices for performing NDA 

measurements, methods for performing 

specific types of NDA measurements (for 

example, ASTM C–1133–03, NDA of LowDensity Scrap and Waste by Segmented 

Passive Gamma Ray Scanning), and training 

and qualification of NDA personnel. While 

this guidance has been used informally at 

some sites, DOE has not required its use for 

NDA measurements. 

Lack of Design Requirements for New 

Facilities—Many of the problems that require 

in situ NDA to determine radioactive material 

holdup arose because facilities were designed 

and built before the need for NDA technology 

was evident. As a result, no consistent 

attempt was made to design facility systems 

to minimize holdup or facilitate its 

measurement. This historical trend should 

not be repeated in new facilities. The 

necessity of monitoring radioactive material 

holdup must be considered in the design of 

new facilities. For example, locations for 

monitoring can be selected during the design 

phase on the basis of the most likely 

locations for holdup to occur. Calibrations 

can then be performed at these locations 

before the facility begins operations to 

provide a baseline for future NDA 

measurements. Facilities can also be 

designed to minimize holdup in areas where 

it may be of concern. 

Lack of Research and Development 

Activities—Los Alamos National Laboratory 

(LANL) conducted NDA research for more 

than 20 years. LANL developed most of the 

NDA techniques in current use, and conducts 

associated training programs. However, it is 

not clear that any significant research and 

development for in situ NDA measurements 

is currently being conducted within DOE to 

address serious concerns with material 

holdup. Research and development activities 

are focused in other areas, such as nuclear 

material safeguards and homeland security, 

but these efforts have different objectives and 

may not yield results that are beneficial for 

measurements using in situ NDA. 

Recommendation 

The Board, therefore, recommends that 

DOE: 

1. Evaluate the extent of condition 

regarding inaccurate in situ NDA programs 

mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Notices 24281 

within DOE. This effort should involve at 

least two actions: 

A. Identifying all cases within the defense 

nuclear complex in which in situ NDA 

results are used to ensure compliance with 

nuclear safety limits. 

B. Reviewing the cases identified in step 

1.A to validate that the protocols, 

methodologies, calculations, and 

assumptions used to obtain NDA results are 

sufficiently conservative. This review should 

take into consideration lessons learned from 

recent events. 

2. Establish requirements and guidance in 

a DOE directive or directives. The 

requirements and guidance should focus on 

in situ NDA programs that are used to 

demonstrate compliance with nuclear safety 

limits. Particular issues to be addressed 

should include: 

A. Training and qualification standards for 

personnel involved in performing NDA 

measurements, interpreting and reviewing 

results, and managing site programs. 

B. Application of standard protocols and 

methodologies, such as those given in the 

national consensus series issued by ASTM, 

for performing NDA measurements. 

C. Standardization of correction factors for 

common situations (geometry and selfattenuation factors) and consistent 

application of uncertainty values. 

D. Reinforcement of the use of formal 

lessons-learned mechanisms in the 

application of NDA programs so that 

information can be shared easily among 

affected DOE sites. 

E. Incorporation of features in the design 

of new facilities to minimize radioactive 

material holdup and facilitate accurate NDA 

holdup measurements. 

F. Periodic assessments of the need for new 

NDA technology and the status of ongoing 

NDA-related research and development 

programs. 

G. Periodic assessments to ensure that 

NDA programs are using the best available 

technology. 

H. Incorporation of appropriate quality 

assurance elements into in situ NDA 

measurements when used for compliance 

with nuclear safety limits as required by 10 

Code of Federal Regulations Part 830. 

A.J. Eggenberger, 

Chairman. 

[FR Doc. E7–8374 Filed 5–1–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3670–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection Requests 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed information 

collection requests. 

SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, 

Regulatory Information Management 

Services, Office of Management, invites 

comments on the proposed information 

collection requests as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: An emergency review has been 

requested in accordance with the Act 

(44 U.S.C. Chapter 3507(j)), since public 

harm is reasonably likely to result if 

normal clearance procedures are 

followed. Approval by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

been requested by December 7, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments 

regarding the emergency review should 

be addressed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention: Rachael Potter, Desk Officer, 

Department of Education, Office of 

Management and Budget; 725 17th 

Street, NW., Room 10222, New 

Executive Office Building, Washington, 

DC 20503 or faxed to (202) 395–6974. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires 

that the Director of OMB provide 

interested Federal agencies and the 

public an early opportunity to comment 

on information collection requests. The 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) may amend or waive the 

requirement for public consultation to 

the extent that public participation in 

the approval process would defeat the 

purpose of the information collection, 

violate State or Federal law, or 

substantially interfere with any agency’s 

ability to perform its statutory 

obligations. The IC Clearance Official, 

Regulatory Information Management 

Services, Office of Management, 

publishes this notice containing 

proposed information collection 

requests at the beginning of the 

Departmental review of the information 

collection. Each proposed information 

collection, grouped by office, contains 

the following: (1) Type of review 

requested, e.g., new, revision, extension, 

existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) 

Summary of the collection; (4) 

Description of the need for, and 

proposed use of, the information; (5) 

Respondents and frequency of 

collection; and (6) Reporting and/or 

Recordkeeping burden. ED invites 

public comment. The Department of 

Education is especially interested in 

public comment addressing the 

following issues: (1) Is this collection 

necessary to the proper functions of the 

Department; (2) will this information be 

processed and used in a timely manner; 

(3) is the estimate of burden accurate; 

(4) how might the Department enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (5) how 

might the Department minimize the 

burden of this collection on 

respondents, including through the use 

of information technology. 

Dated: April 26, 2007. 

Angela C. Arrington, 

IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of Management. 

Office of Postsecondary Education 

Type of Review: New. 

Title: U.S.-Russian Program: 

Improving Research and Educational 

Activities in Higher Education. 

Abstract: This is a new Special Focus 

Competition, administered by the Fund 

for the Improvement for Postsecondary 

Education (FIPSE). FIPSE’s U.S.-Russia 

Program will award grants to U.S. 

institutions participating in bilateral 

institutional cooperation to support 

innovative projects that will improve 

research and education activities in 

higher education in the U.S. and Russia. 

The rationale for the U.S.-Russia 

Program is based upon the need for 

increased interconnectedness between 

the U.S. and Russia in order to operate 

effectively in a global economy. 

Institutions will be funded by their 

respective government agencies in areas 

that advance the study of English and 

Russian and demonstrate innovative 

and/or best practices in a variety of 

academic disciplines, such as 

mathematics, science, and economics. 

Additional Information: This 

important unique program is facing a 

tight deadline in order for both nations 

to have adequate time to apply, and 

hence we are asking for this emergency 

clearance to provide possible applicants 

a decent amount of time to complete the 

necessary application. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Affected Public: Not-for-profit 

institutions. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: 

Responses: 12. 

Burden Hours: 360. 

Requests for copies of the proposed 

information collection request may be 

accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, 

by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending 

Collections’’ link and by clicking on 

link number 3323. When you access the 

information collection, click on 

‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. 

Written requests for information should 

be addressed to U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, 

DC 20202–4700. Requests may also be 

electronically mailed to the Internet 

address ICDocketMgr@.edgov or faxed to 

202–245–6623. Please specify the 

complete title of the information 

collection when making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who 

mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB