48868 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 1997 / Notices

government?’’ and ‘‘What is the Role of the

Federal Agencies?’’

Benefits to Non-Designated Rivers

Respondents were curious about what

benefits will go to non-designated rivers. The

initiative provides benefits to all people

working to revitalize their rivers. See

additional discussion under ‘‘Benefits to

Applicants Who Submit Complete

Nomination Packets’’ and ‘‘Improved

Services Available to All Communities.’’

Role of the River Navigator

Some respondents stated that the River

Navigator would be of great help to the

community; others focused on the possibility

that this individual would hold too much

power, would add a layer of bureaucracy,

and/or would not represent the community’s

wishes. These issues have been clarified in

this Federal Register notice. The River

Navigator will not be given any new

authority over local zoning or local land use

decisions. When American Heritage Rivers

are selected, members of the relevant

communities will have the opportunity to

help shape the specific duties of their River

Navigator and have a role in choosing one

Navigator from several candidates. Although

the Administration believes that River

Navigators will be extremely helpful, no

community will be required to accept a River

Navigator. See additional discussion under

‘‘Benefits of Designation,’’ subsection ‘‘River

Navigator.’’

Private Property Concerns

Many wrote in with concerns about private

property rights. While existing laws and

programs will continue to apply, the

American Heritage Rivers initiative, in and of

itself, will have no effect on private property

rights. However, several new directives

concerning protection of property rights were

included in the Federal Register notice. See

additional discussion under ‘‘What is the

Role of the Federal Agencies?’’ and

‘‘Protection for Private Property and Other

Rights.’’

Nomination and Selection Process

Many respondents questioned how rivers

would be nominated. The term ‘‘river

community’’ was confusing to many people.

They sought clarification on which groups

composed a ‘‘river community’’ and the

extent of community support needed for a

nomination. Of particular concern was that a

group of people who lived outside the ‘‘river

community’’ could successfully nominate a

river without the support of the people who

relied on the river for their livelihood or

recreation.

Only those people who live or work in the

proposed area may nominate their river.

However, people representing all interests

should be involved in the process. See

discussion under ‘‘Summary of American

Heritage Rivers Initiative’’ and ‘‘How do

communities nominate a river and who may

apply?’’

Respondents showed considerable interest

in particular rivers being designated. As of

September 12, 1997, no nominations have

been solicited or accepted and no rivers have

been selected. Nomination packets are now

available. The nomination period will be

open from September 11 to December 10. The

President will announce the selected rivers

in early 1998. See more detailed discussion

under ‘‘How do communities nominate a

river and who may apply?’’ and ‘‘How will

rivers be selected?’’

Public Involvement in the Design of the

Initiative

Respondents sought information on when

and how the public has played a role in

designing the initiative. Extensive public

involvement has been a cornerstone of the

initiative from the beginning. See discussion

under ‘‘How the initiative was developed.’’

[FR Doc. 97–24774 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3125–01–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

[Report No. 2224]

Petitions for Reconsideration and

Clarification of Action in Rulemaking

Proceedings

September 12, 1997.

Petitions for reconsideration have

been filed in the Commission’s

rulemaking proceedings listed in this

Public Notice and published pursuant to

47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of

these documents are available for

viewing and copying in Room 239, 1919

M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., or

may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor, ITS, Inc.

(202) 857–3800. Oppositions to this

petitions must be filed October 2, 1997.

See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the

Commission’s rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)).

Replies to an opposition must be filed

within 10 days after the time for filing

oppositions has expired.

Subject: Changes to Board of Directors

of the National Exchange Carrier

Association, Inc. (CC Docket No. 97–21).

Federal-State Joint Board on Universal

Service (CC Docket No. 96–45).

Number of Petitions Filed: 5.

Subject: Federal-State Joint Board on

Universal Service (CC Docket No. 96–

45).

Number of Petitions Filed: 6.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24723 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

The companies listed in this notice

have applied to the Board for approval,

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company

Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.)

(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part

225), and all other applicable statutes

and regulations to become a bank

holding company and/or to acquire the

assets or the ownership of, control of, or

the power to vote shares of a bank or

bank holding company and all of the

banks and nonbanking companies

owned by the bank holding company,

including the companies listed below.

The applications listed below, as well

as other related filings required by the

Board, are available for immediate

inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank

indicated. The application also will be

available for inspection at the offices of

the Board of Governors. Interested

persons may express their views in

writing on the standards enumerated in

the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the

proposal also involves the acquisition of

a nonbanking company, the review also

includes whether the acquisition of the

nonbanking company complies with the

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act.

Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking

activities will be conducted throughout

the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments

regarding each of these applications

must be received at the Reserve Bank

indicated or the offices of the Board of

Governors not later than October 9,

1997.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of

Richmond (A. Linwood Gill III,

Assistant Vice President) 701 East Byrd

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528:

1. One Valley Bancorp, Inc.,

Charleston, West Virginia; to acquire

100 percent of the voting shares of One

Valley Bank-Central Virginia, N.A.,

Lynchburg, Virginia. The proposed

successor by charter conversion to One

Valley Bank-Central Virginia,

Lynchburg, Virginia, a subsidiary of One

Valley Bancorp, Inc.

B. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

(Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411

Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63102-

2034:

1. First United Bancshares, Inc., El

Dorado, Arkansas; to acquire 100

percent of the voting shares of City Bank

& Trust of Shreveport, Shreveport,

Louisiana.

C. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas

City (D. Michael Manies, Assistant Vice

President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas

City, Missouri 64198-0001:

1. FirstBank Holding Company of

Colorado, ESOP, Lakewood, Colorado;

to acquire an additional .86 percent for

a total of 26.36 percent, of the voting

shares of FirstBank Holding Company of

Colorado, Lakewood, Colorado, and

thereby indirectly acquire FirstBank of
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 1997 / Notices 48869

Arvada, N.A., Arvada, Colorado;

FirstBank of Aurora, N.A., Aurora,

Colorado; FirstBank of Avon, Avon,

Colorado; FirstBank of Boulder, N.A.,

Boulder, Colorado; FirstBank of

Breckenridge, N.A., Breckenridge,

Colorado; FirstBank of Douglas County,

N.A., Castle Rock, Colorado; FirstBank

of Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs,

Colorado; FirstBank of Cherry Creek,

N.A., Denver, Colorado; FirstBank of

Denver, N.A., Denver, Colorado;

FirstBank of Longmont, Longmont,

Colorado; FirstBank of Northern

Colorado, Fort Collins, Colorado;

FirstBank of Greeley, Greeley, Colorado;

FirstBank of Tech Center, N.A.,

Englewood, Colorado; FirstBank of

Colorado, N.A., Lakewood, Colorado;

FirstBank of South Jeffco, Littleton,

Colorado; FirstBank of Lakewood,

N.A.,Lakewood, Colorado; FirstBank of

Littleton, N.A., Littleton, Colorado;

FirstBank of Arapahoe County, N.A.,

Littleton, Colorado; FirstBank of

Silverthorne, N.A., Silverthorne,

Colorado; FirstBank of Vail, Vail,

Colorado; FirstBank North, N.A.,

Westminster, Colorado; FirstBank of

Wheat Ridge, N.A., Wheat Ridge,

Colorado; FirstBank of Evergreen,

Evergreen, Colorado; and FirstBank,

N.A., Palm Desert, California.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, September 12, 1997.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–24701 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Agency for Health Care Policy and

Research

Contract Review Meeting

In accordance with section 10(a) of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5

U.S.C. Appendix 2), the Agency for

Health Care Policy and Research

(AHCPR) announces the following

technical review committee to meet

during the month of September 1997:

Name: Technical Review Committee for

the AHCPR User Liaison Program Mail Key

Support Services Contract.

Date and Time: September 24, 1997, 10

a.m.—3 p.m.

Place: Agency for Health Care Policy and

Research Willco Building, 3rd Floor

Conference Room 6000 Executive Boulevard

Rockville, MD 20852.

This meeting will be closed to the public.

Purpose: The Technical Review

Committee’s charge is to provide, on behalf

of the AHCPR Contracts Review Committee,

recommendations to the Administrator,

AHCPR, regarding the technical merit of

contract proposals submitted in response to

a specific Request for Proposals regarding the

User Liaison Program (ULP) Mail Key

Support Services contract.

The purpose of this contract is to provide

for the timely merging and mailing of letters

of invitation to User Liaison Program (ULP)

workshops through use of a ULP developed,

automated data base. The contractor will use

and maintain a data base of State legislators,

Governors and their staff, Federal and State

executive branch, and local health officials,

as well as selected public and private users

of health services research including—health

care consumers, purchasers, plans,

practitioners, and policymakers. The

contractor will perform mail merges for all

letters of invitation and mail such invitations

numbering between 3500 and 6000 as bulk

mailings. Using the data in the database, the

contractor will generate an annual User

Liaison Program Directory. These services are

required to ensure the timely dissemination

of AHCPR research findings and related

publications to the research community and

general public.

Agenda: The Committee meeting will be

devoted entirely to the technical review and

evaluation of contract proposals submitted in

response to the above referenced Request for

Proposals. The Administrator, AHCPR, has

made a formal determination that this

meeting will not be open to the public. This

action is necessary to protect the free and full

exchange of views in the contract evaluation

process and safeguard confidential

proprietary information, and personal

information concerning individuals

associated with the proposals that may be

revealed during the meeting. This action is

taken in accordance with section 10(d) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C.,

Appendix 2, 5 USC 522(b)(c)(6), 41 CFR 101–

6.1023 and Department procurement

regulations, 48 CFR 315.604(d).

Anyone wishing to obtain information

regarding this meeting should contact Serena

Toro, User Liaison Program, Center for

Health Information Dissemination, Agency

for Health Care Policy and Research, 2101

East Jefferson Street, Suite 401, Rockville,

Maryland 20852, 301/594–6668.

Dated: September 11, 1997.

John M. Eisenberg,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–24651 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–90–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry

Expert Workshop Regarding Medical

Monitoring in Bunker Hill, ID; Meeting

The Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry (ATSDR) announces

the following meeting.

Name: Expert Workshop Regarding

Medical Monitoring in Bunker Hill, ID.

Times and Dates: 8 a.m.–5 p.m., September

23–24, 1997.

Place: The D. Abbott Turner Center at

Emory University, 703 Clifton Road, NE,

Atlanta, GA 30329, telephone 404/712–6725.

Status: Open to the public, limited only by

the space available. The meeting room

accommodates approximately 100 people.

Purpose: ATSDR is considering the

appropriateness of medical monitoring for

populations who lived around the former

Bunker Hill lead smelting facility (the Bunker

Hill Superfund Site) in the Silver Valley area

of Idaho during a time of excess exposures

of public health significance. As Page 2 part

of this consideration process, ATSDR is

convening a series of workshops to examine

the appropriateness and feasibility of a

medical monitoring program.

The purpose of the medical monitoring

program is to provide a public health service

to communities affected by exposures to

hazardous substances. This is accomplished

by screening target populations at significant

risk of a specific health effect or outcome,

identifying individuals in need of further

diagnosis or treatment, and arranging for

appropriate referrals.

Section 104(i)(9) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation, and

Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended (42

U.S.C. 9604(i)(9)), provides for the

Administrator, ATSDR, to initiate a health

surveillance program for populations at

significantly increased risk of adverse health

effects as a result of exposure to hazardous

substances released from a facility. A

program included under health surveillance

is referred to as ‘‘medical monitoring or

screening’’ by ATSDR and is defined in the

legislation as ‘‘the periodic medical testing to

screen people at significant increased risk for

disease.’’

ATSDR has established criteria to

determine when medical monitoring is an

appropriate health activity and the

requirements for establishing a medical

monitoring program at a site. The legislation

requires that a mechanism to refer people for

treatment be included in the program. The

statute does not authorize ATSDR to provide

medical treatment; thus, medical monitoring

is performed as a community service, not a

health study.

ATSDR is convening three expert

workshops to assist in the evaluation of a

medical monitoring program at the Bunker

Hill site. If a program is deemed appropriate,

the Agency will develop a medical

monitoring plan for the target population(s).

The first workshop, was held on August 19–

20, 1997. This notice announces the second

workshop.

Matters to be Considered: The objective of

this workshop is to use all available relevant

data from ATSDR, including that produced

by the first workshop, to make individual

recommendations and answer questions

related to:

(1) The analysis of specific outcomes as

candidates for monitoring from the first

workshop, (2) further definition of the target

populations from the first workshop, (3) the

consideration of other heavy metals

exposures as moderators of lead-based

medical monitoring recommendations, and