### 68262 Federal Register/Vol. 

### 63, No. 

### 237/Thursday, 

### December 

### 10, 1998/

# J,,c()

appropriate Department ofEnergy Authorization Official.

· (5) The Departmentwill develop and implement options necessary to sustain a technicallycompetent Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Group talent pool.

(6) The Department recognizes the need to pursue the safety managementenhancement sought in Recommendation 98-2 consistent with the development ofthe Pantex Integrated Safety Management System as part oftheImplementation Plan for Recommendation 95-2.

The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Military Application and Stockpile Management, Defense Programs. is the Responsible Manager for the preparation ofthe Implementation Plan. He will work withyou to develop an acceptable plan, meeting our mutual expectations. Yours sincerely. Bill Richardson. [FR Doc. 98-32902 Filed 12-9-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8450-01-P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

DOE Response to Recommendation 98-1 ofthe Defense-Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Integrated Safety Management and the Department of Energy (DOE) Facilities.

AGENCY: Department ofEnergy

ACTION: Notice

SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board published Recommendation 98-1. concerning integrated safety management and the Department ofEnergy (DOE) facilities,

on October 6, 1998 (63 FR 53646). Section 315(b) ofthe Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2286d(b) required the Department ofEnergy to transmit a response to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board by November 20. 1998. The Secretary's response follows.

DATES: Comments, data, views, or arguments concerning the Secretary's response are due on orbefore January 11. 1999.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, data. views. or arguments concerning the Secretary's response to: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue, N.W

.. Suite 700, Washington. D.C., 20004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ellen Livingston-Behan, Senior Program Advisor to the Secretary ofEnergy, Department ofEnergy, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W

.. ·Washington. D.C

.. 20585. Issued inWashington, DC on December 2, 1998.

. Theodore Wyka, DepartmentalRepresentativeto theDefense NuclearFacilities Safet}'Board. November 20, 1998. The HonorableJohn T. Conway. Chairman, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 625 Indiana Avenue, NW

.. Suite 700, · Washington. D.C. 20004

Dear Mr. Chairman: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) Recommendation 98-1, issued on September 28, 1998, recommends improvements to the Department's program for resolving the findings ofits independentinternal safety oversight organization. I agree that such improvements

### w:m enhanceour ability to
ensure safety. Thus, the Department accepts Board recommendation 98-1.

The Department ls committed to having an effective internal, independent oversight function as part ofan overall safety assurance approach that also includes line management self-assessments. The Department's policy on line environment, safety and health oversight clearly establishes our expectations that robust, rigorous and credible contractor selfassessments together with Department line management oversight provide the primary basis for ensuring safety. Concurrently, the Department's Office ofOversight is responsible for independent safety oversight. Its findings are communicated to line management through inspection reports (such as safety management evaluations), topical and issue reviews. special studies, and accident investigations. Adequate and timely resolution ofsafetyfindings is the responsibility ofline management, which has overall responsibility for performing work safely, gathering and considering safety feedback, and making necessary improvements. By acting on the Board's recommendation, we expectto further clarify these roles .and responsibilities, and promote effective communication.between line management and the independent oversight organization. Both are essential to the effective resolution ofidentified oversight findings.

The Department has completed a preliminary analysis ofthe issues raised in the Board's.recommendation, and has identified the following as the foundation and focus ofour implementation plan.

• The plan will describe a consisJent, disciplined framework for developing and implementingcorrective action plans in response to oversightfindings, tracking and reporting status ofcorrective actions, verifying the completion ofcorrective actions, and resolving differences or issues that may arise relative to corrective actions. Department directives will be revised to implementthe necessary framework.

• The role ofthe Office ofthe Secretary in resolving differences orissues that may arise in response to independent oversight findings will be clarified through enhancements to existingDepartment directives.

I have asked M's. Ellen Livingston-Behan, SeniorProgram Advisor to the Office ofthe Secretary. to serve as the responsible manager for this recommendation. As the principal point ofcontactwith the Board for this recommendation, she will work with you andyour staffto develop an acceptable implementation plan that meets our mutual expectations. Ifyou have questions, please contact her at (202) 586-9500. Yours sincerely. Bill Richardson [FR Doc. 98-32903 Filed 12-9-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 645CHl1-P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Science; Office of Science Financial Assistance Program Notice 99-04: Human Genome ProgramTechnological Advances

AGENCY: U.S. Department ofEnergy (DOE).
ACTION: Correction.

In notice document 98-31367 beginning on page 64944, in the issue of Tuesday. November 24, 1998, make the following correction:

On page 64945. in the third column, under the· heading "Program Funding", in the second line the dollar amount should read "$5.000,000''.

Issued inWashington, DC. on December 3, 1998.

. John Rodney Clark, AssociateDirectorof ScienceforResource Management. [FR Doc. 98-32901 Filed 12-9-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

RIN 1904-AA67 Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Office ofEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice ofsubmission for review by the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) andrequest for comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, the Office ofCodes and Standards (OCS) in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE) has submitted the following proposal(s) for the collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

\

# :·~l t' 

### ·Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 237/Thursday, December 10, 199.8/Notices 

### 68263

DATES: Consideration will be given to comments submitted byJanuary 11, 1999.

. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to: Office ofManagement and Budget. Attn: OMB Energy Desk Officer, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building. Washington, DC 20503. A copy ofthe comments should also be submitted to: Department ofEnergy. Attn: Bryan Berringer, Office ofCodes and Standards (EE-43), Room lJ-018/ FORS, 1000 Independence Ave., SW. Washington, DC 20585-0121.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of Energy, Office ofEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Forrestal Building, Mail Station EE-431. 1000 Independence Avenue, SW,

. Washington, DC 20585-0121. (202) 586-

. 0371. E-mail:

Bryan.Berringer@HQ.DOE.GOV; Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office ofGeneral Counsel, Forrestal Building. Mail Station GC-72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9507;

or the OMB Energy Desk Officer, Office ·ofManagement and Budget. Room 10202,NewExecutive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-3087.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Collection title: Proposed Clothes Washer Consumer Impact Analysis.

Form(s) submitted: OMB 83-:-I. OMB Number: None. Expiration date of current OMB clearance:NI A Type of request: Approval ofnew collection.

Respondents:Individuals or households.

Estimatedannualnumberof respondents: 600.

Estimated burden hoursper respondent: 2 hours.

Frequency of response: One time. Total annual reportinghours: 1,200. Estimate costburden to respondents: No monetary burden.

Collection description: OCS is collecting consumer data to determine the value consumers' place on clothes washer attributes, such as rinse and wash cycle temperature, annual electricity and water bill savings, price ofclothes washer. top or front loading, etc. Legislation requires that "the Secretary consider, among other factors, 

### * * * ifany lessening ofthe utility or performance ofthe products is likely to result from the imposition ofthe standard" (42 U.S.C. Sec. 6295(0)(2) (B) (I) (3)). OSC will analY'le the data to determine ifthe new efficiency standard negatively impacts any ofthe attributes

. highly valued by consumers._ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Copies ofthe form and supporting documents can be

· obtained from: Bryan Berringer, Office ofCodes and Standards {EE-43). Room l]-018/FORS, 1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington. DC 20585-0121.

Issued inWashington, DC. on December 7, 1998. DanW. Reicher, AssistantSecretary. EnergyEfficiencyand RenewableEnergy. [FR Doc;. 98-32864 Filed 12-9-98; 8:45 am)
BILLING CODE 6450--01-P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy Information Administration Agency Information Collection Under Review by the Office of Management and Budget

AGENCY: Energy Information Administration, Department ofEnergy.
ACTION: Submissionfor OMB review; commentrequest.

SUMMARY: The Energy Information Administration (EIA) has submitted the energy information collection(s) listed at the end ofthis notice to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review underprovisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). The listing does not include collections ofinformation contained in

new orrevised regulations which are to be submitted under section 3507(d)(l)(A) ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act. nor management and procurement assistance requirements collected by the Department ofEnergy (DOE).

Each entry contains the following iri.formation: (1) Collection number and title; (2) summary ofthe collection of information (includes sponsor (the DOE component)). current OMB document number (ifapplicable). type ofr,equest (new, revision, extension, or reinstatement); response obligation (mandatory, voluntary, or required to obtain orretain benefits); (3) a description ofthe need and proposed

use ofthe information; (4) description of the likelyrespondents; and (5) estimate oftotal annual reporting burden (average hours perresponse x proposed frequency ofresponse peryear 

### x estimated number oflikely respondents.)
DATES: Comments must be filed by January 11. 1999. Ifyou anticipate that you will be submittingcomments but find it difficult to do so within the time allowed by this notice, you should advise the OMB DOE Desk Officer listed below ofyour intention to do so as soon
as possible. The Desk Officer may be telephoned at (202) 395-3084. (Also, please notify theEIA contact listed below.)

ADDRESSES: Address comments to the Department ofEnergy Desk Officer, Office ofInformation and Regulatory Affairs, Office ofManagement and Budget, 726 Jackson Place NW, Washington, D.C. 20503. (Comments should also be addressed to the Statistics and Methods Group at the address below.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information should be directed to Herbert Miller, Statistics and Methods Group, (EI-70). Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of Energy. Washington. D.C. 20585. Mr. Miller may be telephoned at (202) 426- 1103, FAX (202) 426-1081. or e-mail at hmiller@eia.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The energy information collection submitted to OMB for review was: L EIA-846(A). (B). and (C). "Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey" (MECS).

2. Energy Information Administration; OMB No. 1905-0169; Reinstatement. with change, ofa previously approved collection for which approval has expired; Mandatory.

3. EIA-846(A). (B), and (C) will be used to collect data on energy consumption andrelated subjects for the manufacturing sector ofthe U.S. economy. In addition to being used for the National Energy Modeling System, the MECS is used to augment a data base on the manufacturing sector. Respondents are manufacturing establishments.

4. Business or other for-profit. 5. 49,447 hours (18,000 respondents x 1response peryear x 8.24 hours per response) (The 148,340 J:iour burden is being prorated over a three-year period since the survey will be conducted only

one time during this period.)

StatutoryAuthority: Section 3506(c)(2) (A) ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-13).

·Issued inWashington, D.C

.. December 4. 1998. Jay H. Casselberry, AgencyClearance Offlcer, Statisticsand Methods Group, EnergyInformation Administration. [FR Doc. 98-32905 Filed 12-9-98: 8:45 am)

BILLING CODE 6450--01-P