Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices 41453 

‘‘contain an assessment of the 

completeness and reliability of the 

performance data included in it [that] 

* * * describes any material 

inadequacies in the completeness and 

reliability of the data.’’ (OMB Circular 

A–11, Section 230.2 (f)). The 

Department emphasizes the importance 

of complete and accurate information 

for program monitoring and improving 

program performance. 

The UI DV program employs a refined 

and automated approach to review 322 

elements reported on 13 benefits reports 

and one tax report. The Department uses 

many of these elements for key 

performance measures as well as for 

workload items. 

The validation process assesses the 

validity (accuracy) of the counts of 

transactions or measurements of status 

as follows. In the validation process, 

guided by a detailed handbook, the state 

first constructs extract files containing 

all pertinent individual transactions for 

the desired report period to be 

validated. These transactions are 

grouped into 15 benefits and five tax 

populations. Each transaction record 

contains the necessary characteristics or 

dimensions that enable it to be summed 

into an independent recount of what the 

state has already reported. The 

Department provides state agencies with 

software that edits the extract file (to 

identify and remove duplicate 

transactions and improperly built 

records, for example), then aggregates 

the transactions to produce an 

independent reconstruction or 

‘‘validation count’’ of the reported 

figure. The reported count is considered 

valid by this ‘‘quantity’’ validation test 

if it is within ±2% of the validation 

count (±1% for a GPRA-related 

element). 

The software also draws samples of 

most transaction types from the extract 

files. Guided by a state-specific 

handbook, the validators review these 

sample records against documentation 

in the state’s management information 

system to determine whether the 

transactions in the extract file are 

supported by system documentation. 

This qualitative check determines 

whether the validation count can be 

trusted as accurate. The benefits extract 

files are considered to pass this 

‘‘quality’’ review if random samples 

indicate that no more than 5% of the 

records contain errors; tax files are 

subjected to different but related tests. A 

reported count is considered valid only 

if it differs from a reconstructed 

(validation) count by no more than the 

appropriate criterion of ±2% or ±1%, 

and that validation count comes from an 

extract file that has satisfied all quality 

tests. 

For Federal fiscal years 2011 and 

beyond, all states will be required to 

conduct a complete validation every 

three years. In three cases the three-year 

rule does not apply, and a revalidation 

must occur within one year: (1) Groups 

of reported counts that are summed for 

purposes of making a Pass/Fail 

determination and do not pass 

validation by being within ±2% of the 

reconstructed counts or the extract file 

does not pass all quality tests; (2) the 

validation applies to the two benefits 

populations and one tax population 

used for GPRA measures; and (3) reports 

are produced by new reporting software. 

Every year states must also certify that 

Module 3 of the Benefits and Tax 

handbooks are up to date. 

In January 2012 through UIPL 08–12 

the Department issued changes that 

added 100 cells to the ETA 227 report; 

most of these cells will be validated 

through the UI DV program. The ETA 

227 report is now validated through 

three of the 15 benefit populations. 

Accommodating the new report cells 

requires: (1) Adding a sixteenth benefit 

population; (2) making one-time 

changes to the three populations that 

validate the old 227 report; and (3) 

adding 13 items (called Steps or 

Substeps) to Module 3 of the Benefits 

handbook, which relates State 

definitions and data system locations for 

Federal reporting requirements. These 

changes will impose both one-time and 

continuing burdens on state validators. 

II. Review Focus 

The Department is particularly 

interested in comments which: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• 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; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through 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. 

III. Current Actions 

Type of Review: Extension with 

revisions. 

Title: Unemployment Insurance Data 

Validation Benefits and Tax. 

OMB Number: 1205–0431. 

Affected Public: State Workforce 

Agencies. 

Form(s): ET Handbook 361. 

Total Annual Respondents: 53. 

Annual Frequency: At least five 

validation items per state (two benefits 

populations and one tax population) 

plus reviewing and certifying that 

Benefits and Tax Module items are up 

to date. 

Total Annual Estimated Responses: 

265 (53 states × 5 populations). 

Average Time per Response: 573 

Hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 30,369 Hours. 

Total Annual Burden Cost for 

Respondents: $1,244,825.31. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this comment request will be 

summarized and/or included in the 

request for OMB approval of the ICR; 

they will also become a matter of public 

record. 

Dated: Signed on this 5th day of July 2012. 

Jane Oates, 

Assistant Secretary for Employment and 

Training, Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2012–17068 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FW–P 

NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE 

ARTS AND HUMANITIES 

Submission for OMB Review, 

Comment Request, Proposed 

Collection: General Clearance for 

Guidelines, Applications, and 

Reporting Forms 

AGENCY: Institute of Museum and 

Library Services, National Foundation 

for the Arts and Humanities. 

ACTION: Submission for OMB Review, 

Comment Request. 

SUMMARY: The Institute of Museum and 

Library Services announces the 

following information collection has 

been submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget for review and 

approval in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TTY/TDD) may call 202–653–4614. 

This review 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
41454 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices 

understood, and the impact of collection 

requirements on respondents can be 

properly assessed. 

A copy of the proposed information 

collection request can be obtained by 

contacting the individual listed below 

in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted to 

the office listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section below on 

or before August 13, 2012. 

OMB is particularly interested in 

comments that help the agency to: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• 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; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

ADDRESSES: Kim A. Miller, Management 

Analyst, Institute of Museum and 

Library Services, 1800 M Street NW., 

9th Floor, Washington, DC 20036. 

Telephone: 202–653–4762; Fax: 202– 

653–4600; or email: kmiller@imls.gov; or 

by teletype (TTY/TDD) for persons with 

hearing difficulty at 202–653–4614. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services is the primary source of federal 

support for the Nation’s 123,000 

libraries and 17,500 museums. The 

mission of IMLS is to inspire libraries 

and museums to advance innovation, 

lifelong learning, and cultural and civic 

engagement. We provide leadership 

through research, policy development, 

and grant making. IMLS provides a 

variety of grant programs to assist the 

Nation’s museums and libraries in 

improving their operations and 

enhancing their services to the public. 

(20 U.S.C. 9101 et seq.). 

Current Actions: This notice proposes 

general clearance of the agency’s 

guideline application and report forms. 

The 60-day Notice for the ‘‘Notice of 

Continuance for General Clearance for 

Guidelines, Applications, and Reporting 

Forms’’ was published in the Federal 

Register on May 10, 2012 (FR vol. 77, 

No. 91, pgs. 27486). No comments were 

received. 

Agency: Institute of Museum and 

Library Services. 

Title: IMLS Guidelines, Applications 

and Reporting Forms. 

OMB Number: 3137–0029, 3137– 

0071. 

Agency Number: 3137. 

Frequency: Annually, Semi-annually. 

Affected Public: State Library 

Administrative Agencies, museums, 

libraries, institutions of higher 

education, library and museum 

professional associations, and museum 

and library professionals, Indian tribes 

(including Alaska native villages, 

regional corporations, or village 

corporations), and organizations that 

primarily serve and represent Native 

Hawaiians. 

Number of Respondents: 7,961. 

Estimated Time per Respondent: 

.08–90 hours. 

Total Burden Hours: 70,092. 

Total Annualized Capital/Startup 

Costs: 0. 

Total Annual Costs: $1,921,209. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Comments should be sent to Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attn.: OMB Desk Officer for Education, 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, 

(202) 395–7316. 

Dated: July 10, 2012. 

Kim A. Miller, 

Management Analyst, Office of Policy, 

Planning, Research, and Communication. 

[FR Doc. 2012–17169 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7036–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–425; NRC–2012–0169] 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 

Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of 

Application for Amendment to Facility 

Operating License 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (the Commission) has 

granted the request of Southern Nuclear 

Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee) 

to withdraw its December 19, 2011, 

application for proposed amendment to 

Facility Operating License No. NPF–81 

for the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, 

Unit 2, located in Burke County, 

Georgia. 

The proposed amendment would 

have revised the Technical 

Specifications related to the Engineered 

Safety Features Room Cooler and SafetyRelated Chiller System, Allowed 

Completion Time for Condition A. 

The Commission had previously 

issued a Notice of Consideration of 

Issuance of Amendment published in 

the Federal Register on February 7, 

2012 (77 FR 6149). However, by letter 

dated June 19, 2012, the licensee 

withdrew the proposed change. 

For further details with respect to this 

action, see the application for 

amendment dated December 19, 2011, 

and the licensee’s letter dated June 19, 

2012, which withdrew the application 

for license amendment. Documents may 

be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at 

the NRC’s Public Document Room 

(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 

Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. Publicly available 

documents created or received at the 

NRC are accessible electronically 

through the Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS) in the NRC Library at 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS should contact the 

NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone 

at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737 or 

by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day 

of July 2012. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Patrick G. Boyle, 

Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II– 

1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2012–17121 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–247 and 50–286; NRC– 

2012–0168] 

Entergy Nuclear Indian Point Unit 2, 

LLC, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point Unit 

3, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Operations, 

Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating 

Units 2 and 3; Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an amendment and changes 

to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for 

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–26 

and DPR–64, issued to Entergy Nuclear 

Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the 

licensee) for operation of the Indian 

Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3 

(IP2 and IP3) located in Westchester 

County, New York, in accordance with 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES