Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Notices 58833 

that offers of products of Italy would 

continue to be exempt from the U.S. 

Buy American Act and Balance of 

Payments Program policy that would 

otherwise require DoD to add 50 percent 

to the price of the foreign products 

when evaluating offers. This also means 

that U.S. products should be exempt 

from any analogous ‘‘Buy Italian’’ law or 

policy applicable to procurements by 

the Italian Ministry of Defense or Armed 

Forces. DoD is interested in comments 

relating to the transparency, integrity, 

and general fairness of Italy’s public 

(defense) procurement processes. DoD is 

also interested in comments relating to 

the degree of reciprocity that exists 

between the United States and Italy 

when it comes to the openness of 

defense procurements to offers of 

products of the other country. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

November 16, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to: Office of the Director, Defense 

Procurement and Acquisition Policy, 

ATTN: OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (CPIC), 

3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3060; or by e-mail to 

nancy.dowling@osd.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Nancy Dowling, telephone 703–697–

9352. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Reciprocal Defense Procurement MOUs 

DoD has with 21 countries are signed at 

the level of the Secretary of Defense and 

his counterpart. The purpose of RDP 

MOUs is to promote rationalization, 

standardization, and interoperability of 

defense equipment with allies and 

friendly governments. It provides a 

framework for ongoing communication 

regarding market access and 

procurement matters that affect effective 

defense cooperation. Based on the 

MOU, each country affords the other 

certain benefits on a reciprocal basis 

consistent with national laws and 

regulations. For 19 of the 21 RDP MOU 

countries, including Italy, these benefits 

include evaluation of offers without 

applying price differentials otherwise 

required by the Buy American Act and 

the Balance of Payments Program. For 

all RDP MOU countries, two additional 

benefits are that (1) the specialty metals 

restriction in 10 U.S.C. 2533b does not 

apply to products manufactured in the 

RDP MOU partner country, and (2) the 

United States does not include customs, 

taxes, and duties in the evaluation of 

offers and waives charges for customs 

and duties for procurements to which 

the RDP MOU applies. 

The United States and Italy originally 

entered into a RDP MOU on September 

11, 1978. All of the countries with 

which DoD has RDP MOUs are 

identified in DFARS 225.872–1. If DoD 

determines that it would continue to be 

inconsistent with the public interest to 

apply the restrictions of the Buy 

American Act to the acquisition of 

Italian defense equipment and supplies, 

Italy would remain on the list in DFARS 

225.872–1(a). 

RDP MOUs generally include 

language by which the parties agree that 

their defense procurements will be 

conducted in accordance with certain 

implementing procedures. These 

procedures relate to publication of 

notices of proposed purchases; the 

content and availability of solicitations 

for proposed purchases; notification to 

each unsuccessful offeror; feedback, 

upon request, to unsuccessful offerors 

concerning the reasons they were not 

allowed to participate in a procurement 

or were not awarded a contract; and 

providing for the hearing and review of 

complaints arising in connection with 

any phase of the procurement process to 

ensure that, to the extent possible, 

complaints are equitably and 

expeditiously resolved. 

While DoD is evaluating Italy’s laws 

and regulations in this area, DoD would 

benefit from U.S. industry’s experience 

in participating in Italy’s public defense 

procurements. Therefore, DoD is asking 

U.S. firms that have participated or 

attempted to participate in 

procurements by or on behalf of Italy’s 

Ministry of Defense or Armed Forces to 

provide input as to whether the 

procurements were conducted in 

accordance with published procedures 

with transparency, integrity, fairness, 

and due process, and if not, the nature 

of the problems encountered. 

Michele P. Peterson, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

[FR Doc. E7–20450 Filed 10–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Guidance Memoranda for the 

Comprehensive Everglades 

Restoration Plan 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: The Army Corps of Engineers 

and the South Florida Water 

Management District have developed 

the six guidance memoranda required 

by the programmatic regulations for the 

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration 

Plan for approval by the Secretary of the 

Army. The public is invited to review 

and comment on the revised final draft 

of the guidance memoranda prepared by 

the Army Corps of Engineers and the 

South Florida Water Management 

District. 

DATES: We will accept comments until 

December 17, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment on 

the guidance memoranda, you may 

submit your comments by either of 

these methods: 

1. You may submit written comments 

to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

ATTN: Stu Appelbaum, P.O. Box 4970, 

Jacksonville, FL 32232–0019. 

2. You may send comments by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to: 

GMComments@usace.army.mil. 

If submitting comments by electronic 

format, please submit them in ASCII file 

format or Word file format and avoid the 

use of special characters and any form 

of encryption. Please include your name 

and return e-mail address in your e-mail 

message. Please note that your e-mail 

address will not be retained at the 

termination of the public comment 

period. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stu 

Appelbaum, Corps of Engineers, 

Jacksonville District, P.O. Box 4970, 

Jacksonville, Florida 32232–0019, 

phone (904) 232–2584; fax (904) 232–

1251. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 12, 2003 the Department of 

the Army published the final rule in the 

Federal Register that established the 

programmatic regulations required by 

the Water Resources Development Act 

of 2000 as 33 CFR Part 385. Section 

385.5 of the programmatic regulations 

requires that the Army Corps of 

Engineers and the South Florida Water 

Management District develop, in 

consultation with the Department of the 

Interior, the Environmental Protection 

Agency, the Department of Commerce, 

the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of 

Florida, the Seminole Tribe of Florida, 

the Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection, and other 

Federal, State, and local agencies, six 

guidance memoranda for approval by 

the Secretary of the Army. Guidance 

memoranda are program-wide 

procedures and processes needed to 

guide implementation of the 

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration 

Plan and to ensure that the goals and 

purposes of the Plan are achieved. The 

programmatic regulations require that 

the Secretary of the Army afford the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
58834 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 17, 2007 / Notices 

public an opportunity to comment on 

the Guidance Memoranda prior to their 

approval. On May 6, 2005, a Notice of 

Availability was placed in the Federal 

Register (70 FR 24008) inviting the 

public to comment on the final draft of 

the Guidance Memoranda. As a result of 

public comment we received on the 

final draft, we have revised the 

Guidance Memoranda and invite the 

public to comment on the revised final 

draft. The programmatic regulations also 

require the concurrence of the Secretary 

of the Interior and the Governor of 

Florida on the Guidance Memoranda 

prior to their approval. An electronic 

copy of the guidance memoranda 

document is available at: http:// 

www.evergladesplan.org/pm/

progr_regs_guidance_memoranda.aspx. 

Brenda S. Bowen, 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 07–5110 Filed 10–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–AJ–M 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Environmental Management; 

Advance Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Area IV of the Santa Susana Field 

Laboratory and Public Involvement 

Activities 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Advance Notice of Intent. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is providing an Advance 

Notice of its Intent (ANOI) to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

for remediation of Area IV of the Santa 

Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL). DOE is 

preparing the EIS in response to a May 

2, 2007, decision by the U.S. District 

Court of Northern California that a 2003 

DOE decision to prepare a Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) and conduct 

remediation of Area IV on the basis of 

an environmental assessment, rather 

than prepare an EIS, violated the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA). DOE is also requesting early 

comments from the public and other 

stakeholders on the scope of the EIS and 

issues to be considered in EIS analysis. 

To facilitate collaboration on these EIS 

issues, DOE also is announcing plans for 

public involvement activities to be held 

this fall, to provide information to its 

stakeholders and to receive comments 

from them. 

DOE is issuing this ANOI, pursuant to 

10 CFR 1021.311(b), in order to inform 

and request early comments and 

assistance from Federal and State 

agencies, State and local governments, 

natural resource trustees, the general 

public, and other interested parties on 

the appropriate scope of the EIS, 

possible environmental issues, and the 

potential environmental impacts related 

to DOE’s proposed activities for Area IV. 

Following the issuance of this ANOI, 

DOE intends to collect updated 

information that it will incorporate into 

the EIS analysis. 

DOE will conduct community and 

regulator interviews through November 

2007. These public involvement 

opportunities will focus on consultation 

with the public about the process for 

EIS scoping, the development of the 

range of reasonable alternatives to be 

analyzed in the EIS, and related public 

concerns about the remediation. If, 

based on community input, DOE 

decides to hold a public meeting, DOE 

will notify the community through local 

media. Early comments on the scope of 

the EIS and issues to be considered are 

due by December 14, 2007. Though DOE 

will attempt to consider comments 

received after this date, it will only be 

able to do so to the extent practicable. 

DOE plans to issue a Notice of Intent 

(NOI) for this EIS in the spring of 

calendar year 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Please direct requests to be 

notified of interviews or a public 

meeting, comments on the scope of the 

EIS, and questions concerning the 

proposed project to: Stephanie Jennings, 

NEPA Document Manager, Office of Site 

Support and Small Projects (EM–3.2), 

U.S. Department of Energy, Energy 

Technology Engineering Center, P.O. 

Box 10300, Canoga Park, CA 91309, 

telephone: 818–466–8162, fax: 818–

466–8730, or e-mail to: 

Stephanie.Jennings@em.doe.gov (use 

‘‘ANOI comments’’ for the subject). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request further information about this 

EIS or about the public involvement 

activities, or to be placed on the EIS 

distribution list, use any of the methods 

listed under ADDRESSES above. For 

general information concerning the DOE 

NEPA process, contact Carol Borgstrom, 

Director, Office of NEPA Policy and 

Compliance (GC–20), U.S. Department 

of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0119, email to: AskNEPA@hq.doe.gov, 

telephone: 202–586–4600, leave a 

message at 1–800–472–2756, or fax: 

202–586–7031. 

This Advance Notice of Intent (ANOI) 

will be available on the Internet at: 

http://www.eh.doe.gov/NEPA. Further 

information about Area IV and the 

Energy Technology Engineering Center 

(ETEC) can be found at http:// 

apps.em.doe.gov/etec/. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL), 

located on approximately 2,850 acres in 

the hills between Chatsworth and Simi 

Valley, CA, was developed as a remote 

site to test rocket engines and conduct 

nuclear research. The Atomics 

International Unit of Rockwell 

International’s Canoga Park-based 

Rocketdyne Division began testing in 

1947, and conducted an estimated 

17,000 open-air rocket tests in support 

of the space program. In 1996, Rockwell 

International sold its aerospace and 

defense business, including the SSFL to 

The Boeing Company (Boeing). 

SSFL is divided in four administrative 

areas—Area I, Area II, Area III, and Area 

IV—along with two buffer zones. Area I 

is about 713 acres, of which 671 acres 

is owned and operated by Boeing and 42 

acres is owned by the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration 

(NASA) and operated for it by Boeing. 

Area II, about 410 acres, is owned by 

NASA and operated for it by Boeing. 

Area III, about 114 acres, is owned and 

operated by Boeing. Area IV, about 290 

acres, is owned by Boeing, which 

operates it for DOE. Boeing also owns a 

contiguous buffer zone of 1143 acres to 

the south and a contiguous buffer zone 

of 182 acres to the north. 

Starting in the mid-1950s, the Atomic 

Energy Commission (AEC), a 

predecessor agency of DOE, funded 

nuclear energy research on a 90-acre 

parcel of Area IV leased from 

Rocketdyne. The Energy Technology 

and Engineering Center (ETEC) was 

established by the AEC on this parcel in 

the early 1960s as a ‘‘center of 

excellence’’ for liquid metals 

technology. 

The AEC built a small nuclear power 

plant to deliver energy to the 

commercial grid at the ETEC. Research 

also included testing of nuclear 

powered systems, for example, using 

liquid metals for space vehicles and a 

sodium coolant medium in 10 small 

reactors. All reactor operations ended in 

1980 and nuclear research work was 

completed in 1988. Cleanup of ETEC 

began in the 1960s and was performed 

in an ongoing manner as unnecessary 

facilities were decommissioned when 

there was no longer a use for them. DOE 

continues to lease the 90 acre parcel in 

Area IV from Boeing. 

In March 2003, DOE issued an 

Environmental Assessment (EA), 

Environmental Assessment for Cleanup 

and Closure of the Energy Technology 

Engineering Center, DOE/EA–1345. 

Based on the results of the EA, DOE 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES