Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 217 / Friday, November 9, 2007 / Notices 63629 

1The record is defined in sec.–tion 207.2(f) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 

CFR § 207.2(f)). 2Raw flexible magnets were provided for in HTS 

statistical reporting number 8505.19.0040 prior to 

December 19, 2004. 3Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane determines that 

there is a reasonable indication that an industry in 

the United States is materially injured by reason of 

such imports. 

4Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane determines that 

there is a reasonable indication that an industry in 

the United States is materially injured by reason of 

such imports. 

ecological health and improve water 

management for beneficial uses of the 

San Francisco/Sacramento and San 

Joaquin Bay Delta. 

Committee agendas and meeting 

materials will be available prior to all 

meetings on the California Bay-Delta 

Program Web site http://Calwater.ca.gov 

and at the meetings. These meetings are 

open to the public. Oral comments will 

be accepted from members of the public 

at each meeting and will be limited to 

3-5 minutes. 

Authority: The Committee was established 

pursuant to the Department of the Interior’s 

authority to implement the Water Supply, 

Reliability, and Environmental Improvement 

Act, Pub. L. 108–361; the Fish and Wildlife 

Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661 et. seq.; the 

Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.; and the Reclamation Act of 1902, 43 

U.S.C. 391 et. seq., and the acts amendatory 

thereof or supplementary thereto, all 

collectively referred to as the Federal 

Reclamation laws, and in particular, the 

Central Valley Project Improvement Act, 34 

U.S.C. 3401. 

Dated: October 24, 2007. 

Diane A. Buzzard, 

Acting Special Projects Officer, Mid-Pacific 

Region, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 

[FR Doc. 07–5597 Filed 11–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MN–M 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation Nos. 701–TA–452 and 731–

TA–1129 and 1130 (Preliminary)] 

Raw Flexible Magnets fom China and 

Taiwan 

Determinations 

On the basis of the record 1 developed 

in the subject investigations, the United 

States International Trade Commission 

(Commission) determines, pursuant to 

section 703(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 

(19 U.S.C. 1671b(a)) (the Act), that there 

is a reasonable indication that an 

industry in the United States is 

threatened with material injury by 

reason of imports from China of raw 

flexible magnets, provided for in 

subheadings 8505.19.10 and 8505.19.20 

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 

the United States,2 that are alleged to be 

subsidized by the Government of 

China.3 The Commission further 

determines, pursuant to section 733(a) 

of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)), that 

there is a reasonable indication that an 

industry in the United States is 

threatened with material injury by 

reason of imports from China and 

Taiwan of raw flexible magnets, that are 

alleged to be sold in the United States 

at less than fair value (LTFV).4

Commencement of Final Phase 

Investigations 

Pursuant to section 207.18 of the 

Commission’s rules, the Commission 

also gives notice of the commencement 

of the final phase of its investigations. 

The Commission will issue a final phase 

notice of scheduling, which will be 

published in the Federal Register as 

provided in section 207.21 of the 

Commission’s rules, upon notice from 

the Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) of affirmative preliminary 

determinations in the investigations 

under section 703(b) and section 733(b) 

of the Act, or, if the preliminary 

determinations are negative, upon 

notice of affirmative final 

determinations in those investigations 

under section 705(a) and section 735(a) 

of the Act. Parties that filed entries of 

appearance in the preliminary phase of 

the investigations need not enter a 

separate appearance for the final phase 

of the investigations. Industrial users 

and, if the merchandise under 

investigation is sold at the retail level, 

representative consumer organizations 

have the right to appear as parties in 

Commission antidumping and 

countervailing duty investigations. The 

Secretary will prepare a public service 

list containing the names and addresses 

of all persons, or their representatives, 

who are parties to the investigations. 

Background 

On September 21, 2007, a petition 

was filed with the Commission and 

Commerce by Magnum Magnetics Corp., 

alleging that an industry in the United 

States is materially injured or 

threatened with material injury by 

reason of subsidized imports of raw 

flexible magnets from China, and by 

reason of LTFV imports from China and 

Taiwan. Accordingly, effective 

September 21, 2007, the Commission 

instituted countervailing duty and 

antidumping duty investigation Nos. 

701–TA–452 and 731–TA–1129 and 

1130 (Preliminary). 

Notice of the institution of the 

Commission’s investigations and of a 

public conference to be held in 

connection therewith was given by 

posting copies of the notice in the Office 

of the Secretary, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, Washington, DC, 

and by publishing the notice in the 

Federal Register of September 28, 2007 

(72 FR 55248). The conference was held 

in Washington, DC, on October 12, 

2007, and all persons who requested the 

opportunity were permitted to appear in 

person or by counsel. 

The Commission transmitted its 

determinations in these investigations to 

the Secretary of Commerce on 

November 5, 2007. The views of the 

Commission are contained in USITC 

Publication 3961 (November 2007), 

entitled Raw Flexible Magnets from 

China and Taiwan: Investigation Nos. 

701–TA–452 and 731–TA–1129 and 

1130 (Preliminary). 

Issued: November 5, 2007. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E7–22014 Filed 11–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Research Performance Progress 

Report Format 

AGENCY: National Science Foundation 

(NSF). 

ACTION: Request for public comment on 

a standardized Research Performance 

Progress Report (RPPR) format. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF), on behalf of the 

Chief Financial Officers Council’s 

Grants Policy Committee, the Grants.gov 

Executive Board, and the National 

Science & Technology Council’s 

Research Business Models 

Subcommittee, is soliciting public 

comment on a standardized Research 

Performance Progress Report (RPPR) 

format. The NSF has agreed to serve as 

the ‘‘sponsor’’ of this Federal-wide 

format for receipt of comments under 

this interagency initiative. 

Development of a standardized RPPR 

is an initiative of the Research Business 

Models (RBM) Subcommittee of the 

Committee on Science (CoS), a 

Committee of the National Science and 

Technology Council (NSTC). It is also 

part of the implementation of the 

Federal Financial Assistance 

Management Improvement Act of 1999 

(Pub. L. 106–107). Consistent with the 

purposes of that Act, the objective of 

this initiative is to establish a uniform 

format for reporting performance on 

Federally-funded research projects. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

63630 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 217 / Friday, November 9, 2007 / Notices 

Although different Federal agencies 

utilize a variety of formats for reporting 

progress on activities supported by 

research grants, similar information is 

usually collected. These variations 

increase administrative effort and costs 

for recipients of Federal awards and 

make it difficult to compare research 

programs across government. 

Development of standard reporting 

categories will facilitate the 

development of a common electronic 

solution for collecting the information 

in lieu of collecting it through numerous 

agency-unique reporting forms currently 

used. In furtherance of Public Law 106–

107, this proposed format will directly 

benefit award recipients by making it 

easier for recipients to administer 

Federal grant programs through 

standardization of the types of research 

information required in performance 

reports. This proposed format is for 

interim progress reports only, and once 

implemented, it is intended to replace 

other formats. The NSTC RBM 

Subcommittee may consider a similar 

format for final reports, subsequent to 

this RPPR initiative. Agencies may use 

other OMB-approved reporting formats 

for specialized research grants, such as 

centers/institutes, clinical trials, or 

fellowship/training awards. 

Each category is in the proposed 

RPPR is a separate reporting component. 

Award recipients would be required to 

report on the mandatory category and 

may be required to report on the 

mandatory category and may be 

required to report on any of the optional 

categories as instructed by an awarding 

agency. Agencies may develop an 

agency- or program-specific category, if 

necessary, to meet programmatic 

requirements, although agencies would 

be instructed to minimize the degree to 

which they supplement the standard 

categories. Comment is requested on 

any aspect of the reporting components 

proposed, such as appropriateness, 

feasibility, completeness, or mandatory 

specification. The NSF also invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies to comment on estimates of 

burden as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

January 8, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Suzanne H. Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, Division of 

Administrative Services, National 

Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd, 

Arlington, VA 22230, e-mail 

splimpton@nsf.gov; telephone: (703) 

292–7556; Fax (703) 292–9188. We 

encourage respondents to submit 

comments electronically to ensure 

timely receipt. We cannot guarantee that 

comments mailed will be received 

before the comment closing date. Please 

include ‘‘Research Performance 

Progress Reporting’’ in the subject line 

of the e-mail message; please also 

include in the full body of your 

comments in the text of the message and 

as an attachment. Include your name, 

title, organization, postal address, 

telephone number, and e-mail address 

in your message. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

view the RPPR format, see: http:// 

www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rppr/ 

index.jsp. For information on the RPPR, 

contact Jean Feldman, Head, Policy 

Office, Division of Institution & 

Support, National Science Foundation, 

4201 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA, 

22230, e-mail: jfeldman@nsf.gov; 

telephone (703) 292–8243; Fax: (703) 

292–9171. For further information on 

the NSTC RBM Subcommittee, contact 

Diane DiEuliis, at the Office of Science 

and Technology Policy, 725 17th Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20503; e-mail: 

ddieuliis@ostp.eop.gov; telephone 202–

456–6059; Fax 202–456–6027. See also 

the RBM Subcommittee’s Internet Web 

site located at: http://rbm.nih.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

This project is an initiative of the 

Research Business Models (RBM) 

Subcommittee of the Committee on 

Science (COS), a committee of the 

National Science and Technology 

Council (NSTC). The RBM 

Subcommittee’s objectives include: 

• Facilitating a coordinated effort 

across Federal agencies to address 

policy implications arising from the 

changing nature of scientific research; 

and 

• Examining the effects of these 

changes on business models for the 

conduct of scientific research sponsored 

by the Federal government. 

The Subcommittee used public 

comments, agency perspectives, and 

input from a series of regional public 

meetings to identify priority areas on 

which it would focus its initial efforts. 

In each priority area, the Subcommittee 

is pursuing initiatives to promote, as 

appropriate, common policy, 

streamlining of current procedures, or 

the identification of agencies’ and 

institutions’ ‘‘best practices.’’ As further 

information about initiatives becomes 

available, it will be posted at the 

Subcommittee’s Internet Web site: 

http://rbm.nih.gov. 

The objective of one of the RBM 

Subcommittee’s priority areas is greater 

uniformity in the form and content of 

performance reports that are required by 

Federal grants and cooperative 

agreements awarded under research 

programs. Many Federal agencies have 

their own forms or formats that 

recipients must use to report progress 

on activities supported by research 

grants. While agencies use different 

formats and different language to 

request information on progress, they 

usually collect similar information. 

These variations increase the 

administrative effort and costs for 

recipients of Federal awards and make 

it difficult to compare research 

programs across the government. In 

furtherance of Pub. L. 106–107, this 

proposed format will directly benefit 

recipients by making it easier to 

administer Federal grant programs, 

through standardization of the types of 

research information required in 

performance reports. It will also 

facilitate the creation of a common 

electronic solution for collecting the 

information in lieu of collecting it 

through the numerous agency-unique 

reporting forms or systems currently 

used by different Federal agencies. The 

RBM Subcommittee reviewed all 

formats currently in use by Federal 

agencies for reporting performance on 

research grants. The reporting categories 

used by the NSF were selected as a 

starting point for designing a standard 

format, as hundreds of NSF research 

programs have used these categories 

successfully. The proposed format does 

not change the performance reporting 

requirements in OMB Circulars A–102 

and A–110; it merely provides 

additional clarification, instructions, 

and a standard format for collecting the 

information. 

This proposed format is intended for 

interim progress reports, not for use in 

submission of final reports (see section 

III. Invitation to Comment below), and 

once implemented, it is intended to 

replace other formats. The RPPR is 

intended to address progress for the 

most recently completed period, at the 

frequency required or designated by the 

sponsoring agency. Information, once 

reported, does not have to be provided 

again on subsequent reports. 

II. Proposed Reporting Categories 

The proposed format for interim 

performance progress reporting on 

grants and cooperative agreements 

awarded under research programs are 

available on the NSF Web site at: 

http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/ 

rppr/index.jsp. These include the cover 

page data elements, the mandatory and 

optional categories for reporting, and 

associated instructions. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 217 / Friday, November 9, 2007 / Notices 63631 

Each of the categories specified is a 

separate reporting component. Federal 

agencies will direct recipients to report 

on the mandatory category and may also 

require reporting on optional categories, 

as appropriate. Recipients will not be 

required or expected to report on each 

of the questions or items listed under a 

particular category. They will be 

advised to state ‘‘None’’ or ‘‘Nothing to 

report’’ if they have nothing significant 

to report. 

Agencies will utilize the standard 

instructions that have been developed 

for each category, but may provide 

additional program-specific instructions 

necessary to clarify a requirement for a 

particular program. For example, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is required to collect information on 

environmental impacts; so under the 

following reporting question: ‘‘How has 

the project contributed to society 

beyond science and technology?’’, the 

EPA can direct recipients to specifically 

report on the research’s benefit or 

impact to the environment. 

Agencies also may develop additional 

agency- or program-specific reporting 

categories and instructions (e.g., the 

National Institutes of Health may need 

to collect additional information on 

clinical trial awards); however, to 

maintain maximum uniformity, 

agencies will be instructed to minimize 

the degree to which they supplement 

the standard categories. 

III. Invitation to Comment 

Input is welcome on any aspect of the 

proposed standard reporting categories. 

Questions that individuals may wish to 

address include, but are not limited to, 

the following: 

• Are the categories and the elements 

appropriate? 

• Are there other elements that 

should be included under the reporting 

categories? 

• Should other categories be 

mandatory? 

• Are the instructions straightforward 

and easy to understand? 

• Should agencies defer final 

implementation until there is a common 

solution for collecting the information 

electronically? Should agencies use a 

downloadable fillable form or webbased form to report progress? 

• The RBM Subcommittee may 

consider using this format for final 

reports as well as progress reports. Is 

this proposed format appropriate for a 

final report? If so, should recipients be 

directed to provide summary 

information for the entire project period, 

or just for the last period? If not, what 

information should be included in a 

final report? 

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act 

In furtherance of Pub. L. 106–107, and 

its goal of streamlining the Federal grant 

process, this proposed format will 

reduce the burden on recipients 

currently expending time and effort on 

a variety of agency-specific forms. 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA), OMB assigns a control number to 

each ‘‘collection of information’’ that it 

reviews and approves for use by an 

agency. An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless the collection of information 

displays a valid OMB Control Number. 

The PRA also requires agencies to 

estimate the burden for each collection 

of information. Given that this reporting 

format has not yet been utilized by 

Federal recipients to report progress on 

research awards, it is difficult to 

estimate the burden hours associated 

with this information collection at this 

time. Also, because individual 

components of the proposed RPPR are 

in a new format, burden hours per 

component are uncertain. Depending on 

which optional components agencies 

select in addition to the mandatory 

component, however, burden hours may 

be estimated within a range. It should be 

noted that burden estimates associated 

with forms currently in use range from 

a minimum of 5 hours to a maximum of 

16 hours, depending on the type of 

research project being supported. 

Proposed PRA Submission to OMB 

Title: Research Performance Progress 

Report (RPPR). 

OMB Number: 4040–NEW. 

Abstract: The Research Performance 

Progress Report (RPPR) will establish a 

uniform format for reporting 

performance on Federally-funded 

research projects. 

Type of Review: New Collection. 

Affected Public: Public or private 

institutions, such as universities, 

colleges, hospitals, and laboratories; 

units of state and local government; 

domestic or foreign non-profit and forprofit organizations; and eligible 

agencies of the Federal government. 

Note that affected public will vary 

depending on individual agency and the 

type of research being supported. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

The number of Annual Project Reports 

that NSF received from 10–01–2006 

through 9–30–2007 was 24,603. 

Total Estimated Time: The burden 

imposed by various agencies will 

depend on the number of respondents 

using the collection for their programs. 

Estimated Time per Respondent: 

Estimated time per respondent may 

range from 5 to 16 hours depending on 

the type of research being supported. 

Total Estimated Out-of-Pocket Costs: 

Estimated Out-of-Pocket Cost per 

Respondent: Agencies and the public 

are asked to comment on: 

• Whether the collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

• The accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the collection 

of information; 

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; 

• Ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology; 

and 

• Estimates of capital or start-up costs 

and costs of operation, maintenance, 

and purchase of services to provide 

information. 

Prior to submission of the information 

collection request to OMB for final 

clearance, however, specific burden 

hours associated with interim progress 

reporting will be reported by agencies. 

Comments submitted in response to this 

notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval. 

Dated: November 6, 2007. 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation. 

[FR Doc. 07–5601 Filed 11–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Submission for the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

Review; Comment Request 

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC). 

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of 

information collection and solicitation 

of public comment. 

SUMMARY: The NRC has recently 

submitted the following proposal for the 

collection of information under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) to 

OMB for review. The NRC hereby 

informs potential respondents that an 

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and 

that a person is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless it 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES