Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices 30005 

Seattle, FHWA, and WSDOT to 

incorporate all relevant material from 

their NEPA efforts, share information, 

and reduce duplication of efforts. 

2. Alternatives: A number of seawall 

replacement alternatives are being 

considered including the no action 

alternative. Several structural, nonstructural and construction technique 

options will be considered including 

soil improvement, secant piles, and 

buttress fill, among others; more than 

one option may be included in the 

preferred alternative. Additionally; in 

conjunction with any of the structural 

options, the seawall alignment will be 

considered; examining where the 

seawall face can be reconstructed in the 

existing alignment or if it can be pulled 

back landward. Similarly, habitat 

restoration and recreational access 

options will be considered with any of 

the structural options. Public input is 

specifically invited regarding the 

reasonableness of the build alternatives 

and whether any additional alternatives 

are appropriate for consideration. 

3. Scoping and Public Involvement: 

An initial notice of intent for this 

project was issued on March 31, 2006 

(71 FR 16293). Since that time, the 

scope of the project has changed to 

include the evaluation of seismic 

damages and to consider additional 

alternatives. This present notice of 

intent formally re-commences the 

scoping process under NEPA. As part of 

the scoping process, all affected Federal, 

State and local agencies, Native 

American Tribes, private organizations, 

and the public are invited to comment 

on the scope of the EIS. To date, the 

following issues of concern have been 

identified for in-depth analysis in the 

draft EIS: (1) Construction impacts, 

particularly those related to noise, 

transportation, and effects to businesses 

and residences within/adjacent to the 

construction zone; (2) impacts 

associated with potential variations of 

the existing seawall alignment; (3) 

potential impacts to historical 

properties; and (4) potential benefits to 

the Elliott Bay aquatic ecosystem. 

4. Scoping Meeting: One public 

scoping meeting will be held to identify 

issues of major concern, identify studies 

that might be needed in order to analyze 

and evaluate impacts, and obtain public 

input on the range and acceptability of 

alternatives. This meeting will be held 

at the Bell Harbor International 

Conference Center, Pier 66 on 

Wednesday, June 16, 2010. An informal 

open house will be held between 4 and 

5:30 p.m. A presentation to summarize 

the purpose of scoping and existing 

information will be made between 5:30 

and 6 p.m. Then, testimony will be 

taken between 6 and 7 p.m. Verbal 

(maximum 3 minutes) or written 

comments will be accepted at the 

scoping meeting or written comments 

may be sent by regular or electronic 

mail to EIS Scoping Comments c/o 

Patrick Cagney (see ADDRESSES). 

Ongoing communication with agencies, 

Native American tribes, public interest 

groups, and interested citizens will take 

place throughout the EIS development 

through the use of public meetings, 

mailings, and the Internet. Additional 

meetings will be scheduled upon 

completion of the DEIS. 

5. Other Environmental Review 

Coordination and Permit Requirements: 

The environmental review process will 

be comprehensive and will satisfy the 

requirements of both NEPA and the 

Washington State Environmental Policy 

Act (SEPA) per preparation of a joint 

NEPA/SEPA document with the City of 

Seattle. All other relevant Federal, State 

and local environmental laws will be 

complied with during the feasibility 

and/or design phases of the project. 

Dated: May 20, 2010. 

Anthony Wright, 

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District 

Commander. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12878 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services; List of 

Correspondence 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

ACTION: List of Correspondence from 

October 1, 2009 through December 31, 

2009. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary is publishing 

the following list pursuant to section 

607(f) of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). 

Under section 607(f) of the IDEA, the 

Secretary is required, on a quarterly 

basis, to publish in the Federal Register 

a list of correspondence from the U.S. 

Department of Education (Department) 

received by individuals during the 

previous quarter that describes the 

interpretations of the Department of the 

IDEA or the regulations that implement 

the IDEA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurel Nishi or Mary Louise Dirrigl. 

Telephone: (202) 245–7468. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), you can call 

the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities can 

obtain a copy of this notice in an 

accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

on request to the contact persons listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

following list identifies correspondence 

from the Department issued from 

October 1, 2009 through December 31, 

2009. Included on the list are those 

letters that contain interpretations of the 

requirements of the IDEA and its 

implementing regulations, as well as 

letters and other documents that the 

Department believes will assist the 

public in understanding the 

requirements of the law and its 

regulations. The date of and topic 

addressed by each letter are identified, 

and summary information is also 

provided, as appropriate. To protect the 

privacy interests of the individual or 

individuals involved, personally 

identifiable information has been 

redacted, as appropriate. 

Part B—Assistance for Education of All 

Children With Disabilities 

Section 611—Authorization; Allotment; 

Use of Funds; Authorization of 

Appropriations 

Topic Addressed: State Administration 

Æ Letters dated November 13, 2009 to 

Senator Lamar Alexander, Senator 

Richard M. Burr, Senator Tom Coburn, 

Senator Michael B. Enzi, Senator Judd 

Gregg, Senator Orrin G. Hatch, and 

Senator Johnny Isakson, regarding the 

Secretary’s authority to adjust the 

statutory caps on State administration 

for Federal fiscal year 2009 under 

section 611 of the IDEA and Title I of 

the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965, as amended, to 

help defray the costs of implementing 

the data collection requirements 

associated with the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). 

Topic Addressed: Use of Funds 

Æ Letter dated October 27, 2009 to 

National Association of Private Special 

Education Centers Executive Director 

and CEO Sherry L. Kolbe, clarifying 

when Part B, IDEA funds may be used 

for professional development activities 

for private school personnel and 

contractors serving children with 

disabilities placed in private schools by 

public agencies. 

Section 612—State Eligibility 

Topic Addressed: Maintenance of State 

Financial Support 

Æ Office of Special Education 

Programs Memorandum 10–5, dated 

December 2, 2009 to Chief State School 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
30006 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices 

Officers and State Directors of Special 

Education, regarding the State funds 

that must be included in the calculation 

of State financial support for special 

education and related services. 

Topic Addressed: Children in Private 

Schools 

Æ Letter dated December 8, 2009 to 

New York Attorney Lawrence D. 

Weinberg, regarding whether parents 

can obtain reimbursement under Part B 

of the IDEA for the cost of a private 

placement for a child not previously 

found eligible for special education and 

related services. 

Section 613—Local Educational Agency 

Eligibility 

Topic Addressed: Maintenance of Effort 

Æ Letter dated October 29, 2009 to 

Learning Disabilities Association of 

Connecticut Board of Directors 

Secretary Diane Willcutts, regarding the 

use of ARRA Part B, IDEA funds by 

local educational agencies (LEAs) and 

LEA maintenance of effort requirements. 

Æ Letter dated November 13, 2009 to 

Iowa Department of Education Chief 

Lana Michelson and Legal Consultant 

Thomas A. Mayes, reaffirming the 

Department’s position that a State 

educational agency (SEA) must prohibit 

an LEA from taking advantage of the 

LEA maintenance of effort reduction if 

the SEA identifies the LEA as having 

significant disproportionality. 

Section 616—Monitoring, Technical 

Assistance, and Enforcement 

Topic Addressed: State Determinations 

on the Performance of Each Local 

Educational Agency 

Æ Letter dated October 21, 2009 to 

Chief State School Officers and State 

Directors of Special Education urging 

States to maintain high standards and 

not compromise the determination 

process under section 616(d)(2) of the 

IDEA. 

Æ Letter dated October 30, 2009 to 

Montana Office of Public Instruction 

Director of Special Education Tim 

Harris, clarifying that an SEA must 

prohibit an LEA that receives a 

determination of ‘‘needs assistance,’’ 

‘‘needs intervention,’’ or ‘‘needs 

substantial intervention’’ pursuant to 

section 616(d)(2) of the IDEA from 

taking advantage of the 50 percent LEA 

maintenance of effort reduction. 

Part C—Infants and Toddlers With 

Disabilities 

Section 635—Requirements for 

Statewide System 

Topic Addressed: Complaint Resolution 

Æ Letter dated October 27, 2009 to 

Nevada Aging and Disability Services 

Division Part C Coordinator Wendy 

Whipple, regarding the obligation of the 

State lead agency to provide 

compensatory services under Part C of 

the IDEA for children who were denied 

early intervention services, even after 

they moved out of the State. 

Section 639—Procedural Safeguards 

Topic Addressed: Evaluations, Parental 

Consent, and Reevaluations 

Æ Letter dated November 13, 2009 to 

California Early Start Part C Coordinator 

Rick Ingraham, regarding when parental 

consent must be obtained for changes in 

the individualized family service plan. 

Other Letters That Do Not Interpret the 

Idea But May Be of Interest To Readers 

Topic Addressed: Seclusion and 

Restraint 

Æ Letter dated December 8, 2009 to 

Senator Christopher J. Dodd, 

Representative George Miller, and 

Congresswoman Cathy McMorris 

Rodgers, outlining principles for 

Congress to consider in developing 

legislation to limit the use of physical 

restraint and seclusion in schools and 

other educational settings that receive 

Federal funds. 

Electronic Access To This Document 

You can view this document, as well 

as all other Department of Education 

documents published in the Federal 

Register, in text or Adobe Portable 

Document Format (PDF) on the Internet 

at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/ 

news/fedregister/index.html. 

To use PDF you must have Adobe 

Acrobat Reader, which is available free 

at this site. If you have questions about 

using PDF, call the U.S. Government 

Printing Office (GPO), toll-free, at 1– 

888–293–6498; or in the Washington, 

DC area at (202) 512–1530. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/

index.html. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Number 84.027, Assistance to States for 

Education of Children with Disabilities) 

Dated: May 24, 2010. 

Alexa Posny, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12946 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

SUMMARY: The Acting Director, 

Information Collection Clearance 

Division, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of 

Management invites comments on the 

submission for OMB review as required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before June 28, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be addressed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention: Education Desk Officer, 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street, NW., Room 10222, New 

Executive Office Building, Washington, 

DC 20503, be faxed to (202) 395–5806 or 

e-mailed to 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov with a 

cc: to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) provide interested 

Federal agencies and the public an early 

opportunity to comment on information 

collection requests. OMB may amend or 

waive the requirement for public 

consultation to the extent that public 

participation in the approval process 

would defeat the purpose of the 

information collection, violate State or 

Federal law, or substantially interfere 

with any agency’s ability to perform its 

statutory obligations. The Acting 

Director, Information Collection 

Clearance Division, Regulatory 

Information Management Services, 

Office of Management, publishes that 

notice containing proposed information 

collection requests prior to submission 

of these requests to OMB. Each 

proposed information collection, 

grouped by office, contains the 

following: (1) Type of review requested, 

e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or 

reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of 

the collection; (4) Description of the 

need for, and proposed use of, the 

information; (5) Respondents and 

frequency of collection; and (6) 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES