Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Notices 50973 

4 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II). 

5See 47 CFR 1.1200(a), 1.1206. 

6See Commission Emphasizes the Public’s 

Responsibilities in Permit-But-Disclose 

Proceedings, Public Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 19945 

(2000). 

7See 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2). Other rules pertaining 

to oral and written presentations are also set forth 

in 1.1206(b). See 47 CFR 1.1206(b). 

to act within the above time frames, the 

application shall be ‘‘deemed granted.’’

Alternatively, CTIA asks the 

Commission to establish a presumption 

that entitles an applicant to a courtordered injunction granting the 

application unless the zoning authority 

can justify the delay. Third, CTIA asks 

the Commission to clarify that section 

332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II), which forbids state 

and local decisions that ‘‘prohibit or 

have the effect of prohibiting the 

provision of personal wireless 

services,’’ 4 bars zoning decisions that 

have the effect of preventing a specific 

provider from providing service to a 

location on the basis of another 

provider’s presence there. Finally, CTIA 

requests that the Commission preempt, 

under section 253 of the 

Communications Act, local ordinances 

and state laws that automatically require 

a wireless service provider to obtain a 

variance before siting facilities. 

Procedural Matters 

This proceeding has been designated 

as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding in 

accordance with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules.5 Parties making oral ex 

parte presentations in this proceeding 

are reminded that memoranda 

summarizing the presentation must 

contain the presentation’s substance and 

not merely list the subjects discussed.6

More than a one- or two-sentence 

description of the views and arguments 

presented is generally required.7

Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using: (1) The Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS), (2) the Federal Government’s 

eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing 

paper copies. See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121 (May 1, 1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/ 

cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Filers should follow the instructions 

provided on the Web site for submitting 

comments. 

• For ECFS filers, if multiple docket 

or rulemaking numbers appear in the 

caption of this proceeding, filers must 

transmit one electronic copy of the 

comments for each docket or 

rulemaking number referenced in the 

caption. In completing the transmittal 

screen, filers should include their full 

name, U.S. Postal Service mailing 

address, and the applicable docket or 

rulemaking number. Parties may also 

submit an electronic comment by 

Internet e-mail. To get filing 

instructions, filers should send an email to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the 

following words in the body of the 

message, ‘‘get form.’’ A sample form and 

directions will be sent in response. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

four copies of each filing. If more than 

one docket or rulemaking number 

appears in the caption of this 

proceeding, filers must submit two 

additional copies for each additional 

docket or rulemaking number. 

Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail 

(although we continue to experience 

delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service 

mail). All filings must be addressed to 

the Commission’s Secretary, Office of 

the Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• The Commission’s contractor will 

receive hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary at 236 

Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, 

Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours 

at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All 

hand deliveries must be held together 

with rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes must be disposed of before 

entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–

418–0432 (tty). 

Parties shall send one copy of their 

comments and reply comments to Best 

Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 

12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, (800) 378–3160, 

e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Comments 

filed in response to this public notice 

will be available for public inspection 

and copying during business hours in 

the FCC Reference Information Center, 

Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 

CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554, and 

via the Commission’s Electronic 

Comment Filing System (ECFS) by 

entering the docket number, WT Docket 

No. 08–165. The comments may also be 

purchased from Best Copy and Printing, 

Inc., telephone (800) 378–3160, 

facsimile (202) 488–5563, or e-mail 

FCC@BCPIWEB.com. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

James D. Schlichting, 

Acting Chief, Wireless Telecommunications 

Bureau. 

[FR Doc. E8–20010 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 08–04] 

Tienshan, Inc. v. Tianjin Hua Feng 

Transport Agency Co., Ltd.; Notice of 

Filing of Complaint and Assignment 

Notice is given that a complaint has 

been filed with the Federal Maritime 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) by 

Tienshan, Inc. Complainant asserts that 

it is a corporation organized and 

existing pursuant to the laws of the 

State of Delaware with its principal 

place of business at 231 Wilson Avenue, 

South Norwalk, Connecticut 06854. 

Complainant alleges that Respondent, 

Tianjin Hua Feng Transport Agency Co., 

Ltd., is a foreign corporation organized 

and operating pursuant the laws of the 

People’s Republic of China with its 

principal place of business at Rm. 1002, 

Bldg. A, International Commercial 

Trade Center, No. 59 Machang Road, 

Hexi District, Tianjin, China. 

Complainant also alleges that 

Respondent is operating as a bonded 

and tariffed foreign-based Non-VesselOperating Common Carrier under FMC 

No. 018117. 

Complainant asserts that, in April 

2008 it signed a sales contract for the 

purchase of stoneware from Henan 

Huatai Ceramic Technology Trading 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Henan Huatai’’ or 

‘‘Shipper’’), located in Henan, China, 

and that the terms of sale were FOB 

Tianjin Port, China. Complainant avers 

that it purchased the stoneware in order 

to perform its contracts with Wal-Mart 

Stores, Inc. (‘‘Wal-Mart’’) and other U.S. 

retailers. Complainant maintains that it 

paid the full contract price to Henan 

Huatai, and consequently, title to the 

goods was transferred to Complainant. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

50974 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Notices 

Complainant alleges that the goods 

were loaded on a Wan Hai Lines 

(Singapore) PTE Ltd. (‘‘Wan Hai’’) 

vessel, under a Wan Hai bill of lading 

naming Henan Huatai as Shipper, and 

Complainant as Consignee; and that the 

cargo arrived at the port of discharge, 

Long Beach, CA, mid-June 2008. 

Complainant further alleges that it paid 

the full amount of the ocean freight and 

other charges to Wan Hai. Complainant 

claims that Shipper, Henan Huatai, 

went out of business in June 2008, and 

Respondent, acting as a freight 

forwarder in China on behalf of the 

Shipper, is unlawfully holding the 

original bill of lading, alleging debts 

owed by Shipper to Respondent. 

Complainant alleges that 

Respondent’s refusal to provide the 

original bill of lading to Complainant, 

unless Complainant paid to Respondent 

the amount owed by the Shipper, 

constitutes an unreasonable regulation 

or practice related to the delivery of 

property in violation of 46 U.S.C. 

41102(c) (formerly § 10(d)(1) of the 

Shipping Act of 1984). Complainant 

claims injury in the form of demurrage 

charges in the amount of $16,944.00; 

loss of its funds held in an escrow 

account required by Wan Hai in the 

amount of $47,801.42; and liquidated 

damages imposed by Wal-Mart for lost 

sales in the amount $106,115.00; for a 

total of $170,860.42, with liquidated 

damages continuing to accrue. 

Complainant requests that the 

Commission issue as relief, an Order: (1) 

Compelling Respondent to answer the 

charges in the subject complaint, and 

scheduling a hearing in Washington, 

DC; (2) finding that Respondent’s 

activities were unlawful and in 

violation of the Shipping Act; (3) 

compelling Respondent to pay 

reparations of $170,860.42 plus interest, 

costs, and attorney’s fees; and (4) 

requiring Respondent to provide 

Complainant with the original bill of 

lading to allow Complainant to secure 

release of its escrow deposit from Wan 

Hai and stop other liquidated damages 

from accruing. Additionally, 

Complainant requests that the 

Commission issue further relief as it 

deems just and proper. 

This proceeding has been assigned to 

the Office of Administrative Law Judges. 

Hearing in this matter, if any is held, 

shall commence within the time 

limitations prescribed in 46 CFR 502.61, 

and only after consideration has been 

given by the parties and the presiding 

officer to the use of alternative forms of 

dispute resolution. The hearing shall 

include oral testimony and crossexamination in the discretion of the 

presiding officer only upon proper 

showing that there are genuine issues of 

material fact that cannot be resolved on 

the basis of sworn statements, affidavits, 

depositions, or other documents or that 

the nature of the matter in issue is such 

that an oral hearing and crossexamination are necessary for the 

development of an adequate record. 

Pursuant to the further terms of 46 CFR 

502.61, the initial decision of the 

presiding officer in this proceeding shall 

be issued by August 26, 2009, and the 

final decision of the Commission shall 

be issued by December 24, 2009. 

Karen V. Gregory, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–20115 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality 

Common Formats for Patient Safety 

Data Collection and Event Reporting 

AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research 

and Quality (AHRQ), DHHS. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability—

Common Formats for Safety Data 

Collection and Event Reporting. 

SUMMARY: The Patient Safety and 

Quality Improvement Act of 2005 

(Patient Safety Act) provides for the 

formation of Patient Safety 

Organizations (PSOs), which would 

collect and analyze confidential 

information reported by healthcare 

providers. The Patient Safety Act (at 42 

U.S.C. 299b–23) authorizes the 

collection of this information in a 

standardized manner, as explained in 

the related Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking published in the Federal 

Register on February 12, 2008: 73 FR 

8112–8183. As requested by the 

Secretary of DHHS, AHRQ has 

coordinated the development of a set of 

common definitions and reporting 

formats (Common Formats) which 

would facilitate the voluntary collection 

of patient safety data and reporting of 

this information to PSOs. The purpose 

of this notice is to announce the initial 

release of the Common Formats, Version 

0.1 Beta, and the process for 

development of future versions. 

DATES: Ongoing public input. 

ADDRESSES: The Common Formats can 

be accessed electronically at the 

following Web site of the Department of 

Health and Human Services: http:// 

www.pso.ahrq.gov/index.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Grinder, Center for Quality 

Improvement and Patient Safety, AHRQ, 

540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; 

Telephone (toll free): (866) 403–3697; 

Telephone (local): (301) 427–1111; TTY 

(toll free): (866) 438–7231; TTY (local): 

(301) 427–1130; E-mail: 

psoc@ahrq.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Patient Safety Act establishes a 

framework by which doctors, hospitals, 

and other health care providers may 

voluntarily report information on a 

privileged and confidential basis 

regarding patient safety events and 

quality of care. The Patient Safety Act 

provides for voluntary formation of 

PSOs, which can be public or private 

organizations, that collect, aggregate, 

and analyze information regarding the 

quality and safety of care delivered in 

any healthcare setting. Information that 

is assembled and developed by 

providers and PSOs—called ‘‘patient 

safety work product’’—is privileged and 

confidential; it can be used to identify 

patient safety events and unsafe 

conditions that increase risks to 

patients. 

The Patient Safety Act requires PSOs, 

to the extent practical and appropriate, 

to collect patient safety work product 

from providers in a standardized 

manner in order to permit valid 

comparisons of similar cases among 

similar providers. 

One of the goals of the legislation is 

to allow aggregation of sufficient data to 

identify and address underlying causal 

factors of patient safety problems. In 

order to facilitate standardized data 

collection, the Secretary of DHHS 

requested AHRQ to coordinate the 

development of Common Formats for 

patient safety events. 

Definitions and other details about 

PSOs and patient safety work product 

have been prepared for publication at 42 

CFR Part 3; a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking was published in the 

Federal Register on February 12, 2008, 

as noted above, and a final regulation 

implementing the Patient Safety Act is 

under review. 

Definition of Common Formats 

The term Common Formats is used to 

describe technical requirements 

developed for the uniform collection 

and reporting of patient safety data, 

including all supporting material: 

• Descriptions of patient safety events 

and unsafe conditions to be reported, 

• Delineation of data elements to be 

collected for specific types of events, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES