Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices 66455

Dated: December 14, 2001.

Marybeth Peters,

Register of Copyrights.

APPENDIX A—LIBRARIAN’S

REMAND ORDER DATED JUNE 5, 2001

[Docket No. 2002–2 CARP CD 93–97]

In the Matter of Distribution of 1993, 1994,

1995, 1996 and 1997 Cable Royalty Funds

Order

On April 16, 2001, the Librarian of

Congress received the report of the Copyright

Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP) in the

above-captioned proceeding. Both the Motion

Picture Association of America (MPAA) and

the Independent Producers Group (IPG), the

two litigants in this proceeding, have filed

their petitions to modify and/or set aside the

determination of the CARP, and their replies

to those petitions.

After a review of the report and

examination of the record in this proceeding,

the Register recommends that the Librarian

reject the decision of the CARP, and remand

the case to the CARP for modification of the

decision. The Register concludes that the

CARP acted arbitrarily in three ways. First,

the CARP did not follow the decisional

guidelines and intent of the June 22, 2000,

Order issued in this proceeding which

directed the CARP to dismiss any claimants

listed in exhibit D of IPG’s written direct case

that did not have a written representation

agreement with Worldwide Subsidy Group

on or before July 31, 1998.

Second, the CARP arbitrarily included two

programs—Critter Gitters and Bloopy’s

Buddies—in the claim of Litton Syndications,

Inc. (represented by IPG) when IPG did not

introduce any evidence as to the value of

those programs. In addition, the CARP

arbitrarily assigned the program Dramatic

Moments in Black Sports History to IPG

without adequate explanation of its decision.

Third, the CARP acted arbitrarily in

awarding 0.5% of the 1997 cable royalties to

IPG, and the remaining 99.5% of the royalties

to MPAA, because it did not provide any

explanation of the methodology or analysis it

used to arrive at these numbers.

A full discussion of the Register’s reasons

for these conclusions shall appear in the final

order in this proceeding published in the

Federal Register.

Wherefore, the Register recommends that

the Librarian reject the CARP’s report and

remand to the CARP to take the following

actions in modifying its report:

1. That the CARP award royalties to IPG

only on the claims of Litton Syndications and

not award any royalties to IPG based upon

the other claimants in exhibit D of IPG’s

written direct case;

2. That the CARP credit Litton with only

the following programs: Algo’s Factory; Jack

Hanna’s Animal Adventures; Harvey

Penick’s Golf Lesson; Mom USA; Nprint;

Sophisticated Gents; Just Imagine and The

Sports Bar;

3. That the CARP explain its reasons for

crediting Dramatic Moments in Black Sports

History to Litton’s claim; and, if it concludes

that its initial decision was correct, add the

program to the list contained in #2;

4. That the CARP enter a new distribution

percentage for IPG, based only on the claim

of Litton and the programs listed in #2 and,

if appropriate, #3, and allocate the remainder

of the royalties to MPAA; and

5. That the CARP fully explain its reasons

and methodology for the distribution

percentages it assigns to IPG and MPAA.

The Register further recommends that the

CARP be given until June 20, 2001, to report

its modified decision to the Librarian and

that section 251.55 of the rules, 37 C.F.R.,

apply to the CARP’s modified report, except

that the periods for petitions and replies be

shortened from 14 days to 7 days for

petitions, and from 14 days to 5 days for

replies, due to the proximity of the time

period for issuance of the Librarian’s final

order in this proceeding.

So recommended.

Dated: June 5, 2001.

Marybeth Peters,

Register of Copyrights.

So Ordered.

James H. Billington,

The Librarian of Congress.

[FR Doc. 01–31607 Filed 12–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–33–P

MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP

AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

FOUNDATION

Institute for Environmental Conflict

Resolution—Program Evaluation

Instruments: Agency Information

Collection Activities: Proposed

Collection; Comment Request

AGENCY: Morris K. Udall Scholarship

and Excellence in National

Environmental Policy Foundation, U.S.

Institute for Environmental Conflict

Resolution.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this document announces

that the U.S. Institute for Environmental

Conflict Resolution (the U.S. Institute),

part of the Morris K. Udall Foundation,

is planning to submit 18 proposed

Information Collection Requests (ICRs)

to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB). Each of these 18 ICRs is a new

collection request; they are being

consolidated under a single filing to

provide a more coherent picture of

information collection activities by the

U.S. Institute. The proposed information

collection is expected to neither have a

significant economic impact on

respondents, nor affect a substantial

number of small entities. The average

cost (in lost time) per respondent is

estimated to be $4.91.

Before submitting the ICRs to OMB for

review and approval, the U.S. Institute

is soliciting comments on specific

aspects of the information collection as

described at the beginning of the section

labeled ‘‘Supplementary Information.’’

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before February 25, 2002.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Institute for

Environmental Conflict Resolution, 110

South Church Avenue, Suite 3350,

Tucson, Arizona 85701. Worldwide

web: www.ecr.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David P. Bernard, Associate Director,

U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict

Resolution, 110 South Church Avenue,

Suite 3350, Tucson, Arizona 85701, Fax:

520–670–5530, Phone: 520–670–5299,

E-mail: bernard@ecr.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OVERVIEW

To comply with the Government

Performance and Results Act (GPRA)

(Pub. L. 103–62), the U.S. Institute for

Environmental Conflict Resolution, as

part of the Morris K. Udall Foundation,

is required to produce, each year, an

Annual Performance Plan, linked

directly to the goals and objectives

outlined in the Institute’s five-year

Strategic Plan. The U.S. Institute is also

required to produce an Annual

Performance Report, evaluating progress

toward achieving its performance

commitments. The U.S. Institute is

currently developing a program

evaluation system to gather and analyze

information needed to assist in

producing its Annual Performance

Report.

The U.S. Institute is committed to

establishing, achieving, and maintaining

a national standard of excellence in all

its programs, products, and services. To

do so, the U.S. Institute requires high

quality information concerning

effectiveness of its various initiatives.

Systematic and ongoing monitoring of

program outcomes will allow the U.S.

Institute to perform a variety of tasks,

including giving individual project and

program managers, as well as the

Institute’s management, the ability to

accurately assess and report on program

and project achievements. The new

evaluation system has been carefully

designed to support efficient and

economical generation, analysis and use

of this much-needed information, with

an emphasis on program feedback,

learning and improvement.

As part of the program evaluation

system, the U.S. Institute intends to

collect specific information from

participants in, and users of, several of

its programs and services. Specifically,

five of the Institute’s programs and

services are the subject of this Federal

66456 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices

Notice: (1) Environmental conflict

assessment services; (2) environmental

conflict resolution services; (3) the

National Roster of Environmental

Dispute Resolution and Consensus

Building Professionals; (4)

environmental conflict resolution

training courses and workshops; and (5)

meeting facilitation. Evaluations will

mainly involve administering

questionnaires to parties and

professionals engaged in U.S. Institute

projects, as well as members and users

of the National Roster. Responses by

members of the public to the Institute’s

request for information (i.e.,

questionnaires) will be voluntary and

anonymous.

The U.S. Institute is exploring with

several other federal agencies how its

program evaluation system can be of use

to their own program evaluation needs.

The broader use of similar data

collection instruments and consistent

data collection and analysis techniques

may provide cost savings to other

agencies and accelerate the rate at

which each agency reviews and

improves effective performance of

conflict resolution processes.

Key Issues

The U.S. Institute would appreciate

receiving comments that can be used to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the U.S.

Institute, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

(ii) Determine whether the nature and

extent of the proposed level of

anonymity for those from whom the

U.S. Institute will be collecting

information is adequate and

appropriate;

(iii) Evaluate the accuracy of the U.S.

Institute’s estimate of the burden

associated with the proposed

information collection activities;

(iv) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected;

(v) Minimize the burden of the

information collection on those who are

to respond, including suggestions

concerning use of automated collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology (e.g., allowing electronic

submission of responses).

As used in this document, ‘‘burden’’

means the total time, effort, or financial

resources expended by persons to

generate, maintain, retain, disclose or

provide information to or for a Federal

Agency. This includes time needed to:

review instructions; develop, acquire,

install, and utilize technology and

systems for the purposes of collecting,

validating, and verifying information,

processing and maintaining

information, and disclosing and

providing information; adjust existing

ways to comply with any previously

applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Technical Details

The upcoming information collection

request by the U.S. Institute is one step

in the process for establishing an

operational program evaluation system.

Development of the system formally

began in 1999, as part of a broader

collaborative program evaluation

initiative co-sponsored by the U.S.

Institute and the Policy Consensus

Initiative (PCI), involving the University

of Arizona’s Udall Center for Studies in

Public Policy, Indiana University’s

School for Public and Environmental

Affairs, the Indiana Conflict Resolution

Institute, and Syracuse University’s

Maxwell School for Citizenship and

Public Affairs. After extensive

preparation, a two-day workshop on

program evaluation was held with

several federal and state program

managers, academic researchers, and

practitioners. Subsequently, the U.S.

Institute and PCI began working

together with two state agencies that

administer public policy and

environmental dispute resolution

programs; the Massachusetts Office of

Dispute Resolution and the Oregon

Dispute Resolution Commission. With

PCI’s support and coordination and

contracted program evaluation

consultants, the U.S. Institute and these

state programs have been developing

their program evaluation systems. These

programs have now completed pilot

testing and are in the early stages of

implementation. This collaborative

effort has provided essential guidance,

critical review and confirmation for the

U.S. Institute’s approach to its program

evaluation system.

Technical details of the Institute’s

evolving program evaluation system are

contained in a December 2001 draft

report entitled Applying Program

Evaluation Methods at the U.S. Institute

for Environmental Conflict Resolution.

Paper copies of this report can be

obtained by contacting the Institute; an

electronic copy can be downloaded

from the Institute’s website:

www.ecr.gov/techdoc.htm.

One of the most important design

criteria for any program evaluation

system is its validity—ensuring that

reported results will be trustworthy and

accurately portray the level of success

that individual programs and projects

achieved in meeting intended outcomes.

For each of the Institute’s five program

and service areas an operational

diagram was composed that

systematically registers all intended

program outcomes and each of the

factors believed by current program

theory to affect those outcomes. These

five outcome diagrams were then used

as the framework for formulating the

detailed questionnaires that will be used

to gather information for evaluating

whether intended outcomes were

achieved, and for providing diagnostic

insights useful in analyzing what factors

most influenced the outcomes.

Primary audiences for results from the

U.S. Institute’s program evaluation

system include members of the U.S.

Institute program staff and management,

which will use the information in

decision-making regarding program

operation and directions, and oversight

bodies such as the Udall Foundation

Board of Trustees and OMB. Secondary

audiences will likely include other

federal agencies, practitioners in the

field, researchers, and members of the

public. The U.S. Institute will use the

information and analysis generated by

its program evaluation system for a

variety of purposes, including: ongoing

improvements to design and operation

of projects and programs; periodic

performance reporting; annual

evaluations of personnel performance;

and learning about what factors most

influence successful outcomes in

specific situations. Ultimately, it is

expected that this information will aid

further development of best practices for

the field of environmental conflict

resolution (ECR).

A. List of ICRs Planned To Be Submitted

The U.S. Institute is planning to

submit 18 ICRs to OMB, corresponding

to 18 individual questionnaires that will

be administered to those involved in

environmental conflict resolution (ECR)

activities connected with U.S. Institute

services and programs. Questionnaires

will be used to gather information

concerning the effectiveness of the ECR

services and programs provided by or

on behalf of the U.S. Institute. As noted

above, consideration is being given to

the use of these questionnaires by other

agencies for ECR activities, which may

or may not involve the U.S. Institute. In

the listing below, the questionnaires are

organized into five activity areas,

indicating the recipients of the

questionnaires and, in parentheses, the

frequency of administration. It should

be noted that additional questionnaires

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices 66457

will be administered to U.S. Institute

project managers, but OMB clearance is

not required for questionnaires directed

to federal employees.

Environmental Conflict Assessment

(1) Assessment—Initiating

Organization, at the conclusion of

the process (once)

(2) Assessment—Neutral, at the

conclusion of the process (once)

Environmental Conflict Resolution

Services

(3) ECR Process—Parties, at the

conclusion of the process (once)

(4) ECR Process—Parties, subsequent

to the conclusion of the process

(once)

(5) ECR Process—Parties’ Attorneys,

subsequent to the conclusion of the

process (mediation only) (once)

(6) ECR Process—Neutral (facilitators

and mediators) at the conclusion of

the process (once)

(7) ECR Process—Neutral case

summary at conclusion of the

process (once)

National Roster of Environmental

Dispute Resolution and ConsensusBuilding Professionals

(8) National Roster—Members (once,

upon acceptance to the roster)

(9) National Roster—Members (annual

follow-up)

(10) National Roster—Users (once,

upon initial use of WWW site)

(11) National Roster-Users (once, per

Roster search)

(12) National Roster—Users

requesting a referral (once, per

request)

Environmental Conflict Resolution

Training Courses and Workshops

(13) Training—Participants, prior to

start (once)

(14) Training—Participants, at the

conclusion (once)

(15) Training—Participants, follow-up

(once, six months after training)

(16) Training—Instructor, prior to

start (once)

(17) Training—Instructor, at the

conclusion (once)

Meeting Facilitation

(18) Meeting Facilitation—Meeting

Attendees, at the conclusion of the

process (once)

B. Contact Individual for ICRs

David P. Bernard, Associate Director,

U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict

Resolution, 110 South Church Avenue,

Suite 3350, Tucson, Arizona 85701, Fax:

520–670–5530, Phone: 520–670–5299,

E-mail: bernard@ecr.gov.

C. Confidentiality and Access to

Information

To encourage candor and

responsiveness on the part of those

completing the questionnaires, the U.S.

Institute intends to report information

obtained from questionnaires only in

the aggregate. The U.S. Institute intends

to withhold the names of respondents

and individuals named in responses.

Such information regarding individuals

is exempt from disclosure under the

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),

pursuant to exemption (b)(6) (5 U.S.C.

Section 552(b)(6), as the public interest

in disclosure of that information would

not outweigh the privacy interests of the

individuals. Therefore, respondents will

be afforded anonymity. Furthermore, no

substantive case-specific information

that might be confidential under statute,

court order or rules, or agreement of the

parties will be sought.

The U.S. Institute is committed to

providing agencies, researchers and the

public with information on the

effectiveness of environmental conflict

resolution (ECR) and the performance of

the U.S. Institute’s programs and

services. Access to such useful

information will be facilitated to the

extent possible. The U.S. Institute is

also committed, however, to managing

the collection and reporting of data so

as not to interfere with any ongoing ECR

processes or the subsequent

implementation of agreements. Case

specific data will not be released until

an appropriate time period has passed

following conclusion of the case; such

time period to be determined. FOIA

requests will be evaluated on a case-bycase basis.

D. Information on Individual ICRs

Environmental Conflict Assessment

The U.S. Institute consistently

encourages the use of conflict or

situation assessments. Generally, such

assessments are conducted by a neutral

party and include a series of

confidential structured interviews in

person or on the telephone with

individuals or groups of parties.

Through such assessments, neutrals

identify and clarify key issues and

parties, and assess the appropriateness

of an ECR process and its potential for

helping the parties reach agreement.

Assessment reports seek to clarify and

communicate in a neutral manner the

issues and concerns of all parties, and

commonly conclude with process

design recommendations intended to

provide the parties with one or more

options for effectively collaborating in

inventing a solution to their conflict.

(1) Assessment—Initiating

Organization Questionnaire; New

collection request; Abstract:

Immediately following conclusion of a

conflict assessment process, the

initiating agency or organization(s) will

be surveyed once via questionnaire to

determine their views on a variety of

issues. Topics to be investigated

include: was the conflict assessment

approach well suited to the nature of the

issues in conflict; was the selected

neutral appropriate for the assignment;

were all key parties consulted, and,

were all key issues and alternatives

properly identified and considered? The

voluntary questionnaire contains 15

simple questions, many of which

require respondents to only provide a

fill-in-the blank rating number.

Information from the questionnaire will

permit U.S. Institute staff to not only

evaluate performance for specific

projects, but also improve the design of

future assessment projects. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are individuals in

organizations that participate in a

conflict assessment conducted by U.S.

Institute staff or contractors. Burden

Statement: It is estimated that the

annual national public burden and

associated costs and will be

approximately 15 hours and $405

respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average (a)

respondents require 12 minutes per

questionnaire (b) there are 1.5

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 50 assessments conducted each

year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a)

there are no capital or start-up costs for

respondents, and (b) respondents’ time

is valued at $27 hr.

(2) Assessment—Neutral

Questionnaire; New collection request;

Abstract: Immediately following

conclusion of a conflict assessment, the

selected neutral(s) will be surveyed

once via questionnaire to determine

their views on a variety of issues. Topics

to be investigated include: was the

conflict assessment approach well

suited to the nature of the issues in

conflict; were all key parties consulted,

and, were all key issues and alternatives

properly identified and considered? In

most cases, it will be specified in the

neutral’s contract that they be required

to complete the questionnaire. The

neutral’s questionnaire contains 14

simple questions, many of which

require respondents only to provide a

fill-in-the blank rating number.

Information from the questionnaire will

permit U.S. Institute staff to not only

evaluate performance for the neutral,

but also improve the process for

selecting appropriate neutrals for future

assessment projects. Affected Entities:

Entities potentially affected by this

action are neutral ECR practitioners who

66458 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices

either are staff members of the U.S.

Institute or have been contracted by the

Institute. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs and

will be approximately 10.5 hours and

$378, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

neutrals require 10 minutes per

questionnaire (b) there are 1.25

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 50 assessments conducted each

year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a)

there are no capital or start-up costs for

respondents, and (b) respondents’ time

is valued at $36 hr.

Environmental Conflict Resolution

Services

A variety of non-adversarial,

participatory processes are available as

adjuncts or alternatives to conventional

forums for resolving environmental

disputes or reaching environmental

agreements. Such environmental

conflict resolution (ECR) processes

range broadly depending on the nature

of the dispute and the parties involved

as well as their context (for example,

early on in planning processes, when

seeking administrative relief, or during

litigation). Under the right

circumstances, a well-designed ECR

process facilitated or mediated by the

right neutral can effectively assist

parties in reaching agreement on plans,

proposals, and recommendations to

settle their dispute. ECR processes can

also result in improvement in

relationships among the parties, and

increase their individual and collective

capacity to manage or resolve future

conflicts. The following survey

instruments have been designed for use

across the full range of ECR, be they

collaborative agreement-seeking

processes or environmental mediation.

(3) ECR Process—Parties

Questionnaire; New collection request;

Abstract: Immediately following

conclusion of an ECR process, the

parties that have been involved will be

surveyed once, via questionnaire, to

determine their views on a variety of

issues. Topics to be investigated

include: are the parties now more likely

to consider collaborative processes in

the future; were the ‘‘right’’ parties

effectively engaged throughout the

process; was there an appropriate scope

and design for the ECR process; did the

parties have the capacity to engage in

the process; was the neutral (or team)

that guided the process appropriate; and

did all parties have access to the best

available and relevant information? The

voluntary questionnaire contains 29

questions, many of which require

respondents only to fill-in-the blank

with their level of agreement or a rating

number. Information from the

questionnaire will permit U.S. Institute

staff to evaluate if the intended ECR

outcomes were achieved, and if so or

not, why. Affected Entities: Entities

potentially affected by this action are

parties to ECR process conducted by, on

behalf of, the U.S. Institute. Burden

Statement: It is estimated that the

annual national public burden and

associated costs and will be

approximately 400 hours and $10,800,

respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

parties require 12 minutes per

questionnaire (b) there are 20

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 100 ECR projects conducted

each year. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $27 hr.

(4) ECR Process—Parties Follow-up

Questionnaire; New collection request;

Abstract: To gain information

concerning the loner-term effectiveness

of the ECR process, an additional

questionnaire will be administered to

the parties at a future date following

conclusion of the process. Topics to be

examined include: do all parties

perceive an improvement in their

collective relationships; do the parties

consider the ECR process to have been

fair and open; are the parties satisfied

with services of the U.S. Institute; did

the decision makers agree to implement

the plans, proposals, recommendations

or settlement agreement; and—if

implemented—did the solution endure

changes in conditions and

unanticipated events. The voluntary

questionnaire contains 13 questions,

many of which require respondents to

only fill-in-the blank with their level of

agreement or a rating number.

Information from the questionnaire will

permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate if

the ECR outcomes were sustainable, and

if not, why. Affected Entities: Entities

potentially affected by this action are

parties to ECR process conducted by, on

behalf of, the U.S. Institute. Burden

Statement: It is estimated that the

annual national public burden and

associated costs and will be

approximately 333 hours and $9,000,

respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

parties require 10 minutes per

questionnaire (b) there are 20

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 100 ECR projects conducted

each year. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $27 hr.

(5) ECR Process—Parties’ Attorneys

Questionnaire (mediation only); New

collection request; Abstract:

Immediately following conclusion of an

ECR mediation process, attorneys (if

any) who represented parties to the

dispute will be surveyed once, via

questionnaire, to determine their views

on a variety of issues. Topics to be

investigated are similar to those in

questionnaire (4), above, except this

instrument places greater emphasis on

gaining a legal perspective. This

voluntary questionnaire contains 38

questions, and only a few of these

require other than a simple fill-in-the

blank response. Information from this

questionnaire will permit U.S. Institute

staff to evaluate if the intended ECR

outcomes were achieved, and if so or

not, why. Affected Entities: Entities

potentially affected by this action are

parties to ECR process conducted by, on

behalf of, the U.S. Institute. Burden

Statement: It is estimated that the

annual national public burden and

associated costs and will be

approximately 9 hours and $369,

respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

attorneys require 12 minutes per

questionnaire; (b) there are 0.45

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 100 ECR projects conducted

each year. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $41 hr.

(6) ECR Process—Neutral (facilitators

and mediators) Questionnaire; New

collection request; Abstract:

Immediately following conclusion of an

environmental conflict resolution

process, the neutral(s) will be surveyed

once, via questionnaire, to determine

their views on a variety of issues. Topics

to be investigated include: was the ECR

approach well suited to the nature of the

issues in conflict; were all key parties

consulted, and, were all key issues and

alternatives properly identified and

considered? In most cases, it will be

specified in the neutral’s contract that

they be required to complete the

questionnaire. The neutral’s

questionnaire contains 44 questions.

Information from this questionnaire will

permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate if

the intended ECR outcomes were

achieved, and if so or not, why. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are neutrals in ECR processes

conducted by, on behalf of, the U.S.

Institute. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices 66459

public burden and associated costs and

will be approximately 62.5 hours and

$2,250, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

neutrals will require minutes per

questionnaire; (b) there are 1.25

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 100 ECR projects conducted

each year. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $36 hr.

(7) ECR Process—Neutral case

summary; New collection request;

Abstract: Immediately following

conclusion of an environmental conflict

resolution process, the neutral(s) will be

asked to provide answers to four

questions the answers to which will

help the U.S. Institute characterize the

controversy. Among other things, the

questions explore the benefits from the

collaborative process, and insights

concerning which controversies are

most appropriate for collaborative

processes, along with suggestions

regarding the design and

implementation of ECR processes. In

those cases managed by the U.S.

Institute, it will be specified in the

neutral’s contract that they be required

to provide answers to these questions.

Information from this questionnaire will

permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate if

the intended ECR outcomes were

achieved, and if so or not, why. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are neutrals in ECR processes

conducted by, on behalf of, the U.S.

Institute. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs and

will be approximately 31.25 hours and

$1,125, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

neutrals will require 15 minutes per

questionnaire; (b) there are 1.25

respondents per project (c) respondents

are surveyed only once, and (d) there

will be 100 ECR projects conducted

each year. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $36 hr.

National Roster of Environmental

Dispute Resolution and ConsensusBuilding Professionals

The U.S. Institute has a full-time

Roster Manager who supervises a Roster

Program consisting of two main

components: design and operation of

the National Roster of Environmental

Dispute Resolution and Consensus

Building Professionals, and overseeing

the associated referral system.

Membership on the roster remains open

at all times. Potential members apply on

line and are required to provide

information that demonstrates a level of

training and experience adequate to

meet specific, objective entry criteria.

First constituted in February 2000, the

roster currently includes over 180

members, nationwide. When making

referrals and locating neutrals for subcontracting, the U.S. Institute uses the

roster as a primary source to find

experienced individuals, particularly in

the locale of the project or dispute (as

required by the Institute’s enabling

legislation). Currently, dispute

resolutions specialists at the U.S. EPA

have direct access to the roster and use

it to assist them in finding practitioners.

Other federal agencies, and the public,

will soon have direct access to the roster

via the WWW. When requested by any

party to a qualifying dispute, the Roster

Manager also provides advice and

assistance regarding selection of

appropriate practitioners.

(8) National Roster—Members

Questionnaire; New collection request;

Abstract: After being registered as a

roster member, individuals will be

surveyed once, via questionnaire, to

determine their views on a variety of

issues. Topics to be investigated include

their level of satisfaction with the

application process and computer

system that provides web access; and

their level awareness of the roster and

how to best use it for their needs. This

voluntary questionnaire contains 20

questions, and most require only a

simple fill-in-the blank response. Data

and information from this questionnaire

will permit U.S. Institute staff to

evaluate the performance of the Roster

Program, to determine it is meeting its

intended outcomes, and if so or not,

why. Affected Entities: Entities

potentially affected by this action are

roster members. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs and

will be approximately 66.7 hours and

$2,400, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

roster members require 20 minutes per

questionnaire; (b) there are 200 roster

members per year; (c) respondents are

surveyed only once. Cost burden

estimates assume: (a) there are no

capital or start-up costs for respondents,

and (b) respondents’ time is valued at

$36 hr.

(9) National Roster—Members Followup Questionnaire; New collection

request; Abstract: After being registered

as a roster member for a period of time,

individuals will be again surveyed,

once, via questionnaire, to determine

their views on a variety of issues. Topics

to be investigated are similar to those in

questionnaire (8), described above, and

include their level of satisfaction with

their roster membership, the computer

system that provides web access; and

the degree to which roster membership

has been beneficial to them. This

voluntary questionnaire contains 20

questions, and most require only a

simple fill-in-the blank response. Data

and information from this questionnaire

will permit U.S. Institute staff to

evaluate the performance of its Roster

Program, to determine if it is meeting its

intended outcomes, and if not, why.

Affected Entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are roster

members. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs will

be approximately 76.7 hours and

$2,760, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

roster members require 20 minutes per

questionnaire; (b) there are 230 roster

members per year; (c) respondents are

surveyed only once. Cost burden

estimates assume: (a) there are no

capital or start-up costs for respondents,

and (b) respondents’ time is valued at

$36 hr.

(10) National Roster—Users

Questionnaire (Upon Registering); New

collection request; Abstract: Users who

are seeking to identify appropriate

neutrals for a specific case via electronic

access to the roster must first register on

line with the Roster Manager to gain

access to the roster website. After

gaining access, users will be surveyed

once prior to logging off from their first

use of the website to gain information

concerning the functioning and utility

of the website. Should major revisions

occur in the website design, these users

will again be surveyed, once, following

their next use of the roster website. This

voluntary questionnaire contains seven

questions, most requiring only a simple

fill-in-the blank response. Information

from this questionnaire will permit U.S.

Institute staff to evaluate the

performance of the Roster website and

whether it is meeting the intended

outcomes, and if so or not, why.

Affected Entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are individuals

who have register to use the roster

website. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs and

will be approximately 5 hours and $135,

respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

users require 15 minutes to complete

the questionnaire; (b) there are 20 new

users per year; and (c) respondents are

surveyed only once. Cost burden

estimates assume: (a) there are no

capital or start-up costs for respondents,

66460 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices

and (b) respondents’ time is valued at

$27 hr.

(11) National Roster-Questionnaire for

Users After Each Roster Search; New

collection request; Abstract: Users who

search the roster will be surveyed once

for each new roster search. This

voluntary questionnaire contains 23

questions, most requiring no more than

a simple fill-in-the blank response.

Information from this questionnaire will

permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate

how well the Roster is performing in

meeting the needs of those searching the

roster, and if so or not, why. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are individuals who use the

roster to search for names of neutrals.

Burden Statement: It is estimated that

the annual national public burden and

associated costs will be approximately

10 hours and $270, respectively. These

values were calculated assuming that on

average: (a) roster searchers require 10

minutes to complete the questionnaire;

(b) there are 60 roster searches per year;

and (c) respondents are surveyed only

once. Cost burden estimates assume: (a)

there are no capital or start-up costs for

respondents, and (b) respondents’ time

is valued at $27 hr.

(12) National Roster—Questionnaire

for Users Requesting A Referral; New

collection request; Abstract: Users who

request assistance for their roster search

directly from the Roster Manager, or

other U.S. Institute staff, will be

surveyed once for each new assisted

roster search. This voluntary

questionnaire contains 18 questions,

most requiring only a simple fill-in-the

blank response. Information from this

questionnaire will permit U.S. Institute

staff to evaluate how well the

combination of the roster and support

from Institute personnel performed in

meeting the needs of those requesting

assistance, and if or if not fully, then

why. Affected Entities: Entities

potentially affected by this action are

individuals who request assistance in

using the roster to search for names of

neutral candidates. Burden Statement: It

is estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs will

be approximately 10 hours and $360,

respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

users who have requested assistance

will require 10 minutes to complete the

questionnaire; (b) there are 60 assisted

roster searches each year; and (c)

respondents are surveyed only once for

each referral. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $36 hr.

Environmental Conflict Resolution

Training Courses and Workshops

Education and training sessions are

conducted by the U.S. Institute and its

contractors for a variety of audiences to

both increase the appropriate use of ECR

and to improve the ability of those

participating in ECR processes to

effectively negotiate on their own behalf

and collaborate on the best possible

agreement. The subject of training

sessions varies widely, depending on

the participants and their specific

training needs. The specific objectives

of the training must be articulated at the

outset and professional training

instructors are expected to design and/

or deliver appropriate training to meet

those objectives and the expectations of

the participants.

Participants in training sessions will

be asked to complete three

questionnaires, one each before the

course is presented, again at the

conclusion of the training, and finally at

some future date. Likewise, instructors

will be asked to complete two

questionnaires, one each before the

course begins, and at the conclusion of

the course.

(13) Training—Participants

Questionnaire, prior to start; New

collection request; Abstract: Training

participants will be asked to complete a

questionnaire before the course begins.

Participation is voluntary and the

questionnaire contains 18 questions,

most requiring only a simple fill-in-the

blank response. Data and information

from this questionnaire will establish a

baseline for measuring changes in an

individual’s level of skill and

knowledge as a function of participation

in the training sessions. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are individuals who

participate in training sessions

sponsored by the U.S. Institute. Burden

Statement: It is estimated that the

annual national public burden and

associated costs will be approximately

500 hours and $13,500, respectively.

These values were calculated assuming

that on average: (a) training participants

require 10 minutes to complete the

questionnaire; and (b) there are 3,000

training participants each year. Cost

burden estimates assume: (a) there are

no capital or start-up costs for

respondents, and (b) respondents’ time

is valued at $27 hr.

(14) Training—Participants

Questionnaire, at the conclusion; New

collection request; Abstract: Training

participants will be asked to complete a

questionnaire at the end of the course.

Participation is voluntary and the

survey instrument contains nine

questions, about half requiring

descriptive answers. Data and

information from this questionnaire will

be compared with the baseline

established with the pre-training

questionnaire. Results will be used to

determine the effectiveness of the

training in improving each participant’s

level of skill and knowledge, and to aid

in determining what, if any, factors

favorably or adversely affected the

participant’s learning. Affected Entities:

Entities potentially affected by this

action are individuals who participate

in training sessions sponsored by the

U.S. Institute. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs and

will be approximately 500 hours and

$13,500, respectively. These values

were calculated assuming that on

average: (a) training participants require

10 minutes to complete this

questionnaire; and (b) there are 3,000

training participants each year. Cost

burden estimates assume: (a) there are

no capital or start-up costs for

respondents, and (b) respondents’ time

is valued at $27 hr.

(15) Training—Participants

Questionnaire, Follow-Up; New

collection request; Abstract: Six months

(or an appropriate interval to be

determined) after the training session,

each participant will be asked to

complete a final questionnaire.

Participation is voluntary and the

survey instrument contains nine

questions, about half requiring

descriptive answers. Data and

information from this questionnaire will

be used to determine the longevity and

practical usefulness of any

improvements in skills and knowledge

that participants gained from the

original training sessions. The

questionnaire also contains some

questions designed to identify if and

why longer-term training results may

not be expected. Affected Entities:

Entities potentially affected by this

action are individuals who participate

in training sessions sponsored by the

U.S. Institute. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs will

be approximately 500 hours and

$13,000, respectively. These values

were calculated assuming that on

average: (a) training participants require

10 minutes to complete this

questionnaire; and (b) there are 3,000

training participants each year. Cost

burden estimates assume: (a) there are

no capital or start-up costs for

respondents, and (b) respondents’ time

is valued at $27 hr.

(16) Training—Instructor

Questionnaire, prior to start; New

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 26, 2001 / Notices 66461

collection request; Abstract: Instructors

will be asked to complete a

questionnaire before the course begins.

In most cases, it will be specified in the

instructor’s contract that they complete

the questionnaire. This survey

instrument contains six questions, most

requiring only a simple fill-in-the blank

response. Data and information from

this questionnaire will establish a

baseline of the instructor’s expectations

and intentions to be used in measuring

changes at the end of the course.

Affected Entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are instructors

who lead training sessions sponsored by

the U.S. Institute. Burden Statement: It

is estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs will

be approximately 33.3 hours and

$1,200, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

instructors require 10 minutes to

complete the questionnaire; and (b) each

year there are 200 instructors who work

on training sessions sponsored by the

U.S. Institute. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $36 hr.

(17) Training—Instructor

Questionnaire, at the conclusion; New

collection request; Abstract: When the

course concludes, instructors will be

asked to complete a questionnaire. In

most cases, it will be specified in their

contract that they complete this

questionnaire. The survey instrument

contains five questions, most requiring

only a simple fill-in-the blank response.

Data and information from this

questionnaire will help establish a

contextual baseline for evaluating

survey data from the training

participants. As well, this instrument is

also intended to generate useful

feedback on ways to improve the U.S.

Institute’s training projects. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are instructors who lead

training sessions sponsored by the U.S.

Institute. Burden Statement: It is

estimated that the annual national

public burden and associated costs will

be approximately 33.3 hours and

$1,200, respectively. These values were

calculated assuming that on average: (a)

instructors require 10 minutes to

complete the questionnaire; and (b) each

year there are 200 instructors who work

on training sessions sponsored by the

U.S. Institute. Cost burden estimates

assume: (a) there are no capital or startup costs for respondents, and (b)

respondents’ time is valued at $36 hr.

Meeting Facilitation

U.S. Institute staff and contractors

facilitate and provide leadership for

many public meetings, ranging from

small group meetings to large public

convenings of several hundred

attendees. In order to maximize the

probability that such meeting objectives

will be accomplished, the meeting

participants must both understand the

objectives for the meeting, and perceive

that the meeting was managed in a fair

and efficient manner. This requires that

the right facilitator run the meeting, and

the right people attend the meeting.

(18) Meeting Facilitation—Meeting

Attendees Questionnaire, at the

conclusion of the process; New

collection request; Abstract: Attendees

at public meetings run by U.S. Institute

staff or contractors will be asked to

complete a voluntary questionnaire at

the conclusion of the meeting. The

questionnaire used in this case contains

nine questions, two-thirds requiring

only a simple fill-in-the blank response.

Information from this questionnaire will

help evaluate the effectiveness of

individual facilitators and particular

meeting process designs. Affected

Entities: Entities potentially affected by

this action are individuals who

participate in these public meetings.

Burden Statement: It is estimated that

the annual national public burden and

associated costs will be approximately

833.3 hours and $22,500, respectively.

These values were calculated assuming

that on average: (a) meeting attendees

require 10 minutes to complete the

questionnaire; (b) the U.S. Institute

conducts 100 public meetings each year;

and (c) 50 people attend the average

meeting. Cost burden estimates assume:

(a) there are no capital or start-up costs

for respondents; and (b) respondents’

time is valued at $27 hr.

Dated: December 18, 2001.

Christopher L. Helms,

Executive Director, Morris K. Udall

Foundation.

[FR Doc. 01–31587 Filed 12–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–FN–P

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory

Committee; Notice of Meeting

In accordance with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, as amended), the National Science

Foundation announces the following

meeting.

Name: DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory

Committee (1176).

Date and Time: Monday, Jan. 14, 2002 8

a.m.–6 p.m.; Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2002; 8 a.m.–

6 p.m.

Place: Rm 585–II 4201 Wilson Blvd.,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Contact Person: Dr. Bradley D. Keister,

Program Director for Nuclear Physics,

National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson

Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone (703)

292–7380.

Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and

recommendations concerning the scientific

programs of the NSF and DOE in the area of

basic nuclear physics research.

Dated: December 19, 2001.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 01–31640 Filed 12–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Biweekly Notice; Applications and

Amendments to Facility Operating

Licenses Involving No Significant

Hazards Considerations

(Note: The publication date for this notice

will change from every other Wednesday to

every other Tuesday, effective January 8,

2002. The notice will contain the same

information and will continue to be

published biweekly.)

I. Background

Pursuant to Public Law 97–415, the

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(the Commission or NRC staff) is

publishing this regular biweekly notice.

Public Law 97–415 revised section 189

of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as

amended (the Act), to require the

Commission to publish notice of any

amendments issued, or proposed to be

issued, under a new provision of section

189 of the Act. This provision grants the

Commission the authority to issue and

make immediately effective any

amendment to an operating license

upon a determination by the

Commission that such amendment

involves no significant hazards

consideration, notwithstanding the

pendency before the Commission of a

request for a hearing from any person.

This biweekly notice includes all

notices of amendments issued, or

proposed to be issued from December 3,

2001 through December 14, 2001. The

last biweekly notice was published on

December 12, 2001 (66 FR 64284).

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of

Amendments to Facility Operating

Licenses, Proposed No Significant

Hazards Consideration Determination,

and Opportunity for a Hearing

The Commission has made a

proposed determination that the

following amendment requests involve

no significant hazards consideration.

Under the Commission’s regulations in

10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation