5 March 2001
Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html

Contents:

1. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Notice, Request or Comments on Section 105(a) of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, March 2, 2001.

2. Drug Enforcement Administration, Electronic Commerce: Electronic Orders for Schedule I and II Controlled Substances; Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled Substances, March 5, 2001.

3. Department of Education, Electronic Grant Initiatives, March 5, 2001.

4. Department of Education, Grants and Cooperative Agreements; Availability, etc., March 5, 2001.

5. Securities and Exchange Commission, Public Information: Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electronic Reporting and Recordkeeping and Delayed Effective Date of Recordkeeping Provisions in the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of 2000, March 5, 2001.

6. Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program; Call for Public Comments on 8 Nominations, Proposed for Listing in or Delisting From the Report on Carcinogens, Tenth Edition, March 5, 2001. Your furniture kills.


[Federal Register: March 2, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 42)]
[Notices]
[Page 13048-13050]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02mr01-45]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

[Docket No. 010222048-1048-01]
RIN 0660-XX11


Notice, Request or Comments on Section 105(a) of the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act

AGENCY: National Telecommunications and Information Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Request for comments on the Section 105(a) of the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) invites interested parties to review and comment on section
105(a) of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act
(``ESIGN'' or ``the Act'') (Pub. L. 106-229, 114 Stat. 464). Section
105(a) requires the Secretary of Commerce to conduct an inquiry and
report to Congress on the effectiveness of delivery of electronic
records to consumers using electronic mail as compared with the
delivery of written records via the United States Postal Service and
private express mail services. In connection with this report, this
Federal Register notice is intended to solicit comments from interested
parties. NTIA invites the public to submit comments on section 105(a)
of the ESIGN Act in paper or electronic form. All comments submitted in
response to this Notice will be posted on the NTIA website.

DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit comments no later than
April 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Josephine Scarlett, Office of the
Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, Room 4713 HCHB, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington,
DC 20230. Paper submissions should include a diskette in ASCII,
WordPerfect (please specify version) or Microsoft Word (please specify
version) format. Diskettes should be labeled with the name and
organizational affiliation of the filer, and the name version of the
word processing program used to create the document.
    In the alternative, comments may be submitted electronically to the
following electronic mail address: esign105a@ntia.doc.gov>. Comments
submitted via electronic mail should be submitted in one or more of the
formats specified above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josephine Scarlett, Office of the
Chief Counsel, telephone: (202) 482-1816; or electronic mail:
jscarlett@ntia.doc.gov>. Media inquiries should be directed to the
Office of Public Affairs, National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, at (202) 482-7002.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Advances in information technology and increased Internet usage in
domestic and international business transactions have produced
significant benefits to U.S. businesses and consumers. Electronic
commerce or ``e-commerce'' has contributed significantly to the growth
of the U.S. economy in recent years. Census Bureau statistics show that
total retail e-commerce sales for 2000 reached an estimated $25.8
billion, and accounted for .08 percent of the total retail sales.
Although commercial transactions over the Internet have increased over
previous years, one of the greatest burdens to the growth of Internet
commerce has been the lack of consistent, national rules that govern
the use of electronic documents and signatures in electronic business
transactions.
    In order to promote continued growth in electronic commerce,
Congress enacted ESIGN on June 30, 2000. ESIGN facilitates the use of
electronic documents in domestic and international commerce and
reinforces the validity and enforceability of electronic contracts and
signatures. The Act gives businesses the option of transmitting
electronic copies of documents that are legally required to be provided
to consumers in written form, and provides consumers with the option of
receiving electronic copies of these documents. ESIGN does not apply,
however, to all documents and notices that are required to be presented
in writing.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 103 of ESIGN provides exceptions for testamentary
and domestic relations documents, court orders, notices of
cancellation for utility services and health benefits, housing or
rental foreclosure and default notices, and product safety and
hazardous material notices. ESIGN does not affect state or federal
laws that require a writing for these types of documents and
notices.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 13049]]

    Section 105(a) of ESIGN directs the Secretary of Commerce to
prepare a study comparing the effectiveness of electronic mail in the
delivery of electronic records with the effectiveness of traditional
methods of document delivery (e.g. mail, express delivery services),
and to report the findings of the study to Congress no later than June
30, 2001. NTIA invites interested parties to submit comments on the
general issue of the effectiveness of electronic mail in the delivery
of electronic documents in comparison to the traditional methods of
document delivery and on the specific issues set out in this Notice.
    NTIA recently sought public comment on a joint study conducted with
the Federal Trade Commission on section 105(b) of the ESIGN Act.\2\ The
joint study being conducted under section 105(b) concerns the consumer
consent provisions of the ESIGN Act and is separate from the study
being prepared for this Notice. Comments submitted in this proceeding
may be used in preparation of the report to Congress regarding the
consumer consent provisions of the Act under section 105(b). Parties
should note or incorporate by reference any comment that was submitted
in conjunction with the joint study under 105(b) that also should be
considered in this study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Request for Comment and Notice of Public Workshop:
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, 66 FR
10011 (Feb. 13, 2001). The notice and comments received concerning
the joint study are also available on NTIA's homepage at http://
www.ntia.doc.gov>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Statutory Language Requiring a Report to Congress

    The statutory language requiring the Secretary of Commerce to
submit a report to Congress on the effectiveness of electronic mail is
found in section 105(a) of ESIGN and is set forth below.
Sec. 105. STUDIES.
    (a) DELIVERY.--Within 12 months after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Commerce shall conduct an inquiry regarding
the effectiveness of the delivery of electronic records to consumers
using electronic mail as compared with delivery of written records via
the United States Postal Service and private express mail services. The
Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress regarding results of
such inquiry by the conclusion of such 12-month period.

III. Specific Questions

    The Department seeks comment on the following specific questions.
Parties need not address all questions, but are encouraged to respond
to those about which they have particular knowledge or information.

1. General Issues

    a. Provide an estimate of the percentage of transactions that you
conduct per month that require next day, or same day, delivery.
    b. Of the transactions included in 1(a) above, approximately what
percentage of these are complicated by the fact that mail services do
not have Sunday delivery?
    c. Describe any delivery problems that you experience with
electronic transmissions. How do these problems compare with any
problems you experience using the Postal Service, private express, or
courier services for delivery of records?

2. Business Issues

    a. Do you offer consumers a choice of delivery mechanisms (i.e.
electronic or traditional)? Has the market evolved enough to give
consumers the choices they need? State whether you conduct a mail or
express delivery service, or an electronic mail business.
    b. Explain any benefits to your business of providing consumers
with a choice between electronic transmission, postal service, or
express mail service delivery of documents. Is cost a large factor in
your decision to offer more than one method of delivery?
    c. How important is the elimination of paper to your business?
    d. Does your software enable your company or business to accurately
keep track of customer confirmations and electronically ``file''
correspondence and consents received from customers?
    e. What method(s), if any, do you employ for sender/signature
verification for electronic transactions?
    f. What types of consent mechanisms does your business employ?
    g. What methods do you employ for third parties who are
authenticating electronic delivery?
    h. Under what circumstances will information received from a
customer be shared?
    i. Do you provide universal service (i.e. delivery to all
geographic locations)?
    (i) Please estimate the percentage of the population that your
business serves that receives daily deliveries, as opposed to
deliveries every few days (e.g. to areas less populated). Estimate the
number of those who receive deliveries every few days that also use
your electronic services, if available, for faster delivery.
    (ii) What percentage of your electronic customers are small
businesses, what percentage are large businesses, and what percentage
are individuals?

3. Consumer Issues

    a. Do you have access to the necessary tools to enable you to
receive documents electronically?
    b. If you have the option of receiving electronic records but
choose not to, is this decision related to a lack of technology to
conduct business in this manner?
    c. Describe any burdens that you as a consumer experience, or
expect to experience, in receiving electronic records (such as the
inability to open, store, or print electronic records).
    d. Compare the usefulness and burdens of receiving an electronic
record, and confirming receipt electronically, with the usefulness and
burdens of receiving a written record.
    e. Describe how the existence of electronic records affects the
convenience of record-keeping, both negatively and positively.
    f. How concerned are you with online privacy and security issues?
Describe any specific issues you have encountered (e.g. viruses).
    g. Describe any concerns you have with keeping paper documents
confidential during their transmission or storage. Are the same
concerns present for electronic documents received through electronic
mail? If so, state whether you are more concerned with preserving the
confidentiality of paper documents or electronic documents.
    h. Are electronic transactions complicated by the fact that the
consumer must notify a business when the consumer's e-mail address
changes? If so, how significantly?
    i. Do electronic transactions increase or decrease the potential
for fraud or identity theft?

4. Technology Issues

    a. What are the estimated costs, either to businesses or consumers,
of updating software to ensure compatibility for the electronic
transmission of electronic records?
    b. What types of technology are being employed to ensure security
of transmissions? For example, does your business utilize smart cards,
encryption, or password protection devices? Are these devices
effective?
    c. Are anonymizer-type programs effective in protecting online
privacy? Do such programs render authentication ineffective?
    d. Does your business use/provide biometrics?
    e. Does your business provide consumers with technical support in
the

[[Page 13050]]

event that consumers encounter difficulties in making electronic
transmissions?

Kathy D. Smith,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-5053 Filed 3-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-60-P

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Federal Register: March 5, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 43)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 13274]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr01-21]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

21 CFR Parts 1304, 1305, 1306, 1311

[DEA-214A]
RIN 1117-AA60, 1117-AA61

 
Electronic Commerce: Electronic Orders for Schedule I and II 
Controlled Substances; Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled 
Substances

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Justice.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is publishing this 
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to formally notify the interested 
public of DEA's intent to publish Notices of Proposed Rulemaking 
regarding two electronic initiatives. The first electronic initiative 
(RIN 1117-AA60) will propose regulations to provide DEA registrants 
with the option of ordering Schedule I and II controlled substances 
electronically in a manner consistent with the requirements of the 
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.). The regulations will 
propose that this electronic system may also be used for ordering 
controlled substances in Schedules III, IV and V. The second electronic 
initiative (RIN 1117-AA61) will propose regulations to permit DEA 
registered prescribers to electronically write, sign and transmit 
prescriptions. These proposed regulations would be an addition to, not 
a replacement of, the existing rules. Through these electronic 
initiatives, DEA will be proposing regulations consistent with the 
Government Paperwork Elimination Act (Pub. L. 105-277) (GPEA) and the 
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (Pub. L. 106-
229) (E-Sign). Publication of this Advance Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking also responds to the requirements of E-Sign which state that 
for a Federal agency which has announced, proposed, or initiated a 
rulemaking proceeding to prescribe a regulation responding to E-Sign on 
or before March 1, 2001, the effect of E-Sign's record retention 
provision is delayed until June 1, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia M. Good, Chief, Liaison and 
Policy Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration, Washington, D.C. 20537, Telephone (202) 307-7297, Web 
site: http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Why Is DEA Publishing This Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking?

    DEA is publishing this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to 
formally notify the interested public that DEA intends to publish, in 
the near future, two Notices of Proposed Rulemaking regarding two 
electronic initiatives DEA has undertaken. These electronic 
initiatives, and their accompanying regulations, will permit DEA to 
comply with GPEA and E-Sign, while ensuring appropriate controls over 
the ordering and prescribing of controlled substances in order to 
prevent diversion. DEA is publishing this Advance Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking to comply with Sec. 107(b)(1)(B) of Pub. L. 106-229 which 
states: ``DELAYED EFFECT FOR PENDING RULEMAKINGS. If on March 1, 2001, 
a Federal regulatory agency or State regulatory agency has announced, 
proposed, or initiated, but not completed, a rulemaking proceeding to 
prescribe a regulation under section 104(b)(3) with respect to a 
requirement described in subparagraph (A), this title shall be 
effective on June 1, 2001, with respect to such requirement.''

What Electronic Initiatives Does DEA Intend To Propose?

    DEA expects to publish, in the near future, two Notices of Proposed 
Rulemaking to propose new regulations for two electronic initiatives. 
The first electronic initiative (RIN 1117-AA60) will propose 
regulations to provide DEA registrants with the option of ordering 
Schedule I and II controlled substances electronically in a manner 
consistent with the requirements of the Controlled Substances Act (21 
U.S.C. 801 et seq.). The regulations will propose that this electronic 
system may also be used for controlled substances in Schedules III, IV 
and V. The second electronic initiative (RIN 1117-AA61) will propose 
regulations to permit DEA registered prescribers to electronically 
write, sign and transmit prescriptions. These proposed regulations 
would be an addition to, not a replacement of, the existing rules.

What Actions Has DEA Already Undertaken Regarding These Electronic 
Initiatives?

    In 1999, PEC Solutions, Inc. (PEC) (formerly Performance 
Engineering Corporation) was selected by DEA's Office of Diversion 
Control to analyze mandated, paper-based regulatory processes and to 
design and develop proposed concepts for public key infrastructures 
(PKIs) that would allow DEA and industry the option of using the 
current paper-based systems or electronic formats to order or prescribe 
controlled substances. As part of the project methodology, DEA/PEC 
sought input from persons within the interested industries to gain an 
understanding of processes involved in these regulated activities. DEA 
has published relevant documents and information regarding both 
electronic initiatives on the Office of Diversion Control's web site, 
at http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov, link to ``Electronic Commerce 
Initiatives''. Finally, DEA has held a number of public meetings 
(announced on DEA's web site and in letters to the industry) to detail 
progress of the projects, answer questions and solicit further input. 
DEA continues to provide information on its web site regarding project 
documents, updates and future meetings.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

    Due to the preliminary nature of this document, information to 
complete the rulemaking analyses and notice is unavailable, and thus, 
not contained in this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

    Dated: February 27, 2001.
Laura M. Nagel,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control.
[FR Doc. 01-5362 Filed 3-1-01; 11:12 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Federal Register: March 5, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 43)]
[Notices]               
[Page 13381-13383]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr01-113]                         


[[Page 13381]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II


Department of Education

Electronic Grant Initiatives; Notice

[[Page 13382]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

 
Electronic Grant Initiatives

AGENCY: Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice announcing the development and implementation of a 
system to administer grants via the Internet.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Chief Financial Officer announces the U.S. Department of 
Education Electronic Grant Initiatives (e-Grants) and requests comments 
on the effectiveness of this system. We intend to use your comments to 
assist us in improving our services and helping potential applicants 
and grantees to benefit from electronic commerce (e-commerce).

ADDRESSES: Address all comments and suggestions regarding e-Grants to 
Rebecca Harding-Spitzgo, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland 
Avenue, SW., room 4E310, Washington, DC 20202-4300. If you prefer to 
send your comments through the Internet, use the following address: 
edcapsuser@ed.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blanca Rosa Rodriguez, Director, 
Grants Policy and Oversight Staff, U.S. Department of Education, 400 
Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3652, ROB-3, Washington, DC 20202-4248. 
Telephone: (202) 260-0172; fax: (202) 205-0667; or via Internet: 
Blanca_Rodriguez@ed.gov or Rebecca Harding-Spitzgo, Project Manager 
(GAPS), U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 
4E310, Washington, DC 20202-4300. Telephone: (202) 205-0707; fax: (202) 
205-0729; or via Internet: Rebecca--Harding@ed.gov.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to either contact person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

New Initiatives in Electronic Grant-Making at the U.S. Department 
of Education

    The Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) of 1998, (Pub. L. 
105-277) and the Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement 
Act of 1999, (Pub. L. 106-107) encourage us to undertake initiatives to 
improve our grant process. Enhancing the ability of individuals and 
entities to conduct business with us electronically is a major part of 
our response to these Acts. E-commerce--for example, conducting 
transactions via Internet--is playing a vital role in achieving our 
mission. This notice presents an overview of the Department's present 
and proposed activities.
    We are taking steps to adopt the Internet as our chief means of 
conducting transactions in order to improve services to our customers 
and to simplify and expedite our business processes.
    We are also working with other Federal departments and agencies to 
develop the Federal Commons, which will be a shared location on the 
Internet for information about Federal financial assistance. The goal 
of this initiative is to create a single point of entry on the Internet 
to make it easier for prospective applicants to locate information 
about, and apply for, grants under all Federal programs. In the future, 
applicants who access the Federal Commons can search for available 
funding opportunities throughout the Federal Government, complete 
standard application forms, and submit grant applications online. You 
may obtain more information about the Federal Commons at: http://
www.fedcommons.gov.

Accomplishments to Date

    During fiscal year (FY) 2000, under our Grant Administration and 
Payment System (GAPS), we conducted a pilot project using an Internet-
based software program for submitting applications. The project 
involved eight grant competitions. Applicants had the opportunity to 
submit their grant applications to us online through the e-Application 
Web site.
    A survey after the pilot project indicated that participants were 
positive about their experiences using e-Application. In fact, 90 
percent of the participating applicants found our system easy to use, 
and most said that they would use the system in future competitions. To 
help applicants get used to applying for grants electronically, we have 
established a demonstration and training area on the e-Grants Web site.
    We have also developed e-Reports, a new electronic enhancement to 
GAPS. Using e-Reports grantees will be able to submit their annual 
grant performance reports to us via the Internet. The system will also 
notify each grantee of the deadline for its annual grant performance 
report. Additional features of the system will include applicant 
registration, e-mail confirmations, and printing capabilities.
    In addition, we are developing e-Reader, another electronic 
enhancement to GAPS, to support the review of grant applications. With 
e-Reader, an ED discretionary grant program can use the Internet to 
transmit applications electronically to reviewers at various locations, 
enable reviewers to evaluate and score applications on a Web-based 
form; and collect the reviewers' scores and comments. One of the many 
benefits of e-Reader is that it will give program officials a cost-
effective way to facilitate and monitor the application review process 
from their offices in the Washington, DC area.

ED's Plans for the Future

    For FY 2001 we plan to--
     Provide applicants the option of submitting their 
applications electronically in up to 50 percent of our new grant 
competitions, including several formula programs;
     Increase the number of ED programs using e-Reports, 
allowing grantees in these programs to submit their annual grant 
performance reports electronically; and
     Complete the development of e-Reader and apply it in eight 
to ten grant competitions that use the electronic grant application 
review process.
    Beyond FY 2001 we plan to expand and promote the use of electronic 
procedures for the submission and review of applications and the filing 
of reports under all of our grant programs. Our goal over time is to 
encourage applicants and grantees to make e-commerce their preferred 
method of doing business. We will do this by communication and outreach 
efforts to the public.
    We plan to do the following to make applicants and grantees aware 
of our Electronic Grant Initiatives and familiar with our electronic 
business process:
     Continue to host public workshops on our electronic grant 
initiatives at various national conferences and meetings of project 
directors;
     Make the system more convenient for users by increasing 
the hours it is available;
     Provide ongoing support to applicants who need assistance 
using the system;
     Inform the public about changes and improvements to our 
Electronic Grant Initiatives; and
     Work toward further integration of our electronic 
applications system with the Governmentwide system known as the Federal 
Commons.
    Information concerning the availability of e-Application will be

[[Page 13383]]

contained in specific program announcements and application packages, 
grant forecasts, and specific areas of our Web site. In addition, 
program offices will make grantees aware of electronic reporting 
options as they become available.
    Please be aware that electronic application and reporting will be 
voluntary. Paper-based application and reporting options will still be 
available to applicants and grantees who do not have the capability to 
do business electronically. We will give every application, whether 
paper or electronic, the same consideration in the review process.

Invitation To Comment

    We are determined to help make the transition to e-commerce as 
smooth as possible for our customers. As we develop e-commerce 
capabilities, we ask you for your support and welcome your suggestions 
regarding our plans for electronic grantmaking. We invite you, as 
potential applicants and grantees, to use the electronic methods 
described and to provide feedback about your experiences. We also 
invite you to comment now on the plans outlined in this notice. Please 
send your comments to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this 
notice.
    To obtain additional information about e-GRANTS or to participate 
in e-GRANTS pilot projects, see the portal page at: http://e-
grants.ed.gov.

Electronic Access to This Document

    You may 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 either of the 
following sites:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html

    To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at either of the previous sites. 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.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html.


    Dated: February 27, 2001.
Mark Carney,
Deputy Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-5253 Filed 3-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Federal Register: March 5, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 43)]
[Notices]               
[Page 13311-13312]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr01-47]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA No. 84.341]

 
Grants and Cooperative Agreements; Availability, etc.

AGENCY: Office of Vocational and Adult Education.

ACTION: Notice inviting applicants to serve as field readers for the 
Community Technology Centers Program.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE) invites 
interested individuals to apply to serve as field readers to evaluate 
grant applications for the Community Technology Centers Program. The 
purpose of the Community Technology Centers Program is to increase 
access to information technology and related educational services for 
adults and children in economically distressed low-income urban and 
rural communities through grants to establish or expand community 
technology centers.

DATES: Interested individuals are strongly encouraged to apply by April 
15, 2001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Detailed information on the program is 
available online at: http://ed.gov/offices/OVAE/CTC.
    Duties and Compensation of Field Readers: Field readers will review 
applications according to the applicable selection criteria. It is 
expected that reviewers will be mailed applications and materials, 
oriented in a telephone conference call, assigned to a panel, and given 
a set period of time to review applications. Panel discussions with 
other reviewers will take about five hours and will also be conducted 
by telephone conference call. Each field reader who is selected will 
receive compensation for the review.
    Field Reader Qualifications: The Department is seeking experienced 
and knowledgeable professionals who are current with issues regarding 
the provision of computers and technology to residents of low-income 
urban and rural communities. These professionals should be familiar 
with issues dealing with the start-up and expansion of community 
technology centers; use of technology in adult, preschool, elementary 
or secondary education programs; technology and technology management; 
or community development and outreach to residents of low-income 
communities.
    Prospective field readers may include technology providers, 
administrators, and experts; individuals with experience in use of 
technology in preschool, elementary, secondary or adult education; 
individuals from State and district agencies, early childhood, 
elementary and secondary education, institutions of higher education, 
and community-based organizations and agencies; and individuals with 
experience in providing access to technology in low-income communities. 
Each field reader must have the expertise necessary to accurately 
assess an applicant's submission on the applicable selection criteria.
    The Community Technology Centers Program will be participating in a 
pilot of e-Reader, the Department's electronic field reading 
initiative. Readers will be required to have unrestricted access to a 
computer with Internet accessibility and a printer. In addition, a 
reader should be able to navigate a World Wide Web browser, be able to 
complete and submit on-line forms, and be able to send and receive e-
mail.
    Conflict of Interest: You may not serve as a reviewer if you or 
your spouse plan to submit a grant application under the program in 
Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 and you will be paid by the grant if awarded, 
and/or you or your spouse otherwise have a financial interest in the 
outcome of the FY 2001 grant competition.
    Application Process: If you are interested in serving as a field 
reader, mail, fax or e-mail a copy of your resume to the address listed 
below and indicate that you are interested in serving as a field reader 
for the Community Technology Centers Program. Resumes should not exceed 
two pages and should include an e-mail address. A cover letter should 
highlight any experience the individual may have had as a reader in 
other competitions and any special knowledge and skills that are 
applicable for the review of applications under this competition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Community Technology Centers Program, 
Division of Adult Education and Literacy, Office of Vocational and 
Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 20202-
7240. Resumes and inquiries may be sent by e-mail to ctc@ed.gov or by 
Fax to: (202) 205-8973. Individuals who use a telecommunication device 
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service 
(FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, 
Monday through Friday.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audio tape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding 
paragraph.

[[Page 13312]]

Electronic Access to This Document

    You may 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 either of the 
following sites:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html

    To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at either of the previous sites. If you have questions about using 
PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office 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.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html


Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6832.

    Dated: February 28, 2001.
Robert Muller,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult Education.
[FR Doc. 01-5256 Filed 3-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-M


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Federal Register: March 5, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 43)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13273-13274]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr01-20]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Chapter II

[Release Nos. 33-7955, 34-44014, 35-27350, IA-1929, IC-24879]
RIN 3235-AI14


Public Information: Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
Electronic Reporting and Recordkeeping and Delayed Effective Date of
Recordkeeping Provisions in the Electronic Signatures in Global and
National Commerce Act of 2000

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission announces several
upcoming rulemaking activities regarding recordkeeping requirements
under the federal securities laws consistent with the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of 2000. The action
delays the effective date of certain provisions in the Act that may
affect certain recordkeeping requirements under the federal securities
laws.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael A. Macchiaroli, Associate
Director, (202) 942-0131; Thomas K. McGowan, Assistant Director, (202)
942-4886; Randall W. Roy, Special Counsel, (202) 942-0798, or Mathew
Comstock, Attorney, (202) 942-0156, Division of Market Regulation (for
broker-dealers); Larry E. Bergmann, Associate Director, (202) 942-0770;
Jerry Carpenter, Assistant Director; David Karasik, Special Counsel,
(202) 942-4187, Division of Market Regulation (for transfer agents);
Martha B. Peterson, Special Counsel, Office of Regulatory Policy,
Division of Investment Management (202) 942-0690; Victoria J. Adraktas,
Attorney-Advisor, Office of Public Utility Regulation (202) 942-0545;
Mark Borges, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Rulemaking, Division of
Corporation Finance, (202) 942-2900, at the Securities and Exchange
Commission, 450 5th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Securities and Exchange Commission
announces today several upcoming rulemaking activities regarding
recordkeeping requirements under the federal securities laws consistent
with the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of
2000 (Pub. L. 106-229) (``ESign''). Under Section 107(b)(1)(B) of
ESign, the record retention provisions of Title I of that Act will
become effective on June 1, 2001.
    Under the federal securities laws, regulated entities, including
registered broker-dealers, transfer agents, investment companies,
investment advisers, and public utility holding companies, must keep
certain records of their activities. The Commission currently allows
these entities to keep certain records electronically, subject to
standards designed to protect investors' interests, the financial
stability of regulated entities and generally to further the purposes
of the federal securities laws. ESign is intended to remove unnecessary
impediments to the use of electronic records in commerce, while
preserving the ability of agencies

[[Page 13274]]

like the Commission to reconcile ESign's policy with the statutes they
administer. The Commission will act shortly to provide interpretative
guidance and, where appropriate, propose or adopt rules consistent with
ESign. These releases will be published separately in the Federal
Register.
    Because ESign does not generally apply to information required to
be filed with government agencies, the Commission is not currently
contemplating any changes to its existing filing rules as a result of
ESign. Filers should therefore continue to follow current filing rules.

    Dated: February 28, 2001.

    By the Commission.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-5328 Filed 3-1-01; 11:12 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Federal Register: March 5, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 43)]
[Notices]
[Page 13334-13338]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr01-80]

[[Page 13334]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service


National Toxicology Program; Call for Public Comments on 8
Nominations, Proposed for Listing in or Delisting From the Report on
Carcinogens, Tenth Edition

Background

    The National Toxicology Program (NTP) solicits final public
comments on agents, substances, mixtures and exposure circumstances
reviewed in 2000 for listing in or delisting from the Report on
Carcinogens, Tenth Edition. This Report (previously known as the Annual
Report on Carcinogens) is a Congressionally mandated listing of known
human carcinogens and reasonably anticipated human carcinogens and its
preparation is delegated to the National Toxicology Program by the
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Section
301(b)(4) of the Public Health Service Act, as amended, provides that
the Secretary, (DHHS), shall publish a biennial report which contains a
list of all substances (1) which either are known to be human
carcinogens or may reasonably be anticipated to be human carcinogens;
and (2) to which a significant number of persons residing in the United
States (US) are exposed. The law also states that the reports should
provide available information on the nature of exposures, the estimated
number of persons exposed and the extent to which the implementation of
Federal regulations decreases the risk to public health from exposure
to these chemicals.
    In 2000, eight nominations were reviewed for listing in the Tenth
Report. This review included two Federal and one non-government,
scientific peer reviews and public comment and review. The three
scientific review committees evaluated all available data relevant to
the criteria for inclusion of candidate nominations in the Report. The
criteria used in the review process and a detailed description of the
review procedures, including the steps in the current formal review
process, can be obtained from the NTP Home Page web site at http://ntp-
server.niehs.nih.gov/ or by contacting: Dr. C.W. Jameson, National
Toxicology Program, Report on Carcinogens, MD EC-14, P.O. Box 12233,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; phone: (919) 541-4096, fax: (919)
541-0144, email: jameson@niehs.nih.gov.

Public Comment Requested

    The nominations reviewed in 2000 are provided in the following
table with their Chemical Abstracts Services (CAS) Registry numbers
(where available) and the recommendations from the three scientific
peer reviews of the nominations. The NTP will be making a final
recommendation in 2001 for these eight nominations for listing in, or
changing the current listing from reasonably anticipated to be a human
carcinogen to the known to be a human carcinogen category in the Tenth
Report.
    Background documents provided to the review committees and the
public are available on the web in PDF-format at the address above.
Hard copies of these documents are also available upon request. The NTP
will review the recommendations from each of the review committees and
consider the public comments received throughout the process in making
decisions regarding the NTP recommendations to the Secretary, DHHS, for
listing of the nominated substances in the Tenth Edition of the Report
on Carcinogens. The NTP solicits final public comment to supplement any
previously submitted comments or to provide comments for the first time
on any substance in the following table. Comments will be accepted for
60 days from the publication date of this announcement and should be
directed to Dr. C.W. Jameson at the address listed above. Individuals
submitting public comments are asked to include relevant contact
information [name, affiliation (if any), address, telephone, fax, and
e-mail].
Attachment

    Dated: February 21, 2001.
Kenneth Olden,
Director, National Toxicology Program.

   Summary of RG1,9 RG2 2 and NTP Board Subcommittee 3 Recommendations for the Agents, Substances, Mixtures or
      Exposure Circumstances Reviewed in 2000 for Listing in, Delisting From, or Upgrading in the Report on
                                           Carcinogens,4 10th Edition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   NTP board
       Nomination/CAS No.           Primary uses or       RG1 action          RG2 action         subcommittee
                                       exposures                                                    action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broad Spectrum UV Radiation       Solar and           Motion to list UVR  Motion list UVR as  Motion to list UVR
 (UVR) and UVA, and UVB, and UVC.  artificial          as known to be a    known to be a       as known to be a
                                   sources of          human carcinogen    human carcinogen    human carcinogen
                                   ultraviolet         passed by           passed by           passed by
                                   radiation.          unanimous vote (6/  unanimous vote (8/  unanimous vote
                                                       0).                 0).                 (10/0).
                                                      Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list UVA
                                                       UVA, UVB and UVC    UVA, UVB and UVC    as reasonably
                                                       as reasonably       as reasonably       anticipated to be
                                                       anticipated to be   anticipated to be   human carcinogen
                                                       human carcinogens   human carcinogens   passed by
                                                       passed by           passed by           unanimous vote
                                                       unanimous vote (6/  unanimous vote (8/  (10/0).
                                                       0).                 0).
                                                                                              Motion to list UVB
                                                                                               as reasonably
                                                                                               anticipated to be
                                                                                               human carcinogen
                                                                                               passed by vote of
                                                                                               7 yes to 3 no.
                                                                                               Negative votes
                                                                                               (3) cast because
                                                                                               members felt data
                                                                                               meets criteria to
                                                                                               list as known
                                                                                               human carcinogen.

[[Page 13335]]

                                                                                              Motion to list UVC
                                                                                               as reasonably
                                                                                               anticipated to be
                                                                                               human carcinogen
                                                                                               passed by vote of
                                                                                               9 yes to 1 no.
                                                                                               Negative vote (1)
                                                                                               cast because
                                                                                               member felt
                                                                                               insufficient
                                                                                               human data to
                                                                                               list as
                                                                                               reasonably
                                                                                               anticipated
                                                                                               carcinogen.
Chloramphenicol (56-75-7).......  Chloramphenicol     Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list
                                   has been used an    Chloramphenicol     Chloramphenicol     Chloramphenicol
                                   antibiotic since    as reasonably       reasonably          as reasonably
                                   the 1950s.          anticipated to be   anticipated to be   anticipated to be
                                                       human carcinogen    human carcinogen    human carcinogen
                                                       passed by           passed by vote of   passed by
                                                       unanimous vote (7/  7 yes to 0 no       unanimous vote
                                                       0).                 with 1              (10/0).
                                                                           abstention.
                                                                           Abstention (1)
                                                                           was because
                                                                           member felt data
                                                                           concerning link
                                                                           between aplastic
                                                                           anemia and
                                                                           leukemia was not
                                                                           compelling.
Estrogens, Steroidal............  Estrogens are       Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list
                                   widely used in      Steroidal           Steroidal           Steriodal
                                   post-menopausal     Estrogens as        Estrogens as        Estrogens as
                                   therapy and in      known to be a       known to be a       known to be a
                                   oral                human carcinogen    human carcinogen    human carcinogen
                                   contraceptives      passed by           passed by           passed by a vote
                                   for women.          unanimous vote (7/  unanimous vote (8/  of 8 yes to 1 no.
                                                       0).                 0).                 Negative vote (1)
                                                                                               cast because
                                                                                               member felt
                                                                                               insufficient
                                                                                               human data to
                                                                                               list all
                                                                                               steroidal
                                                                                               estrogens in the
                                                                                               Report.
Methyleugenol (93-15-2).........  Methyleugenol are   Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list
                                   flavoring agents    Methyleugenol as    Methyleugenol as    Methyleugenol as
                                   used in jellies,    reasonably          reasonably          reasonably
                                   baked goods,        anticipated to be   anticipated to be   anticipated to be
                                   nonalcoholic        human carcinogen    human carcinogen    human carcinogen
                                   beverages,          passed by           passed by           passed by a vote
                                   chewing gum,        unanimous vote (7/  unanimous vote (8/  of 9 yes to 1 no.
                                   candy, and ice      0).                 0).                 Negative vote (1)
                                   cream. Also used                                            cast because
                                   as fragrance for                                            member felt
                                   many perfumes,                                              insufficient
                                   lotions,                                                    human data to
                                   detergents and                                              list in the
                                   soaps.                                                      Report.
Nickel (metallic) and Certain     Metallic Nickel     Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list
 Nickel Alloys.                    and Nickel Alloys   Metallic Nickel     Metallic Nickel     Metallic Nickel
                                   have been used in   and Certain         as reasonability    as reasonability
                                   commercial          Nickel alloys as    anticipated to be   anticipated to be
                                   applications for    reasonability       human carcinogen    human carcinogen
                                   over 100 years.     anticipated to be   passed by a vote    passed by a vote
                                                       human carcinogen    of 7 yes to 1 no.   of 7 yes to 3 no.
                                                       passed by a vote    Negative vote (1)   Negative votes
                                                       of 6 yes to 2 no.   cast because        (3) cast because
                                                       Negative votes      member felt the     members felt that
                                                       (2) cast because    animal data not     the human and
                                                       members did not     persuasive to       animal data not
                                                       agree with the      list in the         persuasive to
                                                       use of term         Report as           list in the
                                                       ``certain'' in      reasonably          Report as
                                                       the listing of      anticipated human   reasonably
                                                       Nickel alloys.      carcinogens         anticipated human
                                                                           because of          carcinogens.
                                                                           inappropriate
                                                                           routes of
                                                                           exposure.

[[Page 13336]]

                                                                          Motion not to list  Motion to list
                                                                           Certain Nickel      Certain Nickel
                                                                           Alloys in RoC was   Alloys as
                                                                           passed a vote of    reasonably
                                                                           6 yes to 2 no.      anticipated to be
                                                                           Negative votes      human carcinogen
                                                                           (2) cast because    was defeated by a
                                                                           members felt data   vote of 3 yes to
                                                                           meets criteria to   7 no. in RoC.
                                                                           list as             Negative votes
                                                                           reasonably          (7) cast because
                                                                           anticipated to be   members felt
                                                                           a human             available data
                                                                           carcinogen.         not persuasive to
                                                                                               list in the
                                                                                               Report as
                                                                                               reasonably
                                                                                               anticipated human
                                                                                               carcinogens.
                                                                                              Motion not to list
                                                                                               Certain Nickel
                                                                                               Alloys in RoC was
                                                                                               passed by a vote
                                                                                               of 9 yes 1 no.
                                                                                               Negative votes
                                                                                               (1) cast because
                                                                                               member felt data
                                                                                               meets criteria to
                                                                                               list as
                                                                                               reasonably
                                                                                               anticipated to be
                                                                                               a human
                                                                                               carcinogen.
Talc (14807-96-6) Abestiform and  Both Asbestiform    Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list
 Non-Abestiform.                   talc (i.e., talc    Talc containing     Talc containing     Talc containing
                                   containing          asbestiform         asbestiform         asbestiform
                                   asbestiform         fibers as known     fibers as known     fibers as
                                   fibers) and non-    to be a human       to be a human       reasonably
                                   asbestiform talc    carcinogen passed   carcinogen was      anticipated to be
                                   (i.e. talc not      by unanimous vote   defeated by a       a human
                                   containing          (7/0).              vote of 2 yes to    carcinogen
                                   asbestiform        Motion to list       6 no. Negative      resulted in a tie
                                   fibers) occur in    Talc not            votes (6) cast      vote (5 yes to 5
                                   various             containing          because members     no). Negatives
                                   geological          asbestiform         felt human data     votes (4) cast
                                   settings around     fibers as           were not            because members
                                   the world.          reasonably          sufficient to       felt human and
                                   Occupational        anticipated to be   list as a known     animal data not
                                   exposure to both    a human             human carcinogen    sufficient to
                                   forms occurs        carcinogen passed   because             list in Report.
                                   during mining,      by a vote of 6      asbestiform         Other negative
                                   milling, and        yes to 1 no.        fibers were not     (1) cast because
                                   processing.         Negative vote (1)   considered to       member felt
                                   Exposure to non-    cast because        include asbestos    action should be
                                   asbestiform talc    member questioned   contamination.      deferred.
                                   by the general      the biological
                                   population occurs   plausibility of
                                   through the use     talc using
                                   of products such    causing ovarian
                                   as cosmetics.       neoplasms in
                                                       women.

[[Page 13337]]

                                                                          Motion to list      Motion not to list
                                                                           Talc containing     talc not
                                                                           asbestiform         containing
                                                                           fibers as           asbestiform
                                                                           reasonably          fibers as
                                                                           anticipated to be   reasonably
                                                                           a human             anticipated to be
                                                                           carcinogen passed   a human
                                                                           by a vote of 6      carcinogen passed
                                                                           yes to 2 no.        by a vote of 7
                                                                           Negative vote (1)   yes to 3 no.
                                                                           cast because        Negative votes
                                                                           member felt data    cast either
                                                                           sufficient to       because the
                                                                           list as a known     member felt that
                                                                           human carcinogen.   data meets
                                                                           Other negative      criteria to list
                                                                           vote (1) cast       talc not
                                                                           because member      containing
                                                                           felt evidence not   asbestiform
                                                                           adequate to list    fibers as
                                                                           in the Report.      reasonability
                                                                          Motion to list       anticipated to be
                                                                           Talc not            a human
                                                                           containing          carcinogen or
                                                                           asbestiform         that ovarian
                                                                           fibers as           cancer studies
                                                                           reasonably          should have been
                                                                           anticipated to be   considered in the
                                                                           human carcinogen    evaluation. The
                                                                           passed by a vote    Subcommittee did
                                                                           of 7 yes to 1 no.   not consider the
                                                                           Negative vote (1)   ovarian cancer
                                                                           cast because        studies in the
                                                                           member felt         evaluation of
                                                                           animal data not     talc not
                                                                           sufficient and      containing
                                                                           human data          asbestiform
                                                                           confounded          fibers because it
                                                                           because of the      was unclear if
                                                                           uncertainty of      the talc used in
                                                                           possible            these studies
                                                                           contamination of    might have been
                                                                           talc with           contaminated with
                                                                           asbestos.           asbestos.
Trichloroethylene (TCE) (79-01-   Trichloroethylene   Motion to list TCE  Motion to list TCE  Motion that the
 6).                               is widely used as   as known to be a    as known to be a    listing of TCE
                                   a solvent with 80-  human carcinogen    human carcinogen    should remain as
                                   90% used            passed by           was defeated by a   reasonably
                                   worldwide for       unanimous vote (7/  vote of 3 yes to    anticipated to be
                                   degreasing metals.  0).                 4 no. Negative      a human
                                                                           votes (4) cast      carcinogen passed
                                                                           because members     by a vote of 9
                                                                           felt the human      yes to 1 no.
                                                                           data did not meet   Negative vote (1)
                                                                           the criteria for    because member
                                                                           listing as a        felt human data
                                                                           known human         sufficient to
                                                                           carcinogen          list as a known
                                                                           because the         human carcinogen.
                                                                           exposures in the
                                                                           human studies may
                                                                           not have been
                                                                           specific for TCE.
Wood Dust.......................  It is estimated     Motion to list      Motion to list      Motion to list
                                   that at least two   Wood Dust as        Wood as known to    Wood Dust as
                                   million people      known to be a       be a human          known to be a
                                   are routinely       human carcinogen    carcinogen passed   human carcinogen
                                   exposed             passed by           by unanimous vote   passed by
                                   occupationally to   unanimous vote      (\70\).             unanimous vote
                                   wood dust           (\80\).                                 (\80\).
                                   worldwide. Non-
                                   occupational
                                   exposure also
                                   occurs. The
                                   highest exposures
                                   have generally
                                   been reported in
                                   wood furniture
                                   and cabinet
                                   manufacture,
                                   especially during
                                   machine sanding
                                   and similar
                                   operations..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 The NIEHS Review Committee for the Report on Carcinogens (RG1).
2 The NTP Executive Committee (Agencies from the NTP Executive Committee represented on RG2 include: Agency for
  Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Environmental
  Protection Agency (EPA), National Center for Environmental Health of the Centers for Disease Control and
  Prevention (NCEH/CDC), National Center for Toxicological Research of the Food and Drug Administration (NCTR/
  FDA), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health/CDC (NIOSH/CDC), Occupational Safety and Health
  Administration (OSHA), National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NCI/NIH), and National
  Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/NIH(NIEHS/NIH) Interagency Working Group for the Report on
  Carcinogens (RG2).
3 The NTP Board of Scientific Counselors Report on Carcinogens Subcommittee (the External Peer Review Group).
4 RoC--Report on Carcinogens.

[[Page 13338]]

[FR Doc. 01-5175 Filed 3-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P

-------------------------------------------------------------------------