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