Notices. Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

37,254 words·~169 min read·/register/2006/02/15/06-1242

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 7510-01-P 71 31 Wednesday, February 15, 2006 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23886; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-255-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Model Falcon 900EX Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplanes. This proposed AD would require inspecting the number 2 engine left- and right-hand forward mounts for missing rivets and installing rivets if necessary. This proposed AD results from reports of two missing rivets in the front section of the central engine mast discovered on airplanes in service and in production. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct missing rivets in the front section of the central engine mast, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the central engine mast, possible separation of the engine from the airplane during flight, and consequent loss of control of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax:

(202)493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98055-4056; telephone

(425)227-1137; fax

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-23886; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-255-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone

(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion The Direction Ge ne rale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on certain Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplanes. The DGAC advises that it has received reports of two missing rivets in the front section of the central engine mast discovered on airplanes in service and in production. This condition, if not corrected, could result in reduced structural integrity of the central engine mast, possible separation of the engine from the airplane during flight, and consequent loss of control of the airplane. Relevant Service Information Dassault has issued Service Bulletin F900EX-220, Revision 1, dated July 29, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for inspecting the number 2 engine left- and right-hand forward mounts for missing rivets and installing new rivets if there are missing rivets. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The DGAC mandated the service information and issued French airworthiness directive F-2005-066, dated April 27, 2005, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in France. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD This airplane model is manufactured in France and is type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the DGAC's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Clarification of Inspection Type Neither the French airworthiness directive nor the service bulletin defines the type of inspection that should be done for missing rivets. We have determined that the procedures in the service bulletin should be described as a “general visual inspection.” Note 2 has been included in this AD to define this type of inspection. Costs of Compliance The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Inspection for missing rivets 2 $65 $130 81 $10,530 Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Dassault Aviation:** Docket No. FAA-2006-23886; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-255-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by March 17, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplanes, certificated in any category, having serial numbers 1 through 137 inclusive. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from reports of two missing rivets in the front section of the central engine mast discovered on airplanes in service and in production. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct missing rivets in the front section of the central engine mast, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the central engine mast, possible separation of the engine from the airplane during flight, and consequent loss of control of the airplane. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Service Bulletin References

(f)The term “service bulletin,” as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F900EX-220, Revision 1, dated July 29, 2005. Although the service bulletin referenced in this AD specifies to submit information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include such a requirement. Inspection for and Installation of Missing Rivets

(g)Prior to accumulating 7,500 total flight hours, or within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later: Do a general visual inspection of the number 2 engine left- and right-hand forward mounts for missing rivets, in accordance with the service bulletin. If any rivet is missing, before further flight, install the new rivet, in accordance with the service bulletin. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection is: “A visual examination of an interior or exterior area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain proximity to the area being checked.” Inspections and Installations According to Previous Issue of Service Bulletin

(h)Inspecting for and installing rivets is also acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph

(g)of this AD if done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F900EX-220, dated April 14, 2004. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (i)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(2)Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information

(j)French airworthiness directive F-2005-066, dated April 27, 2005, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 6, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-2175 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23890; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-229-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Goodrich Evacuation Systems Approved Under Technical Standard Order

(TSO)TSO-C69b and Installed on Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 Series Airplanes; Model A340-200 and -300 Series Airplanes; and Model A340-541 and -642 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for Goodrich Evacuation Systems approved under TSO-C69b and installed on certain Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 series airplanes; Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes; and Model A340-541 and -642 airplanes. This proposed AD would require inspecting to determine the part number of the pressure relief valves on the affected Goodrich evacuation systems, and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report indicating that, during maintenance testing, the pressure relief valves on the affected Goodrich evacuation systems did not seal when activated, which caused the pressure in the escape slide/raft to drop below the minimum allowable raft mode pressure. We are proposing this AD to prevent loss of pressure in the escape slides/rafts after an emergency evacuation, which could result in inadequate buoyancy to support the raft's passenger capacity during ditching, and increase the chance for injury to raft passengers. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax:

(202)493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Goodrich, Aircraft Interior Products, ATTN: Technical Publications, 3414 South Fifth Street, Phoenix, AZ 85040, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy Ton, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety/Mechanical and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone

(562)627-5352; fax

(562)627-5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-23890; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-229-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone

(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion We have received a report indicating that an unsafe condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 series airplanes; Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes; and Model A340-541 and -642 airplanes; equipped with certain Goodrich evacuation systems. During maintenance testing, the pressure relief valves of the affected Goodrich evacuation systems did not seal when activated, which caused the pressure in the slide/raft to drop below the minimum allowable operating pressure. The affected Goodrich evacuation systems have certain part numbers (P/Ns) and are approved under Technical Standard Order

(TSO)TSO-C69b. A review of service data indicates that there have been similar problems with pressure relief valves on multiple transport category airplane models. Loss of pressure in the escape slides/rafts after an emergency evacuation could result in inadequate buoyancy to support the raft's passenger capacity during ditching, and increase the chance for injury to raft passengers. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Goodrich Service Bulletin 25-355, dated July 25, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for inspecting to determine the P/N of the pressure relief valves on affected Goodrich evacuation systems, and corrective actions if necessary. The service bulletin also describes procedures for permanently marking the service bulletin number on the girt adjacent to the system identification placard to indicate compliance with the bulletin. The corrective action involves replacing any affected pressure relief valve on the affected evacuation system with a new valve. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Difference Between This Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.” Difference Between This Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin Although the service bulletin recommends accomplishing the inspection “at the next scheduled shop visit of the unit,” we have determined that this imprecise compliance time might not address the identified unsafe condition soon enough to ensure an adequate level of safety for the affected fleet. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered the manufacturer's recommendation, the degree of urgency associated with the subject unsafe condition, and the average utilization of the affected fleet. In light of all of these factors, we find that a compliance time of 36 months for the inspection represents an appropriate interval of time for affected airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 27 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $1,755, or $65 per airplane Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Airbus:** Docket No. FAA-2006-23890; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-229-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by March 17, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Goodrich Evacuation Systems Approved Under Technical Standard Order

(TSO)TSO-C69b and having any part number identified in Goodrich Service Bulletin 25-355, dated July 25, 2005, as installed on Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -301, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes; Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes; and Model A340-541 and -642 airplanes; certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report indicating that, during maintenance testing, the pressure relief valves of certain Goodrich evacuation systems did not seal when activated, which allowed the pressure in the slide/raft to drop below the minimum allowable raft mode pressure. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of pressure in the escape slides/rafts after an emergency evacuation, which could result in inadequate buoyancy to support the raft's passenger capacity during ditching, and increase the chance for injury to raft passengers. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Inspection

(f)Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD: Perform an inspection to determine the part number (P/N) of the pressure relief valve on the Goodrich evacuation systems in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Goodrich Service Bulletin 25-355, dated July 25, 2005.

(1)If any pressure relief valve having P/N 4A3791-3 is installed, before further flight, replace the valve with a new or serviceable valve having P/N 4A3641-1 and mark the girt adjacent to the placard, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin.

(2)If any pressure release valve having P/N 4A3641-1 is installed, before further flight, mark the girt adjacent to the placard in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Part Installation

(g)As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a pressure relief valve having P/N 4A3791-3, on any airplane equipped with Goodrich evacuation systems identified in Goodrich Service Bulletin 25-355, dated July 25, 2005. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(i)None. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 7, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-2173 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23889; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-252-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318-111 Airplanes; A319-100 Series Airplanes; A320-111 Airplanes; A320-200 Series Airplanes; and A321-100 and -200 Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain Airbus transport category airplanes. This proposed AD would require inspecting to determine the part number of the twin motor actuators, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report of a low pressure valve of the twin motor actuator found partially open, although the valve detection system indicated that the valve was closed. Investigation revealed that the locating pin in the actuator was too short to engage with the valve slot, resulting in incorrect alignment of the actuator and the drive assembly, causing the valve to remain partially open. We are proposing this AD to ensure that, in the event of an engine fire, the valve actuator functions properly to delay or block the fuel flow to the engine and prevent an uncontrollable fire. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax:

(202)493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone

(425)227-2125; fax

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-23889; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-252-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone

(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion The Direction Générale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on certain Airbus transport category airplanes. The DGAC advises that it received a report of a low pressure valve of the twin motor actuator found partially open, although the valve detection system indicated that the valve was closed. Investigation revealed that the locating pin in the actuator was too short to engage with the valve slot, resulting in incorrect alignment. The cause of the defective locating pin was erroneous manufacturing tolerances. In the event of an engine fire, proper functioning of the valve actuator will delay or block the fuel flow to the engine and prevent an uncontrollable fire. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-28-1122, including Appendix 01, dated November 19, 2004. The service bulletin describes procedures for inspecting to determine the part number of the twin motor actuators, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. If there is no affected actuator, the service bulletin specifies that no further action is required. If there is any affected actuator, the service bulletin specifies that operators should do the related investigative action of inspecting the locating pin of the valve of the twin-motor actuator for damage or misalignment, and accomplish all necessary corrective actions. The corrective action includes replacing any defective pin and repairing any damage to the actuator or drive assembly to ensure correct alignment can be attained. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The DGAC mandated the service information and issued French airworthiness directive F-2005-189, dated November 23, 2005, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in France. The Airbus service bulletin refers to FR-HITEMP Service Bulletin HTE190001-28-003, dated March 30, 2004, as an additional source of service information for determining the part number of the twin motor actuators and accomplishing any related investigative and corrective actions. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the DGAC's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the Airbus service information described previously. Clarification of Inspection Language The French airworthiness directive and the service bulletin request that operators “inspect” the twin motor actuators to determine the part number. This proposed AD defines that inspection as a “general visual inspection.” This inspection is defined in Note 1 of this proposed AD. Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 719 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed inspection would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $46,735, or $65 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Airbus:** Docket No. FAA-2006-23889; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-252-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by March 17, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Airbus Model A318-111; A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133; A320-111, -211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233; and A321-111, -112, -131, -211 and -231 airplanes; certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report of a low pressure valve of the twin motor actuator found partially open, although the valve detection system indicated that the valve was closed. Investigation revealed that the locating pin in the actuator was too short to engage with the valve slot, resulting in incorrect alignment of the actuator and the drive assembly, causing the valve to remain partially open. We are issuing this AD to ensure that, in the event of an engine fire, the valve actuator functions properly to delay or block the fuel flow to the engine and prevent an uncontrollable fire. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Inspection

(f)Within 6,000 flight hours or 24 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is first: Accomplish a one-time general visual inspection to determine the part number (P/N) of the twin motor actuators in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1122, including Appendix 01, dated November 19, 2004.

(1)For airplanes having any actuator with P/N FRH010041 or P/N FRH010034, no further action is required by this paragraph.

(2)For airplanes having any actuator with P/N HTE190001-2, where the actuator serial number is not identified in Appendix 01 of the service bulletin, no further action is required by this paragraph.

(3)For airplanes having any actuator with P/N HTE190001, HTE190001-1, or HTE190001-2, where the actuator serial number is identified in Appendix 01 of the service bulletin, do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight, in accordance with the service bulletin. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection is: “A visual examination of an interior or exterior area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain proximity to the area being checked.” Note 2: Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1122, dated November 19, 2004, refers to FR-HITEMP Service Bulletin HTE190001-28-003, dated March 30, 2004, as an additional source of service information for determining the part number of the twin motor actuators and accomplishing any related investigative and corrective actions. Parts Installation

(g)As of the effective date of this AD: No person may install an actuator with P/N HTE190001, HTE190001-1, or HTE190001-2, and a serial number identified in Appendix 01 of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1122, dated November 19, 2004, on any airplane unless all applicable related investigative and corrective actions have been done in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (h)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(i)French airworthiness directive F-2005-189, dated November 23, 2005, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 6, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-2172 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23850; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-126-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F Airplanes and Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive

(AD)that applies to certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires a revision of the airplane flight manual

(AFM)to alert the flightcrew that both flight management computers

(FMC)must be installed and operational. The existing AD also requires an inspection to determine the serial number of the FMCs; and follow-on corrective actions, if necessary, which terminate the AFM revision. The existing AD also requires an inspection to verify if a certain modification is on the identification plates of the FMCs; and applicable follow-on and corrective actions. This proposed AD would require installation of upgraded flight management computer software, which would terminate the existing AD. This proposed AD would also add airplanes to the applicability, including adding Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes. This proposed AD results from a report that the FMC does not acknowledge the pre-set glareshield control panel

(GCP)altitude when profile

(PROF)mode is engaged in descent mode. We are proposing this AD to prevent the un-commanded descent of an airplane below the selected level-off altitude, which could result in an unacceptable reduction in the separation between the airplane and nearby air traffic or terrain. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax:

(202)493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natalie Phan-Tran, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone

(562)627-5343; fax

(562)627-5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “Docket No. FAA-2006-23850; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-126-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or visit *http://dms.dot.gov* . Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone

(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion On October 15, 2001, we issued AD 2001-21-05, amendment 39-12476 (66 FR 53335, October 22, 2001), for certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 series airplanes. That AD requires a revision of the airplane flight manual

(AFM)to alert the flightcrew that both flight management computers

(FMC)must be installed and operational. That AD also requires an inspection to determine the serial number of the FMCs; and follow-on corrective actions, if necessary, which terminate the AFM revision. That AD also requires an inspection to verify if a certain modification is on the identification plates of the FMCs; and applicable follow-on and corrective actions. That AD resulted from a report indicating that, due to incorrect multiplexers that were installed in the FMC's during production, certain data busses failed simultaneously during a ground test. We issued that AD to prevent loss of airspeed and altitude indications on both primary flight displays in the cockpit, and/or loss or degradation of the autopilot functionality, and consequent failure of the data busses. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued Since we issued AD 2001-21-05, we have received a report that an operator has discovered an anomaly during a descent phase of flight where the FMC does not acknowledge the pre-set glareshield control panel

(GCP)altitude when profile

(PROF)mode is engaged in descent mode. As a result of the anomaly, the airplane may deviate below the selected level-off altitude. This condition, if not corrected, could result in an unacceptable reduction in the separation between the airplane and nearby air traffic or terrain. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-068, Revision 3, dated April 6, 2004 (for Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes). The service bulletin describes procedures for installing hardware and software to upgrade the flight management computer from P/N 4059050-912 to P/N 4059050-920. The service bulletin refers to Honeywell Service Bulletin 4059050-34-0010, dated March 19, 2003, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions. We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129, dated September 22, 2004 (for Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes). The service bulletin describes procedures for installing new software in the main avionics rack and reidentifying FMC-1 and FMC-2 to P/N 4059050-921. The service bulletin refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4059050-34-A6023, dated September 22, 2004, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions. We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-130, dated March 16, 2005 (for Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes). The service bulletin describes procedures for installing new software in the main avionics rack and reidentifying FMCs to P/N 4059050-913. The service bulletin refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4059050-34-A6024, dated March 9, 2005, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions. We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin MD10-31-053, Revision 1, dated June 14, 2005 (for Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes). The service bulletin describes procedures for installing new software in the main avionics rack and reidentifying the versatile integrated avionics

(VIA)digital computer as P/N 4081580-903. The service bulletin refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4081580-31-A6002, dated January 14, 2005, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. Other Relevant Rulemaking We have previously issued AD 2004-18-04, amendment 39-13782 (69 FR 53794, September 3, 2004) (A correction of the rule was published in the **Federal Register** on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56480). That AD applies to all McDonnell Douglas MD-10-10F, MD-10-30F, MD-11, MD-11F, and 717-200 airplanes, and requires revising the Limitations section of the AFM to prohibit the use of the flight management system PROF mode for descent and/or approach operations unless certain conditions are met. Doing the applicable software/hardware upgrades that would be required by paragraphs

(j)and

(k)of this proposed AD are approved as an alternative method of compliance for the actions required by AD 2004-18-04. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would supersede AD 2001-21-05. This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2001-21-05 and would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, which would terminate the requirements of the existing AD. This proposed AD also expands the applicability to include all Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes and certain Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. Explanation of Change to Applicability We have revised the applicability of the existing AD to identify model designations as published in the most recent type certificate data sheet for the affected models. Clarification of Alternative Method of Compliance

(AMOC)Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. Change to Existing AD This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 2001-21-05. Since AD 2001-21-05 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table: Revised Paragraph Identifiers Requirement in AD 2001-21-05 Corresponding requirement in this proposed AD Paragraph

(a)Paragraph (f). Paragraph

(b)Paragraph (g). Paragraph

(c)Paragraph (h). Paragraph

(d)Paragraph (i). Clarification of Paragraph Reference Paragraph

(d)of AD 2001-21-05 references “the inspection required by paragraph

(a)of this AD.” However, there is no inspection in paragraph

(a)of AD 2001-21-05; the inspection is specified in paragraph

(b)of AD 2001-21-05. We have the revised paragraph

(i)of this proposed AD (specified as paragraph

(d)of AD 2001-25-05) to reference “the inspection required by paragraph

(g)of this AD” (specified as paragraph

(b)of AD 2001-25-05). Costs of Compliance There are about 230 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet and about 117 U.S.-registered airplanes. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate per hour is $65. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost AFM Revision, Inspections and Software Installation (required by AD 2001-21-05) 2 $0 $130 59 $7,670 Upgrade Software/Hardware (new proposed action) 2 0 130 117 15,210 Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-12476 (66 FR 53335, October 22, 2001) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **McDonnell Douglas:** Docket No. FAA-2006-23850; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-126-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 3, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)This AD supersedes AD 2001-21-05. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas airplanes, as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category.

(1)Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin MD10-31-053, Revision 1, dated June 14, 2005.

(2)All Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report that the flight management computer

(FMC)does not acknowledge the pre-set glareshield control panel

(GCP)altitude when profile

(PROF)mode is engaged in descent mode. We are issuing this AD to prevent the un-commanded descent of an airplane below the selected level-off altitude, which could result in an unacceptable reduction in the separation between the airplane and nearby air traffic or terrain. Compliance

(AFM)Revision

(f)For MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes having manufacturer's fuselage numbers 0447 through 0552 inclusive, and 0554 through 0621 inclusive: Within 5 days after May 20, 1998 (the effective date of AD 98-10-01, amendment 39-10512), revise Section 1, page 5-1, of the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved AFM to include the following statement. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM. “Prior to dispatch of the airplane, both Flight Management Computer 1 (FMC-1) and FMC-2 must be installed and operational.” Inspection

(g)For MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes having manufacturer's fuselage numbers 0447 through 0552 inclusive, and 0554 through 0621 inclusive: Within 90 days after November 26, 2001 (the effective date of AD 2001-21-05), do an inspection to verify that modification “AS” is on the front and rear identification plates of FMC-1 and FMC-2, per McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11-34-085, Revision 01, dated September 20, 1999. After the inspection has been done, the AFM revision required by paragraph

(f)of this AD may be removed from the AFM. Condition 1 (Modification “AS” Is Installed)

(h)If modification “AS” is found installed during the inspection required by paragraph

(g)of this AD, before further flight, do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, per McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11-34-085, Revision 01, dated September 20, 1999.

(1)Do a test of the FMCs in the flight compartment to ensure that modification “AS” is operational, and do applicable corrective actions, if necessary. Both FMCs must have modification “AS” installed and pass the test before loading new software per paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.

(2)Install new software and reidentify FMC-1 and FMC-2 as part number (P/N) 4059050-912. Note 1: McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11-34-085, Revision 01, dated September 20, 1999, references Honeywell Service Bulletin 4059050-34-6020, Revision 1, dated April 30, 1999, as an additional source of service information for the installation and reidentification requirements of paragraphs (h)(2) and (i)(2) of this AD. Condition 2 (Modification “AS” Is Not Installed)

(i)If modification “AS” is NOT found installed during the inspection required by paragraph

(g)of this AD, before further flight, do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, per McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11-34-085, Revision 01, dated September 20, 1999.

(1)Remove FMC-1 and FMC-2.

(2)Install modification “AS” and new software, and reidentify FMC-1 and FMC-2 as P/N 4059050-912.

(3)Install modified and reidentified FMC-1 and FMC-2. New Requirements of This AD Upgrade Software/Hardware—Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes

(j)For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes: Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, upgrade the FMC software, and hardware as applicable, by doing the applicable actions specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3), or (j)(4) of this AD. Doing this upgrade terminates the requirements of paragraphs

(f)through

(i)of this AD.

(1)For airplanes on which FMC P/N 4059050-906 through -912 is installed: Install new software in the main avionics rack, and reidentify FMC-1 and FMC-2 as P/N 4059050-913, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-130, dated March 16, 2005. Note 2: Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-130 refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4059050-34-A6024, dated March 9, 2005, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.

(2)For airplanes on which FMC P/N 4059050-920 is installed: Install new software in the main avionics rack, and reidentify FMC-1 and FMC-2 as P/N 4059050-921, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129, dated September 22, 2004. Note 3: Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129 refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4059050-34-A6023, dated September 22, 2004, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD.

(3)For airplanes on which FMC P/N 4059050-906 through -911 is installed: In lieu of doing the software upgrade specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, install new hardware and software and reidentify FMC-1 and FMC-2 as P/N 4059050-921, by doing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11-34-085, Revision 01, dated September 20, 1999; Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-068, Revision 3, dated April 6, 2004; and Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129, dated September 22, 2004. Note 4: McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11-34-085 references Honeywell Service Bulletin 4059050-34-6020, Revision 1, dated April 30, 1999; Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-068 references Honeywell Service Bulletin 4059050-34-0010, dated March 19, 2003; and Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129 refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4059050-34-A6023, dated September 22, 2004; as additional sources of service information for the doing the actions specified in paragraph (j)(3) of this AD.

(4)For airplanes on which FMC P/N 4059050-912 is installed: In lieu of doing the software upgrade specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, install new hardware and software and reidentify FMC-1 and FMC-2 as P/N 4059050-921, by doing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-068, Revision 3, dated April 6, 2004; and Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129, dated September 22, 2004. Note 5: Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-068 references Honeywell Service Bulletin 4059050-34-0010, dated March 19, 2003; and Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-34-129 refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4059050-34-A6023, dated September 22, 2004; as additional sources of service information for the doing the actions specified in paragraph (j)(4) of this AD. Upgrade Software—Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F Airplanes

(k)For Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes: Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, install new software in the main avionics rack and reidentify the versatile integrated avionics

(VIA)digital computer as P/N 4081580-903, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD10-31-053, Revision 1, dated June 14, 2005. Note 6: Boeing Service Bulletin MD10-31-053 refers to Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin 4081580-31-A6002, dated January 14, 2005, as an additional source of service information for doing the actions specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD. Parts Installation

(l)For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an FMC, P/N 4059050-906 through -912, or -920, on any airplane; except as required by the actions specified in paragraphs (h), (i), and

(j)of this AD.

(m)For MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a VIA digital computer, P/N 4081580-901 or 4081580-902, on any airplane. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (n)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(3)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2001-21-05 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraphs

(f)through

(i)of this AD.

(4)Doing the actions required by paragraph

(j)or

(k)of this AD, as applicable, is approved as an AMOC for the actions required by AD 2004-18-04, amendment 39-13782. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 1, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-2176 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23921; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-205-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive

(AD)that applies to all Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the top and side panel webs and panel stiffeners of the nose wheel well (NWW), and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD would reduce the interval for certain repetitive inspections and remove a certain optional inspection. This proposed AD would also require replacing the NWW side and top panels with new panels. The replacement would terminate the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from the development of a new modification. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in the top and side panel webs and stiffeners of the NWW, which could compromise the structural integrity of the NWW and could lead to the rapid decompression of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax:

(202)493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Kusz, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone

(425)917-6432; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “Docket No. FAA-2006-23921; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-205-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or may can visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone

(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion On April 13, 2005, we issued AD 2005-09-02, amendment 39-14070 (70 FR 29940, May 25, 2005), for all Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the top and side panel webs and panel stiffeners of the nose wheel well (NWW), and corrective actions if necessary. That AD resulted from a report of an in-flight decompression of a Model 747-100 series airplane that had accumulated 27,241 total flight cycles. We issued that AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the top and side panel webs and stiffeners of the NWW, which could compromise the structural integrity of the NWW and could lead to the rapid decompression of the airplane. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued In the preamble to AD 2005-09-02, we stated that we considered the requirements “interim action” and were considering further rulemaking to reduce certain repetitive inspection intervals. In addition, we explained that the manufacturer was developing a modification and that we would consider additional rulemaking once the modification was developed, approved, and available. We now have determined that further rulemaking is indeed necessary, and this proposed AD follows from that determination. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for replacing the NWW side and top panels with new panels. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would supersede AD 2005-09-02 and would continue to require repetitive inspections for cracking of the top and side panel webs and panel stiffeners of the NWW, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD would also reduce the interval for certain repetitive inspections and would require replacing the NWW side and top panels with new panels. The replacement would terminate the repetitive inspections. The replacement would be accomplished in accordance with the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between the Proposed AD and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562.” Differences Between the Proposed AD and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562 Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2005, specifies an effectivity of Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 1307. The service bulletin notes that a future revision will add airplanes with a nose cargo door, and airplanes after line number 1307. This proposed AD is applicable to all Model 747 airplanes. This proposed AD would require that, for Model 747 airplanes identified as Group 1 and 3 in the service bulletin (Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 1307, except those airplanes modified to the Special Freighter configuration), the replacement of the NWW side and top panels must be done according to the service bulletin. For all Model 747 airplanes identified as Group 2 in the service bulletin and airplanes not identified in the service bulletin, the replacement must be done according to a method approved by the FAA. Explanation of Change to Applicability We have revised the applicability of the existing AD to identify model designations as published in the most recent type certificate data sheet for the affected models. Explanation of Changes Made to Paragraph

(f)of This Proposed AD We have reduced the repetitive inspection intervals for Area 3 from 6,000 flight cycles to 1,500 flight cycles for airplanes on which the inspections have been done in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

(ASB)747-53A2465, Revision 2, dated November 11, 2004 (referenced as the appropriate source of service information for doing the inspection specified in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of the existing AD). In addition, we have removed the optional inspection specified in paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of the existing AD; however, we have given credit for airplanes on which the inspections have been done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2465, Revision 1, dated October 16, 2003, for the Area 3 inspections. (Revision 1 was referenced as the appropriate source of service information for doing the inspection specified in paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of the existing AD with a repetitive inspection interval of 1,000 flight cycles.) Since issuance of Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 2, Boeing has received additional reports of cracking and has done additional analysis to determine the flight-cycle interval. The 1,500 flight-cycle interval for Area 3 specified in the proposed AD matches the interval specified in Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 4, dated February 24, 2005 (referenced as the appropriate source of service information for doing the new requirements of the existing AD). We have determined that the 1,500 flight-cycle interval will ensure an acceptable level of safety. We also removed paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(2)(i) of the existing AD because all operators will be doing the inspections of the top and sidewall panel webs specified in paragraph

(g)of the existing AD. The inspections specified in paragraph

(g)of the existing AD terminate the inspections of the top and side panel webs specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(2)(i) of the existing AD. Therefore we do not need to restate paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(2)(i) in the proposed AD. Explanation of Change Made to This Proposed AD We have simplified paragraph

(l)of this proposed AD by referring to the “Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)” paragraph of this proposed AD for repair methods and we have revised the AMOCs paragraph in this proposed AD to clarify the delegation authority for Authorized Representatives for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization. Clarification of AMOC Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. Costs of Compliance There are about 1,127 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Work hours are estimated at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Area 1 and 3 inspections (required by AD 2005-09-02) 79 $0 $5,135, per inspection cycle 255 $1,309,425, per inspection cycle. Area 2 inspections (required by AD 2005-09-02) 8-18 0 $520-$1,170, per inspection cycle 255 Up to $298,350, per inspection cycle. Replacement (new proposed action) 800 115,765 $167,765 255 $42,780,075. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-14070 (70 FR 29940, May 25, 2005) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2006-23921; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-205-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 3, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)This AD supersedes AD 2005-09-02. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from the development of a new modification. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in the top and side panel webs and stiffeners of the nose wheel well (NWW), which could compromise the structural integrity of the NWW and lead to the rapid decompression of the airplane. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Restatement of Requirements of AD 2005-09-02 With New Repetitive Interval and Service Information Initial and Repetitive Inspections of the Top and Side Panel Stiffeners

(f)Prior to the accumulation of 16,000 total flight cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after January 27, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2004-25-23, amendment 39-13911), whichever is later, do internal detailed and surface high frequency eddy current

(HFEC)inspections of the top and side panel stiffeners of the NWW (specified as Area 3 in the service bulletin) for cracks in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

(ASB)747-53A2465, Revision 4, dated February 25, 2005. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the compliance times specified in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

(1)For airplanes on which an inspection has not been done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with any service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD: Within 1,500 flight cycles after doing the inspection specified in paragraph

(f)of this AD, repeat the inspection. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles.

(2)For airplanes on which an inspection has been done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with any service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD: Within 6,000 flight cycles after doing the inspection specified in paragraph

(f)of this AD or within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, repeat the inspection. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles. Table 1.—Boeing Service Bulletins Service bulletin Revision level Date Boeing ASB 747-53A2465 ( 1 ) April 5, 2001. Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2465 1 October 16, 2003. Boeing ASB 747-53A2465 2 November 11, 2004. Boeing ASB 747-53A2465 3 December 23, 2004. Boeing ASB 747-53A2465 4 February 25, 2005. 1 Original. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is defined as: “An intensive visual examination of a specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirrors, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate access procedures may be required.” Initial Inspections of the Top and Sidewall Panel Webs

(g)Do an external detailed inspection of the top and sidewall panel webs of the NWW (specified as Area 1 and Area 2 in the service bulletin) for cracks, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 4, dated February 24, 2005, at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD.

(1)At the later of the times specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD:

(i)Before accumulating 20,000 total flight cycles.

(ii)Within 100 flight cycles or 90 days after May 10, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005-09-02), whichever occurs first.

(2)At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD:

(i)Before accumulating 16,000 total flight cycles.

(ii)Within 1,000 flight cycles after May 10, 2005. Repetitive Inspections of the Top and Sidewall Panel Webs

(h)Repeat the inspection required by paragraph

(g)of this AD at the intervals specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

(1)For airplanes with fewer than 20,000 total flight cycles as of May 10, 2005, repeat at intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles until the first inspection after the airplane reaches 20,000 total flight cycles.

(2)For airplanes with 20,000 total flight cycles or more, repeat at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles. Ultrasonic Inspections

(i)Do a UT inspection of the top and sidewall panel webs for cracks, in accordance with Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 4, dated February 24, 2005, at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles.

(1)Prior to the accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles.

(2)Within 100 flight cycles or 90 days after May 10, 2005, whichever occurs first. Additional Inspections and Corrective Actions

(j)Except as specified in paragraph

(l)of this AD, if any crack is found during any inspection required by this AD, prior to further flight, do any applicable additional detailed inspections of stiffeners and beams and make repairs, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 4, dated February 24, 2005. Actions Accomplished Per Previous Issues of Service Bulletin

(k)The actions specified in paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(3) of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding action specified in the applicable paragraph.

(1)Inspections and corrective actions accomplished before January 27, 2005, in accordance with Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, dated April 5, 2001, are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding inspections specified in paragraph

(f)of this AD.

(2)Inspections accomplished before the effective date of this AD, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2465, Revision 1, dated October 16, 2003; Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 2, dated November 11, 2004; and Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 3, dated December 23, 2004; are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding inspections specified in paragraph

(f)of this AD. Note 2: The detailed and surface HFEC inspections of the top and side panel stiffeners of the NWW specified in Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, dated April 5, 2001; and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2465, Revision 1, dated October 16, 2003; are acceptable for compliance with the internal detailed and surface HFEC inspections specified in paragraph

(f)of this AD.

(3)Inspections and corrective actions accomplished before May 10, 2005, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2465, Revision 1, dated October 16, 2003; Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 2, dated November 11, 2004; and Boeing ASB 747-53A2465, Revision 3, dated December 23, 2004; are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding inspections specified in paragraphs

(g)and

(h)of this AD. Certain Other Corrective Actions

(l)Where Boeing ASB 747-53A2465 specifies contacting the manufacturer if certain cracking is found, this AD requires, before further flight, repairing the cracking using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph

(p)of this AD. No Reporting Requirement

(m)Although Boeing ASB 747-53A2465 specifies that operators should report inspection results to the manufacturer, this AD does not require those inspection results to be reported. New Requirements of This AD Terminating Action

(n)For Group 1 and 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2005: Before accumulating 22,000 total flight cycles or within 48 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, replace the NWW side and top panels with new panels in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2005. Doing the replacement terminates the requirements of this AD.

(o)For Group 2 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2562, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2005, and Model 747 airplanes not identified in the service bulletin: Before accumulating 22,000 total flight cycles or within 48 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, replace the NWW side and top panels using a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Doing the replacement terminates the requirements of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (p)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(3)An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane.

(4)AMOCs approved previously according to AD 2005-09-02, amendment 39-14070, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraphs

(f)through

(j)and

(l)of this AD.

(5)AMOCs approved previously according to AD 2004-25-23, amendment 39-13911, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph

(f)of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 26, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-2170 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2005-22857; Airspace Docket No. 05-AAL-37] Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Galbraith Lake, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace at Galbraith Lake, AK. Two Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being published for the Galbraith Lake Airport. Adoption of this proposal would result in establishment of Class E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) above the surface at Galbraith Lake, AK. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-2005-22857/Airspace Docket No. 05-AAL-37, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* . You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the above address. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Manager, Safety, Alaska Flight Service Operations, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number

(907)271-5898; fax:

(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov.* Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2005-22857/Airspace Docket No. 05-AAL-37.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Availability of Notice of Proposed Rulemakings (NPRMs) An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at *http://www.faa.gov* or the Superintendent of Document's Web page at *http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.* Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591 or by calling

(202)267-8783. Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,

(202)267-9677, to request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is considering an amendment to the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR part 71), which would create new Class E airspace at Galbraith Lake, AK. The intended effect of this proposal is to create Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. above the surface to contain Instrument Flight Rules

(IFR)operations at Galbraith Lake, AK. The FAA Instrument Flight Procedures Production and Maintenance Branch has amended two Special SIAPs for the Galbraith Lake Airport. The approaches are the Non Directional Beacon

(NDB)Distance Measuring Equipment

(DME)Runway

(Rwy)12, Amendment

(Amdt)2, and the Microwave Landing System

(MLS)Rwy 12, Amdt 1. New Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft above the surface within the Galbraith Lake Airport area would be established by this action. The proposed airspace is sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at the Galbraith Lake Airport. The area would be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1200 foot transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 in FAA Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,* dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document would be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and

(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it proposes to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at Galbraith Lake Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,* dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, is to be amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth. AAL AK E5 Galbraith Lake, AK [New] Galbraith Lake Airport, AK (Lat. 68°28′47″ N., long. 149°29′24″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 9.5-mile radius of the Galbraith Lake Airport. Issued in Anchorage, AK, on February 7, 2006. Anthony M. Wylie, Manager, Safety, Area Flight Service Operations. [FR Doc. E6-2180 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23713; Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-06] Proposed Revision of Class E Airspace; Togiak, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This action proposes to revise Class E airspace at Togiak, AK. Two Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being revised and two SIAPs are being produced for the Togiak Airport. Adoption of this proposal would result in revision of Class E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) above the surface at Togiak, AK. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-2006-23713/Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-06, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation Nassif Building at the above address. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Office of the Manager, Safety, Alaska Flight Service Operations, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number

(907)271-5898; fax:

(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov.* Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2006-23713/Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-06.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Availability of Notice of Proposed Rulemakings (NPRMs) An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at *http://www.faa.gov* or the Superintendent of Document's Web page at *http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.* Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591 or by calling

(202)267-8783. Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,

(202)267-9677, to request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is considering an amendment to the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR part 71), which would revise the Class E airspace at Togiak, AK. The intended effect of this proposal is to revise Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. above the surface to contain Instrument Flight Rules

(IFR)operations at Togiak, AK. The FAA Instrument Flight Procedures Production and Maintenance Branch has amended two SIAPs and created two new SIAPs for the Togiak Airport. The amended approaches are

(1)Non-Directional Beacon (NDB)/Distance Measuring Equipment (DME)-A, Amendment

(Amdt)1; and

(2)NDB-B, Amdt 1. The new approaches are

(1)Area Navigation (Global Positioning System) (RNAV (GPS)) RWY03, Original; and

(2)RNAV

(GPS)RWY 21, Original. This action would modify the Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. above the surface near the Togiak Airport. The proposed airspace is sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at the Togiak Airport. The area would be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1200 foot transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 in FAA Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,* dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document would be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and

(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart 1, section 40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it proposes to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at Togiak Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,* dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, is to be amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth. AAL AK E5 Togiak, AK [Revised] Togiak Airport, AK (Lat. 59°03′10″ N., long. 160°23′49″ W.) Togiak NDB (Lat. 59°03′50″ N., long. 160°22′27″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of the Togiak Airport, and within 4 miles west and 8 miles east of the 218° bearing of the Togiak NDB extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 20 miles southwest of the Togiak NDB, and within 4 miles west and 8 miles east of the 019° bearing of the Togiak NDB extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 16 miles northeast of the Togiak NDB. Issued in Anchorage, AK, on February 7, 2006. Anthony M. Wylie, Manager, Safety, Area Flight Service Operations. [FR Doc. E6-2182 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23712; Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-05] Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Ugnu-Kuparuk, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace at Ugnu-Kuparuk, AK. Five Special Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being revised, and three Special SIAPs are being produced for the Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport. Adoption of this proposal would result in establishment of Class E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) above the surface at Ugnu-Kuparuk, AK. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-2006-23712/Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-05, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the above address. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Manager, Safety, Alaska Flight Service Operations, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number

(907)271-5898; fax:

(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov.* Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2006-23712/Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-05.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Availability of Notice of Proposed Rulemakings (NPRMs) An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at *http://www.faa.gov* or the Superintendent of Document's Web page at *http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.* Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591 or by calling

(202)267-8783. Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,

(202)267-9677, to request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is considering an amendment to the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR Part 71), which would establish Class E airspace at Ugnu-Kuparuk, AK. The intended effect of this proposal is to create Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. above the surface to contain Instrument Flight Rules

(IFR)operations at Ugnu-Kuparuk, AK. The FAA Instrument Flight Procedures Production and Maintenance Branch has amended five Special SIAPs and created three new Special SIAPs for the Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport. The amended approaches are

(1)Non-directional Beacon

(NDB)Runway

(RWY)05, Amendment

(Amdt)2;

(2)NDB RWY 23, Amdt 2;

(3)NDB-Distance Measuring Equipment

(DME)RWY 05, Amdt 2;

(4)NDB-DME RWY 23, Amdt 2; and

(5)Localizer (LOC)-DME Back-Course RWY 23, Amdt 2. The new approaches are

(1)Area Navigation (Global Positioning System (RNAV (GPS)) RWY 05, Original;

(2)RNAV

(GPS)RWY 23, Original; and

(3)Instrument Landing System

(ILS)RWY 05, Original. This action would create Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. above the surface near the Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport. The proposed airspace is sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at the Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport. The area would be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1200 foot transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 in FAA Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document would be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and

(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it proposes to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, is to be amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth. AAL AK E5 Kuparuk, AK [New] Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport, AK (Lat. 70°19′51″ N., long. 149°35′51″ W.) Pitsand NDB (Lat. 70°19′41″ N., long. 149°38′07″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius of the Ugnu-Kuparuk Airport, and within 8 miles north and 4 miles south of the 078° bearing of the Pitsand NDB extending from the 7-mile radius to 16 miles east of the Pitsand NDB and within 8 miles north and 4 miles south of the 258° bearing of the Pitsand NDB extending from the 7-mile radius to 16 miles west of the Pitsand NDB. Issued in Anchorage, AK, on February 7, 2006. Anthony M. Wylie, Manager, Safety, Area Flight Service Operations. [FR Doc. E6-2186 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23711; Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-04] Proposed Revision of Class E Airspace; Middleton Island, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This action proposes to revise Class E airspace at Middleton Island, AK. Two Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being revised, and two SIAPs are being produced for the Middleton Island Airport. Adoption of this proposal would result in revision of Class E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at Middleton Island, AK. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-2006-23711/Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-04, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* . You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the above address. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Manager, Safety, Alaska Flight Service Operations, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number

(907)271-5898; fax:

(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov* . Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2006-23711/Airspace Docket No. 06-AAL-04.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Availability of Notice of Proposed Rulemakings (NPRMs) An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* . Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at *http://www.faa.gov* or the Superintendent of Document's Web page at *http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara* . Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591 or by calling

(202)267-8783. Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,

(202)267-9677, to request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is considering an amendment to the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR Part 71), which would revise the Class E airspace at Middleton Island, AK. The intended effect of this proposal is to revise Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above the surface to contain Instrument Flight Rules

(IFR)operations at Middleton Island, AK. The FAA Instrument Flight Procedures Production and Maintenance Branch has amended two SIAPs and created two new SIAPs for the Middleton Island Airport. The amended approaches are

(1)Very High Frequency Omni-directional Range

(VOR)Runway

(RWY)01, Amendment

(Amdt)2; and

(2)VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment

(DME)RWY 19, Amdt 5. The new approaches are

(1)Area Navigation (Global Positioning System) (RNAV (GPS)) RWY 01, Original; and

(2)RNAV

(GPS)RWY 19, Original. This action would modify the Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above the surface near the Middleton Island Airport. The proposed airspace is sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures at the Middleton Island Airport. The area would be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1200 foot transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 in FAA Order 7400.9N, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,* dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document would be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and

(FAA)published a document in the **Federal Register** announcing its long-term policy for Mode S transponder equipment requirements. The policy also sought comment on the proposed termination date of March 1, 2007, for operators currently exempted from the Mode S transponder requirement of 14 CFR parts 121 and 135. This action responds to the comments and adopts the proposed date for which all applicable exemptions will terminate. ADDRESSES: The complete docket for the proposed exemption policy may be examined at the DOT Docket Web site: *http://dms.dot.gov* . Interested persons may perform a Simple Search at that Web site, entering the docket number 22593. Comments may also be examined in Room PL-401, on the Plaza Level of the Department of Transportation Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ida Klepper, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, telephone

(202)267-9677. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Background On October 7, 2005, the FAA published two notices in the **Federal Register** concerning the Mode S transponder equipment requirements in 14 CFR parts 121 and 135. The first notice withdrew Notice No. 96-5, which proposed to withdraw the Mode S transponder requirements for part 135 and certain 121 operations. The first October 7 notice summarized our reassessment of the requirements and articulated the basis for our conclusion to retain the Mode S transponder equipment requirements. ( *See* 70 FR 58966.) Accordingly, the FAA withdrew Notice No. 96-5. The second notice published on October 7 announced our policy with respect to the exemptions granted from the Mode S transponder equipment requirements. ( *See* 70 FR 58976.) We explained that since Notice 96-5 was published in May 1996, the agency granted several exemptions to the Mode S transponder requirements because we were progressing toward the removal of this equipment requirement from all aircraft, except those aircraft operated under part 121 and that have TCAS II. As we subsequently revised our long-term plan for Mode S transponders, we sought comment on the appropriate date for which all current exemptions should terminate. The notice proposed March 1, 2007, as the appropriate termination date. Discussion of Comments We received comments from AirTran Airways, Inc., Federal Express (FedEx), the Regional Airlines Association (RAA), and one individual. However, while the notice specifically sought comment on whether March 1, 2007 was the appropriate date to terminate current exemptions, no comment responded to that request. Although all comments were beyond the scope of the request, we respond to those comments below. AirTran Airways fully supported that all applicable aircraft comply with the Mode S transponder equipment requirements. FedEx commented on two aspects of the notice. First, it questioned whether it must request an extension of its current exemption to continue to use the Mode C and Mode A transponders installed on its Caravan airplanes until March 1, 2007. (FedEx's exemption expires on March 1, 2006.) Second, FedEx stated that it has both Mode A and Mode C transponders installed on its Caravan airplanes. FedEx questioned whether it must replace each transponder with a separate Mode S transponder. The FAA does not intend to grant new exemptions or subsequent extensions of current exemptions during this interim period unless circumstances warrant. FedEx may continue to operate its Caravan airplanes with Mode A and Mode C installed, even after expiration of its exemption, until the transponders are no longer repairable and must be replaced. If FedEx finds that the transponders must be replaced after its exemption terminates, it must do so in accordance with the regulations and install a Mode S transponder. The FAA proposed the March 2007 date to provide a reasonable time for operators to plan for the need to replace outdated equipment when necessary. The FAA did not suggest this date to provide a vehicle for operators to quickly seek an exemption or extension to bide more time for which to equip their aircraft. We do not find that the public interest is served by simply granting additional exemptions for yet another year. It appears to be a business decision by FedEx to have two transponders installed in its aircraft. This is not a regulatory requirement. Consequently, if FedEx needs to install a Mode S transponder in its aircraft, it only needs to install one transponder under the regulations. Any election to install a second transponder is at FedEx's discretion. An individual commented that the ADS-B system is far superior to Mode S because it has the capability to receive other traffic and weather information and urged the adoption of a nationwide Capstone policy to benefit all operators (including general aviation) as opposed to enforcing outdated Mode S equipment. Also, RAA commented it would expect the Mode S requirement to be consistent with the FAA's long term objectives for ADS-B to avoid costly retrofits. Capstone is a successful initiative, but is a limited concept for a defined and remote area in southwest Alaska. Capstone does not rely on ADS-B technology but rather on Global Positioning Systems

(GPS)and Wide Area Augmentation Systems

(WAAS)in areas where ground sensors are not yet available. ADS-B is not considered an alternative to the more mature Mode S technology at this time due to the uncertain timeframe of widespread availability of the technology. FAA plans for expanding the ADS-B technology to the lower 48 states are still under review. Lastly, any requirement to equip and use ADS-B technology must be established through rulemaking. RAA requested that the agency complete a cost benefit analysis of the Mode S policy and provide an opportunity for public comment on that analysis. The FAA is required to economically analyze its intended regulations. 1 (A regulatory evaluation, including cost-benefit analysis, was completed for both the final rule adopting the Mode S requirement 2 and the notice proposing to withdraw the requirement. 3 ) The FAA is not required to conduct an economic review because it determines not to proceed with a proposed regulation. A number of exemptions were granted between 1996 and 2005. The FAA could have simply denied all requests for exemptions until the Mode S transponder equipment requirement was in fact rescinded. However, we did not view this as supporting the public interest and concluded that certain exemptions were justified given the agency position on Mode S in 1996. Several operators have benefited from the exemptions and were able to defer the equipage costs for several years. Since that time, technology developments and the availability of Mode S avionics dictate that we revise our policy. As we are retaining the Mode S transponder requirements, the basis for the current exemptions no longer exists. Operators are not entitled to an exemption as a matter of right. Consequently, we do not agree with RAA's assertion that the previous grant of exemptions is tantamount to a rule and thus deserving of a cost-benefit analysis. We did view, as critical and warranting public input, the appropriate date for which the exemptions would terminate and that affected operators would be required to install a Mode S transponder if their Mode C or Mode A transponder could not be repaired and specifically requested comment on that aspect. 1 Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 5601, et seq.), Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 4 §§ 2531-2533, Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). 2 52 FR 3380; February 3, 1987. 3 61 FR 26036; May 23, 1996. RAA also stated that there are more than 130,000 general aviation users who are not required to install Mode S and questioned why the Mode S transponder are required for part 135 operators. The Mode S transponder requirement for part 91 operations was rescinded in 1992 (57 FR 34614; August 5, 1992). The agency concluded that the expense of requiring the equipment for all part 91 operators could not be justified since the vast majority of general aviation operators do not operate in congested airspace. Furthermore, to impose a Mode S requirement on all such operators would be unduly burdensome with little safety benefit. At this time, we do not see evidence that this rationale is no longer valid. As stated previously, any new exemption or request for extension will be evaluated carefully as to whether it would serve the public interest. Requesting an exemption simply because previous exemptions have been granted is not considered in the public interest. Adoption of the March 1, 2007 Date The FAA concludes that March 1, 2007, provides a reasonable timeframe for the exemptions to terminate. We intend to judiciously exercise our authority in reviewing any petitions for exemption or requests for extension under 14 CFR 11.81. Operators are advised that this policy does not require the installation of Mode S transponders on March 1, 2007. Operators may continue to use Mode A and Mode C transponders beyond the expiration of their exemption and past March 1, 2007, until they can no longer be repaired and must be replaced. Issued in Washington, DC, on February 9, 2006. James J. Ballough, Director, Flight Standards Service. [FR Doc. E6-2178 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 892 [Docket No. 2005N-0467] Medical Devices; Radiology Devices; Reclassification of Bone Sonometers AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration

(FDA)is publishing a proposed rule to reclassify bone sonometer devices from class III into class II, subject to special controls. A bone sonometer is a device that transmits ultrasound energy into the human body to measure acoustic properties of bone that indicate overall bone health and fracture risk. Elsewhere in this issue of the **Federal Register** , FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Bone Sonometers” that the agency proposes to use as a special control for these devices. DATES: Submit comments by May 16, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. 2005N-0467, by any of the following methods: *Electronic Submissions* Submit electronic comments in the following ways: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Agency Web site: *http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the agency Web site. *Written Submissions* Submit written submissions in the following ways: • FAX: 301-827-6870. • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions]: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. To ensure more timely processing of comments, FDA is no longer accepting comments submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages you to continue to submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal or the agency Web site, as described in the *Electronic Submissions* portion of this paragraph. *Instructions* : All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket No(s). and Regulatory Information Number

(RIN)(if a RIN number has been assigned) for this rulemaking. All comments received may be posted without change to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* , including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Comments” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket* : For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* and insert the docket number(s), found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert A. Phillips, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-470), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301-594-1212, ext. 130. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Regulatory Authority The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 301 *et seq* .), as amended by the Medical Device Amendments of 1979 (the 1976 amendments) (Public Law 94-295), the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990

(SMDA)(Pub. L. 101-629), and the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-115), established a comprehensive system for the regulation of medical devices intended for human use. Section 513 of the act (21 U.S.C. 360c) established three categories (classes) of devices, depending on the regulatory controls needed to provide reasonable assurance of their safety and effectiveness. The three categories of devices are class I (general controls), class II (special controls), and class III (premarket approval). Under section 513 of the act, devices that were in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 (the date of enactment of the 1976 amendments), generally referred to as preamendments devices, are classified after FDA has:

(1)Received a recommendation from a device classification panel (an FDA advisory committee);

(2)published the panel's recommendation for comment, along with a proposed regulation classifying the device type; and

(3)published a final regulation classifying the device type. FDA has classified most preamendments devices under these procedures. Devices that were not in commercial distribution prior to May 28, 1976, generally referred to as postamendments devices, are classified automatically by statute (section 513(f) of the act) into class III without any FDA rulemaking process. Those devices remain in class III and require premarket approval, unless and until the device is reclassified into class I or II or FDA issues an order finding the device to be substantially equivalent, under section 513(i) of the act, to a predicate device that does not require premarket approval. The agency determines whether new devices are substantially equivalent to predicate devices by means of premarket notification procedures in section 510(k) of the act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807). A preamendments device that has been classified into class III may be marketed, by means of premarket notification procedures, without submission of a premarket approval application (PMA), until FDA issues a final regulation under section 515(b) of the act (21 U.S.C. 360e(b)) requiring premarket approval. Section 513(f)(3) allows FDA to initiate reclassification of a postamendment device classified into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the act, or the manufacturer or importer of a device to petition the Secretary of Health and Human Services for the issuance of an order classifying the device in class I or class II. FDA's regulations in 21 CFR 860.134 set forth the procedures for the filing and review of a petition for reclassification of such class III devices. To change the classification of the device, it is necessary that the proposed new classification have sufficient regulatory controls to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use. II. Regulatory History of the Device A bone sonometer is a postamendments device classified into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the act. Therefore, this generic type of device cannot be placed in commercial distribution unless it is reclassified under section 513(f)(3), or is the subject of a PMA or notice of completion of a product development protocol under section 515 of the act (21 U.S.C. 360e). Accordingly, under section 513(f)(3) of the act, FDA is initiating this proposal to reclassify bone sonometers from class III to class II when intended for the following:

(1)Determining the possible presence of osteoporosis and assessing fracture risk,

(2)monitoring bone changes over time, and/or

(3)assessing non-age-related bone loss. III. Device Description A bone sonometer is a device that transmits ultrasound energy into the human body to measure acoustic properties of bone that indicate overall bone health and fracture risk. Bone sonometers are used for determining the possible presence of osteoporosis and assessing fracture risk; monitoring bone changes over time; and assessing non-age-related bone loss. The primary components of the device are a voltage generator, a transmitting transducer, a receiving transducer, hardware, and software for reception and processing of the received ultrasonic signal. By processing an ultrasonic signal propagated through a bone, it is possible to estimate broadband ultrasonic attenuation

(BUA)and/or speed of sound (SOS). These two acoustic parameters have also been shown in prospective clinical trials to predict fracture incidence (Refs. 1 and 2). In this way, BUA and SOS can be used to aid a physician in determining the possible presence of osteoporosis and assessing fracture risk; monitoring bone changes over time; and assessing non-age-related bone loss. IV. Summary of the Data Upon Which the Reclassification is Based FDA is proposing this reclassification based on experience with the device and information on the benefits and risks of the device that have developed since the device's classification into class III. Specifically, distinct bone sonometers from different manufacturers demonstrate similar performance and increases the agency's confidence in this technology. In addition, a recent study of 149,524 women compared four peripheral techniques, including bone sonometry, peripheral dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), finger DEXA, and heel single x-ray absorpiometry, for their ability to predict fracture incidence within one year of measurement. (Ref. 3.) The results show that all four techniques were equally effective for this purpose. Peripheral DEXA and finger DEXA are in class II. Moreover, as discussed next, information regarding the risks of the device, along with measures to mitigate these risks, has developed. FDA believes this information is sufficient to establish special controls for this device that will provide a reasonable assurance of its safety and effectiveness if it is reclassified into class II. V. Risks to Health FDA believes that bone sonometers, when used for determining the possible presence of osteoporosis and assessing fracture risk; monitoring bone changes over time; or assessing non-age-related bone loss; should be reclassified into class II because special controls, in addition to general controls, can provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device, and there is sufficient information to establish special controls to provide such assurance. After considering the information regarding bone sonometer use and technology, published literature, and medical device reports, FDA has evaluated the risks to health associated with use of these devices. FDA believes that electrical shock; electromagnetic compatibility; tissue damage; and inaccurate measurement present risks to health associated with the use of bone sonometers. The draft special controls guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Bone Sonometers” aids in mitigating the risks by recommending performance characteristics, safety testing, and appropriate labeling. VI. Special Controls Elsewhere in this issue of the **Federal Register** , FDA is publishing a notice of availability of the draft guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Bone Sonometers,” that the agency is proposing to use as the special control for these device types. The draft guidance document contains specific recommendations with regard to device performance testing and other information that should be included in a premarket (510(k)) notification submission. Particular sections of the guidance document address the following:

(1)Electrical safety,

(2)electromagnetic compatibility,

(3)acoustic intensity,

(4)device performance characteristics, and

(5)labeling. FDA believes that this draft special controls guidance, in addition to general controls, can address the risks to heath described in section V of this document. In table 1 of this document, FDA has identified the risks to health associated with the use of these devices in the first column and the recommended mitigation measures identified in the draft class II special controls guidance document in the second column. These recommendations will also help ensure that the device has appropriate performance characteristics and labeling for its use. Following the effective date of any final reclassification rule based on this proposal, any firm submitting a 510(k) submission for a bone sonometer device will need to address the issues covered in the class II special controls guidance document. However, the firm need only show that its device meets the recommendations of the class II special controls guidance document or in some other way provides equivalent assurances of safety and effectiveness. Table 1 Identified Risk Recommended Mitigation Measures Electrical shock Electrical Safety Electromagnetic interference Electromagnetic Compatibility Tissue damage Acoustic Intensity Inaccurate measurement leading to inappropriate therapy Non-Clinical Testing Clinical Testing Labeling VII. FDA's Findings FDA believes that bone sonometers should be reclassified into class II because special controls, in addition to general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of these devices, and there is sufficient information to establish special controls to provide such assurance. FDA, therefore, is proposing to reclassify bone sonometers into class II and establish the class II special controls guidance document as a special control for these devices. FDA believes for this type of device, premarket notification is necessary to provide reasonable assurance of the device's safety and effectiveness; therefore, the device would not be exempt from premarket notification requirements (section 510 of the act). Thus, persons intending to market this type of device must submit to FDA a premarket notification, prior to marketing the device, which contains information about the device they intend to market. VIII. Effective Date FDA proposes that any final rule that may issue based on this proposal become effective 30 days after its date of publication in the **Federal Register** . IX. Environmental Impact The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this reclassification action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. X. Analysis of Impacts FDA has examined the impacts of the proposed rule under Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The agency believes that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by the Executive order. The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small entities. Reclassification of these devices from class III to class II will relieve all manufacturers of this device type of the costs of complying with the premarket approval requirements in section 515 of the act. Because reclassification will reduce regulatory costs with respect to this device type, it will impose no significant economic impact on any small entities, and it may permit small potential competitors to enter the marketplace by lowering their costs. The agency, therefore, certifies that this proposed rule, if finalized, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires that agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing “any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.” The current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $115 million, using the most current

(2003)Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not expect this proposed rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or exceed this amount. XI. Federalism FDA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the rule does not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Accordingly, the agency has concluded that the rule does not contain policies that have federalism implications as defined in the Executive order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact statement is not required. XII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 FDA tentatively concludes that this proposed rule contains no collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) is not required. FDA also tentatively concludes that the special controls guidance document identified by this proposed rule does not contain new information collection provisions that are subject to review and clearance by OMB under the PRA. Elsewhere in this issue of the ** Federal Register ** , FDA is publishing a notice announcing the availability of the draft guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Bone Sonometers.” The notice contains an analysis of the paperwork burden for the draft guidance. XIII. Comments Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) written or electronic comments regarding this document. Submit a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any mailed comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. XIV. References The following references have been placed on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) and may be seen by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday: 1. Bauer, D. C., et al., “Broadband Ultrasound Attenuation Predicts Fractures Strongly and Independently of Densitometry in Older Women,” *Archives of Internal Medicine* , 157, pp. 629-634, 1997. 2. Hans, D., et al., “Ultrasonographic Heel Measurements to Predict Hip Fracture in Elderly Women: The EPIDOS Prospective Study,” *Lancet* , 348, pp. 511-514, 1996. 3. Miller, P. D., et al., “Prediction of Fracture Risk in Postmenopausal White Women With Peripheral Bone Densitometry: Evidence From the National Osteoporosis Risk Assessment,” *Journal of Bone and Mineral Research* , 17, pp. 2222-2230, 2002. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 892 Medical devices, Radiation protection, X-rays. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under the authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, it is proposed that 21 CFR part 892 be amended as follows: PART 892—RADIOLOGY DEVICES 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 892 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 371. 2. Add section 892.1180 to subpart B to read as follows: § 892.1180 Bone sonometer.

(a)*Identification* . A bone sonometer is a device that transmits ultrasound energy into the human body to measure acoustic properties of bone that indicate overall bone health and fracture risk. The primary components of the device are a voltage generator, a transmitting transducer, a receiving transducer, and hardware and software for reception and processing of the received ultrasonic signal.

(b)*Classification* . Class II (special controls). The special control for this device is FDA's “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Bone Sonometers.” See § 892.1(e) of this chapter for the availability of this guidance document. Dated: January 17, 2006. Linda S. Kahan, Deputy Director, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. [FR Doc. E6-2076 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 46 CFR Parts 67 and 68 [USCG-2005-20258] RIN 1625-AA95 Vessel Documentation: Lease Financing for Vessels Engaged in the Coastwise Trade AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend its regulations for documenting lease-financed vessels that have a “coastwise endorsement” (i.e., vessels used in trade and passenger service within the U.S. or between U.S. ports and those used in dredging and towing in U.S. waters). The vessels affected by this proposal are owned by foreign-owned or controlled U.S. companies, where there is a “demise charter” to a U.S. citizen (i.e., an agreement for the charterer to assume responsibility for operating, crewing, and maintaining the vessel as if the charterer owned it). DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management Facility on or before May 16, 2006. Comments sent to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)on collection of information must reach OMB on or before May 16, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket number USCG-2005-20258 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods:

(1)Web Site: *http://dms.dot.gov.*

(2)Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

(3)Fax: 202-493-2251.

(4)Hand delivery: Room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

(5)Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov.* You must also mail comments on collection of information to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call Patricia Williams, Deputy Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, Coast Guard, telephone 304-271-2506. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-493-0402. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Public Participation and Request for Comments II. Background and Purpose III. Discussion of Proposed Rule A. Third-party audits. B. Waiver of qualified proprietary cargo requirement by the Secretary of Transportation. C. Reorganization of the requirements for a coastwise endorsement under a demise charter. D. Derivation table for proposed 46 CFR part 68. E. Changes to existing 46 CFR part 67. F. Requirements under the 2004 Act (proposed subpart C). G. Existing requirements under 46 CFR part 67 (proposed subpart D). IV. Regulatory Analysis V. List of Subjects VI. Regulatory Text I. Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* and will include any personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation

(DOT)to use the Docket Management Facility. Please see DOT's “Privacy Act” paragraph below. *Submitting comments:* If you submit a comment, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2005-20258), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or hand delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES ; but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. *Viewing comments and documents:* To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to *http://dms.dot.gov* at any time and conduct a simple search using the docket number. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. *Public Meeting:* We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the **Federal Register** . *Privacy Act:* Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* II. Background and Purpose The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1996 (1996 Act) amended the vessel documentation laws to promote lease financing of vessels with a coastwise endorsement on their certificate of documentation. Public Law 104-324, section 1113(d), 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). A coastwise endorsement is required to engage in trade and passenger service within or between U.S. ports and in dredging and towing in U.S. waters. The vessels affected by this proposal are owned by foreign-owned or controlled U.S. companies that are demise chartered to a coastwise qualified U.S. citizen. A coastwise qualified citizen can be either an individual who is a U.S. citizen or any other entity that is at least 75 percent U.S. owned and controlled. Lease financing has become a very common way to finance capital assets in the maritime industry. Under lease financing, ownership of the vessel is in the name of the owner, with a demise charter to the charterer (i.e., the operator) of the vessel. A demise or bareboat charter is an agreement in which the charterer assumes the responsibility for operating, crewing, and maintaining the vessel as if the charterer owned it. Because of the potential cost savings, many vessel operators choose to acquire or build vessels through lease financing, instead of the traditional mortgage financing. But, until the 1996 Act, operators were prevented from obtaining lease financing from U.S. companies that are less than 75 percent U.S. owned, because the leasing company had to be a U.S. citizen under section 2 of the Shipping Act, 1916, which requires at least 75 percent U.S. ownership. 46 U.S.C. app. 802. The Coast Guard published a final rule in the **Federal Register** on February 4, 2004, implementing most of the provisions of the 1996 Act. 69 FR 5390. On the same day, the Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration published a joint notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)entitled “Vessel Documentation: Lease Financing for Vessels Engaged in the Coastwise Trade; Second Rulemaking.” 69 FR 5403. However, on August 9, 2004, the President signed the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004 (2004 Act), which made amendments to 46 U.S.C. 12106 with regard to certain vessels engaged in the coastwise trade. Public Law 108-293. In response to those changes, the Coast Guard and Maritime Administration withdrew the joint NPRM. 70 FR 19376 (Apr. 13, 2005). Subsection 608(a) of the 2004 Act adds a new paragraph

(f)to 46 U.S.C. 12106 setting forth an ownership certification requirement. Under subsection 608(a), the owner of a lease-financed vessel must now certify each year: • That it (or, if the vessel is owned by a trust or similar arrangement, the beneficiary of the trust or similar arrangement) is a leasing company, bank, or financial institution; • That it owns or holds the beneficial interest in the vessel solely as a “passive investment,” as defined in 608(a); • That it does not operate any vessel for hire and is not an affiliate of any person who operates any vessel for hire; and • That it is independent from, and not an affiliate of, any charterer of the vessel or any person who has the right, directly or indirectly, to control or direct the movement or use of the vessel. In addition, subsection 608(a) allows a separate certification for tank vessels that primarily carry qualified proprietary cargo such as oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas. Subsection 608(b) provides requirements for a few particular vessels in the Alaska trade and is referenced in the note to proposed § 68.60. Subsection 608(c) provides for a permanent grandfather from the provisions of subsection 608(a) for most vessels documented under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) on or before August 9, 2004, the date of enactment of the 2004 Act. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule This NRPM would amend the regulations on the documentation for U.S.-built vessels owned by foreign-owned or controlled U.S. companies that are lease financed to a U.S. citizen for use in the coastwise trade. This proposed rule addresses amendments provided by Congress under the 2004 Act concerning information needed to determine the eligibility of a vessel owner for a coastwise endorsement under the lease-financing law. Specifically, it proposes the following changes: • Update and provide consistent documentation requirements to determine the eligibility of lease-financed vessels for coastwise endorsements. • Permanently grandfather, from the new requirements, all lease-financed vessels, except for offshore supply vessels

(OSV)documented on or before August 9, 2004. • Require owners of lease-financed OSVs with valid coastwise endorsements issued before August 9, 2004, to reapply for a new coastwise endorsement by August 9, 2007. • Require all owners of lease-financed vessels with recently-issued coastwise endorsements (i.e., those issued after August 9, 2004) to certify each year that their ownership and investment status has not changed. • Require entities that enter into a demise sub-charter agreement to file a copy of the sub-charter and amendments to the sub-charter with the Director of the National Vessel Documentation Center (NVDC). A. *Third-party audits.* Our February 4, 2004, NPRM that was withdrawn on April 13, 2005, requested comments as to whether we should require that endorsement applications to the Coast Guard be audited by a third party. 69 FR 5403. We stated that we were considering requiring each applicant to provide a certification from an independent auditor with expertise in the business of vessel financing and operations. That certification would provide additional assurance that the transaction would in fact qualify under the lease-financing statute and regulations. However, we recognized that this additional requirement would add time and cost to the process of preparing the application. We expressed particular interest in obtaining comments on this question. The responses received were evenly split between those favoring third-party audits and those opposing it. However, in light of the new self-certification requirement in section 608 of the 2004 Act, which is reflected in proposed § 68.65, it would appear that the cost of third-party audits would outweigh any benefits. 46 U.S.C. 12106(f). The 2004 Act prohibits owners from being affiliates of vessel operators, which should not require a third-party audit. For this reason, we have not included a third-party-audit requirement in our proposed regulatory changes. However, before reaching a conclusion on this matter, we again seek comments on this question. B. *Waiver of qualified proprietary cargo requirement by the Secretary of Transportation.* Section 608(d) of the 2004 Act authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to waive or reduce the requirement that at least 70 percent of annual cargo consist of qualified proprietary cargo under 46 U.S.C. 12106(f)(3)(A)(iii) for vessels owned by entities with ship-operating affiliates. This provision will be handled by the Secretary of Transportation under subsection 608 and will not be implemented by this proposed rule. See the note at the end of proposed § 68.65. C. *Reorganization of the requirements for a coastwise endorsement under a demise charter.* To improve organization of the existing regulations for qualifying and documenting a vessel with a coastwise endorsement under a demise charter, we propose that they be transferred, without substantive change (except as described in paragraph G below), from 46 CFR part 67 to 46 CFR part 68, which deals with other exceptions to the normal coastwise rules. In addition, all of the subparts and sections in existing part 68 would be re-designated to remove the outmoded, hyphenated numbering system. The existing regulations for coastwise endorsement under a demise charter would be placed in proposed subpart D and the new regulations under the 2004 Act would be placed in proposed subpart C. The following derivation table sets out the sources of each of the re-designated subparts and sections. D. * Derivation table for proposed 46 CFR part 68.* Proposed Source Subpart A Subpart 68.01. § 68.1 New. § 68.3 68.01-1. § 68.5 68.01-3. § 68.7 68.01-5. § 68.9 68.01-7. § 68.11 68.01-9. § 68.13 68.01-11. § 68.15 68.01-13. § 68.17 68.01-15. § 68.19 68.01-17. Appendix A to Subpart A Appendix A to Subpart 68.01. Appendix B to Subpart A Appendix B to Subpart 68.01. Subpart B Subpart 68.05. § 68.25 68.05-1. § 68.27 68.05-3. § 68.29 68.05-5. § 68.31 68.05-7. § 68.33 68.05-9. § 68.35 68.05-11. § 68.37 68.05-13. Appendix A to Subpart B Appendix A to Subpart 68.05. Appendix B to Subpart B Appendix B to Subpart 68.05. Subpart C New. § 68.50 New. § 68.55 New. § 68.60 67.20. § 68.65 New. § 68.70(a) New. § 68.70(b) 67.147(b). § 68.75(a)(1) to (a)(5) 67.179. § 68.75(a)(6) 67.147(a)(1) and (a)(2). § 68.80 New. Subpart D New. § 68.100 New. § 68.103 New. § 68.105 New. § 68.107 67.147. § 68.109 67.179. § 68.111 67.167(c)(10). Part 68 would be renamed “DOCUMENTATION OF VESSELS: COASTWISE ENDORSEMENT; EXCEPTIONS TO OWNERSHIP QUALIFICATION.” This heading better reflects the purpose of part 68, which already contains the existing rules for coastwise qualification of vessels documented under the Bowaters Amendment and for oil spill response vessels. It would now also contain the lease-financing provisions under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). Existing subpart 68.03, which had been reserved for documentation of vessels under the Act of August 9, 1954, but which was never used, would be removed as unnecessary. E. *Changes to existing 46 CFR part 67.* Because of the above described reorganization, the existing lease-financing provisions in part 67 would be moved, without substantive change (except as described in paragraph G below), to part 68, subpart D. The definitions of certain terms in § 67.3 would be relocated to proposed § 68.103. Section 67.20, Coastwise endorsement for a vessel under a demise charter, would be transferred to 68.105. References to 67.20 would be removed from § 67.35(c), 67.36(c)(2), and 67.39(c)(2) and replaced with references to § 68.60 or 68.105. Section 67.147, Application procedure: Coastwise endorsement for a vessel under a demise charter, would be revised and re-designated as proposed 68.60, Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under [subpart C]. In 67.167, Requirements for exchange of Certificate of Documentation, paragraph(c)(10) would be revised by removing the list of requirements for exchange of a Certificate of Documentation for a vessel endorsement under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). This would be replaced with a reference to the requirements now in proposed § 68.80 and 68.111. Paragraph (c)(11) of 67.167 would be removed. Section 67.179, Application Procedure: Coastwise operation of a barge under a demise charter, is revised and re-designated as proposed 68.75, Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. F. *Requirements under the 2004 Act (proposed subpart C).* These proposed requirements track subsection 608(a) of the 2004 Act, which added new paragraph

(f)to 46 U.S.C. 12106, setting forth an ownership certification requirement. New subpart C, consisting of §§ 68.50 through 68.80, would address vessels with a coastwise endorsement issued on or after August 9, 2004. Section 68.50 would provide the purpose and applicability of the new subpart. Section 68.55 would include the definition of the terms “affiliate,” “cargo,” “oil,” “operation or management,” “passive investment,” “qualified proprietary cargo,” “sub-charter,” and “United States affiliate.” These definitions would come from the 2004 Act. G. *Existing requirements under 46 CFR part 67 (proposed subpart D).* These requirements would be moved from part 67 to the new part 68, subpart D, consisting of § 68.100 through 68.111, which would address vessels with a coastwise endorsement issued before August 9, 2004. The 2004 Act granted special rights to vessels under a demise charter that were eligible for, and received, a document with a coastwise endorsement before August 9, 2004; to barges deemed eligible to operate in coastwise trade before August 9, 2004, without being documented; and to certain replacement vessels. Until August 9, 2007, this subpart would also apply to OSVs with a certificate of documentation endorsed, as of August 9, 2004, with a coastwise endorsement under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). Proposed 68.103 would set forth definitions for terms carried over from existing § 67.3. Proposed § 68.107(d) and

(e)and 68.109(d) and

(e)(as transferred from existing § 67.147(d) and 67.179(d)) would change the provision for notifying the Coast Guard's NVDC of sub-charters. In the existing regulations, notice is required only when requested by the Director of the NVDC. These provisions would be changed to require notice of demise sub-charters even without a request from the Director, while notice of other sub-charters remains only upon request by the Director. These changes, also found in proposed §§ 68.70(d) and

(e)and 68.75(d) and (e), would assist the Coast Guard in determining whether an entity meets the statutory requirements. IV. Regulatory Analysis Assessment This proposed rule is a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has reviewed it under that Order. It requires an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be minimal. A draft Regulatory Analysis is available in the docket where indicated under the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” section of this preamble. A summary of the analysis follows: The Coast Guard proposes to amend its regulations on the documentation for U.S.-built vessels owned by foreign-owned or controlled U.S. companies that are lease financed to a U.S. citizen for use in the coastwise trade. This proposed rule mostly addresses amendments provided by Congress under the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004 concerning information needed to determine the eligibility of a vessel owner for a coastwise endorsement under the lease-financing law. This proposed rule would update and provide consistent documentation requirements to determine the eligibility of lease-financed vessels for coastwise endorsements as discussed under the “Discussion of Proposed Rule” section of this preamble. The proposed rule also implements the Congressionally-mandated permanent grandfathering of all lease-financed vessels, except for OSVs documented on or before August 9, 2004, from the new requirements. However, this proposed rule would make three changes to the existing regulations that would cause additional costs to industry. First, it would require owners of lease-financed OSVs with valid coastwise endorsements issued before August 9, 2004, to reapply for a new coastwise endorsement by August 9, 2007. Second, it would require all owners of lease-financed vessels with recently issued coastwise endorsements ( *i.e.* , those issued after August 9, 2004) to certify each year that their ownership and investment status has not changed. Lastly, it would require entities that enter into a demise sub-charter agreement to file a copy of the sub-charter and amendments to the sub-charter with the Director of the NVDC. These changes are additional collection-of-information (paperwork) requirements. Based on Coast Guard data, there are currently eight owners of OSVs that would be affected by this proposed rule. We also estimate from the Coast Guard data and from NVDC information that there would be 25 current and future owners affected by the annual certification requirements of this proposed rule, which includes the eight owners of OSVs affected by this proposed rule. We do not have historical data on the number of affected entities impacted by the proposed collection-of-information requirements for demise sub-charter agreements. We assume there would be approximately three demise sub-charter agreements over the next 10 years based on NVDC projections. We estimate that the total first-year cost of this proposed rule to industry is $11,059. This first-year cost includes the one-time cost to the affected OSV owners to reapply for a new coastwise endorsement, the first year cost of annual certification for the affected vessel owners, and a portion of the cost to affected vessel charterers associated with paperwork submissions of future demise sub-charter agreements. After the first year of implementation, the total annual cost of this proposed rule to industry is $1,621, which is the first-year cost less the one-time cost to the affected OSV owners to reapply for a new coastwise endorsement. The estimated 10-year (2005-2014), discounted present value of the total cost of this proposed rule to all affected owners and charterers is $21,623 based on a 7 percent discount rate and $23,684 based on a 3 percent discount rate. The benefit of this proposed rule would be that it updates and provides consistent documentation requirements. These requirements comply with mandates provided by Congress under the 2004 Act concerning information and documentation needed to determine the eligibility of a vessel owner. These updated documentation requirements would assist the Coast Guard in determining the eligibility of lease-financed vessels for coastwise endorsements. We need this information to determine whether an entity meets the current statutory requirements. The result of these proposed documentation requirements would support our efforts to accurately issue coastwise endorsements to eligible lease-financed vessels. We are interested in the potential impacts from this proposed rule. If you think that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on you, your business, or your organization, please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why, how, and to what degree you think this rule would have an economic impact on you. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect owners of lease-financed OSVs with valid coastwise endorsements issued before August 9, 2004, owners of lease-financed vessels with recently-issued coastwise endorsements, and charterers that enter into a demise sub-charter agreement. The owners mentioned above are U.S. subsidiaries or branch companies that are owned or controlled by larger, foreign, corporate affiliates and, therefore, are considered as “one party with such interests aggregated” under the small business size regulations (13 CFR 121.103). We determined whether an owner is a small or large entity using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes and the small entity revenue or employee size standards provided by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). Based on our initial determination, the owners in each NAICS code category exceed the SBA size standard and are classified as large businesses. We used the following NAICS codes and SBA size standards to evaluate owner size: • 238910—Site Preparation Contractors, $12 million in annual corporate revenue. • 483111—Deep Sea Freight Transportation, 500 annual corporate employees. • 532310—General Rental Centers, $6 million in annual corporate revenue. • 551111—Bank Holding Companies, $6 million in annual corporate revenue. There would be costs of this proposed rule for the charterers of the lease-financed vessels mentioned above. Charterers would be affected by this proposed rule if they enter into a demise sub-charter agreement. However, we have determined that the possible charterers affected by the additional costs are classified as large businesses. We used the following NAICS codes and SBA size standards to evaluate the charterer size: • 213112—Support Activities for Oil and Gas Operations, $6 million in annual corporate revenue. • 483111—Deep Sea Freight Transportation, 500 annual corporate employees. This initial determination indicates that the owners and charterers affected by this proposed rule are classified as large businesses by SBA standards. Therefore, at this time, the Coast Guard certifies, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. Public Law 104-121. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please consult Patricia Williams, Deputy Director, National Vessel Documentation Center (NVDC), U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 304-271-2506. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and require a revision to an existing collection. 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), “collection of information” comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other, similar actions. The title and description of the information collection, a description of those who must collect the information, and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of data, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection. Under 46 CFR 68.65, 68.70, 68.75, 68.100, 68.107, and 68.109, this proposed rule would amend the collection-of-information requirements for vessel owners and charterers engaging in the coastwise trade under the lease-financing provisions of 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). The Coast Guard needs this information to determine whether an entity meets the statutory requirements. These provisions will require modifying the burden in the collection previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)under OMB Control Number 1625-0027 (formerly 2115-0110). *Title:* Vessel Documentation: Lease Financing for Vessels Engaged in the Coastwise Trade; Third Rulemaking. *OMB Control Number:* 1625-0027. *Summary of the Collection of Information:* This proposed rule would add new collection-of-information requirements in proposed §§ 68.65, 68.70, 68.75, 68.100, 68.107, and 68.109 for vessel owners and charterers applying to engage in the coastwise trade under the lease-financing provisions of 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). These new requirements would require a change in previously approved collection under OMB Control No. 1625-0027. *Need for Information:* The Coast Guard needs this information to determine whether an entity meets the statutory requirements. *Proposed Use of Information:* The Coast Guard would use this information to determine whether an entity meets the statutory requirements. *Description of Respondents:* The respondents are vessel owners and charterers that engage in the coastwise trade under the lease-financing provisions of 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). We estimate that this proposed rule would involve one-time responses for owners of lease-financed OSVs that must reapply for new certificates of documentation, annual responses for owners that must submit ownership certifications, and the possibility of an additional response every 3 years for entities involved in demise sub-charters. *Number of Respondents:* The existing OMB-approved number of respondents, as adjusted on February 4, 2004, is 180,035. This proposed rule would increase the number of respondents in this OMB-approved collection by approximately 25. The total number of respondents would be 180,060. *Frequency of Response:* The existing OMB-approved number of responses, as adjusted on February 4, 2004, is 245,285. It will vary by year due to the grandfathering provisions of the proposed rule. The first year of this proposed rule would increase that number by 58. After the first year of implementation, the increase would be 25 annually. We estimate an additional response every 3 years for entities involved in demise sub-charters. However, we consider this negligible. The total number of responses in the first year of implementation would be 245,343 and 245,310 annually thereafter. *Burden of Response:* The burden resulting from this proposed rule would arise from changes that require entities that own certain lease-financed OSVs to reapply for new coastwise endorsements and require certain entities to submit annual ownership certifications to the NVDC. We estimate that it would take a total of 30 minutes per OSV to complete the application for a new coastwise endorsement, since the current Coast Guard paperwork-burden time for this application (Form CG-1258) is 30 minutes. We estimate that it would take 5 minutes processing time to sign and submit the annual ownership certification form, since the Coast Guard paperwork-burden time for the Endorsement Renewal Certification (Form CG-1280), a similar form, is 5 minutes. *Estimate of Total Annual Burden:* The existing OMB-approved total annual burden, as adjusted on February 4, 2004, is 50,512 hours. The first year of this proposed rule would increase that number by approximately 19 hours. After the first year of implementation, the increase would be approximately 2 hours annually. The total number of hours in the first year of implementation would be 50,531 and 50,514 annually thereafter. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this proposed rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information. We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information to help us determine how useful the information is; whether it can help us perform our functions better; whether it is readily available elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is; how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can minimize the burden of collection. If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit them both to OMB and to the Docket Management Facility where indicated under ADDRESSES , by the date under DATES . You need not respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the requirements for this collection of information become effective, we will publish notice in the **Federal Register** of OMB's decision to approve, modify, or disapprove the collection. Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order. Though it is a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( *e.g.* , specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(d), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This proposed rulemaking is administrative in nature and concerns the documentation of vessels engaged in the coastwise trade. A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” section of this preamble. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects 46 CFR Part 67 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 68 Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels. Regulatory Text For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 46 CFR parts 67 and 68 as follows: PART 67—DOCUMENTATION OF VESSELS 1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows: Authority: 14 U.S.C. 664; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 9118; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2110; 46 U.S.C. app. 876; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. § 67.3 [Amended] 2. In § 67.3, remove the following terms and their definitions: “affiliate,” “group,” “operation or management of vessels,” “parent,” “primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions,” “sub-charter,” and “subsidiary.” § 67.20 [Removed] 3. Remove § 67.20. § 67.35 [Amended] 4. In § 67.35(c), remove the words “§ 67.20” and add, in their place, the words “§§ 68.60 or 68.105 of this chapter”. § 67.36 [Amended] 5. In § 67.36(c)(2), remove the words “§ 67.20” and add, in their place, the words “§§ 68.60 or 68.105 of this chapter”. § 67.39 [Amended] 6. In § 67.39(c)(2), remove the words “§ 67.20” and add, in their place, the words “§§ 68.60 or 68.105 of this chapter”. § 67.147 [Removed] 7. Remove § 67.147. 8. In § 67.167, in paragraph (c)(9), following the semicolon, add the word “and”; revise paragraph (c)(10) to read as shown below; and remove paragraph (c)(11): § 67.167 Requirement for exchange of Certificate of Documentation.

(c)* * *

(10)For a vessel with a coastwise endorsement under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e), one of the events in §§ 68.80 or 68.111 of this chapter occurs. § 67.179 [Removed] 9. Remove § 67.179. PART 68—DOCUMENTATION OF VESSELS: EXCEPTIONS TO COASTWISE QUALIFICATION 10. Revise the authority citation for part 68 to read as follows: Authority: 14 U.S.C. 664; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 9118; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2110; 46 U.S.C. app. 876; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 11. Revise the heading to part 68 to read as shown above. Subpart 68.03 [Removed] 12. Remove subpart 68.03. 13. In part 68— a. Redesignate the subparts and their appendices as shown in the following table: Old subpart/appendix New subpart/appendix Subpart 68.01 Subpart A. Appendix A to Subpart 68.01 of Part 68 Appendix A to Subpart A of Part 68. Appendix B to Subpart 68.01 of Part 68 Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 68. Subpart 68.03 [Removed]. Subpart 68.05 Subpart B. Appendix A to Subpart 68.05 of Part 68 Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 68. Appendix B to Subpart 68.05 of Part 68 Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 68. b. In the redesignated subparts, redesignate the sections as shown in the following table: Old section New section 68.01-1 68.3 68.01-3 68.5 68.01-5 68.7 68.01-7 68.9 68.01-9 68.11 68.01-11 68.13 68.01-13 68.15 68.01-15 68.17 68.01-17 68.19 68.05-1 68.25 68.05-3 68.27 68.05-5 68.29 68.05-7 68.31 68.05-9 68.33 68.05-11 68.35 68.05-13 68.37 c. In the redesignated sections listed in the first column of the following table, the reference in the second column is revised to read as shown in the third column: New section Old reference New reference 68.7 68.01-3 68.5 68.7 68.01-9(a) 68.11(a) 68.9 68.01-1 68.3 68.9 68.01-9(a) 68.11(a) 68.11 68.01-5 68.7 68.11 68.01-3(a) 68.5(a) 68.11 68.01-11 68.13 68.11 68.01-13 68.15 68.11 68.01-7 68.9 68.11 13 68.15 68.13 68.01-15 68.17 68.13 68.01-17 68.19 68.15 68.01-15 68.17 68.15 68.01-1 68.3 68.15 68.01-15(c) 68.17(c) 68.17 68.01-1 68.3 68.19 68.01-5 68.7 68.29 68.05-9 68.33 68.31 68.05-5 68.29 68.35 68.05-13 68.37 68.35 68.05-7(a) 68.31(a) 68.37 68.05-11(a) 68.35(a) 68.37 68.05-5 68.29 68.37 68.05-9 68.33 d. The table of contents for part 68 reads as follows: PART 68—DOCUMENTATION OF VESSELS: EXCEPTIONS TO COASTWISE QUALIFICATION Subpart A—Regulations for Engaging in Limited Coastwise Trade Sec. 68.1 Purpose of subpart. 68.3 Definitions for the purposes of this subpart. 68.5 Requirements for citizenship under 46 U.S.C. App. 833-1. 68.7 Qualification as an 883-1 corporation. 68.9 Qualification as a parent or subsidiary. 68.11 Cessation of qualifications. 68.13 Privileges conferred—documentation of vessels. 68.15 Privileges conferred—operation of vessels. 68.17 Restrictions. 68.19 Application by an 883-1 corporation to document a vessel. Appendix A to Subpart A of Part 68—Oath for the Qualification of Corporation as a Citizen of the United States Under the Act of Sept. 2, 1958 (46 U.S.C. 883-1) Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 68—Oath of Parent or Subsidiary Corporation Act of September 2, 1958 (46 U.S.C. 883-1) Subpart B—Documentation of Certain Vessels for Oil Spill Cleanup 68.25 Purpose and scope. 68.27 Definitions for purpose of this subpart. 68.29 Citizenship requirements for limited coastwise endorsement. 68.31 Vessel eligibility requirements for limited coastwise endorsement. 68.33 Privileges of a limited coastwise endorsement. 68.35 Application to document a vessel under this subpart. 68.37 Cessation of qualifications. Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 68—Oath for Qualification of a Not-For-Profit Oil Spill Response Cooperative Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 68—Oath for Documentation of Vessels for Use by a Not-For-Profit Oil Spill Response Cooperative Subpart C—Vessels with a Coastwise Endorsement Issued on or after August 9, 2004, that are Demised Chartered to Coastwise Qualified Citizens 68.50 Purpose and applicability. 68.55 Definitions. 68.60 Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under this subpart. 68.65 Annual ownership certification. 68.70 Application procedure for vessels other than barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.75 Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.80 Invalidation of a coastwise endorsement. Subpart D—Vessels with a Coastwise Endorsement Issued Before August 9, 2004, and their Replacements that are Demise Chartered to Coastwise Qualified Citizens 68.100 Purpose and applicability. 68.103 Definitions. 68.105 Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under this subpart. 68.107 Application procedure for vessels other than barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.109 Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.111 Invalidation of a coastwise endorsement. 14. In part 68, revise the heading to subpart A to read as follows: Subpart A—Regulations for Engaging in Limited Coastwise Trade 15. Add § 68.1 to subpart A to read as follows: § 68.1 Purpose of subpart. This subpart contains citizen ownership requirements and procedures to allow documentation of vessels that do not meet the requirements of part 67 of this chapter. The requirements are for corporations engaged in a manufacturing or mineral industry in the United States. § 68.7 [Amended] 16. In § 68.7— a. In paragraph (b), after the redesignated number “§ 68.11(a)”, remove the words “of this subpart”; and following the words “appendix A”, add the words “of this subpart”. § 68.9 [Amended] 17. In § 68.9— a. In paragraph (a), following the words “appendix B”, add the words “of this subpart”; b. In paragraph (b), following the words “appendix B”, add the words “of this subpart”; and c. In paragraph (c), following the redesignated number “§ 68.11(a)”, remove the words “of this subpart”; and following the words “appendix B”, add the words “of this subpart”. § 68.11 [Amended] 18. In § 68.11— a. In paragraph (a), after the redesignated number “§ 68.7”, remove the words “of this subpart”; and b. In paragraph (b), after the redesignated number “§ 68.9”, remove the words “of this subpart”. Appendix A to Subpart A of Part 68 [Amended] 19. In appendix A— a. In the appendix heading and in the text, remove the words “(46 U.S.C. 883-1)” and add, in their place, the words “(46 U.S.C. app. 883-1)”; and b. Following the word “§ 67.39(c)”, add the words “of this chapter”. Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 68 [Amended] 20. In appendix B, in the appendix heading and in the text, remove the words “(46 U.S.C. 883-1)” and add, in their place, the words “(46 U.S.C. app. 883-1)”. 21. Add new subpart C, consisting of §§ 68.50 through 68.80, to read as follows: Subpart C—Vessels With a Coastwise Endorsement Issued on or After August 9, 2004, That Are Demise Chartered to Coastwise Qualified Citizens 68.50 Purpose and applicability. 68.55 Definitions. 68.60 Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under this subpart. 68.65 Annual ownership certification. 68.70 Application procedure for vessels other than barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.75 Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.80 Invalidation of a coastwise endorsement. Subpart C—Vessels With a Coastwise Endorsement Issued on or After August 9, 2004, That Are Demise Chartered to Coastwise Qualified Citizens § 68.50 Purpose and applicability.

(a)This subpart contains requirements, in addition to those in part 67 of this chapter, for obtaining a coastwise endorsement for a U.S.-built vessel—

(1)That is owned by a person that qualifies as a citizen under §§ 67.35(a), 67.36(a), 67.37, or 67.39(a) of this chapter; and

(2)That is demise chartered to a coastwise qualified citizen under §§ 67.33, 67.35(c), 67.36(c), 67.37, 67.39(c), or 67.41 of this chapter.

(b)This subpart applies to a vessel with a coastwise endorsement issued on or after August 9, 2004. It does not apply to a vessel under subpart D of this part. § 68.55 Definitions. In addition to the terms defined in § 67.3 of this chapter, as used in this subpart— *Affiliate* means, with respect to any person, any other person that is—

(1)Directly or indirectly controlled by, under common control with, or controlling that person; or

(2)Named as being part of the same consolidated group in any report or other document submitted to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or the Internal Revenue Service. *Cargo* does not include cargo to which title is held for non-commercial reasons and primarily for the purpose of evading the requirements of § 68.65(a)(2). *Oil* has the meaning given that term in 46 U.S.C. 2101(20). *Operation or management,* for vessels, means all activities related to the use of vessels to provide services. These activities include, but are not limited to, ship agency; ship brokerage; activities performed by a vessel operator or demise charterer in exercising direction and control of a vessel, such as crewing, victualing, storing, and maintaining the vessel and ensuring its safe navigation; and activities associated with controlling the use and employment of the vessel under a time charter or other use agreement. It does not include activities directly associated with making financial investments in vessels or the receipt of earnings derived from these investments. *Passive investment* means an investment in which neither the investor nor any affiliate of the investor is involved in, or has the power to be involved in, the formulation, determination, or direction of any activity or function concerning the use, operation, or management of the asset that is the subject of the investment. *Qualified proprietary cargo* means—

(1)Oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas cargo that is beneficially owned by the person who submits to the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, an application or annual certification under § 68.65(a)(2), or by an affiliate of that person, immediately before, during, or immediately after the cargo is carried in coastwise trade on a vessel owned by that person;

(2)Oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas cargo not beneficially owned by the person who submits to the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, an application or an annual certification under § 68.65(a)(2), or by an affiliate of that person, but that is carried in coastwise trade by a vessel owned by that person and which is part of an arrangement in which vessels owned by that person and at least one other person are operated collectively as one fleet, to the extent that an equal amount of oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas cargo beneficially owned by that person, or an affiliate of that person, is carried in coastwise trade on one or more other vessels, not owned by that person, or an affiliate of that person, if the other vessel or vessels are also part of the same arrangement;

(3)In the case of a towing vessel associated with a non-self-propelled tank vessel where the two vessels function as a single self-propelled vessel, oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas cargo that is beneficially owned by the person who owns both the towing vessel and the non-self-propelled tank vessel, or any United States affiliate of that person, immediately before, during, or immediately after the cargo is carried in coastwise trade on either of the two vessels; or

(4)Any oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas cargo carried on any vessel that is either a self-propelled tank vessel having a length of at least 210 meters (about 689 feet) or a tank vessel that is a liquefied natural gas carrier that—

(i)Was delivered by the builder of the vessel to the owner of the vessel after December 31, 1999; and

(ii)Was purchased by a person for the purpose, and with the reasonable expectation, of transporting on the vessel liquefied natural gas or unrefined petroleum beneficially owned by the owner of the vessel, or an affiliate of the owner, from Alaska to the continental United States. *Sub-charter* means all types of charters or other contracts for the use of a vessel that are subordinate to a charter. The term includes, but is not limited to, a demise charter, a time charter, a voyage charter, a space charter, and a contract of affreightment. *United States affiliate* means, with respect to any person, an affiliate the principal place of business of which is located in the United States. § 68.60 Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under this subpart.

(a)To be eligible for a coastwise endorsement under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and to operate in coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and 12110(b), a vessel must meet the following:

(1)The vessel is eligible for documentation under 46 U.S.C. 12102.

(2)The vessel is eligible for a coastwise endorsement under § 67.19(c) of this chapter and has not lost coastwise eligibility under § 67.19(d) of this chapter.

(3)The person that owns the vessel (or, if the vessel is owned by a trust or similar arrangement, the beneficiary of the trust or similar arrangement) makes the certification in § 68.65.

(4)The person that owns the vessel has transferred to a qualified U.S. citizen under 46 U.S.C. app. 802 full possession, control, and command of the vessel through a demise charter in which the demise charterer is considered the owner *pro hac vice* during the term of the charter.

(5)The charterer must certify to the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, that the charterer is a citizen of the United States for engaging in the coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. app. 802.

(6)The demise charter is for a period of at least 3 years, unless a shorter period is authorized by the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, under circumstances such as—

(i)When the vessel's remaining life would not support a charter of 3 years; or

(ii)To preserve the use or possession of the vessel.

(b)To apply for a coastwise endorsement for a vessel under a demise charter, see § 68.70 and, for a barge, see § 68.75. Note to § 68.60: Section 608(b) of Public Law 108-293 provides special requirements for certain vessels in the Alaska trade. § 68.65 Annual ownership certification.

(a)At the time of initial application for documentation and at the time for annual renewal of the endorsement as required by § 67.163 of this chapter, the person that owns a vessel with a coastwise endorsement under § 68.60 must certify in writing to the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center—

(1)That the person who owns a vessel with a coastwise endorsement under § 68.60—

(i)Is a leasing company, bank, or financial institution;

(ii)Owns, or holds the beneficial interest in, the vessel solely as a passive investment;

(iii)Does not operate any vessel for hire and is not an affiliate of any person who operates any vessel for hire; and

(iv)Is independent from, and not an affiliate of, any charterer of the vessel or any other person who has the right, directly or indirectly, to control or direct the movement or use of the vessel.

(2)For vessels under paragraph

(b)of this section, that—

(i)The aggregate book value of the vessels owned by that person and United States affiliates of that person does not exceed 10 percent of the aggregate book value of all assets owned by that person and its United States affiliates;

(ii)Not more than 10 percent of the aggregate revenues of that person and its United States affiliates is derived from the ownership, operation, or management of vessels;

(iii)At least 70 percent of the aggregate tonnage of all cargo carried by all vessels owned by that person and its United States affiliates and documented under 46 U.S.C. 12106 is qualified proprietary cargo;

(iv)Any cargo other than qualified proprietary cargo carried by all vessels owned by that person and its United States affiliates and documented under 46 U.S.C. 12106 consists of oil, petroleum products, petrochemicals, or liquefied natural gas;

(v)No vessel owned by that person or any of its United States affiliates and documented under 46 U.S.C. 12106 carries molten sulphur; and

(vi)That person owned one or more vessels documented under § 68.10 as of August 9, 2004.

(b)Paragraph (a)(2) of this section applies only to—

(1)A tank vessel having a tonnage of not less than 6,000 gross tons, as measured under 46 U.S.C. 14502 (or an alternative tonnage measured under 46 U.S.C. 14302 as prescribed under 46 U.S.C. 14104); or

(2)A towing vessel associated with a non-self-propelled tank vessel that meets the requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, where the two vessels function as a single self-propelled vessel. Note to § 68.65: The Secretary of Transportation may waive or reduce the qualified proprietary cargo requirement of § 68.65(a)(2)(iii) for a vessel if the person that owns the vessel (or, if the vessel is owned by a trust or similar arrangement, the beneficiary of the trust or similar arrangement) notifies the Secretary that circumstances beyond the direct control of the person that owns the vessel or its affiliates prevent, or reasonably threaten to prevent, the person that owns the vessel from satisfying this requirement, and the Secretary does not, with good cause, determine otherwise. The waiver or reduction applies during the period of time that the circumstances exist. § 68.70 Application procedure for vessels other than barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented.

(a)The person that owns the vessel (other than a barge under § 68.75) and that seeks a coastwise endorsement under § 68.60 must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)Application for Initial Issue, Exchange, or Replacement of Certificate of Documentation; or Redocumentation (form CG-1258);

(2)Title evidence, if applicable;

(3)Mortgagee consent on form CG-4593, if applicable;

(4)If the application is for replacement of a mutilated document or for exchange of documentation, the outstanding Certificate of Documentation;

(5)The certification required by § 68.65(a)(1) or, if a vessel under § 68.65(b), the certification required by § 68.65(a)(2);

(6)A certification in the form of an affidavit and, if requested by the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, supporting documentation establishing the following facts with respect to the transaction from an individual who is authorized to provide certification on behalf of the person that owns the vessel and who is an officer in a corporation, a partner in a partnership, a member of the board of managers in a limited liability company, or their equivalent. The certificate must certify that the person that owns the vessel has transferred to a qualified United States citizen under 46 U.S.C. app. 802 full possession, control, and command of the U.S.-built vessel through a demise charter in which the demise charterer is considered the owner *pro hac vice* during the term of the charter.

(7)A copy of the charter, which must provide that the charterer is deemed to be the owner *pro hac vice* for the term of the charter.

(b)The charterer must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)A certificate certifying that the charterer is a citizen of the United States for the purpose of engaging in the coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. app. 802.

(2)Detailed citizenship information in the format of form CG-1258, Application for Documentation, section G, citizenship. The citizenship information may be attached to the form CG-1258 that is submitted under paragraph (a)(1) of this section and must be signed by, or on behalf of, the charterer.

(c)Whenever a charter submitted under paragraph (a)(7) of this section is amended, the vessel owner must file a copy of the amendment with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after the effective date of the amendment.

(d)Whenever the charterer of a vessel under paragraph

(a)of this section enters into a sub-charter that is a demise charter with another person for the use of the vessel, the charterer must file a copy of the sub-charter and amendments to the sub-charter with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after the effective date of the sub-charter and the sub-charterer must provide detailed citizenship information in the format of form CG-1258, Application for Documentation, section G, citizenship.

(e)Whenever the charterer of a vessel under paragraph

(a)of this section enters into a sub-charter other than a demise charter with another person for the use of the vessel, the charterer must file a copy of the sub-charter and amendments to the sub-charter with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after a request by the Director to do so.

(f)A person that submits a false certification under this section is subject to penalty under 46 U.S.C. 12122 and 18 U.S.C. 1001. § 68.75 Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented.

(a)The person that owns a barge qualified to engage in coastwise trade must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)The certification required by § 68.65(a)(1) or (a)(2).

(2)A certification in the form of an affidavit and, if requested by the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, supporting documentation establishing the following facts with respect to the transaction from an individual who is authorized to provide certification on behalf of the person that owns the barge and who is an officer in a corporation, a partner in a partnership, a member of the board of managers in a limited liability company, or their equivalent. The certificate must certify the following:

(i)That the person that owns the barge is organized under the laws of the United States or a State.

(ii)That the person that owns the barge has transferred to a qualified United States citizen under 46 U.S.C. app. 802 full possession, control, and command of the U.S.-built barge through a demise charter in which the demise charterer is considered the owner *pro hac vice* during the term of the charter.

(iii)That the barge is qualified to engage in the coastwise trade and that it is owned by a person eligible to own vessels documented under 46 U.S.C. 12102(e).

(3)A copy of the charter, which must provide that the charterer is deemed to be the owner *pro hac vice* for the term of the charter.

(b)The charterer must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)A certificate certifying that the charterer is a citizen of the United States for engaging in the coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. app. 802.

(2)Detailed citizenship information in the format of form CG-1258, Application for Documentation, section G, citizenship. The citizenship information must be signed by, or on behalf of, the charterer.

(c)Whenever a charter under paragraph

(a)of this section is amended, the barge owner must file a copy of the amendment with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after the effective date of the amendment.

(d)Whenever the charterer of a barge under paragraph

(a)of this section enters into a sub-charter that is a demise charter with another person for the use of the barge, the charterer must file a copy of the sub-charter and amendments to the sub-charter with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after the effective date of the sub-charter and the sub-charterer must provide detailed citizenship information in the format of form CG-1258, Application for Documentation, section G, citizenship.

(e)Whenever the charterer of a barge under paragraph

(a)of this section enters into a sub-charter other than a demise charter with another person for the use of the barge, the charterer must file a copy of the sub-charter and amendments to the sub-charter with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after a request by the Director to do so.

(f)A person that submits a false certification under this section is subject to penalty under 46 U.S.C. 12122 and 18 U.S.C. 1001. § 68.80 Invalidation of a coastwise endorsement. In addition to the events in § 67.167(c)(1) through (c)(9) of this chapter, a Certificate of Documentation together with a coastwise endorsement under this subpart becomes invalid when—

(a)The owner fails to make the certification required by § 68.65 or ceases to meet the requirements of the certification on file;

(b)The demise charter expires or is transferred to another charterer; or

(c)The citizenship of the charterer or sub-charterer changes to the extent that they are no longer qualified for a coastwise endorsement. 22. Add new subpart D, consisting of §§ 68.100 through 68.111, to read as follows: Subpart D—Vessels With a Coastwise Endorsement Issued Before August 9, 2004, and Their Replacements That Are Demised Chartered to Coastwise-Qualified Citizens 68.100 Purpose and applicability. 68.103 Definitions. 68.105 Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under this subpart. 68.107 Application procedure for vessels other than barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.109 Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented. 68.111 Invalidation of a coastwise endorsement. Subpart D—Vessels With a Coastwise Endorsement Issued Before August 9, 2004, and Their Replacements That Are Demised Chartered to Coastwise-Qualified Citizens § 68.100 Purpose and applicability.

(a)This subpart contains requirements for the documentation of U.S.-built vessels in the coastwise trade that were granted special rights under the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Action of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-293).

(b)This subpart applies to—

(1)A vessel under a demise charter that was eligible for, and received, a document with a coastwise endorsement under § 67.19 of this chapter and 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) before August 9, 2004;

(2)A barge deemed eligible under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and 12110(b) to operate in coastwise trade without being documented before August 9, 2004; and

(3)A replacement vessel of a similar size and function for any vessel under paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of this section.

(c)Except for vessels under paragraph

(d)of this section, this subpart applies to a certificate of documentation, or renewal of one, endorsed with a coastwise endorsement for a vessel under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) or a replacement vessel of a similar size and function that was issued before August 9, 2004, as long as the vessel is owned by the person named in the certificate, or by a subsidiary or affiliate of that person, and the controlling interest in the owner has not been transferred to a person that was not an affiliate of the owner as of August 9, 2004.

(d)With respect to offshore supply vessels with a certificate of documentation endorsed with a coastwise endorsement as of August 9, 2004, this subpart applies until August 9, 2007. On and after August 9, 2007, subpart C of this part applies to these vessels. § 68.103 Definitions. In addition to the terms defined in § 67.3 of this chapter, as used in this subpart— *Affiliate* means a person that is less than 50 percent owned or controlled by another person. *Group* means the person that owns a vessel, the parent of that person, and all subsidiaries and affiliates of the parent of that person. *Offshore supply vessel* means a motor vessel of more than 15 gross tons but less than 500 gross tons as measured under 46 U.S.C. 14502, or an alternate tonnage measured under 46 U.S.C. 14302 as prescribed under 46 U.S.C. 14104, that regularly carries goods, supplies, individuals in addition to the crew, or equipment in support of exploration, exploitation, or production of offshore mineral or energy resources. *Operation or management of vessels* means all activities related to the use of vessels to provide services. These activities include ship agency; ship brokerage; activities performed by a vessel operator or demise charterer in exercising direction and control of a vessel, such as crewing, victualing, storing, and maintaining the vessel and ensuring its safe navigation; and activities associated with controlling the use and employment of the vessel under a time charter or other use agreement. It does not include activities directly associated with making financial investments in vessels or the receipt of earnings derived from these investments. *Parent* means any person that directly or indirectly owns or controls at least 50 percent of another person. If an owner's parent is directly or indirectly controlled at least 50 percent by another person, that person is also a parent of the owner. Therefore, an owner may have multiple parents. *Person* means an individual; corporation; partnership; limited liability partnership; limited liability company; association; joint venture; trust arrangement; and the government of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of the United States or a State; and includes a trustee, beneficiary, receiver, or similar representative of any of them. *Primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions* means lease financing, in which more than 50 percent of the aggregate revenue of a person is derived from banking, investing, lease financing, or other similar transactions. *Replacement vessel* means—

(1)A temporary replacement vessel for a period not to exceed 180 days if the vessel described in § 68.50 is unavailable due to an act of God or a marine casualty; or

(2)A permanent replacement vessel if—

(i)The vessel described in § 68.50 is unavailable for more than 180 days due to an act of God or a marine casualty; or

(ii)A contract to purchase or construct a replacement vessel is executed not later than December 31, 2004. *Sub-charter* means all types of charters or other contracts for the use of a vessel that are subordinate to a charter. The term includes, but is not limited to, a demise charter, a time charter, a voyage charter, a space charter, and a contract of affreightment. *Subsidiary* means a person at least 50 percent of which is directly or indirectly owned or controlled by another person. § 68.105 Eligibility of a vessel for a coastwise endorsement under this subpart.

(a)Except as under paragraphs

(b)through

(e)of this section, to be eligible for a coastwise endorsement under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and to operate in coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and 12110(b), a vessel under a demise charter must meet the following:

(1)The vessel is eligible for documentation under 46 U.S.C. 12102.

(2)The vessel is eligible for a coastwise endorsement under § 67.19(c) of this chapter, has not lost coastwise eligibility under § 67.19(d) of this chapter, and was financed with lease financing.

(3)The person that owns the vessel, the parent of that person, or a subsidiary of the parent of that person is primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions.

(4)The person that owns the vessel is organized under the laws of the United States or of a State.

(5)None of the following is primarily engaged in the direct operation or management of vessels:

(i)The person that owns the vessel.

(ii)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(iii)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member.

(6)The ownership of the vessel is primarily a financial investment without the ability and intent to directly or indirectly control the vessel's operations by a person not primarily engaged in the direct operation or management of vessels.

(7)The majority of the aggregate revenues of each of the following is not derived from the operation or management of vessels:

(i)The person that owns the vessel.

(ii)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(iii)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member.

(8)None of the following is primarily engaged in the operation or management of commercial, foreign-flag vessels used for the carriage of cargo for parties unrelated to the vessel's owner or charterer:

(i)The person that owns the vessel.

(ii)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(iii)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member.

(9)The person that owns the vessel has transferred to a qualified U.S. citizen under 46 U.S.C. app. 802 full possession, control, and command of the U.S.-built vessel through a demise charter in which the demise charterer is considered the owner *pro hac vice* during the term of the charter.

(10)The charterer must certify to the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, that the charterer is a citizen of the United States for engaging in the coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. app. 802.

(11)The demise charter is for a period of at least 3 years, unless a shorter period is authorized by the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, under circumstances such as—

(i)When the vessel's remaining life would not support a charter of 3 years; or

(ii)To preserve the use or possession of the vessel.

(b)A vessel under a demise charter that was eligible for, and received, a document with a coastwise endorsement under § 67.19 of this chapter and 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) before February 4, 2004, may continue to operate under that endorsement on and after that date and may renew the document and endorsement if the certificate of documentation is not subject to—

(1)Exchange under § 67.167(b)(1) through (b)(3) of this chapter;

(2)Deletion under § 67.171(a)(1) through (a)(6) of this chapter; or

(3)Cancellation under § 67.173 of this chapter.

(c)A vessel under a demise charter that was constructed under a building contract that was entered into before February 4, 2004, in reliance on a letter ruling from the Coast Guard issued before February 4, 2004, is eligible for documentation with a coastwise endorsement under § 67.19 of this chapter and 46 U.S.C. 12106(e). The vessel may continue to operate under that endorsement and may renew the document and endorsement if the certificate of documentation is not subject to—

(1)Exchange under § 67.167(b)(1) through (b)(3) of this chapter;

(2)Deletion under § 67.171(a)(1) through (a)(6) of this chapter; or

(3)Cancellation under § 67.173 of this chapter.

(d)A barge deemed eligible under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and 12110(b) to operate in coastwise trade before February 4, 2004, may continue to operate in that trade after that date unless—

(1)The ownership of the barge changes in whole or in part;

(2)The general partners of a partnership owning the barge change by addition, deletion, or substitution;

(3)The State of incorporation of any corporate owner of the barge changes;

(4)The barge is placed under foreign flag;

(5)Any owner of the barge ceases to be a citizen within the meaning of part 67, subpart C, of this chapter; or

(6)The barge ceases to be capable of transportation by water.

(e)A barge under a demise charter that was constructed under a building contract that was entered into before February 4, 2004, in reliance on a letter ruling from the Coast Guard issued before February 4, 2004, is eligible to operate in coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) and 12110(b). The barge may continue to operate in coastwise trade unless—

(1)The ownership of the barge changes in whole or in part;

(2)The general partners of a partnership owning the barge change by addition, deletion, or substitution;

(3)The State of incorporation of any corporate owner of the barge changes;

(4)The barge is placed under foreign flag;

(5)Any owner of the barge ceases to be a citizen within the meaning of subpart C of this part; or

(6)The barge ceases to be capable of transportation by water. § 68.107 Application procedure for vessels other than barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented.

(a)In addition to the items under § 67.141 of this chapter, the person that owns the vessel (other than a barge under § 68.109) and that seeks a coastwise endorsement under this subpart must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)A certification in the form of an affidavit and, if requested by the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, supporting documentation establishing the following facts with respect to the transaction from an individual who is authorized to provide certification on behalf of the person that owns the vessel and who is an officer in a corporation, a partner in a partnership, a member of the board of managers in a limited liability company, or their equivalent. The certificate must certify the following:

(i)That the person that owns the vessel, the parent of that person, or a subsidiary of a parent of that person is primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions.

(ii)That the person that owns the vessel is organized under the laws of the United States or a State.

(iii)That none of the following is primarily engaged in the direct operation or management of vessels:

(A)The person that owns the vessel.

(B)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(C)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member.

(iv)That ownership of the vessel is primarily a financial investment without the ability and intent to directly or indirectly control the vessel's operations by a person not primarily engaged in the direct operation or management of vessels.

(v)That the majority of the aggregate revenues of each of the following is not derived from the operation or management of vessels:

(A)The person that owns the vessel.

(B)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(C)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member.

(vi)That none of the following is primarily engaged in the operation or management of commercial, foreign-flag vessels used for the carriage of cargo for parties unrelated to the vessel's owner or charterer:

(A)The person that owns the vessel.

(B)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(C)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member.

(vii)That the person that owns the vessel has transferred to a qualified United States citizen under 46 U.S.C. app. 802 full possession, control, and command of the U.S.-built vessel through a demise charter in which the demise charterer is considered the owner *pro hac vice* during the term of the charter.

(viii)That the vessel is financed with lease financing.

(2)A copy of the charter, which must provide that the charterer is deemed to be the owner *pro hac vice* for the term of the charter.

(b)The charterer must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)A certificate certifying that the charterer is a citizen of the United States for the purpose of engaging in the coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. app. 802.

(2)Detailed citizenship information in the format of form CG-1258, Application for Documentation, section G, citizenship. The citizenship information may be attached to the form CG-1258 that is submitted under § 67.141 of this chapter and must be signed by, or on behalf of, the charterer.

(c)Whenever a charter under paragraph

(a)of this section is amended, the vessel owner must file a copy of the amendment with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after the effective date of the amendment.

(d)Whenever the charterer of a vessel under paragraph

(e)Whenever the charterer of a vessel under paragraph

(f)A person that submits a false certification under this section is subject to penalty under 46 U.S.C. 12122 and 18 U.S.C. 1001. § 68.109 Application procedure for barges to be operated in coastwise trade without being documented.

(a)The person that owns a barge qualified to engage in coastwise trade under the lease-financing provisions of 46 U.S.C. 12106(e) must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)A certification in the form of an affidavit and, if requested by the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, supporting documentation establishing the following facts with respect to the transaction from an individual who is authorized to provide certification on behalf of the person that owns the barge and who is an officer in a corporation, a partner in a partnership, a member of the board of managers in a limited liability company, or their equivalent. The certificate must certify the following:

(i)That the person that owns the barge, the parent of that person, or a subsidiary of the parent of that person is primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions.

(ii)That the person that owns the barge is organized under the laws of the United States or a State.

(iii)That none of the following is primarily engaged in the direct operation or management of vessels:

(A)The person that owns the barge.

(B)The parent of the person that owns the barge.

(C)The group of which the person that owns the barge is a member.

(iv)That ownership of the barge is primarily a financial investment without the ability and intent to directly or indirectly control the barge's operations by a person not primarily engaged in the direct operation or management of the barge.

(v)That the majority of the aggregate revenues of each of the following is not derived from the operation or management of vessels:

(A)The person that owns the barge.

(B)The parent of the person that owns the barge.

(C)The group of which the person that owns the barge is a member.

(A)The person that owns the barge.

(B)The parent of the person that owns the barge.

(C)The group of which the person that owns the barge is a member.

(vii)That the person that owns the barge has transferred to a qualified United States citizen under 46 U.S.C. app. 802 full possession, control, and command of the U.S.-built barge through a demise charter in which the demise charterer is considered the owner *pro hac vice* for the term of the charter.

(viii)That the barge is qualified to engage in the coastwise trade and that it is owned by a person eligible to own vessels documented under 46 U.S.C. 12102(e).

(ix)That the barge is financed with lease financing.

(2)A copy of the charter, which must provide that the charterer is deemed to be the owner *pro hac vice* for the term of the charter.

(b)The charterer must submit the following to the National Vessel Documentation Center:

(1)A certificate certifying that the charterer is a citizen of the United States for engaging in the coastwise trade under 46 U.S.C. app. 802.

(c)Whenever a charter under paragraph

(a)of this section is amended, the barge owner must file a copy of the amendment with the Director, National Vessel Documentation Center, within 10 days after the effective date of the amendment.

(d)Whenever the charterer of a barge under paragraph

(e)Whenever the charterer of a barge under paragraph

(f)A person that submits a false certification under this section is subject to penalty under 46 U.S.C. 12122 and 18 U.S.C. 1001. § 68.111 Invalidation of a coastwise endorsement.

(a)In addition to the events in § 67.167(c)(1) through (c)(9) of this chapter, a Certificate of Documentation together with a coastwise endorsement in effect before February 4, 2004, becomes invalid when—

(1)The demise charter expires or is transferred to another charterer;

(2)The citizenship of the charterer or sub-charterer changes to the extent that they are no longer qualified for a coastwise endorsement; or

(3)Neither the person that owns the vessel, nor the parent of that person, nor a subsidiary of the parent of that person is primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions.

(b)In addition to the events in § 67.167(c)(1) through (c)(9) of this chapter, a Certificate of Documentation together with a coastwise endorsement in effect on or after February 4, 2004, and before August 9, 2004, becomes invalid when—

(1)The demise charter expires or is transferred to another charterer;

(2)The citizenship of the charterer or sub-charterer changes to the extent that they are no longer qualified for a coastwise endorsement;

(3)Neither the person that owns the vessel, nor the parent of that person, nor any subsidiary of the parent of that person is primarily engaged in leasing or other financing transactions;

(4)The majority of the aggregate revenues of at least one of the following is derived from the operation or management of vessels:

(i)The person that owns the vessel.

(ii)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(iii)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member; or

(5)At least one of the following is primarily engaged in the operation or management of commercial, foreign-flag vessels used for the carriage of cargo for parties unrelated to the vessel's owner or charterer:

(i)The person that owns the vessel.

(ii)The parent of the person that owns the vessel.

(iii)The group of which the person that owns the vessel is a member. Dated: February 7, 2006. T.H. Collins, Admiral, Coast Guard Commandant. [FR Doc. 06-1242 Filed 2-14-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 32

Traces to 32 documents

CFR