Rules and Regulations. Final rule

Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Action: Final rule
Citation: FR Doc. 06-6143 · ET Docket No. 03-122; FCC 06-96 · 47 CFR 15

Summary

This document addresses petitions for reconsideration and clarification of the Commission's rules for 5 GHz U-NII devices adopted in the Report and Order in ET Docket No. 03-122 and revises the measurement procedures for certifying U-NII devices in the 5 GHz band. Our action will ensure that all applications for equipment certification of U-NII devices comply with the U-NII requirements.

Dates

Effective August 11, 2006.

Supplementary Information

This is a summary of the Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order , ET Docket No. 03-122, FCC 06-96, adopted June 29, 2006, and released June 30, 2006. The full text of this document is available for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (CY-A257) 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone (202) 488-5300; fax (202) 488-5563; e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.COM. Summary of the Memorandum Opinion and Order 1. In the Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Commission granted a request by the Wi-Fi Alliance to clarify the Transmit Power Control (TPC) requirements in § 5.407(h)(1), dismissed a request by the Wi-Fi Alliance to clarify the channel availability check time requirement in § 15.407(h)(2)(ii), denied a request by Globespan Virata to revise the rules to state that U-NII device are not required to detect and void frequency hopping radar signals, and dismissed a request by Extreme Networks to modify the definition of a U-NII central controller that must include Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) capability. The Memorandum Opinion and Order also issues a revised measurement procedure for certifying U-NII devices for compliance with the DFS requirements in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands. Our action will ensure that all applications for equipment certification of U-NII devices filed on or after July 20, 2006 will comply with the U-NII requirements for these bands. 2. In its Motion for Clarification, the Wi-Fi Alliance seeks clarification of the TPC requirements for U-NII devices, and the text in § 15.407(h)(2)(ii) regarding the DFS requirement for channel availability check time. The TPC requirement is intended to protect Earth Exploration-Satellite Service (active) (EESS) and Space Research Service (active) (SRS) operations by regulating a device's transmit power in response to an input signal or a condition ( e.g. , a command signal issued by a controller when the received signal falls below a predetermined threshold). We recognize that the first sentence of § 15.407(h)(1) states that all U-NII devices must employ a TPC mechanism, while the last sentence modifies the first sentence by indicating that TPC is not required for systems with an EIRP of less than 500 mW. Because the wording of the TPC requirement in § 15.407(h)(1) may be confusing, we clarify, as the Commission stated in the Report and Order , 69 FR 2677, January 20, 2005, that there is no need to require TPC for a low-power U-NII device and that TPC is only required for U-NII devices operating at power levels higher than 500 mW. A U-NII device with an EIRP less than 500 mW is exempt because the device will not interfere with other operations in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands. We also clarify that the TPC requirement applies to each U-NII device since a U-NII device's transmission output power when combined with antenna gain produces an overall power referred to as “EIRP.” 3. With regard to further clarification of § 15.407(h)(2)(ii) on DFS channel availability check time, the Project Team reached a consensus in the revised measurement procedure on a definition for channel availability check time that allows for fast channel changing. Since this issue is addressed in the revised measurement procedure that we issued with the MO&O, we dismiss this part of the Wi-Fi Alliance petition. Our action will allow industry to continue discussions with the Federal Government on this issue as needed, and the Commission's Laboratory may issue updated measurement procedures in the future if further modifications are needed. 4. Globespan requests that we clarify our rules to state that DFS-equipped U-NII devices are not required to detect and avoid frequency hopping radars in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands. We did not intend to exclude frequency hopping radars from the DFS requirement. In the Report and Order , we adopted DFS requirements to protect all Federal Government radar systems from interference from U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands. We made no distinction in the protection requirements between frequency hopping and other types of radars and Globespan points to no language that would support its contention. In fact, the interim test procedure appended to the Report and Order in this proceeding, which was developed by the Project Team, addresses the unique sharing challenges of how DFS should perform in the presence of frequency hopping radars. 5. The revised measurement procedure that we are endorsing with this MO&O addresses how DFS should perform in the presence of different types of radar systems, including frequency hopping radars. More specifically, section 6 of the revised measurement procedure provides the parameters for the required test waveforms, the minimum percentage of successful detections, and the minimum number of trials that must be used to determine DFS conformance. Accordingly, the DFS requirement is clearly intended to encompass frequency hopping radar systems. 6. Extreme Networks seeks clarification of the definition of a central controller that must have DFS capability. The intent of the DFS requirement in the rules is to ensure that all elements of a system (both master devices and client devices) are capable of avoiding causing harmful interference to government radars by dynamically switching frequencies. Although Section 5 of the revised measurement procedure addresses DFS capability for U-NII devices operating in master-client configurations, it does not address the specific configuration suggested by Extreme Networks. Nonetheless, Extreme Networks does not question the DFS requirement or the compliance criteria in the revised measurement procedure. 7. All U-NII implementations will be tested individually as part of the equipment certification process. If a unique implementation of DFS in U-NII devices is not directly addressed by the revised measurement procedure, the application for U-NII device certification will be handled on a case-by-case basis. We thus decline to clarify at this time the definition of a central controller that must have DFS capability as Extreme Networks requests and dismiss its petition. 8. Revised Measurement Procedure. The Project Team has worked to develop new measurement procedures for performing DFS compliance measurement tests for U-NII equipment operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands. Recently, the Project Team reached a consensus on revised DFS measurement procedures that were presented by the NTIA to the Commission on March 30, 2006 as part of this proceeding. 9. In order to allow for immediate implementation of U-NII devices in accordance with the rules adopted in the Report and Order of this proceeding, we are issuing the revised measurement procedures recommended by NTIA for certifying U-NII devices as an Appendix to this MO&O. Because these revised procedures represent a consensus agreement of industry and government participants, we are not making the substantive changes suggested by CCS since they may materially affect the implementation of the measurement procedures. We encourage industry and government entities to continue discussions on these procedures, as needed, and note that the Commission's Laboratory may issue further updates to the measurement procedures in the future as equipment is developed and as testing methodologies are refined. The revised measurement procedure that we are issuing with this MO&O does include non-substantive editorial changes submitted by CCS. As for the other concern, with respect to the certification process, applications for certification of U-NII devices will be processed in the order in which they are received. Further, with respect to industry readiness to test DFS capabilities, we note that the criteria for DFS and TPC compliance in U-NII devices have been acknowledged and recognized since the adoption of the Report and Order in this proceeding. Therefore, manufacturers were aware of these new rules for U-NII devices well in advance of the July 20, 2006 implementation date. Regulatory Flexibility Certification Analysis 10. The Report and Order 1 included a Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). 2 We received no petitions for reconsideration of that Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification. 1 See Appendix A: Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of the Report and Order. 2 See 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996). 11. The Commission will send a copy of the Memorandum Opinion and Order, including a copy of this Regulatory Flexibility Certification Analysis, in a report to Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. 3 In addition, the Memorandum Opinion and Order and this final certification will be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. 4 3 See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). 4 See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). Ordering Clauses 12. The Congressional Review Act (CRA), was addressed in the Report and Order released by the Commission on November 18, 2003, in “ In the Matter of Revision of Parts 2 and 15 of the Commission's rules to permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) devices in the 5 GHz band ” in this proceeding. This Memorandum Opinion and Order does not change any rules, it only issues updated measurement procedures for certifying unlicensed U-NII devices in accordance with the rules adopted in the Report and Order. Therefore, the CRA requirements have already been fulfilled. 13. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(f), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(f), and 303(r), and section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d), the Memorandum Opinion and Order is hereby adopted. 14. The Motion for Clarification filed by The Wi-Fi Alliance is granted in part and dismissed in part, consistent with the terms of the Memorandum Opinion and Order. 15. The Request for Clarification filed by Extreme Networks, Inc. and the Petition for Clarification or Reconsideration filed by Globespan Virata, Inc. are denied. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15 Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-10794 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06-1367] Radio Broadcasting Services; East Liverpool, OH and Moon Township, PA AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; denial of petition for reconsideration. SUMMARY: The Audio Division has denied the petition for reconsideration of Keymarket Licenses, LLC (“Keymarket”), seeking reconsideration of the Audio Division's return of Keymarket's petition for rulemaking to reallot Channel 282B from East Liverpool, Ohio, to Moon Township, Pennsylvania. Keymarket filed a petition for rule making proposing change of community for Station WOGF (FM) from East Liverpool, Ohio, to Moon Township, Pennsylvania. Keymarket also proposed to change the transmitter site of Station WOGF (FM). The proposal was returned as unacceptable, because it would exacerbate an existing short-spacing. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Audio Division denied Keymarket's petition for reconsideration of the return of Keymarket's petition for rulemaking. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Dupont, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order, adopted June 28, 2006, and released June 30, 2006. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision also may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, (800) 378-3160, or via the company's Web site, http://www.bcpiweb.com. This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. The Commission is, therefore, not required to send a copy of this Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the petition for reconsideration was denied. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E6-10934 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06-1368] Radio Broadcasting Services; Various Locations AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Commission, on its own motion, editorially amends the Table of FM Allotments to specify the actual classes of channels allotted to various communities. The changes in channel classifications have been authorized in response to applications filed by licensees and permittees operating on these channels. This action is taken pursuant to Revision of Section 73.3573(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules Concerning the Lower Classification of an FM Allotment, 4 FCC Rcd 2413 (1989), Amendment of the Commission's Rules to permit FM Channel and Class Modifications by Applications, 8 FCC Rcd 4735 (1993) and Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules in Part 73 and 74 of the Commission's Rules, 15 FCC Rcd 21649 (2000). DATES: Effective July 12, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order, adopted June 28, 2006, and released June 30, 2006. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or * http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* The Commission will not send a copy of the Report & Order in this proceeding pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the adopted rules are rules of particular applicability. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. As stated in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCASTING SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Alaska, is amended by removing Channel 228A and adding Channel 228C1 at Delta Junction. 3. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Arizona, is amended by removing Channel 222A and adding Channel 222C1 at Tusayan. 4. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under California, is amended by removing Channel 261C3 and adding Channel 261C2 at Dunsmuir. 5. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Georgia, is amended by removing Channel 262C and adding Channel 262C0 at Tifton. 6. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Kansas, is amended by removing Channel 231C and adding Channel 231C0 at Kansas City. 7. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Missouri, is amended by removing Channel 271C3 and adding Channel 271A at Louisiana. 8. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Montana, is amended by removing Channel 298A and adding Channel 298C1 at Superior and removing Channel 224A and adding Channel 224C2 at Wolf Point. 9. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Nebraska, is amended by removing Channel 265A and adding Channel 265C3 at Allen. 10. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Nevada, is amended by removing Channel 233C1 and adding Channel 233C at Caliente and removing Channel 295C1 and adding Channel 295C at Overton. 11. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under New Mexico, is amended by removing Channel 245C and adding Channel 245C0 at Farmington and removing Channel 279C3 and adding Channel 279C1 at Lordsburg. 12. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under New York, is amended by removing Channel 240A and adding Channel 238A at Dundee. 13. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oklahoma, is amended by removing Channel 240A and adding Channel 240C3 at Frederick. 14. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under South Carolina, is amended by removing Channel 287C and adding Channel 287C0 at Gaffney. 15. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Tennessee, is amended by removing Channel 289A and adding Channel 289C3 at Rockwood. 16. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Washington, is amended by removing Channel 231C and adding Channel 231C0 at Clarkston and removing Channel 293C and adding Channel 293C0 at Richland. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E6-10935 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06-1232] Radio Broadcasting Services; Lake Isabella, CA AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; denial of petition for reconsideration. SUMMARY: This document denies a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Living Proof, Inc. directed at a staff letter action in this proceeding, which dismissed the Petition for Rulemaking requesting the reservation of vacant FM Channel 239A at Lake Isabella, California for noncommercial educational use. With this action, the proceeding is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order, adopted June 21, 2006, and released June 23, 2006. The full text of this decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or http://www.BCPIWEB.com. The Commission will not send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the aforementioned petition for reconsideration was denied. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E6-10747 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06-1294] Radio Broadcasting Services; Key West, FL AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; denial of petition for reconsideration. SUMMARY: This document denies a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Call Communications Group directed at a staff letter action in this proceeding, which dismissed the Petition for Rulemaking requesting the reservation of vacant FM Channel 224A at Key West, Florida for noncommercial educational use. With this action, the proceeding is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order, adopted June 21, 2006, and released June 23, 2006. The full text of this decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or http://www.BCPIWEB.com. The Commission will not send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the aforementioned petition for reconsideration was denied. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E6-10748 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06-1293; MB Docket No. 05-86; RM-11165, RM-11297] Radio Broadcasting Services; Altamont and Odin, IL AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Audio Division, at the request of Benjamin L. Stratemeyer, allots Channel 288A at Altamont, Illinois, as the community's first local service. Channel 288A can be allotted to Altamont, Illinois, in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a site restriction of 6.2 kilometers (3.9 miles) southwest of Altamont. The coordinates for Channel 288A at Altamont, Illinois, are 39-01-44 North Latitude and 88-48-22 West Longitude. DATES: Effective August 7, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Dupont, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order , MB Docket No. 05-86, adopted June 21, 2006, and released June 23, 2006. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision also may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, (800) 378-3160, or via the company's Web site, http://www.bcpiweb.com. The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. As stated in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Illinois, is amended by adding Altamont, Channel 288A. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E6-10793 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 574 [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-25311] Tire Identification and Recordkeeping; Correction AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Correcting amendment. SUMMARY: In order to facilitate notification to consumers of defective or nonconforming tires, our tire recordkeeping regulation sets forth, among other things, the methods by which independent tire dealers and distributors record, on standard registration forms, their names and addresses and the identification number of the tires sold to consumers, and provide these forms to the consumers for reporting their names to the tire manufacturers. One of the figures related to tire registration forms had been inadvertently deleted through an administrative error. This document corrects this inadvertent removal. DATES: Effective Date: This correcting amendment is effective August 11, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Eric Stas, Attorney-Advisor, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-112, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Fax: (202) 366-3820. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In order to facilitate notification to purchasers of defective or nonconforming tires, 49 CFR Part 574 sets forth, among other things, the methods by which independent tire dealers and distributors record, on standard registration forms, their names and addresses and the identification number of the tires sold to consumers and provide these forms to the consumers so that they report their names to the tire manufacturers. Figure 3(b), depicting the “address side” of the registration form, was inadvertently deleted. This document corrects this inadvertent deletion. The agency examined the amendments to the Federal Register notices affecting 49 CFR Part 574 and concluded that Figure 3(b) had been inadvertently removed from the CFR. Without Figure 3(b), the tire registration form examples are incomplete. This document corrects the CFR by adding the inadvertently removed Figure 3(b) to 49 CFR 574.7. This correction will not impose or relax any substantive requirements or burdens on manufacturers. Therefore, NHTSA finds for good cause that any notice and opportunity for comment on these correcting amendments are not necessary. List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 574 Labeling, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires. Accordingly, 49 CFR part 574 is corrected by making the following correcting amendment: PART 574—TIRE IDENTIFICATION AND RECORDKEEPING 1. The authority citation for part 574 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. 2. In § 574.7, add Figure 3(b) after Figure 3(a) as follows: § 574.7 Information requirements—new tire manufacturers, new tire brand name owners. (d) * * * ER12JY06.000 Issued: July 6, 2006. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E6-10893 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P 71 133 Wednesday, July 12, 2006 Proposed Rules FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION 12 CFR Part 615 RIN 3052-AC23 Funding and Fiscal Affairs, Loan Policies and Operations, and Funding Operations; Investments in Farmers' Notes AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration. ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. SUMMARY: The Farm Credit Administration (FCA or Agency) withdraws its proposed rule to amend regulations governing investments in farmers' notes (Farmers' Notes), and terminates this rulemaking. This notice informs the public that this rulemaking has ended. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dawn Johnson, Policy Analyst, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, Aurora, CO (303) 696-9737, TTY (303) 696-9259. or Richard A. Katz, Senior Counsel, Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090, (703) 883-4020, TTY (703) 883-4020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FCA terminates this rulemaking by withdrawing its proposed rule to amend the Farmers' Notes regulation. This rulemaking began on April 20, 2000 (65 FR 21151), when the FCA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking that asked the public questions about ways to improve the funding and discount relationship between Farm Credit banks and other financing institutions (OFIs). 1 In addition to recommendations for improving the OFI program, some commenters suggested that the FCA also explore other ways for the Farm Credit System (System or FCS) to provide funding and liquidity to non-System agricultural lenders. In response to these comments, the FCA held a public meeting in Des Moines, Iowa on August 3, 2001, that addressed both OFIs and “other types of partnering relationships between System and non-System lending institutions that would increase the availability of funds to agriculture and rural America.” 2 At the public meeting, System and non-System commenters encouraged the FCA to promote other arrangements, in addition to the OFI program, that would make it easier for the FCS to provide funding and liquidity to non-System agricultural lenders. Many commenters expressed their desire for more flexible and informal arrangements between FCS and non-System agricultural lenders. 1 See 65 FR 21151 (April 20, 2000). 2 See 66 FR 35428 (July 5, 2001). On August 11, 2003, the FCA adopted a proposed rule (original proposed rule) on OFIs and Farmers' Notes. 3 The FCA received 105 comment letters from both System and non-System lenders that specifically addressed Farmers' Notes. All 98 non-System commenters opposed the original proposed rule primarily because they believed that it would give System associations a competitive advantage over commercial banks. Seven System commenters expressed the view that revising the Farmers' Note program could strengthen cooperation between the FCS and non-System lenders and increase the flow of credit to agriculture. However, many FCS commenters sought significant changes to the proposal. 3 See 68 FR 47502 (August 11, 2003). Based on these comments, the FCA adopted a final rule on OFIs, but reproposed the Farmers' Notes rule. 4 The second proposed rule (reproposed rule) that the FCA issued on September 14, 2004, sought to address the concerns of both System and non-System commenters. 5 The FCA received 776 comment letters in response to the reproposed rule. Six FCS commenters told the FCA that the reproposed rule would dissuade System associations from investing in Farmers' Notes because it was too restrictive. The remaining 770 comment letters came from commercial bankers or their trade associations who opposed the reproposed rule for the same reasons that they opposed the original proposed rule. 4 See 69 FR 29852 (May 26, 2004). 5 See 69 FR 55362 (September 14, 2004). These comment letters lead the FCA to conclude that enacting a final rule on Farmers' Notes is unlikely to achieve the Agency's objectives of increasing cooperation between System and non-System lenders so more credit is available for agriculture and rural America. For this reason, the FCA withdraws the proposed rule and terminates this rulemaking. Dated: July 6, 2006. Roland E. Smith, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. [FR Doc. E6-10940 Filed 7-11-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6705-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. NM348; Notice No. 25-06-07-SC] Special Conditions: Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X Airplane, Windshield Coating in Lieu of Wipers AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions. SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual design feature(s) associated with use of a hydrophobic coating, rather than windshield wipers, as the means to maintain a clear portion of the windshield during precipitation conditions, as required by the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These proposed special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards. DATES: We must receive your comments by August 28, 2006.*