Unknown. Final rule
18,826 words·~86 min read·
/register/2006/07/18/06-6282A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2006-07-18.xml --- 71 137 Tuesday, July 18, 2006 Contents Agricultural Agricultural Marketing Service RULES Apricots grown in Washington, 40637-40639 E6-11302 Irish potatoes grown in Colorado, 40639-40641 E6-11303 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Agricultural Marketing Service See Commodity Credit Corporation See Forest Service See Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E6-11304 40686-40687 E6-11305 Alcohol Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E6-11310 40734-40736 E6-11311 E6-11363 Arts Arts and Humanities, National Foundation See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40721-40722 E6-11340 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department Commerce Commerce Department See Economic Development Administration See Industry and Security Bureau See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration CITA Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements NOTICES African Growth and Opportunity Act; determinations:
Madagascar; handloomed, handmade, or folklore articles, 40701-40702 06-6299 Commodity Commodity Credit Corporation RULES Certain commodities available for sale; policy, 40641-40643 E6-11236 Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency PROPOSED RULES Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003: Identity theft red flags and address discrepancies, 40786-40826 06-6187 Defense Defense Department See Defense Intelligence Agency RULES Personnel, military and civilian: Child and spousal support allotments, 40656 E6-11323 Voluntary State tax withholding from retired pay, 40656-40657 E6-11324 PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR):
Contractor personnel in theater of operations or at diplomatic or consular mission, 40681-40685 06-6278 NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 40702-40703 06-6270 Defense Defense Intelligence Agency NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 40703-40709 06-6267 06-6268 06-6269 06-6271 Economic Economic Development Administration NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Research and Evaluation Program, 40690-40691 E6-11331 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E6-11307 40709-40711 E6-11308 E6-11309 Employment Employment Standards Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40736-40737 E6-11401 Energy Energy Department See Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Electricity export and import authorizations, permits, etc.:
Dominion Energy Marketing, Inc., 40711 E6-11335 Meetings: Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee, 40711-40712 E6-11337 Presidential permit applications: Northern Electric Cooperative, 40712 E6-11332 Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office NOTICES Meetings: Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee, 40712-40713 E6-11336 EPA Environmental Protection Agency PROPOSED RULES Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Portland cement manufacturing industry, 40679-40681 E6-11334 Water supply:
National primary drinking water regulations— Lead and copper; monitoring, treatment processes, customer awareness, and lead service line replacement, 40828-40863 06-6250 NOTICES Meetings: Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, 40716-40717 06-6275 Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.: Acid copper chromate, 40717-40718 E6-11342 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Review of national ambient air quality standards for ozone; policy assessment of scientific and technical information, 40718-40720 E6-11343 FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness standards:
Special conditions— Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX and Falcon 2000EX airplanes, 40648-40651 E6-11367 Class D airspace, 40651-40652 06-6282 Class E airspace, 40652-40654 06-6281 06-6283 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness standards: Turbine aircraft engines; safety analysis, 40675-40679 E6-11372 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40775 06-6284 Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 40776 E6-11375 FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation PROPOSED RULES Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003:
Identity theft red flags and address discrepancies, 40786-40826 06-6187 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Duke Power Co. LLC, 40716 E6-11354 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* ANR Pipeline Co., 40713 E6-11352 Bayside Power, L.P., 40713-40714 E6-11359 Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C., 40714 E6-11357 HLM Energy LLC, 40714-40715 E6-11353 Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P., 40715 E6-11356 Portland General Electric Co., 40715 E6-11358 Trunkline LNG Co., LLC, 40715-40716 E6-11355 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40776-40777 E6-11366 Environmental statements; notice of intent:
Arlington County, VA and Washington, DC, 40777-40778 E6-11338 Highway planning and construction; licenses, permits, approvals, etc.: Interstate 495, I-95/I-395/I-495 Interchange to American Legion Bridge Project, VA, 40778 06-6265 Federal Housing Federal Housing Finance Board RULES Federal home loan bank system: Board of directors; nomination and election process, 40643-40648 E6-11306 Federal Mine Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission RULES Procedural rules, etc.: Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006; implementation, 40654-40656 E6-11300 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Motor carrier safety standards:
Drivers’ hours of service; exemption applications— National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, 40778-40780 E6-11289 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System PROPOSED RULES Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003: Identity theft red flags and address discrepancies, 40786-40826 06-6187 NOTICES Banks and bank holding companies: Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 40720 E6-11322 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 40720-40721 06-6351 FTC Federal Trade Commission PROPOSED RULES Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003:
Identity theft red flags and address discrepancies, 40786-40826 06-6187 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Meetings: Charter Bus Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee, 40780 06-6324 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES Endangered and threatened species: Gila trout, 40657-40674 06-6215 Food Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40722-40723 E6-11287 Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.:
Public advisory committees; voting consumer representative members, 40723-40724 06-6276 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Useful written consumer medication information, 40724 E6-11329 Foreign Foreign Claims Settlement Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 40736 06-6311 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals; correction, E6-11299 40687-40688 E6-11321 Meetings: Resource Advisory Committees— Sierra County, 40688 06-6263 GSA General Services Administration PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR):
Contractor personnel in theater of operations or at diplomatic or consular mission, 40681-40685 06-6278 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department See National Institutes of Health See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Homeland Homeland Security Department See Transportation Security Administration Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40732-40733 E6-11361 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Export privileges, actions affecting:
Mohsen, Diaa, 40691-40692 06-6273 Inspector Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department NOTICES Program exclusions; list, 40724-40729 E6-11330 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service IRS Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40780-40783 E6-11280 E6-11284 E6-11288 International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping: Fresh garlic from— China, 40692-40694 E6-11290 Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— India, 40694-40696 E6-11292 Stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from— Korea, 40696 E6-11370 Stainless steel wire rod from— Sweden, 40698 E6-11291 Stainless steel wire rods from— India, 40696-40697 06-6300 Cheese quota; foreign government subsidies:
Quarterly update, 40698-40699 E6-11369 Countervailing duties: Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— India, 40699-40700 E6-11371 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Import investigations: Rubber antidegradants, components, and products containing same, 40733-40734 E6-11364 Justice Justice Department See Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau See Foreign Claims Settlement Commission Labor Labor Department See Employment Standards Administration Mine Mine Safety and Health Federal Review Commission See Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR):
Contractor personnel in theater of operations or at diplomatic or consular mission, 40681-40685 06-6278 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Agency records schedules; availability, 40737-40738 E6-11347 National Credit National Credit Union Administration PROPOSED RULES Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003: Identity theft red flags and address discrepancies, 40786-40826 06-6187 National Foundation National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES Meetings:
Arts Advisory Panel, 40738-40739 E6-11301 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Construction grant programs, 40729-40730 06-6262 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Endangered and threatened species permit applications, determinations, etc., 40700-40701 E6-11368 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Arctic Ocean marine geophysical survey;
Coast Guard cutter HEALY, 40739 06-6274 National Transportation National Transportation Safety Board NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 40739 06-6349 NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Red Bayou Watershed Project, Caddo Parrish, LA, 40688-40689 E6-11350 Meetings: Agricultural Air Quality Task Force, 40689 E6-11360 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: National Handbook of Conservation Practices, 40689-40690 E6-11351 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 40742 06-6302 Operating licenses, amendments; no significant hazards considerations; biweekly notices, 40742-40759 06-6246 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* PSEG Nuclear LLC, 40739-40741 E6-11319 R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, 40741-40742 E6-11320 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission PROPOSED RULES Securities: Financial reporting; management's reports on internal control; concept release, 40866-40873 E6-11226 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 40759 06-6303 Securities:
Regulatory responsibilities allocation, 40759-40760 E6-11327 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: American Stock Exchange LLC, 40760-40762 E6-11326 National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., 40762-40766 E6-11325 New York Stock Exchange LLC, 40766-40768 E6-11312 NYSE Arca, Inc., 40768-40770 E6-11313 SBA Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster loan areas: California, 40770 E6-11317 Oregon, 40770-40771 E6-11318 Pennsylvania, 40771 E6-11314 E6-11316 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Rembrandt Venture Partners II, L.P., 40770 E6-11315 State State Department NOTICES Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000:
Hague Convention— Accreditation Council; performance of duties as accrediting entity; memorandum of agreement, 40771-40775 E6-11362 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Meetings: Mental Health Services Center National Advisory Council, 40730 E6-11341 Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Center for Mental Health Services, 40730-40731 06-6272 Surface Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Railroad services abandonment: Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co., 40780 E6-11267 Textile Textile Agreements Implementation Committee See Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements Thrift Thrift Supervision Office PROPOSED RULES Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003:
Identity theft red flags and address discrepancies, 40786-40826 06-6187 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration See Federal Transit Administration See Surface Transportation Board Transportation Transportation Security Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40731-40732 E6-11346 Treasury Treasury Department See Comptroller of the Currency See Internal Revenue Service See Thrift Supervision Office Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation;
Federal Reserve System; Federal Trade Commission; National Credit Union Administration; Treasury Department, Comptroller of the Currency; Treasury Department, Thrift Supervision Office, 40786-40826 06-6187 Part III Environmental Protection Agency, 40828-40863 06-6250 Part IV Securities and Exchange Commission, 40866-40873 E6-11226 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 71 137 Tuesday, July 18, 2006 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 922 [Docket No. FV06-922-1 FIR] Apricots Grown in Designated Counties in Washington; Temporary Suspension of Container Regulations AGENCY:
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture
(USDA)is adopting, as a final rule, without change, an interim final rule that suspends the container regulations prescribed under the Washington apricot marketing order for the 2006 shipping season only. The marketing order regulates the handling of fresh apricots grown in designated counties in the State of Washington, and is administered locally by the Washington Apricot Marketing Committee (Committee). This relaxation of the regulations provides the apricot industry with increased marketing flexibility by allowing handlers to pack and ship apricots in any size, shape, or type of container. The Committee recommended a temporary suspension of the container regulations so that it can thoroughly evaluate the impact the relaxation has on the apricot industry prior to taking any action for subsequent seasons. DATES: *Effective Date:* Effective August 17, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Curry or Gary D. Olson, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220 SW. Third Avenue, Suite 385, Portland, Oregon 97204-2807; Telephone:
(503)326-2724; Fax:
(503)326-7440. Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone
(202)720-2491; Fax:
(202)720-8938; or E-mail: *Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Agreement and Order No. 922 (7 CFR part 922) regulating the handling of apricots grown in designated counties in Washington, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.” USDA is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866. This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. This rule will not preempt any State of local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling. This rule continues in effect the temporary suspension of the container regulations (§ 922.306) prescribed under the order until March 31, 2007. This rule provides additional flexibility to the apricot industry by allowing handlers to pack apricots in any type, shape, or size container. The container regulations prescribed under § 922.306 will resume on April 1, 2007, for the 2007-2008 and future seasons unless the Committee recommends, and the USDA approves, action to extend the suspension. The Committee recommended a temporary suspension of the regulations rather than an open-ended suspension to help ensure that a thorough analysis of the 2006 shipping season is completed prior to any possible future action regarding the issue of container regulation suspension. Section 922.52 of the order authorizes the issuance of regulations for grade, size, quality, maturity, pack, and container for any variety of apricots grown in the production area. Section 922.52(a)(3) specifically authorizes the establishment of the container regulations found in § 922.306. Section 922.53 authorizes the modification, suspension, or termination of regulations issued pursuant to § 922.52. Authority to regulate the size, weight, dimension and pack of containers used in the marketing of fresh apricots was included in the order when promulgated in 1957. Container regulatory authority was included in the order to provide container standardization, to enhance orderly marketing conditions, and to provide for increased producer returns. To provide the industry with needed flexibility, handlers are also authorized to make test shipments in experimental containers. When container regulations are effective, this provision (§ 922.110) allows handlers to apply to the Committee seasonally to pack and ship in containers that would otherwise not be authorized by the regulations. The Committee meets prior to each season to consider recommendations for modification, suspension, or termination of any regulatory requirements for Washington apricots that are issued on a continuing basis. Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. The USDA reviews the Committee recommendations along with any supportive information submitted by the Committee, as well as information from other available resources, and determines whether modification, suspension, or termination of the regulatory requirements would tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act. During such a review at its February 8, 2006, meeting, the Committee unanimously recommended suspending the container regulations for the 2006 shipping season. The Committee recommended that this rule be effective no later than June 1, 2006, to ensure that the earliest shipments of apricots benefit from the relaxed regulations. When effective, § 922.306 provides that apricots must be handled domestically in
(1)open containers or telescopic fiberboard cartons weighing 28 pounds or greater;
(2)closed containers with 14 pounds or more of apricots packed in a row-faced or tray-pack configuration;
(3)closed containers with 12 pounds (or more) of random sized, non row-faced apricots; or
(4)closed containers with 24 pounds or more of loose-packed apricots. Comments made at the public meeting indicate that container standardization has contributed to orderly marketing in the past. Handlers report, however, that buyers are increasingly interested in non-traditional packaging options designed for better handling and greater consumer acceptance. Handlers also desire greater latitude in choosing the optimum weight for a particular type of pack. Packaging options could also include consumer-friendly “clam shell” containers or other similar type containers designed to enhance the appearance of individual pieces of fruit. This temporary suspension of the container regulations provides the industry with needed flexibility, while providing the Committee with the ability to evaluate the affect the relaxation has on the orderly marketing of the apricot crop during the 2006 shipping season. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS)has considered the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis. The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small entity orientation and compatibility. There are approximately 300 apricot producers within the regulated production area and approximately 22 regulated handlers. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $6,500,000. For the 2005 apricot shipping season, the Washington Agricultural Statistics Service has prepared a preliminary report showing that the total 5,600 ton apricot utilization sold for an average of $997 per ton. Based on the number of producers in the production area (300), the average annual producer revenue from the sale of apricots in 2005 can thus be estimated at approximately $18,611. In addition, based on information from the Committee and USDA's Market News Service, 2005 f.o.b. prices ranged from $15.00 to $20.00 per 24-pound loose-pack container, and from $14.00 to $24.00 for 2-layer tray pack containers. With about half of the 2005 season fresh apricot pack-out of 4,471 tons in loose-pack containers and about half in tray-pack containers (weighing an average of about 20 pounds each), all the industry's handlers would have averaged gross receipts of less than $750,000 from the sale of fresh apricots. Thus, the majority of producers and handlers of Washington apricots may be classified as small entities. At its February 8, 2006, meeting the Committee unanimously recommended the temporary suspension of the order's container regulations (§ 922.306). Section 922.52(a)(3) of the order specifically authorizes the establishment of container regulations. Further, § 922.53 authorizes the modification, suspension, or termination of regulations issued pursuant to § 922.52. The temporary relaxation in the container regulations is expected to provide the apricot industry with increased marketing flexibility by allowing handlers to pack and ship apricots in any size, shape, or type of container. Container regulations have been utilized in past seasons to provide a degree of standardization and thus have helped in providing the industry with orderly marketing conditions. Rapidly changing market dynamics have convinced the Committee that such standardization may no longer be necessary to ensure orderly marketing. The Committee recommended a temporary suspension so it can conduct a thorough evaluation of the impact the relaxation had on the industry during the 2006 shipping season prior to taking any further action for subsequent seasons. The Committee anticipates that this rule will not negatively impact small businesses. This rule suspends the container requirements found under § 922.306 of the order's rules and regulations and should provide enhanced marketing opportunities. The Committee anticipates that the only additional costs this rule may have on the industry would be associated with the development and use of any new containers. The Committee discussed alternatives to its recommendation to suspend the container regulations. Primary amongst these was the option of leaving the container regulations intact without change. After some discussion, the Committee rejected this option as being an inadequate response to the growing interest for greater flexibility in packaging. The Committee also discussed whether to recommend an indefinite suspension of the container regulations—an alternative which was rejected in favor of evaluation of the suspension's impact. This rule will not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large apricot handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. AMS is committed to compliance with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), which requires Government agencies in general to provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting business electronically to the maximum extent possible. In addition, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this rule. The Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the Washington apricot industry and all interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee deliberations. Like all Committee meetings, the February 8, 2006, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express their views on this issue. An interim final rule regarding this action was published in the **Federal Register** on April 5, 2006. Copies of the rule were made available by the Committee staff to all Committee members and apricot handlers. In addition, the rule was made available through the Internet by USDA and the Office of the Federal Register. That rule provided for a 60-day comment period which ended June 5, 2006. No comments were received. A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: *http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html.* Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Jay Guerber at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the Committee's recommendation, and other information, it is found that finalization of the interim final rule, without change, as published in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 16982, April 5, 2006) will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 922 Apricots, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. PART 922—APRICOTS GROWN IN DESIGNATED COUNTIES IN WASHINGTON Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR part 922 which was published at 71 FR 16982 on April 5, 2006, is adopted as a final rule without change. Dated: July 12, 2006. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. E6-11302 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 948 [Docket No. FV06-948-1 IFR] Irish Potatoes Grown in Colorado; Suspension of Continuing Assessment Rate AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Interim final rule with request for comments. SUMMARY: This rule suspends the continuing assessment rate established for the Area No. 3 Colorado Potato Administrative Committee (Committee) for the 2006-2007 and subsequent fiscal periods. The Committee, which locally administers the marketing order regulating the handling of potatoes grown in Northern Colorado, made this recommendation for the purpose of lowering the monetary reserve to a level consistent with program requirements. The fiscal period begins July 1 and ends June 30. The assessment rate will remain suspended until an appropriate rate is reinstated. DATES: *Effective Date:* July 19, 2006. Comments received by September 18, 2006, will be considered prior to issuance of a final rule. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax:
(202)720-8938; E-mail: *moab.docketclerk@usda.gov* ; or Internet: *http://www.regulations.gov.* Comments should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this issue of the **Federal Register** and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: *http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Teresa L. Hutchinson or Gary D. Olson, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220 SW. Third Avenue, Suite 385, Portland, OR 97204; telephone:
(503)326-2724; Fax:
(503)326-7440. Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; telephone:
(202)720-2491, Fax:
(202)720-8938, or E-mail: *Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Agreement No. 97 and Marketing Order No. 948, both as amended (7 CFR part 948), regulating the handling of potatoes grown in Colorado, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.” The Department of Agriculture
(USDA)is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866. This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the order now in effect, Colorado potato handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the order are derived from such assessments. For the 2005-2006 fiscal period, an assessment rate of $0.02 per hundredweight of potatoes handled was approved by USDA to continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated. This action suspends the assessment rate for the 2006-2007 fiscal period, which begins July 1, 2006, and will continue in effect until reinstated. This rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling. This rule suspends § 948.215 of the order's rules and regulations. Section 948.215 established an assessment rate of $0.02 per hundredweight of Colorado potatoes handled for 2005-2006 and subsequent fiscal periods. Continuous assessment rates remain in effect from fiscal period to fiscal period unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA. This rule suspends the $0.02 assessment rate for 2006-2007 and will remain in effect during subsequent fiscal periods until reinstated by USDA upon recommendation of the Committee. The order provides authority for the Committee, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the program. In addition, the order authorizes the use of monetary reserve funds to cover program expenses (§ 948.78). The members of the Committee are producers and handlers of Colorado potatoes. They are familiar with the Committee's needs and with the costs for goods and services in their local area and are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input. For the 2005-2006 and subsequent fiscal periods, the Committee recommended, and USDA approved, an assessment rate of $0.02 per hundredweight of potatoes handled. This assessment rate continues in effect from fiscal period to fiscal period unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other information available to USDA. The Committee met on May 11, 2006, and unanimously recommended 2006-2007 expenditures of $20,268 and suspension of the continuing assessment rate. In comparison, last year's budgeted expenditures were $20,368. The suspension of the assessment rate will allow the Committee to draw from the reserve to cover 2006-2007 expenditures. This action should effectively lower the reserve to within the program limit of approximately two fiscal periods' operational expenses (§ 948.78). The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2006-2007 fiscal period include $8,610 for salary, $3,000 for office rent, $1,750 for office expenses, and $1,000 for utilities. These budgeted expenses are the same as those approved for the 2005-2006 fiscal period. As of July 1, 2005, the Committee had $49,237 in its reserve fund. With the 2006-2007 budget set at $20,268, the current maximum reserve permitted by the order is approximately $40,536 (approximately two fiscal periods' expenses (§ 948.78)). To meet 2006-2007 expenses the Committee plans on drawing approximately $15,814 from its reserve, and may additionally earn approximately $4,454 from interest and other income. Thus, with a suspended assessment rate, the Committee's reserve at the end of the 2006-2007 fiscal period could be reduced to approximately $33,423. This amount would be consistent with the order's requirements. The assessment rate suspension will continue in effect indefinitely until reinstated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other available information. Although this suspension of the continuing assessment rate is effective for an indefinite period, the Committee will continue to meet prior to or during each fiscal period to recommend a budget of expenses and consider recommendations for reinstatement of the assessment rate. The dates and times of Committee meetings are available from the Committee or USDA. Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. USDA will evaluate Committee recommendations and other available information such as the level of the budget and the monetary reserve to determine whether assessment rate reinstatement is needed and at what level. Further rulemaking will be undertaken as necessary. The Committee's 2006-2007 budget and those for subsequent fiscal periods will be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved by USDA. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS)has considered the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis. The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small entity orientation and compatibility. Based on Committee data, there are 8 producers and 8 handlers in the production area subject to regulation under the order. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $6,500,000. Based on the total number of Colorado Area No. 3 potato producers (8), 2004 fresh potato production of 557,826 hundredweight (Committee records), and the average 2004 producer price of $6.30 per hundredweight as reported by National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), average annual revenue per producer from the sale of potatoes can be estimated at approximately $439,288. In addition, based on Committee records and an estimated average 2004 f.o.b. price of $8.40 per hundredweight ($6.30 per hundredweight NASS producer price plus Committee estimated packing and handling costs of $2.10 per hundredweight), all of the Colorado Area No. 3 potato handlers ship under $6,500,000 worth of potatoes. In view of the foregoing, it can be concluded that the majority of the Colorado Area No. 3 potato producers and handlers may be classified as small entities. This rule suspends the continuing assessment rate established for the Committee and collected from handlers for the 2006-2007 and subsequent fiscal periods. Funds from the Committee's authorized reserve, along with interest and other income, will be adequate to cover budgeted expenses. As of July 1, 2005, the Committee had $49,237 in its reserve fund. With the 2006-2007 budget set at $20,268, the current maximum reserve permitted by the order is approximately $40,536 (approximately two fiscal periods' expenses (§ 948.78)). To meet 2006-2007 expenses the Committee plans on drawing approximately $15,814 from its reserve, and may additionally earn approximately $4,454 from interest and other income. Thus, with a suspended assessment rate, the Committee's reserve at the end of the 2006-2007 fiscal period could be reduced to approximately $33,423. This amount would be consistent with the order's requirements. The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2006-2007 fiscal period include $8,610 for salary, $3,000 for office rent, $1,750 for office expenses, and $1,000 for utilities. These budgeted expenses are the same as those approved for the 2005-2006 fiscal period. For the 2005-2006 fiscal period, the Committee recommended a decrease in the assessment rate. However, the decreased assessment rate did not reduce the Committee's reserve as anticipated. Therefore, the Committee recommended suspending the continuing assessment rate to enable an increased draw on the reserve, thus maintaining the level of the reserve within program limits of approximately two fiscal periods' operational expenses. The Committee discussed alternatives to this rule, including alternative expenditure levels, but determined that the recommended expenses were reasonable and necessary to adequately cover program operations. Other assessment rates were considered, but not recommended because they would not reduce the reserve as quickly as suspension of the assessment rate. This action suspends the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. Assessments are applied uniformly on all handlers, and some of the costs may be passed on to producers. However, suspending the assessment rate reduces the burden on handlers, and may reduce the burden on producers. In addition, the Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the Colorado potato industry and all interested persons were invited to attend and participate in the Committee's deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the May 11, 2006, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on the issues. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses. This action imposes no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large Colorado potato handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. AMS is committed to compliance with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), which requires Government agencies in general to provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting business electronically to the maximum extent possible. USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule. A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: *http://www.ama.usda.gov/fv/moab.html.* Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Jay Guerber at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the information and recommendation submitted by the Committee and other available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined upon good cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest to give preliminary notice prior to putting this rule into effect, and that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** because:
(1)The 2006-2007 fiscal period begins on July 1, 2006, and the order requires that the assessment rate suspension apply to all assessable Colorado potatoes handled during such fiscal period;
(2)this action relieves restrictions on handlers by suspending the assessment rate beginning with the 2006-2007 fiscal period;
(3)handlers are aware of this action which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public meeting and is similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past years; and
(4)this interim final rule provides a 60-day comment period, and all comments timely received will be considered prior to finalization of this rule. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 948 Marketing agreements, Potatoes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 948 is amended as follows: PART 948—IRISH POTATOES GROWN IN COLORADO 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 948 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674. § 948.215 [Suspended] 2. In part 948, § 948.215 is suspended in its entirety. Dated: July 11, 2006. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. E6-11303 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Commodity Credit Corporation 7 CFR Part 1402 RIN 0560-AH22 Policy for Certain Commodities Available for Sale AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This rule amends regulations of the Commodity Credit Corporation
(CCC)relating to marketing procedures for commodities in CCC inventory to update agency provisions and provide for commodity sales through Internet-based marketing systems. This rule is intended to modernize and streamline CCC commodity marketing procedures. DATES: Effective August 17, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Overbo, Warehouse and Inventory Division, Farm Service Agency (FSA), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), STOP 0553, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0553, telephone
(202)720-4647 or send e-mail to: *Mark.Overbo@wdc.usda.gov.* Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication (braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at
(202)720-2600 (voice and TDD). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion of Final Rule Since the enactment of the Agricultural Act of 1949, CCC's major activity has been the administration and implementation of nonrecourse loans to producers of major agricultural commodities. Generally, Congress establishes loan rates for certain commodities on a per-unit basis. Under the program's “nonrecourse” provisions, the producer may satisfy the loan obligation through forfeiture to CCC of the commodity pledged as collateral for the loan. As a result, CCC acquires commodities that are forfeited or delivered under these nonrecourse loans. The accumulation of stocks of these forfeited commodities requires CCC to maintain provisions for their eventual disposal. The acquisition, procurement, storage, distribution, and disposal of commodities are handled by the Farm Service Agency under the administration of the Deputy Administrator for Commodity Opeartions. The regulations at 7 CFR part 1402 contain CCC policy for certain commodities available for sale by CCC. This rule updates the regulations regarding the dissemination of general sales offering information to reflect current CCC policies. Current regulations at 7 CFR part 1402 provide that CCC will disseminate general sales information through a “CCC Sales List,” published in press release or similar form, and revised and republished periodically as necessary. Methods of providing commodity sales and CCC inventory listings have improved considerably since the regulations were last updated. Currently, sales offerings are being made electronically via several sources such as CCC's Commodity Operations Web site at *http://www.fsa.usda.gov/daco/catalogs* and through other privately-maintained, fully interactive on-line sales systems. This rule replaces the provisions dealing with the publication of the CCC Sales List with the current policies and procedures for Internet posting of commodity inventories offered for sale. Notice and Comment The changes made in this rule are a general edit and reorganization of part 1402 as a whole, which provides how CCC will disseminate information. Thus, this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) for publication of a proposed rule for public notice and comment because it is a rule of agency procedure and practice. Executive Order 12866 This rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and therefore has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act This rule will be submitted to Congress as required by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* ). The rule has been determined not to be a major regulatory action. Thus, the 60-day delay required by section 801 of SBREFA for Congressional review is not applicable. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act is not applicable to this rule because CCC is not required by 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law to publish a notice of proposed rule making for the subject matter of this rule. Executive Order 12372 This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. See the notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, published at 48 FR 29115 (June 24, 1983). Environmental Assessment The environmental impacts of this rule have been considered consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* , the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality, 40 CFR parts 1500-1508, and the FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA, 7 CFR part 799. FSA completed an environmental evaluation and concluded the rule requires no further environmental review. No extraordinary circumstances or other unforeseeable factors exist which would require preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. A copy of the environmental evaluation is available for inspection and review upon request. Executive Order 12612 The Federalism implications of this rule are not sufficient to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on States or their political subdivisions or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of Government. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This Rule contains no Federal mandates as defined in Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)for State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject to sections 202 and 205 of UMRA. Paperwork Reduction Act There are no public information collection, reporting or recordkeeping requirements associated with this rulemaking. Federal Assistance Programs The title and number of the Federal assistance program found in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to which this final rule applies are Commodity Loans and Loan Deficiency Payments, 10.051. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1402 Agricultural commodities, Price support programs, Processed commodities, Surplus agricultural commodities. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 7 CFR part 1402 is revised as set forth below: 1. Revise 7 CFR part 1402 to read as follows: PART 1402—POLICY FOR CERTAIN COMMODITIES AVAILABLE FOR SALE Sec. 1402.1 General. 1402.2 Sales of inventory. 1402.3 Submission of offers, terms, and conditions. 1402.4 Information availability. 1402.5 Late payments. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7285, 15 U.S.C. 714b and 714c. § 1402.1 General. To facilitate trade through usual and customary channels, facilities, and arrangements of trade and commerce, the Commodity Credit Corporation
(CCC)will disseminate general sales offering information on the Farm Service Agency's
(FSA)Commodity Operations Web site located on the Worldwide Web at *http://www.fsa.usda.gov/daco/default.htm.* The Web site will be reviewed and amended as necessary to reflect current general sales offering information. CCC will make regular amendments as necessary deleting or adding to the sales provisions or changing prices or methods of sales. The information posted at this Web site is for the purpose of public information and does not constitute an offer to sell by CCC or an invitation for offers to purchase from CCC. CCC may make its commodities available for sale without prior notification to storing warehouse operators. Information pertaining to opportunities to purchase commodities from CCC will be published on the FSA Commodity Operations Web site when such opportunities are available. § 1402.2 Sales of inventory. CCC will entertain offers from prospective buyers for the purchase of any commodities owned by CCC, including those commodities that are marketed through commercial, Internet-based marketing services. Various commodities owned by CCC may be offered for sale through commercial, Internet-based marketing services. Interested parties may submit requests for information related to Internet-based commodity sales to the Director, Warehouse and Inventory Division, Stop 0553, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9860. § 1402.3 Submission of offers, terms, and conditions. Offers accepted by CCC will be subject to terms and conditions prescribed by CCC. These terms include, among other things, payment by wire transfer of funds, certified check or cashiers check before delivery of the commodity, removal of the commodity from CCC storage within a reasonable period of time, and in sales that require a commodity to be used for only a specific purpose, documentation that use of the commodity was for only that purpose. § 1402.4 Information availability. The terms and conditions of sale with respect to commodities that are not sold through Internet-based marketing service are available online. Requests for terms and conditions may be addressed to the Director, Warehouse and Inventory Division, Stop 0553, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9860. § 1402.5 Late payments. If payment is not received by CCC within the period specified in the sales contract, interest will be assessed by CCC. If a buyer fails to make arrangements for payment according to the provisions of the contract, CCC retains the right to terminate the sales contract. If CCC terminates the sales contract for default in whole or in part, CCC may offer the commodity for sale and the original party will be liable to CCC for any losses incurred and damages sustained as a result of the party's failure to timely remit payment for the commodity. Signed in Washington, DC, on June 29, 2006. Teresa C. Lasseter, Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation. [FR Doc. E6-11236 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD 12 CFR Part 915 [No. 2006-12] RIN 3069-AB31 Federal Home Loan Bank Elective Directors AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance Board. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance Board (Finance Board) is amending its rules relating to the election of Federal Home Loan Bank
(Bank)directors to allow each Bank greater latitude in providing members information about the range of skills and experience among board members the Bank believes is best suited to administer its affairs. The final rule is intended to enhance the corporate governance of each Bank by allowing a Bank to provide to its members, during the election process, information about the expertise the Bank has identified as appropriate to enhance the board of directors in providing overall board management of the Bank. The final rule also revises and reorganizes the prohibitions on actions during the election process. DATES: *Effective Date:* The final rule is effective July 18, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John P. Kennedy, General Counsel, 202-408-2983, *kennedyj@fhfb.gov;* or Thomas P. Jennings, Senior Attorney Advisor, Office of General Counsel, 202-408-2553, *jenningst@fhfb.gov.* You can send mail to the Federal Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Statutory and Regulatory Background Congress has delegated to the Finance Board broad authority to fulfill its statutory mandates. Section 2B of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank Act) states that the Finance Board has the power “[t]o supervise the Federal Home Loan Banks and to promulgate and enforce such regulations and orders as are necessary from time to time to carry out the provisions of” the Bank Act. 12 U.S.C. 1422b(a)(1). The primary mandate for the Finance Board is to “ensure that the Federal Home Loan Banks operate in a financially safe and sound manner.” 12 U.S.C. 1422a(a)(3)(A). Within this broad authority, Congress also specifically authorized the Finance Board to “prescribe such rules and regulations as it may deem necessary or appropriate for the nomination and election of directors of Federal home loan banks.” 12 U.S.C. 1427(d). The Finance Board has long had in place regulations addressing the manner in which persons are nominated and elected to the boards of the Banks. Effective December 30, 1998, the Finance Board amended various provisions of its regulations relating to director elections to devolve to each Bank, through its board of directors, the responsibility for administering the process for electing Bank directors. *See* Resolution Number 1998-47, *published at* 63 FR 65683 (November 30, 1998) (available electronically in the FOIA Reading Room on the Finance Board Web site at: *http://www.fhfb.gov/Default.aspx?Page=59* ). Notwithstanding that devolution of authority to the Banks, the Finance Board remains responsible for the safety and soundness of the Banks and for periodically reviewing its regulations to ensure that they continue to carry out their intended purposes in a logical and efficient manner. The Finance Board believes that an informed and capable board of directors is one of the more important elements in maintaining a safe and sound Bank. In recent months, the Finance Board has received suggestions that the electoral process could be improved if certain provisions of its regulations were revised to permit the Banks to be more involved in the process of identifying qualified and capable individuals to serve on the boards. Accordingly, on April 18, 2006, the Finance Board published a proposed regulation with a 45-day comment period that would amend part 915—the provision of its regulations dealing with the election of directors—to allow the Banks more flexibility in providing information to their members during the election process. Briefly stated, the proposed rule would have allowed any Bank to assess the skills and experience of the existing individuals on the board of directors, to determine what skills or experience might be useful in enhancing the capabilities of the board, and to communicate its assessment of existing and desired skills to the members when soliciting nominations from and providing ballots to the members of the Bank. The proposed rule also would have removed certain provisions of the regulations that prohibit persons associated with the Finance Board from being involved in the elections process, because those provisions dated to a time at which the Finance Board actually administered the elections at each of the Banks. *See* Resolution Number 2006-04, *published at* 71 FR 19832 (April 18, 2006) (available electronically in the FOIA Reading Room on the Finance Board Web site at: *http://www.fhfb.gov/Default.aspx?Page=59* ). The final rule generally amends the various provisions of part 915 as set forth in the proposed rule. II. Analysis of the Public Comments and Final Rule The Finance Board received 17 comments in response to the proposed rule, which addressed the Finance Board's proposal to expand the ability of the Banks to communicate with their members during the election process and its proposal to remove prohibitions on the conduct of persons associated with the Finance Board. The commenters included 6 Banks. Most commenters supported the proposal, though almost all offered suggested revisions to the rule. Three commenters opposed the proposal, 2 citing a perceived potential for the process to further impede the ability of some members to obtain representation on the Bank boards of directors, and 1 expressing a concern about the possible bias in the information to be provided to the members as well as the perception created by the deletion of prohibitions barring the involvement of Finance Board employees in the elections process. The comments can be divided into 6 substantive areas, which are discussed separately below. A. Self-Assessments Under § 915.9(a) Section 915.9(a) of the proposed rule would have allowed the board of directors of each Bank to conduct an annual assessment of the skills and experience needed on the board of directors and to inform its members of those identified needs. The final rule adopts this provision substantially as proposed. Section 915.9(a) of the final rule is permissive in nature—it authorizes, but does not require, a board of directors to assess how well the skills and experience of the incumbent board members align with the needs of the Bank. It also authorizes, but does not require, a board to determine whether it could benefit from the addition of persons with particular skills or experience and, if so, whether to provide the members with that information in advance of the nominations and voting process. The Finance Board believes that the board of directors of a Bank, as the body charged by Congress to “administer the affairs of the bank fairly and impartially and without discrimination in favor of or against any member,” 12 U.S.C. 1427(j), is the most appropriate body to oversee the self-assessment. The final rule does not prescribe the process or the procedures through which the board of directors is to conduct a self-assessment of its needs, although it vests ultimate responsibility for these decisions with the board. Thus, the rule would allow a board of directors to consult with the members or with management in assessing what skills and experience would be of most use to the board. Although the rule includes a list of skills and experience as part of § 915.9(a), it is intended only as an example of the types of skills that a Bank might determine it needs on its board of directors. A board may well decide that it could benefit from the addition of persons with other skills, and it could include those skills as part of its assessment. Indeed, because the business plans of the Banks vary, the needs of the individual Banks with respect to the skill sets of the boards as a whole also will likely vary. The rule is intended to allow each Bank adequate flexibility to determine its own particular needs. The commenters addressed several issues relating to the assessment of director skills and experience. Some commenters suggested that the rule include a more expansive list of skills, while others were concerned that identifying specific skills in the rule might make it more difficult for the chief executive officer of a member—who may have a broad range of business and financial skills, rather than the individual skills listed—to be nominated or elected. Because the list of skills is intended to be illustrative rather than exclusive, the Finance Board does not believe that the list needs to be expanded. In a similar fashion, the Finance Board believes that the concerns about chief executive officers being handicapped in their ability to be nominated or elected are not well-founded. The rule does not affect the ability of a member to nominate a person of its choosing, and any member can nominate its own officers or directors. The rule also does not limit the right of a member to vote for whomever it believes to be the best qualified, regardless of whether that person possesses the qualifications identified by the assessment. Moreover, because all elected directors must either be an officer or a director of a member of the Bank, it is likely that the list of nominees will continue to include a significant number of persons who serve as chief executives of their institution. Other commenters questioned the need or usefulness of the rule, contending that there is no need for such a rule because such assessments are not barred by statute or regulation, it would allow certain members to perpetuate their representation on the board, or would be unlikely to produce better candidates than are nominated under the current structure. Although it is correct that there are no statutory or regulatory impediments to conducting a self-assessment, the final rule responds to concerns expressed by some parties that the rules be amended to state more clearly that such actions are permissible. Moreover, certain provisions of the existing regulations—§§ 915.6 and 915.8—do regulate the content of the notice that the Banks provide to their members regarding nominations, which starts the election process, as well as the content of the ballots. Given both of those facts, the Finance Board believes that it is appropriate to include these new provisions as part of the rules that already address communications with the members during the elections process. Moreover, such provisions will ensure—for those Banks that undertake the assessment and inform their members of the desired skills and experience—that members receive the information at a time when it can assist them in deciding who they may want to nominate. As to the concern about a self-perpetuating board, the Finance Board notes that all directors not only have a statutory duty to act fairly and impartially to all members, as set forth in 12 U.S.C. 1427(j), but also a fiduciary duty as representatives of the members. The Finance Board believes that any conduct by a director that placed the interests of the individual director or the director's institution above the interests of the Bank likely would violate both of those duties and would be sanctioned accordingly. The Finance Board acknowledges, as suggested by the comments, that the process of assessing the qualifications of the board as a whole and identifying the needs of a Bank will not by itself result in the election of a more qualified board. The objective of the rule, however, is to provide both the Banks and their members an avenue through which they may improve the quality of the boards. The Finance Board believes that key factors in achieving that result include information as to the needs of the Bank's board and information as to the qualifications of the nominees for the directorships. To the extent that the collective skills and experience of a Bank's board of directors may not align precisely with the needs of the Bank despite efforts to achieve that result, the board of directors still would retain the authority to hire consultants to advise it in any areas where the collective skills of the board members may be less than optimum. The Finance Board believes that a Bank should do all that it reasonably can to obtain a well-performing board of directors, even if those efforts are not guaranteed to succeed every time. Other commenters suggested that the Finance Board allow members a greater role in conducting the self-assessment, allow Banks to form nominations committees composed of Bank directors and other representatives from members, and allow management to work with the board in the nominations and election process. As noted previously, by statute the board of directors of each Bank is charged with responsibility for administering the affairs of the Bank and the Finance Board believes that the board is the appropriate body to determine what skills and experience are most likely to enhance its ability to carry out its duties. Moreover, the suggestions that the final rule allow the establishment of nominations committees and the greater involvement of management in the nominations process go beyond the scope of the proposed rule. The proposal was intended to allow an opportunity for the Banks to develop and then provide to the members additional information regarding the needs of the boards and the skills and experience of individual candidates seeking election to the board. It was not intended to alter the substantive nature of the nominations process, which is tied closely to the statutory provisions that authorize the members, and not the Bank, to nominate persons to stand for election to the boards of the Banks. Accordingly, the final rule does not include provisions addressing the issues raised by those commenters. As the party responsible for conducting the assessment, the board also has the authority to determine what resources, if any, it needs in order to conduct any self-assessment. Clearly, Bank management works for the board of directors and, if so directed by the board, can undertake tasks to aid the board in doing the self-assessment. B. Information at the Nominations Stage—§ 915.6(a)(3) Proposed § 915.6(a)(3) would have authorized each Bank to send to the members, as part of the initial notice for nominations, a brief statement of the skills and experience that the Bank's board of directors has identified. The final rule adopts the substance of § 915.6(a)(3) as proposed with clarifying changes to the language used. Some commenters raised concerns about providing the members with such information at the start of the nominations process, including concerns that the information might steer nominations to a preferred candidate, or that it might cause persons with other qualifications not to be nominated, and suggested that the rule explicitly state that a member can nominate any eligible person without regard to whether that person has the experience identified by the Bank. As to the timing concern, the purpose of the rule is to allow both the Bank and its members to be better informed about the needs of the Bank at the board level and the qualifications that prospective nominees might bring to the board. If a Bank opts to undertake the self-assessment, the Finance Board believes that it is better for the members to receive the information at the beginning of the election process, before nominations are due. Accordingly, the final rule retains the provision allowing the information to be made available to the members prior to the submission of nominations. With respect to the concern about steering nominations, the Finance Board does not believe that the risks of that occurring are significant. As an initial matter, the information provided to the members will relate only to the needs of the Bank; it will not be specific to any individuals and should not cause any member to fail to nominate an individual the member believes is an appropriate candidate. Moreover, each member has a legal right to nominate any eligible person, without regard to whether the person possesses the skills or experience identified by the Bank. Having directors who meet the eligibility requirements is a minimum standard, while having directors with the skills and experience identified by the Banks is a goal to which the Banks would aspire. Commenters suggested that the rule require a Bank to include with the statement identifying the needed skills and experience a statement that a member may nominate any otherwise eligible persons. Existing Finance Board rules already include a provision stating that any member eligible to vote in an election may nominate persons for that election. Consequently, the Finance Board does not believe such a revision to the final rule is necessary and has not adopted that suggestion. Some commenters suggested that the final rule prescribe how a Bank must describe the identified skills and experience in any communication sent to the members, while others sought revisions to clearly state that only the board of directors can decide what information to include in the initial notice. Because the current regulations at 12 CFR 915.6(a) provide that “a Bank” must provide the notice to the members, the Finance Board views the preparation and sending of the notice as a ministerial function which is subject to the oversight of a Bank's board of directors, which can determine how much, or how little, involvement to have. Moreover, § 915.3(a) of the Finance Board regulations requires the disinterested directors, or a committee thereof, to provide the oversight with respect to the election of directors. The Finance Board views this provision as requiring that the disinterested directors carry out the details of providing the information to the members. Proposed § 915.6(a)(3) would require that the statement of skills be brief and that it be a statement of the skills identified pursuant to § 915.9, which are the skills identified by the board of directors. Prescriptive regulation should not be necessary in order to assure that the skills identified by the boards of directors are indeed described accurately and briefly, if at all, in the initial notice to members. C. Information Accompanying the Ballots—§ 915.8(b). Proposed § 915.8(b) would have allowed each Bank to send with the ballots a brief statement of the skills and experience that the Bank's board of directors has identified as needed on the board. The Finance Board has retained that provision in the final rule with some clarifying changes. The Finance Board received comments similar to those made with respect to the initial notice under proposed § 915.6(a)(3). The Finance Board believes that its response to the comments on the initial notice are equally applicable to the similar comments on proposed § 915.8(b). The Finance Board also received comments raising other issues, including a request that the final rule authorize the Banks to form a nominations committee. One commenter recommended that the committee be permitted to make nominations, while the other suggested that the committee make recommendations to members, but allow the members to decide whether to nominate those persons. These commenters would allow the Banks to endorse particular candidates or to provide information in the form of a proxy statement that contains information about the candidates and the Bank's recommendations or endorsements of specific individuals. The Finance Board is not prepared to expand the final rule to incorporate the recommendations made by these commenters. As an initial matter, the suggestions relating to nominations committees and proxy statements go beyond the scope of the changes at the heart of the proposed rule, which were intended to allow the Banks to provide greater information to members about the needs of the Banks and the experience of the prospective directors. They were not intended to alter the nature of the nominations process, which each of those suggestions would do to some degree. Those suggestions also raise questions as to the legal limits on what type of changes to the nominations and election process would be permissible under the Bank Act, which the Finance Board has not addressed in the proposed rule. Moreover, since 1989, Finance Board rules have prohibited Bank personnel (other than incumbents acting in their personal capacity) from communicating that the Bank endorses specific individuals. In light of that history and the policy reasons underlying it, the Finance Board declines to go beyond authorizing the disclosures set forth in the final rule. Two commenters requested that the final rule prevent a Bank from altering the statement that it provides to its members between the initial distribution with the nominations announcement and the subsequent distribution of the ballots. Those persons were concerned that in the absence of such a provision a Bank would be free to change its directorship needs assessment for the purpose of directing votes to particular candidates. In the preamble to the proposed rule, the Finance Board stated that the two statements are not required to be the same. See 71 FR at 19834. Although the Finance Board believes that in most situations there would be no reason to change the information from one communication to the next, it is possible that events could occur after the initial distribution that could cause the initial communication to no longer be full, complete, or accurate. For example, directors could resign or become ineligible to serve between the time of nominations and the election, thus creating a need that was not apparent when the Bank distributed the results of the assessment to its members at the nominations stage of the process. If such an event were to occur, the Finance Board believes that the board of directors should be able to provide its members with a revised statement of the most current skills assessment by the board, and the Finance Board is revising the rule accordingly. The Finance Board also is revising the final rule to require each Bank to explain to its voting members why any changes to the statement are warranted. The Finance Board recognizes that, for purposes of the elections occurring this year, it is likely that the Banks will not have included the results of a self-assessment with the nominations notice previously sent to the members. If any Bank has conducted a self-assessment prior to the distribution of the ballots, the Finance Board believes that the Bank and its members should be able to benefit from that effort. Accordingly, the Finance Board will permit any such Banks to include the results of their assessment with the ballots that it provides to its members. We anticipate that in subsequent years the Banks that choose to conduct a self-assessment and inform their members of that action will do so sufficiently in advance of the start of the nominations process to allow the inclusion of those materials with the nominations materials as well as with the ballots. D. Ballot Information About the Nominees—§ 915.8(a). Proposed § 915.8(a)(1) would have authorized the Banks to include on the ballots a brief description of each nominee's skills and experience. Like the authorizations in proposed §§ 915.6(a) and 915.8(b) with respect to information that could be included in the initial notice and with the ballots, such information would be permitted, but is not required to be on the ballots. Several commenters suggested revisions to the provisions addressing the information that may be provided on the ballots. Some suggested that the final rule prescribe how such information would be obtained and displayed on the ballots; others suggested that only the board of directors be permitted to decide how to describe a nominee's skills and experience, while others would allow each nominee to describe his or her skills and experience. Three commenters opposed any such statement on the ballots, believing that it could not be done in a purely neutral fashion. The Finance Board believes that the Banks, under the oversight of their disinterested directors and through the use of resources available to them, have the capability to obtain information on each candidate's skills and experience and to prepare a brief statement of such skills and experience, should they choose to do so. The intent of the proposed and final rule is to afford the Banks the opportunity to provide certain information to the members at various stages of the electoral process, but not to require that they do so. Given that the rule is not mandatory, and that the disinterested directors of the Banks already administer the elections, the Finance Board does not believe that it is necessary for the final rule to impose the level of detail that these comments suggest. The Finance Board, therefore, is adopting the language in § 915.8(a) substantially as proposed, but is adding a new sentence to clarify that even though other provisions on the ballots are mandatory, the inclusion of the candidates' skills and experience is at the discretion of each Bank's disinterested directors. E. Finance Board Involvement in the Election Process—§ 915.9(b) and
(c)Proposed § 915.9 would have reorganized the prohibitions in current § 915.9 and authorized the board of directors of a Bank to assess its current and needed skills. Part of this reorganization would delete the prohibitions in current § 915.9(a)(1), which bar persons associated with the Finance Board from being involved in the elections process. As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule (see 71 FR at 19834), the Finance Board believes that these prohibitions are no longer necessary, because the Finance Board no longer administers the elections, as it did when these prohibitions were implemented. Several comments expressed concern that removing the prohibitions would allow the Finance Board to become more involved in the election process. Other commenters expressed a similar concern that removal of the prohibition reflected a desire by the Finance Board to become more involved in the election process. On the other hand, another commenter suggested that the Finance Board remove all the prohibitions that limit the ability of other persons and entities to become involved in the elections process. As noted above, the prohibition on involvement by Finance Board personnel in the elections process ceased to have any significant effect on the administration of elections when the Finance Board devolved that responsibility to the individual Banks. Nevertheless, because some commenters believe that removal of the prohibition would allow or encourage Finance Board involvement in the election of directors, the Finance Board has accepted their suggestion that the prohibitions on the conduct of Finance Board directors, officers, attorneys, employees, and agents not be removed. The final rule revises proposed § 915.9(c) to make the prohibition applicable to both Bank and Finance Board directors, officers, attorneys, employees, and agents. F. Adequate Representation. Four commenters, 2 representing community banks and 2 representing credit unions, expressed concern that the proposed rule might adversely affect the ability of smaller members to have an adequate voice on the boards of directors of the Banks. In general, these commenters expressed a desire that the Finance Board take action that would enable more “minority” members to be represented on the boards of directors of the Banks, and expressed the view that the rule is likely to hinder the ability of such members to be represented on the boards. As an initial matter, adding provisions to the final rule to address the type of issues raised by these commenters, i.e., whether the interests of all members are equally represented on the boards of directors of the Banks, would go well beyond the scope of the proposed rule. The purpose of the proposed rule was to authorize a process through which the Banks could take certain actions to provide members with additional information to allow them to improve the quality of their boards of directors, if they so choose. The purpose was not to allocate representation on the boards of the Banks to particular segments of the membership base. Moreover, the Finance Board is not persuaded that the proposed rule, in and of itself, will have the effect perceived by those commenters, who have not offered any factual basis to support their concerns. The board structure of the Banks is set by statute, as are the voting rights of the members, which in certain respects already favor the smaller members. For example, the Bank Act limits the number of votes that each member may cast in an election to the average number of shares of stock required to be held by all members located in that state. 12 U.S.C. 1227(b). The effect of that provision is to disenfranchise the largest members of a Bank; to the extent that they own shares in excess of the average, those shares have no voting rights. Smaller members are not affected by that limitation. While it may be true that at some Banks certain segments of the membership base do not have representatives from their industry on the boards of the Banks, that result reflects the fact that the Banks are cooperatives and operate with a board structure and voting rights that have been set by statute. If, as the Finance Board hopes, the final rule will facilitate a process wherein the members can nominate and vote for candidates who possess skills and experience needed by the Bank to carry out its housing finance mission in a safe and sound manner, then the interests of all members should benefit. III. Effective Date Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Finance Board has found that “good cause” exists to have the final rule take effect immediately upon publication in the **Federal Register** . First, the rule requires no mandatory actions on the part of the Banks. The rule authorizes the Banks to take actions during the election process, but it does not require that those actions be taken. Thus, no Banks are required to take any steps to prepare for the effective date of the final rule. Second, now is the time when most Banks begin their yearly election process. Some Banks already may have started the process by sending their first notice to the members. Having an effective date immediately upon publication in the **Federal Register** will give the Banks more of an opportunity to use the provisions of the final rule in this year's election process than they otherwise would have. Third, § 915.9(b) and
(c)removes prohibitions on certain conduct. This rule will not require any preparation efforts on the part of the Banks in order to adjust to the rule being in effect. IV. Paperwork Reduction Act The final rule will have no substantive effect on any collection of information covered by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). See 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Therefore, the Finance Board has not submitted this rule to the Office of Management and Budget for review. V. Regulatory Flexibility Act The final rule will apply only to the Banks, which do not come within the meaning of “small entities” as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). See 5 U.S.C. 601(6). Thus, in accordance with section 605(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Finance Board hereby certifies that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 915 Banks, Banking, Conflict of interests, Elections, Federal home loan banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Finance Board hereby amends 12 CFR part 915, as follows: PART 915—BANK DIRECTOR ELIGIBILITY, APPOINTMENT AND ELECTIONS 1. The authority citation for part 915 continues to read as follows: Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422a(a)(3), 1422b(a), 1426, 1427, and 1432. 2. Amend § 915.6, by redesignating paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) as paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5), respectively, adding a new paragraph (a)(3), and revising redesignated paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows: § 915.6 Elective director nominations.
(a)* * *
(3)A brief statement describing the skills and experience the Bank believes are most likely to add strength to the board of directors, provided that the Bank previously has conducted the annual assessment permitted by § 915.9 and the Bank has elected to provide the results of the assessment to the members;
(4)An attachment indicating the name, location, and FHFB ID number of every member in the member's voting state, and the number of votes each such member may cast for each directorship to be filled in the election, as determined in accordance with § 915.5; and 3. Amend § 915.8, by revising paragraph (a), redesignating paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and
(e)as paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (f), respectively, and adding a new paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 915.8 Election process.
(a)*Ballots* . Promptly after verifying the eligibility of all nominees in accordance with § 915.7(a), a Bank shall prepare a ballot for each voting State for which an elective directorship is to be filled and shall mail the ballot to all members within that State that were members as of the record date.
(1)A ballot shall include at least the following provisions:
(i)An alphabetical listing of the names of each nominee for the member's voting state, the name, location, and FHFB ID number of the member each nominee serves, the nominee's title or position with the member, and the number of elective directorships to be filled by members in that voting state in the election;
(ii)A statement that write-in candidates are not permitted; and
(iii)A confidentiality statement prohibiting the Banks from disclosing how a member voted.
(2)At the election of the Bank, a ballot also may include, in the body or as an attachment, a brief description of the skills and experience of each individual nominee.
(b)*Statement on skills and experience* . If a Bank has conducted an annual assessment permitted by § 915.9 and has included the results of the assessment as part of the notice to members required by § 915.6(a), it may include with each ballot a statement regarding the types of skills and experience the Bank has determined are most likely to add strength to the board of directors. If the statement differs from the statement provided under § 915.6(a)(3), the Bank also shall include an explanation of why the statements differ. 4. Revise § 915.9 to read as follows: § 915.9 Actions affecting director elections.
(a)*Banks* . Each Bank, acting through its board of directors, may conduct an annual assessment of the skills and experience possessed by the members of its board of directors as a whole and may determine whether the capabilities of the board would be enhanced through the addition of persons with particular skills and experience. If the board of directors determines that the Bank could benefit by the addition to the board of directors of persons with particular qualifications, such as in financial management, accounting, hedging, risk management, capital markets, securities laws, or housing finance, it may identify those qualifications and so inform the members as part of the announcement of elections.
(b)*Incumbent Bank directors* . A Bank director acting in his or her personal capacity may support the nomination or election of any person for an elective directorship, provided that no such director may purport to represent the views of the Bank or its board of directors in doing so.
(c)*Prohibition* . Except as provided in paragraphs
(a)and
(b)of this section, no director, officer, attorney, employee, or agent of a Bank or the Finance Board may:
(1)Communicate in any manner that a director, officer, attorney, employee, or agent of a Bank, directly or indirectly, supports the nomination or election of a particular person for an elective directorship; or
(2)Take any other action to influence votes for a directorship. § 915.16 [Amended] 5. Amend the last sentence of § 915.16(e) by revising the reference “§ 915.8(e)” to read “§ 915.8(f)”. § 915.17 [Amended] 6. Amend the last sentence of § 915.17(b)(1) by revising the reference “§ 915.8(b)” to read “§ 915.8(c)”. Dated: July 12, 2006. By the Board of Directors of the Federal Housing Finance Board. Ronald A. Rosenfeld, Chairman. [FR Doc. E6-11306 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6725-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. NM349; Special Conditions No. 25-319-SC] Special Conditions: Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX and Falcon 2000EX Airplanes; Enhanced Flight Visibility System
(EFVS)AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments. SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for certain Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX and Falcon 2000EX airplanes. These airplanes will have an advanced enhanced flight visibility system (EFVS). The EFVS is a novel or unusual design feature which consists of a head up display
(HUD)system modified to display forward-looking infrared
(FLIR)imagery. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These 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: The effective date of these special conditions is July 7, 2006. We must receive your comments by September 1, 2006. ADDRESSES: You must mail two copies of your comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Attn: Rules Docket (ANM-113), Docket No. NM349, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056. You may deliver two copies to the Transport Airplane Directorate at the above address. You must mark your comments: Docket No. NM349. Comments may be inspected in the Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Dunford, FAA, Transport Standards Staff, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone
(425)227-2239; fax
(425)227-1320; e-mail: *dale.dunford@faa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that the substance of these special conditions has previously been subject to the public comment process. These particular special conditions were recently issued and only three non-substantive comments were received during the public comment period. The FAA therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon issuance. Comments Invited We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of written comments. We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel about these special conditions. You can inspect the docket before and after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive. If you want us to let you know we received your comments on these special conditions, send us a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it back to you. Background On August 18, 2004, Dassault Aviation applied for an amendment to the type design for the installation and operation of an infrared enhanced flight visibility system
(EFVS)on Model Falcon 900EX airplanes with modification M3083 installed, and Model Falcon 2000EX airplanes with modification M1691 installed. Commercially, these airplanes are identified as the Falcon 900EX EASy and the Falcon 2000EX EASy. In this document, all references to Falcon 900EX EASy and Falcon 2000EX EASy airplanes mean airplanes with the applicable modification installed. The original type certificate for the Model Falcon 900EX airplane is A46EU, revision 13, dated February 27, 2006. The original type certificate for the Model Falcon 2000EX airplane is A50NM revision 3, dated September 21, 2004. The Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX and Falcon 2000EX are transport category airplanes that operate with a crew of two. The Model Falcon 900EX has a wing span of 63 feet 5 inches, a length of 66 feet 4 inches, a maximum takeoff gross weight of 48,300 pounds, is powered by three Allied Signal Engines TFE 731-60-1C turbofan engines, and has a maximum range of 4,500 nautical miles. The Model Falcon 2000EX airplane has a wing span of 63 feet 5 inches, a length of 66 feet 4 inches, a maximum takeoff gross weight of 41,300 pounds, is powered by two Pratt & Whitney Canada Model PW308C turbofan engines, and has a maximum range of 3,800 nautical miles. The electronic infrared image displayed between the pilot and the forward windshield represents a novel or unusual design feature in the context of 14 CFR 25.773. Section 25.773 was not written in anticipation of such technology. The electronic image has the potential to enhance the pilot's awareness of the terrain, hazards and airport features. At the same time, the image may partially obscure the pilot's direct outside compartment view. Therefore, the FAA needs adequate safety standards to evaluate the EFVS to determine that the imagery provides the intended visual enhancements without undue interference with the pilot's outside compartment view. The FAA intent is that the pilot will be able to use a combination of the information seen in the image and the natural view of the outside scene seen through the image, as safely and effectively as a pilot compartment view without an EVS image that is compliant with § 25.773. Although the FAA has determined that the existing regulations are not adequate for certification of EFVSs, it believes that EFVSs could be certified through application of appropriate safety criteria. Therefore, the FAA has determined that special conditions should be issued for certification of EFVS to provide a level of safety equivalent to that provided by the standard in § 25.773. Note: The term “enhanced vision system”
(EVS)has been commonly used to refer to a system comprised of a head-up display, imaging sensor(s), and avionics interfaces that displayed the sensor imagery on the head up display
(HUD)and overlaid it with alpha-numeric and symbolic flight information. However, the term has also been commonly used in reference to systems which displayed the sensor imagery, with or without other flight information, on a head down display. To avoid confusion, the FAA created the term “enhanced flight visibility system”
(EFVS)to refer to certain EVS systems that meet the requirements of the new operational rules—in particular the requirement for a HUD and specified flight information—and can be used to determine “enhanced flight visibility.” EFVSs can be considered a subset of systems otherwise labeled EVSs. On January 9, 2004, the FAA published revisions to operational rules in 14 CFR parts 1, 91, 121, 125, and 135 to allow aircraft to operate below certain altitudes during a straight-in instrument approach while using an EFVS to meet visibility requirements. Prior to this rule change, the FAA issued Special Conditions No. 25-180-SC, which approved the use of an EVS on Gulfstream Model G-V airplanes. Those special conditions addressed the requirements for the pilot compartment view and limited the scope of the intended functions permissible under the operational rules at the time. The intended function of the EVS imagery was to aid the pilot during the approach and allow the pilot to detect and identify the visual references for the intended runway down to 100 feet above the touchdown zone. However, the EVS imagery alone was not to be used as a means to satisfy visibility requirements below 100 feet. The recent operational rule change expands the permissible application of certain EVSs that are certified to meet the new EFVS standards. The new rule will allow the use of EFVSs for operation below the minimum descent altitude
(MDA)or decision height
(DH)to meet new visibility requirements of § 91.175(l). The purpose of these special conditions is not only to address the issue of the “pilot compartment view,” as was done by Special Conditions No. 25-180-SC, but also to define the scope of intended function consistent with § 91.175(l) and (m). Type Certification Basis Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101, Dassault Aviation must show that the Model Falcon 900EX and Falcon 2000EX airplanes, as modified, comply with the regulations in the U.S. type certification basis established for those airplanes. The U.S. type certification basis for the airplanes is established in accordance with §§ 21.21 and 21.17, and the type certification application date. The U.S. type certification basis for the Model Falcon 900EX airplanes is listed in Type Certificate Data Sheet No. A46EU, revision 13, dated February 27, 2006, which covers all variants of the Model Falcon 900 airplanes, including the Falcon 900EX EASy. The U.S. type certification basis for the Model Falcon 2000EX airplanes is listed in Type Certificate Data Sheet No. A50NM, revision 3, dated September 21, 2004, which covers all variants of the Model Falcon 2000 airplanes, including the Falcon 2000 EX EASy. In addition, the certification basis includes certain special conditions and exemptions that are not relevant to these special conditions. Also, if the regulations incorporated by reference do not provide adequate standards with respect to the change, the applicant must comply with certain regulations in effect on the date of application for the change. If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations ( *i.e.* , part 25 as amended) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX and Falcon 2000EX, modified by Dassault Aviation, because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16. In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX EASy and Falcon 2000EX EASy airplanes must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36. The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in § 11.19, under § 11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis under § 21.101. Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the type certificate for those models be amended later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model. Novel or Unusual Design Features The Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX EASy and Falcon 2000EX EASy airplanes will incorporate an EFVS, which is a novel or unusual design feature. The EFVS is a novel or unusual design feature because it projects a video image derived from a forward-looking infrared
(FLIR)camera through the HUD. The EFVS image is projected in the center of the “pilot compartment view,” which is governed by § 25.773. The image is displayed with HUD symbology and overlays the forward outside view. Therefore, § 25.773 does not contain appropriate safety standards for the EFVS display. Operationally, during an instrument approach, the EFVS image is intended to enhance the pilot's ability to detect and identify “visual references for the intended runway” [see § 91.175(l)(3)] to continue the approach below decision height or minimum descent altitude. Depending on atmospheric conditions and the strength of infrared energy emitted and/or reflected from the scene, the pilot can see these visual references in the image better than he or she can see them through the window without EFVS. Scene contrast detected by infrared sensors can be much different from that detected by natural pilot vision. On a dark night, thermal differences of objects which are not detectable by the naked eye will be easily detected by many imaging infrared systems. On the other hand, contrasting colors in visual wavelengths may be distinguished by the naked eye but not by an imaging infrared system. Where thermal contrast in the scene is sufficiently detectable, the pilot can recognize shapes and patterns of certain visual references in the infrared image. However, depending on conditions, those shapes and patterns in the infrared image can appear significantly different than they would with normal vision. Considering these factors, the EFVS image needs to be evaluated to determine that it can be accurately interpreted by the pilot. The image may improve the pilot's ability to detect and identify items of interest. However, the EFVS needs to be evaluated to determine that the imagery allows the pilot to perform the normal duties of the flightcrew and adequately see outside the window through the image, consistent with the safety intent of § 25.773(a)(2). Compared to a HUD displaying the EFVS image and symbology, a HUD that only displays stroke-written symbols is easier to see through. Stroke symbology illuminates a small fraction of the total display area of the HUD, leaving much of that area free of reflected light that could interfere with the pilot's view out the window through the display. However, unlike stroke symbology, the video image illuminates most of the total display area of the HUD (approximately 30 degrees horizontally and 25 degrees vertically) which is a significant fraction of the pilot compartment view. The pilot cannot see around the larger illuminated portions of the video image, but must see the outside scene through it. Unlike the pilot's external view, the EFVS image is a monochrome, two-dimensional display. Many, but not all, of the depth cues found in the natural view are also found in the image. The quality of the EFVS image and the level of EFVS infrared sensor performance could depend significantly on conditions of the atmospheric and external light sources. The pilot needs adequate control of sensor gain and image brightness, which can significantly affect image quality and transparency ( *i.e.* , the ability to see the outside view through the image). Certain system characteristics could create distracting and confusing display artifacts. Finally, because this is a sensor-based system intended to provide a conformal perspective corresponding with the outside scene, the system must be able to ensure accurate alignment. Therefore, safety standards are needed for each of the following factors: • An acceptable degree of image transparency; • Image alignment; • Lack of significant distortion; and • The potential for pilot confusion or misleading information. Section 25.773, Pilot compartment view, specifies that “Each pilot compartment must be free of glare and reflection that could interfere with the normal duties of the minimum flight crew * * *.” In issuing § 25.773, the FAA did not anticipate the development of EFVSs and does not consider § 25.773 to be adequate to address the specific issues related to such a system. Therefore, the FAA has determined that special conditions are needed to address the specific issues particular to the installation and use of an EFVS. Discussion The EFVS is intended to function by presenting an enhanced view during the approach. This enhanced view would help the pilot to see and recognize external visual references, as required by § 91.175(l), and to visually monitor the integrity of the approach, as described in FAA Order 6750.24D (“Instrument Landing System and Ancillary Electronic Component Configuration and Performance Requirements,” dated March 1, 2000). Based on this approved functionality, users would seek to obtain operational approval to conduct approaches—including approaches to Type I runways—in visibility conditions much lower than those for conventional Category I. The purpose of these special conditions is to ensure that the EFVS to be installed can perform the following functions: • Present an enhanced view that would aid the pilot during the approach. • Provide enhanced flight visibility to the pilot that is no less than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach procedure. • Display an image that the pilot can use to detect and identify the “visual references for the intended runway” required by § 91.175(l)(3) to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 100 feet height above the touchdown zone elevation. Depending on the atmospheric conditions and the particular visual references that happen to be distinctly visible and detectable in the EFVS image, these functions would support its use by the pilot to visually monitor the integrity of the approach path. Compliance with these special conditions does not affect the applicability of any of the requirements of the operating regulations ( *i.e.* , 14 CFR parts 91, 121, and 135). Furthermore, use of the EFVS does not change the approach minima prescribed in the standard instrument approach procedure being used; published minima still apply. The FAA certification of this EFVS is limited as follows: • The infrared-based EFVS image will not be certified as a means to satisfy the requirements for descent below 100 feet height above touchdown (HAT). • The EFVS may be used as a supplemental device to enhance the pilot's situational awareness during any phase of flight or operation in which its safe use has been established. An EFVS image may provide an enhanced image of the scene that may compensate for any reduction in the clear outside view of the visual field framed by the HUD combiner. The pilot must be able to use this combination of information seen in the image and the natural view of the outside scene seen through the image as safely and effectively as the pilot would use a pilot compartment view without an EVS image that is compliant with § 25.773. This is the fundamental objective of the special conditions. The FAA will also apply additional certification criteria, not as special conditions, for compliance with related regulatory requirements, such as §§ 25.1301 and 25.1309. These additional criteria address certain image characteristics, installation, demonstration, and system safety. Image characteristics criteria include the following: • Resolution, • Luminance, • Luminance uniformity, • Low level luminance, • Contrast variation, • Display quality, • Display dynamics ( *e.g.* , jitter, flicker, update rate, and lag), and • Brightness controls. Installation criteria address visibility and access to EFVS controls and integration of EFVS in the cockpit. The EFVS demonstration criteria address the flight and environmental conditions that need to be covered. The FAA also intends to apply certification criteria relevant to high intensity radiated fields
(HIRF)and lightning protection. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX airplanes with modification M3083 installed (Falcon 900EX EASy) and Model Falcon 2000EX airplanes with modification M1691 installed (Falcon 2000EX EASy). Should Dassault Aviation apply at a later date for an amendment to the type design to modify any other model included on Type Certificates No. A46EU or A50NM to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to those models as well. Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX EASy and Falcon 2000EX EASy airplanes modified by Dassault Aviation. It is not a rule of general applicability. The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would significantly affect the certification of the airplane, which is imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting these special conditions upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for comment described above. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704. The Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 900EX airplanes with modification M3083 installed (Falcon 900EX EASy) and Model Falcon 2000EX airplanes with modification M1691 installed (Falcon Model 2000EX EASy). 1. The EFVS imagery on the HUD must not degrade the safety of flight or interfere with the effective use of outside visual references for required pilot tasks during any phase of flight in which it is to be used. 2. To avoid unacceptable interference with the safe and effective use of the pilot compartment view, the EFVS device must meet the following requirements: a. The EFVS design must minimize unacceptable display characteristics or artifacts (e.g. noise, “burlap” overlay, running water droplets) that obscure the desired image of the scene, impair the pilot's ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, distract the pilot, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety. b. Control of EFVS display brightness must be sufficiently effective in dynamically changing background (ambient) lighting conditions to prevent full or partial blooming of the display that would distract the pilot, impair the pilot's ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety. If automatic control for image brightness is not provided, it must be shown that a single manual setting is satisfactory for the range of lighting conditions encountered during a time-critical, high workload phase of flight (e.g., low visibility instrument approach). c. A readily accessible control must be provided that permits the pilot to immediately deactivate and reactivate display of the EFVS image on demand. d. The EFVS image on the HUD must not impair the pilot's use of guidance information or degrade the presentation and pilot awareness of essential flight information displayed on the HUD, such as alerts, airspeed, attitude, altitude and direction, approach guidance, windshear guidance, TCAS resolution advisories, or unusual attitude recovery cues. e. The EFVS image and the HUD symbols—which are spatially referenced to the pitch scale, outside view and image—must be scaled and aligned ( *i.e.* , conformal) to the external scene. In addition, the EFVS image and the HUD symbols—when considered singly or in combination—must not be misleading, cause pilot confusion, or increase workload. There may be airplane attitudes or cross-wind conditions which cause certain symbols ( *e.g.* , the zero-pitch line or flight path vector) to reach field of view limits, such that they cannot be positioned conformally with the image and external scene. In such cases, these symbols may be displayed but with an altered appearance which makes the pilot aware that they are no longer displayed conformally (for example, “ghosting”). f. A HUD system used to display EFVS images must, if previously certified, continue to meet all of the requirements of the original approval. 3. The safety and performance of the pilot tasks associated with the use of the pilot compartment view must not be degraded by the display of the EFVS image. These tasks include the following: a. Detection, accurate identification and maneuvering, as necessary, to avoid traffic, terrain, obstacles, and other hazards of flight. b. Accurate identification and utilization of visual references required for every task relevant to the phase of flight. 4. Compliance with these special conditions will enable the EFVS to be used during instrument approaches in accordance with § 91.175(l) such that it may be found acceptable for the following intended functions: a. Presenting an image that would aid the pilot during a straight-in instrument approach. b. Enabling the pilot to determine that there is sufficient “enhanced flight visibility,” as required by § 91.175(l)(2), for descent and operation below minimum descent altitude/decision height (MDA)/(DH). c. Enabling the pilot to use the EFVS imagery to detect and identify the “visual references for the intended runway,” required by § 91.175(l)(3), to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 100 feet height above touchdown zone elevation. 5. Use of EFVS for instrument approach operations must be in accordance with the provisions of § 91.175(l) and (m). Appropriate limitations must be stated in the Operating Limitations section of the airplane flight manual to prohibit the use of the EFVS for functions that have not been found to be acceptable. Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 7, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-11367 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2006-24243; Airspace Docket No. 06-AWP-11] Revocation of Class D Airspace; Elko, NV AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Direct final rule, request for comments. SUMMARY: This action revokes the Class D airspace area for Elko Municipal-J.C. Harris Field, Elko, NV. The FAA is taking this action due to the closure of the Elko Municipal Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT). DATES: *Effective Date:* 0901 UTC October 26, 2006. *Comment Date:* Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before August 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send comments on this direct final rule 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-2006-25243/Airspace Docket No. 06-AWP-11, 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 final rule, 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Tonish, Airspace Specialist, AWP-520, Western Terminal Service Area, Federal Aviation Administration, 15000 Aviation Boulevard, Lawndale, California 90261, telephone
(310)725-6539. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Airport Traffic Control Tower services are no longer available at Elko Regional Airport. Therefore, under Federal regulation, the airport no longer qualifies for Class D airspace. Class D airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9N dated September 1, 2005 and effective September 16, 2005, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace designation listed in the document will be subsequently removed in the Order. The Direct Final Rule Procedure The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse or negative comment and therefore is issuing it as a direct final rule. Unless a written adverse or negative comment, or a written notice of intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received within the comment period, the regulation will become effective on the date specified above. After the close of the comment period, the FAA will publish a document in the **Federal Register** indicating that no adverse or negative comments were received and confirming the date on which the final rule will become effective. If the FAA does receive, within the comment period, an adverse or negative comment, or written notice of intent to submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the direct final rule will be published in the **Federal Register** , and a notice of proposed rulemaking may be published with a new comment period. Comments Invited Although this action is in the form of a final rule and was not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, comments are invited on this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES . All communications received on or before the closing date for comments will be considered, and this rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of the comments received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of this action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be needed. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this action will be filed in the Rules Docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2006-25243/Airspace Docket No. 06-AWP-11.” The postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter. Agency Findings The regulations adopted herein will not 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 governments. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. The FAA has determined that this regulation is noncontroversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation—(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 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; 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 the Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9N, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 16, 2005, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. AWP NV D Elko, NV Elko Municipal-J.C. Harris Field, NV. Remove. Issued in Los Angeles, California, on July 13, 2006. Leonard A. Mobley, Acting Area Director, Western Terminal Operations. [FR Doc. 06-6282 Filed 7-17-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 18
Traces to 18 documents
register
CFR
U.S. Code
- Rule making§ 553
- SHORT TITLE.§ 801
- Congressional declaration of purpose§ 4321
- Commodity Credit Corporation sales price restrictions§ 7285
- General powers of Corporation§ 714b
- Directors§ 1427
- Purposes§ 3501
- Definitions§ 601
- Avoidance of duplicative or unnecessary analyses§ 605
- Federal Aviation Administration§ 106
16 references not yet in our index
- 7 CFR 922
- 7 USC 601-674
- 7 CFR 948
- 7 CFR 1402
- 7 CFR 3015
- 7 CFR 799
- 12 CFR 915
- 12 USC 1422b(a)(1)
- 12 USC 1422a(a)(3)(A)
- 12 CFR 915.6(a)
- 12 USC 1227(b)
- 12 USC 1422a(a)(3)
- 14 CFR 25
- 14 CFR 34
- 14 CFR 36
- 14 CFR 71
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final rule
Cite7 CFR 922
Cite7 USC 601-674
Cite7 CFR 948
Cites 34 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources