Proposed Rules. Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

8,936 words·~41 min read·/register/2006/08/16/06-6987

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

BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-25563; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-083-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Learjet Model 23, 24, 24A, 24B, 24B-A, 24C, 24D, 24D-A, 24E, 24F, 24F-A, 25, 25A, 25B, 25C, 25D, 25F, 28, 29, 31, 31A, 35, 35A (C-21A), 36, 36A, 55, 55B, and 55C Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain Learjet Model 23, 24, 24A, 24B, 24B-A, 24C, 24D, 24D-A, 24E, 24F, 24F-A, 25, 25A, 25B, 25C, 25D, 25F, 28, 29, 31, 31A, 35, 35A (C-21A), 36, 36A, 55, 55B, and 55C airplanes. This proposed AD would require modifying the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches. This proposed AD would also require revising the Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections of the airplane flight manual to advise the flightcrew of the proper procedures to follow in the event of failure of the standby fuel pump to shut off. This proposed AD results from a report of inadvertent operation of a standby fuel pump due to an electrical system malfunction. We are proposing this AD to prevent this inadvertent operation, which could result in inadvertent fuel transfer by the left or right wing fuel system and subsequent over-limit fuel imbalance between the left and right wing fuel loads. This imbalance could affect lateral control of the airplane which could result in reduced controllability. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 2, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • *DOT Docket Web site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Government-wide rulemaking Web site:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • *Fax:*

(202)493-2251. • *Hand Delivery:* Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942, for the service information identified in this proposed AD FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Galstad, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone

(316)946-4135; fax

(316)946-4107. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-25563; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-083-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone

(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion We have received a report indicating that inadvertent operation of a standby fuel pump due to an electrical system malfunction occurred on a Learjet Model 35A (C-21A) airplane. This condition, if not corrected, could result in inadvertent fuel transfer by the left or right wing fuel system and subsequent over-limit fuel imbalance between the left and right wing fuel loads. This imbalance could affect lateral control of the airplane which could result in reduced controllability. Relevant Service Information We reviewed the Bombardier service bulletins identified in the following table: Service Information Service bulletin Revision level Date Learjet model(s) 23-28-6 Original Issue April 21, 1998 23 24/25-28-3 2 February 21, 1998 24/25 28/29-28-4 3 June 2, 1999 28/29 31-28-7 3 January 26, 2001 31 35/36-28-11 4 December 4, 2000 35/36 55-28-13 3 December 15, 2000 55 The service bulletins describe the following procedures: For airplanes on which the replacement of the standby fuel pump switch has been accomplished per the original or earlier revisions of the applicable referenced service bulletins, the procedures include installing fuses and fuse holders, and modifying the electrical wiring. For airplanes on which the replacement has not been accomplished per the original issue or earlier revisions of the applicable referenced service bulletins, the procedures include replacing the standby fuel pump switches, installing the fuel pump dimming box assembly, and modifying the electrical wiring. The procedures also describe verifying that the subject temporary flight manual

(TFM)changes have been incorporated into the applicable airplane flight manual (AFM). We have also reviewed the following Learjet TFM changes: TFM Date TFM 96-08 May 30, 1996. TFM 96-09 May 30, 1996. TFM 98-01 May 11, 1999. TFM 98-02 May 11, 1999. The TFMs describe procedures for revising the Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections of the AFM to advise the flightcrew of the proper procedures to follow in the event of failure of the standby fuel pump to shut off. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Costs of Compliance There are about 1,613 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour, depending on airplane configuration. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Modification Between 4 and 12 Between $1,426 and $1,470 Between $1,746 and $2,430 1,150 Between $2,007,900 and $2,794,500. AFM Revision 1 None $80 1,150 $92,000. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Learjet:** Docket No. FAA-2006-25563; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-083-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October 2, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to the Learjet models identified in the applicable Bombardier service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD. Table 1.—Applicability by Service Bulletin Service bulletin Revision level Date Learjet model(s) 23-28-6 Original Issue April 21, 1998 23. 24/25-28-3 2 February 21, 1998 24, 24A, 24B, 24B-A, 24C, 24D, 24D-A, 24E, 24F, and 24F-A; 25, 25A, 25B, 25C, 25D, and 25F. 28/29-28-4 3 June 2, 1999 28 and 29. 31-28-7 3 January 26, 2001 31 and 31A. 35/36-28-11 4 December 4, 2000 35 and 35A (C-21A); 36 and 36A. 55-28-13 3 December 15, 2000 55, 55B and 55C. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report of inadvertent operation of a standby fuel pump due to an electrical system malfunction. We are issuing this AD to prevent this inadvertent operation, which could result in inadvertent fuel transfer by the left or right wing fuel system and subsequent over-limit fuel imbalance between the left and right wing fuel loads. This imbalance could affect lateral control of the airplane which could result in reduced controllability. Compliance

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

(f)Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD: Modify the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin identified in Table 1 of this AD. Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM)Revision

(g)Before further flight after accomplishing the modification required by paragraph

(f)of this AD: Revise the Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections of the applicable AFM to advise the flightcrew of proper procedures to follow in the event of failure of the standby fuel pump to shut off by including the information in the Learjet temporary flight manual

(TFM)Changes identified in Table 2 of this AD. Table 2.—TFM Changes Learjet model(s) TFM Date 24/25, 28/29, 31, 35/35, 55 TFM 96-08 May 30, 1996. 24/25, 28/29, 31, 35/35, 55 TFM 96-09 May 30, 1996. 23 TFM 98-01 May 11, 1999. 23 TFM 98-02 May 11, 1999. This may be done by inserting a copy of the TFM changes into the AFM. When the TFM changes have been included in the general revisions of the AFM, those general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, provided the relevant information in the general revisions is identical to that in the TFM changes. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (h)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(2)Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 3, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-13453 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Bureau of Customs and Border Protection 19 CFR Part 101 [USCBP 2005-0035] Extension of Port Limits of St. Louis, MO AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend the Department of Homeland Security

(DHS)Regulations pertaining to the field organization of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)by extending the geographical limits of the port of St. Louis, Missouri, to include the entire Lambert-St. Louis International Airport after the completion of its ongoing expansion. The expansion of the airport is expected to be complete by March 2006. The extension would also modify the geographic description of the port of St. Louis, Missouri, to align the port boundaries with the Federal Interstate Highways that encircle the St. Louis metropolitan area. The proposed change is part of CBP's continuing program to more efficiently utilize its personnel, facilities, and resources, and to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 16, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by *docket number,* by *one* of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number USCBP-2005-0035. • *Mail:* Border Security Regulations Branch, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. (Mint Annex), Washington, DC 20229. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Participation” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Submitted comments may also be inspected during regular business days between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Office of Regulations and Rulings, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC. Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clark at

(202)572-8768. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Dore, Office of Field Operations, 202-344-2776. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background As part of its continuing efforts to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is proposing to extend the port boundaries for the port of entry at St. Louis, Missouri. The Lambert-St. Louis International Airport is currently located within the boundaries of the St. Louis, Missouri, port of entry. However, the airport has initiated an expansion project, which, when completed, will place part of the airport outside of the port's current boundaries. The expansion is expected to be complete by March 2006. In order to accommodate the entire airport and to make the boundaries more easily identifiable to the public, CBP is proposing to extend the port limits of the port of St. Louis, Missouri, in such a way that will align the port boundaries with the Federal Interstate Highways that encircle the St. Louis metropolitan area. CBP has determined that this proposed change in the boundaries of the port of St. Louis, Missouri, will not result in a change in the service that is provided to the public by the port, nor will it require a change in the staffing or workload at the port. Current Port Limits of St. Louis, Missouri The current port limits of St. Louis, Missouri, are described as follows in Treasury Decision (T.D.) 69-224 of September 27, 1969: Beginning at a point where Federal Interstate Highway 270 crosses the Mississippi River; thence west along Federal Interstate Highway 270 to a point where this highway and State Highway 140 intersect; thence south along State Highway 140 to a point just north of where this highway intersects with State Highway 100 and becomes U.S. Highway 61; thence continuing in a south and southeasterly direction along U.S. Highway 61 across the Mississippi River to a point where this highway and State Highway 3 intersect; thence south along State Highway 3 to a point where this highway and State Highway 158 intersect; thence in a northeasterly direction along State Highway 158 to a point where this highway and State Highway 159 intersect; thence north along State Highway 159 to a point where this highway and Federal Interstate Highway 270 intersect; thence west along Federal Interstate Highway 270 to the Mississippi River, the point of beginning. Proposed Port Limits of St. Louis, Missouri The new port limits of St. Louis, Missouri, are proposed as follows: Beginning at the point where Federal Interstate Highway 270 crosses the Mississippi River; thence west, southwest, south and southeast, along Federal Interstate Highway 270 to the point where it becomes Federal Interstate Highway 255; thence southeast on Federal Interstate Highway 255 across the Mississippi River; thence north and east to the point where Federal Interstate Highway 255 intersects with Federal Interstate Highway 270; thence west along Federal Interstate Highway 270 to the Mississippi River, the point of beginning. Proposed Amendment to Regulations If the proposed port limits are adopted, CBP will amend the list of CBP ports of entry at 19 CFR section 101.3(b)(1), to reflect the new description of the limits of the St. Louis, Missouri, port of entry. Public Participation Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the proposed rule. CBP also invites comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism affects that might result from this proposed rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP will reference a specific portion of the proposed rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that support such recommended change. Authority This change is proposed under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301 and 19 U.S.C. 2, 66 and 1624, and the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296 (November 25, 2002). Signing Authority The signing authority for this document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a) because this port extension is not within the bounds of those regulations for which the Secretary of the Treasury has retained sole authority. Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking may be signed by the Secretary of Homeland Security (or his or her delegate). The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866 With DHS approval, CBP establishes, expands and consolidates CBP ports of entry throughout the United States to accommodate the volume of CBP-related activity in various parts of the country. The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this regulatory proposal is not a significant regulatory action as defined under Executive Order 12866. This proposed rule also will not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, it is certified that this document is not subject to the additional requirements of the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). Michael Chertoff, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13446 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Part 3286 [Docket No. FR-4812-N-03] RIN 2502-AH97 HUD's Manufactured Home Installation Program Extension of Public Comment Period AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This proposed rule announces an extension of the public comment period on HUD's proposed rule regarding the Manufactured Home Installation Program, published on June 14, 2006. The June 14, 2006, proposed rule provided for a 60-day public comment period, which would close the public comment period on August 14, 2006. This notice advises that the public comment period has been extended to September 14, 2006. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 14, 2006. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding this proposed rule to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Room 10276, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410. All communications should refer to the above docket number and title. Facsimile

(FAX)comments and e-mail comments are *not* acceptable. A copy of each communication submitted will be available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the public comments must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at

(202)708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Copies of all comments submitted are available for inspection and downloading at *http://www.regulations.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William W. Matchneer III, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Regulatory Affairs, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Manufactured Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 9164, Washington, DC 20410-8000; telephone

(202)708-6401 (this is not a toll free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at

(800)877-8389. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 14, 2006 (71 FR 34476), HUD published its proposed rule that would establish a Federal manufactured home installation program. HUD is required to establish such a program in accordance with the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 *et seq.* ), as amended by the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (Title VI, Pub. L. 106-659, enacted December 27, 2000). States that have their own installation programs that include the elements required by statute are permitted to administer under their own state installation programs the new requirements that would be established through this proposed and final rulemaking. The June 14, 2006, proposed rule provided for a 60-day public comment period. In response to significant public interest, HUD wants to provide additional time for interested parties to prepare and submit comments that HUD will consider in the development of the final rule; therefore, HUD is announcing through this notice that it is extending the public comment period on the June 14, 2006, proposed rule for an additional month. The new public comment deadline is September 14, 2006. Dated: August 9, 2006. Frank L. Davis, General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing. [FR Doc. E6-13382 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-112994-06] RIN 1545-BF47 Guidance Under Section 7874 Regarding Expatriated Entities and Their Foreign Parents; Correction Notice AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing; correction. SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing that was published in the **Federal Register** on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 (71 FR 32495) relating to the determination of whether a foreign entity shall be treated as a surrogate foreign corporation under section 7874(a)(2)(B). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Milton Cahn at

(202)622-3918 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing (REG-112994-06) that is the subject of these corrections are under section 7874 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing (REG-112994-06) contains errors that may prove to be misleading are in need of correction. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing (REG-112994-06), that was the subject of FR Doc. E6-8698, is corrected as follows: 1. On page 32495, column 2, in the preamble, under the caption SUMMARY , line 8, the language “of the Code. The text of those” is corrected to read “of the Internal Revenue Code. The text of those”. 2. On page 32495, column 2, in the preamble, under the caption DATES , lines 5 and 6, the language “24, 2006 at 10 a.m., must be received by October 3, 2006” is corrected to read “31, 2006, at 10 a.m., must be received by October 10, 2006”. 3. On page 32495, column 2, in the preamble, under the caption ADDRESSES , lines 2-11, the language “CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-112994-06), room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-112994-06), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC, or sent”. is corrected to read CC:PA:LPD (REG-112994-06), Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604 Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044 or sent”. 4. On page 32495, column 2, in the preamble, under the caption ADDRESSES , lines 1-3 from the bottom of the paragraph, the language, “held in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington DC” is corrected to read “held in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Service, New Carrollton Federal Building (NCFB), 5000 Ellin Rd., Lanham, MD 20706”. 5. On page 32495, column 2, in the preamble, under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , line 3, the language “Milton Cahn at

(202)622-3860;” is corrected to read “Milton Cahn at

(202)927-0889 or

(202)622-3918;”. 6. On page 32495, column 3, in the preamble, under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , lines 2 and 3 from the top of the column, the language “Treena Garrett,

(202)622-7180 (not toll-free numbers)” is corrected to read “Kelly Banks,

(202)927-1443 (not toll-free numbers)”. 7. On page 32495, column 3, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ *Background and Explanation of Provisions* ”, line 5 from the bottom of the paragraph, the language “7874(a)(2)(B) of the Code. The text of” is corrected to read “7874(a)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code. The text of”. 8. On page 32495, column 3, in the preamble, under the paragraph “ *Special Analyses* ”, line 5 from the bottom of the paragraph, the language “of the Code, this notice of proposed” is corrected to read “of the Internal Revenue Code, this notice of proposed”. 9. On page 32496, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ *Comments and Public Hearing* ”, first paragraph of the column, lines 2 through 5, the language “for October 24, 2006, at 10 a.m. in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.” is corrected to read “for October 31, 2006, at 10 a.m. in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Service, New Carrollton Federal Building, 5000 Ellin Road, Lanham, MD 20706.” 10. On page 32496, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ *Comments and Public Hearing* ”, second paragraph of the column, lines 2 through 5, the language “for October 24, 2006, at 10 a.m. in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington DC. Due to building” is corrected to read “for October 31, 2006, at 10 a.m. in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Service, New Carrollton Federal Building, 5000 Ellin Road, Lanham, MD 20706.” Guy R. Traynor, Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E6-13424 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [CGD05-06-078] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Patapsco River, Inner Harbor, Baltimore, MD AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish special local regulations during the “Red Bull Flugtag Baltimore”, a marine event to be held October 21, 2006, on the waters of the Patapsco River, Inner Harbor, Baltimore, MD. These special local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is intended to temporarily restrict vessel traffic in a portion of the Baltimore Inner Harbor during the event. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before September 15, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander (dpi), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia 23704-5004, hand-deliver them to Room 415 at the same address between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, or fax them to

(757)398-6203. The Inspections and Investigations Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at the above address between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Sens, Project Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District, Inspections and Investigations Branch, at

(757)398-6204. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD05-06-078), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the address listed under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the **Federal Register** . Background and Purpose On October 21, 2006, Red Bull North America will sponsor “Red Bull Flugtag Baltimore” at the Inner Harbor in Baltimore, MD. The event will consist of 30 teams who attempt to fly a human powered craft from an 80-foot long flight deck that extends over the water immediately adjacent to the southwest corner of the promenade surrounding the Baltimore Inner Harbor. The regulated area originates at the southwest corner of the Inner Harbor adjacent to the Maryland Science Center and extends outward over the water within an approximately 150 yard arc. Due to the need for vessel control during the event, the Coast Guard will temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the event area to provide for the safety of participants, spectators and other transiting vessels. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to establish temporary special local regulations on specified waters of the Patapsco River, Inner Harbor, Baltimore, MD. The regulations would be in effect from 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 21, 2006. The effect would be to restrict general navigation in the regulated area during the event. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel would be permitted enter or remain in the regulated area. Vessel traffic may be allowed to transit the regulated area at slow speed when event activity is halted, and when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander determines it is safe to do so. These regulations are needed to control vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety of participants, spectators and transiting vessels. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Although this regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the Baltimore Inner Harbor during the event, the effect of this regulation will not be significant due to the limited duration that the regulated area will be in effect and the extensive advance notifications that will be made to the maritime community via the Local Notice to Mariners, marine information broadcasts, and area newspapers, so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Additionally, the regulated area has been narrowly tailored to impose the least impact on general navigation yet provide the level of safety deemed necessary. Vessel traffic may be able to transit the regulated area at slow speed when event activity is halted, when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do so. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the effected portion of the Baltimore Inner Harbor during the event. Although this regulation prevents traffic from transiting a small segment of the Baltimore Inner Harbor during the event, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This proposed rule would be in effect for only a limited period. Vessel traffic may be able to transit the regulated area when event activity is halted, when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do so. Before the enforcement period, we will issue maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the address listed under ADDRESSES . The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. Special local regulations issued in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade permit are specifically excluded from further analysis and documentation under that section. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, an “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are not required for this rule. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether to categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: PART 100—REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add a temporary § 100.35T-05-078 to read as follows: § 100.35T-05-078 Patapsco River, Inner Harbor, Baltimore, MD.

(a)*Definitions.* The following definitions apply to this section:

(1)*Coast Guard Patrol Commander* means a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard who has been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore.

(2)*Official Patrol* means any vessel assigned or approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.

(3)*Participant* includes all vessels participating in the Red Bull Flugtag Baltimore under the auspices of a Marine Event Permit issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore.

(4)*Regulated area* includes the waters of the Patapsco River, Baltimore, MD, Inner Harbor within the immediate vicinity of the southwest corner of the harbor adjacent to the Maryland Science Center. The area is bounded on the south and west by the shoreline promenade, bounded on the north by a line drawn along latitude 39°16′58″ North and bounded on the east by a line drawn along longitude 076°36′36.5″ West. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.

(b)*Special local regulations.*

(1)Except for event participants and persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area.

(2)The operator of any vessel in the regulated area shall:

(i)Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any Official Patrol.

(ii)Proceed as directed by any Official Patrol.

(iii)When authorized to transit the regulated area, all vessels shall proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course that minimizes wake near the event area.

(c)*Effective period.* This section will be enforced from 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 21, 2006. Dated: July 28, 2006. Larry L. Hereth, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E6-13494 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2004-NH-0001; A-1-FRL-8210-6] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Hampshire; Withdrawal of Proposed Rulemaking To Control Gasoline Fuel Parameters and Remove the Reformulated Gasoline Program From Four Counties in New Hampshire AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule. SUMMARY: In a letter dated May 31, 2006, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services

(DES)requested withdrawal of their previously submitted State Implementation Plan

(SIP)revision for oxygen flexible reformulated gasoline (OFRFG). EPA had proposed to approve this revision on February 2, 2004 (69 FR 4903), and received comments from five parties which outlined concerns. For reasons outlined below, New Hampshire has withdrawn this SIP revision request. Therefore, EPA is also withdrawing its proposed approval of the SIP revision. DATES: The proposed rule is withdrawn as of August 16, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Judge, EPA New England (CAQ), 1 Congress Street, suite 1100, Boston MA 02203; telephone, 617-918-1045; fax, 617-918-0045; *judge.robert@epa.gov.* SUMMARY: On February 2, 2004 (69 FR 4903), EPA proposed approval of a State Implementation Plan

(SIP)revision submitted by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services

(DES)on October 31, 2002 and October 3, 2003, establishing fuel emissions performance requirements for gasoline distributed in southern New Hampshire which includes Hillsborough, Merrimack, Rockingham, and Strafford Counties. Final EPA approval of this SIP revision would ultimately result in New Hampshire no longer utilizing Federal reformulated gasoline

(RFG)in this area 90 days after the effective date of the rule. New Hampshire had hoped their program would result in gasoline with less methyl tertiary butyl ether

(MTBE)being distributed in the State. On May 31, 2006, DES submitted a letter by which the State of New Hampshire withdrew their request to adopt their own State specific fuel program (OFRFG), and their request to opt-out of the Federal reformulated gasoline program. In this letter, New Hampshire outlined several reasons for withdrawing this SIP revision request. They explained that since the time of their initial SIP submission and EPA's subsequent proposed approval in February 2004, several circumstances that impact New Hampshire's choice to opt-out of RFG and implement their own State fuel program have changed. Specifically, they noted that MTBE bans were implemented in 2004 in Connecticut and New York areas with Federal reformulated gasoline without supply or price disruptions. Informed by this development, the New Hampshire General Court passed House Bill 58 in 2005 which banned (effective January, 2007) the importation and distribution of gasoline containing MTBE in New Hampshire. (Other similar MTBE ban legislation was also enacted in Maine, Vermont, and Rhode Island). And finally, New Hampshire pointed to the enactment of Federal energy legislation (the Energy Policy Act of 2005) with provisions that eliminated the Clean Air Act

(CAA)minimum 2 percent oxygen mandate for RFG (the requirement that had resulted in between 3 and 10 times higher MTBE levels in RFG than conventional gasoline), mandated increased use of renewable fuels (primarily ethanol) nationally, and limited EPA's ability to approve new “boutique” fuel blends. Given those circumstances, New Hampshire felt that their state, as well as many other areas of the country, would soon be receiving cleaner fuels with significantly reduced levels of MTBE. As such, they feel they achieved the state's objective of reducing MTBE in its gasoline without removing itself from the Federal RFG program and its associated toxics emission reduction benefits. Therefore, New Hampshire has requested that EPA no longer consider this SIP revision request, and has withdrawn the SIP revision request from EPA. As a result, EPA is also withdrawing its previous proposed approval of New Hampshire's SIP revision request. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Dated: August 7, 2006. Robert W. Varney, Regional Administrator, EPA-New England. [FR Doc. E6-13492 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 71 158 Wednesday, August 16, 2006 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [CN-06-003] American Pima Spot Quotations AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS), Cotton Program, Market News Branch changes to the American Pima Spot Quotations. The changes include combining the San Joaquin Valley and Desert Southwest Pima cotton markets into one unified American Pima Market; changing the quotation terms to Uniform-Density free (UD-free), Freight-on-Board

(FOB)warehouse; and, quoting discounts for cotton fiber strength that is 37.4 grams per Tex

(gpt)and lower. The changes will be reflected in both the Daily Spot Cotton Quotations and the Monthly and Annual Cotton Price Statistics that are currently published by the AMS, Cotton Program, Market News Branch. This action is necessary to more accurately reflect the overall American Pima cotton market. DATES: Effective August 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darryl Earnest, Deputy Administrator, Cotton Program, AMS, USDA, STOP 0224, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0224. Telephone

(202)720-2145, facsimile

(202)690-1718, or e-mail *darryl.earnest@usda.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized under the Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act of 1927

(Act)(7 U.S.C. 473 *et seq.* ) for the collection, authentication, publication and distribution of timely information on the market supply, demand, location, condition and market prices for cotton. The AMS, Cotton Program disseminates market information and reports from spot cotton markets under the authority of the Act and the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1622 *et seq.* ). AMS, Cotton Program, Market News Branch reports American Pima cotton spot prices. The market news price reporting format has changed as the classification of American Pima cotton has changed. Current recipients of the report will only notice minor changes to the report layout as of August 1, 2006, as outlined below. The data collected and used for the report will not change. In recent years, American Pima cotton production has shifted dramatically, and the vast majority of the American Pima cotton crop is produced in the San Joaquin Valley, California. As production has increased in the San Joaquin Valley, production has sharply decreased in the Desert Southwest in Arizona, New Mexico and the area around El Paso, Texas. In 1994, 45 percent of the American Pima cotton crop was grown in the Desert Southwest with the remaining 55 percent grown in the San Joaquin Valley. In 2005, just 11 percent of the American Pima cotton crop was grown in the Desert Southwest, with the remaining 89 percent grown in the San Joaquin Valley. In addition to the production shift, the amount of cotton traded for immediate delivery and immediate payment (referred to as a spot transaction) also decreased. By changing from two separate markets to one combined market, for reporting purposes, the spot quotations will more accurately reflect the overall American Pima cotton market. Currently, quotation terms reflect those used in the Desert Southwest, “FOB (freight on board) warehouse, compression charges not included”). Therefore, most cotton traded had to be converted to Desert Southwest terms. With the spot quotations changed to reflect just one Pima market and the majority of the American Pima cotton now being grown and traded in the San Joaquin Valley, the quotation terms will reflect where the bulk of the cotton is grown and traded. Beginning August 1, 2006 the quotation terms for the American Pima Spot Quotations will be changed to “UD (universal density) free, FOB warehouse.” The final change to the Pima Spot Quotations will involve reporting strength discounts. Beginning with the 2004 Crop, strength discounts were applied to American Pima cotton placed into the Commodity Credit Corporation

(CCC)loan program. For the past two years the Cotton Program's Market News Branch has surveyed buyers and sellers of American Pima to determine if there were any commercial discounts being applied to Pima cotton with strength measuring 37.4 grams per Tex

(gpt)and lower. Results indicated that there were measurable discounts being applied to cotton with strength 37.4 gpt and lower. All ranges quoted by Cotton Program's Market News Branch for American Pima cotton will be the same as those used by the CCC loan schedule of premiums and discounts. These CCC ranges (from lowest to highest) are 35.4 and below, 35.5-36.4, 36.5-37.4 and 37.5 and above. Dated: August 9, 2006. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. E6-13501 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Research Service Office of the Under Secretary, Research, Education, and Economics; Notice of the Scientific Review Panel at the National Animal Disease Center, Ames, IA AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service (ARS), USDA. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The United States Department of Agriculture announces a meeting of the Scientific Review Panel at the National Animal Disease Center, Ames, Iowa. DATES: August 23, 2006, 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon Central Time. Written requests to make oral comments at the meeting must be received by the contact person identified herein at least three business days before the meeting. ADDRESSES: City Council Chambers, City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010. Requests to make oral comments at the meeting may be sent to the contact person at USDA-ARS, Midwest Area Director, 1815 North University Street, Room 2006, Peoria, Illinois 61604. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Shafer, Midwest Area Director, USDA-ARS, Telephone

(309)681-6602; Fax

(309)681-6684; E-mail *sshafer@mwa.ars.usda.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 4, 2006, the City of Ames received allegations that wastes from areas at the National Animal Disease Center

(NADC)with animals challenged with prions were not properly treated prior to discharge to the City wastewater plant. USDA, in cooperation with the City of Ames, is convening an expert panel to review scientific information about deactivation of prions and assess practices used at NADC to treat liquid wastes from areas where animals with prions are housed and handled that enter the Ames wastewater treatment system. ( *Note:* For the purposes of this panel and its review, prions are defined as specific proteins that are abnormally shaped and can cause transmissible diseases associated with the allegations). This meeting will initiate implementation of the panel's charge to evaluate four main issues related to the handling and disposal of potentially prion-contaminated materials in wastewater from the NADC:

(1)Identify scientifically accepted methods for effectively destroying prions;

(2)Assess the concerns raised regarding NADC's current and past methods for the destruction of prions;

(3)Determine the risk posed to humans and the environment from the current, as well as previous, methods for the destruction of prions utilized at NADC; and

(4)If remediation is needed, provide scientifically sound approaches for corrective action(s) that may be taken. Final conclusions of the review will be developed during a meeting at a later date, also to be announced. At the conclusion of its review, the panel will prepare a written report that documents the panel's findings for the four main issues being evaluated. On August 23, 2006, between 8:30 a.m. and 12 noon Central Time, if time permits, reasonable provision will be made for verbal comments of no more than three minutes each in duration. The meeting will be open to the public, but space is limited. If you want to be assured of a seat at this meeting, you must register by contacting the contact person named above at least 5 days prior to the meeting. Please provide your name, title, business affiliation, address, and telephone and fax numbers when you register. If you require a sign language interpreter or other special accommodation due to disability, please indicate those needs at the time of registration. Pre-registrations will be limited to 80 people; others may be able to attend on a space-available basis. Dated: August 7, 2006. Caird E. Rexroad, Jr., Associate Administrator, Agricultural Research Service. [FR Doc. 06-6987 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 18

Traces to 18 documents