Rules and Regulations. Final special conditions; request for comments

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT
Action: Final special conditions; request for comments
Citation: FR Doc. 06-7119 · Docket No. CE258; Special Conditions No. 23-198-SC · 14 CFR 23

Summary

These special conditions are issued to Avcon Industries, Inc., for the Learjet Model 23 series airplanes modified by Avcon Industries, Inc. This airplane as modified by Avcon Industries, Inc., will have a novel or unusual design feature associated with the installation of a new Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) air data system. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the protection of these systems from the effects of high-intensity radiated fields (HIRF). 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 August 17, 2006. Comments must be received on or before September 25, 2006.

Supplementary Information

The FAA has determined that notice and opportunity for prior public comment hereon are impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay issuance of the approval design and thus delivery of the affected aircraft. In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been subject to the public comment process in several prior instances with no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special conditions effective on issuance. Comments Invited Interested persons are invited to submit such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Communications should identify the regulatory docket or special condition number and be submitted in duplicate to the address specified above. All communications received on or before the closing date for comments will be considered by the Administrator. The special conditions may be changed in light of the comments received. All comments received will be available in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons, both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this notice must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to CE258.” The postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter. Background On June 26, 2006, Avcon Industries, Inc.; P.O. Box 748; Newton, Kansas 67114, applied for a supplemental type certificate (STC) to modify Learjet Model 23 series airplanes currently approved under Type Certificate (TC) No. A5CE. The Learjet 23 series airplanes are normal category airplanes powered by two turbojet engines, with a maximum takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds. These airplanes operate with a 2-person crew and can seat up to 8 passengers. The proposed modification is the installation of an Innovative Solutions & Support Air Data Display Units and Analog Interface Unit. The avionics/electronics and electrical systems installed in this airplane have the potential to be vulnerable to HIRF external to the airplane. Type Certification Basis Under the provisions of § 21.101, Avcon Industries, Inc., must show that the Learjet Model 23 series airplanes, as changed, continue to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in Type Certificate No. A5CE, or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the change. The regulations incorporated by reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the “original type certification basis.” The regulations incorporated by reference in the Type Certificate No. A5CE for the Learjet Model 23 series airplanes includes Civil Air Regulations (CAR), part 3, effective May 15, 1956, as amended by Amendments 3-1 through 3-8, plus special conditions set forth in FAA letter to Learjet, dated November 12, 1963, and Amendment No. 1, dated July 31, 1964, and No. 2, dated March 14, 1966, and Exception No. 352 from compliance with CAR 3.74(a)(2) and (3) for ground operation at a maximum weight of 12,750 pounds. If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations ( i.e. , part 23, as amended) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Learjet Model 23 series airplanes 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 Learjet Model 23 series 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. Special conditions, as appropriate, as defined in § 11.19, are issued in accordance with § 11.38, and become part of the type certification basis in accordance with § 21.101. Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should Avcon Industries, Inc., apply for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model included on TC No. A5CE to incorporate the same or a similar novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to the other model under the provisions of § 21.101. Novel or Unusual Design Features The Learjet Model 23 series airplanes, as modified by Avcon Industries, Inc., will incorporate an Innovative Solutions & Support Air Data Display Units and Analog Interface Unit. The Innovative Solutions & Support Air Data Display Units and Analog Interface Unit perform critical functions. These systems may be vulnerable to HIRF external to the airplane. The current airworthiness standards of part 23 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the protection of this equipment from the adverse effects of HIRF. Therefore, we consider this system to be a novel or unusual design feature. Discussion There is no specific regulation that addresses protection requirements for electrical and electronic systems from HIRF. Increased power levels from ground-based radio transmitters and the growing use of sensitive avionics/electronics and electrical systems to command and control airplanes have made it necessary to provide adequate protection. To ensure that a level of safety is achieved equivalent to that intended by the regulations incorporated by reference, special conditions are needed for the Learjet Model 23 series airplanes as modified by Avcon Industries, Inc. These special conditions require that new avionics/electronics and electrical systems that perform critical functions be designed and installed to preclude component damage and interruption of function due to both the direct and indirect effects of HIRF. High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) With the trend toward increased power levels from ground-based transmitters, and the advent of space and satellite communications, coupled with electronic command and control of the airplane, the immunity of critical avionics/electronics and electrical systems to HIRF must be established. It is not possible to precisely define the HIRF to which the airplane will be exposed in service. There is also uncertainty concerning the effectiveness of airframe shielding for HIRF. Furthermore, coupling of electromagnetic energy to cockpit-installed equipment through the cockpit window apertures is undefined. Based on surveys and analysis of existing HIRF emitters, an adequate level of protection exists when compliance with the HIRF protection special condition is shown with either paragraph 1 or 2 below: 1. A minimum threat of 100 volts rms (root-mean-square) per meter electric field strength from 10 KHz to 18 GHz. a. The threat must be applied to the system elements and their associated wiring harnesses without the benefit of airframe shielding. b. Demonstration of this level of protection is established through system tests and analysis. 2. A threat external to the airframe of the field strengths identified in the table below for the frequency ranges indicated. Both peak and average field strength components from the table are to be demonstrated. Frequency Field strength (volts per meter) Peak Average 10 kHz-100 kHz 50 50 100 kHz-500 kHz 50 50 500 kHz-2 MHz 50 50 2 MHz-30 MHz 100 100 30 MHz-70 MHz 50 50 70 MHz-100 MHz 50 50 100 MHz-200 MHz 100 100 200 MHz-400 MHz 100 100 400 MHz-700 MHz 700 50 700 MHz-1 GHz 700 100 1 GHz-2 GHz 2000 200 2 GHz-4 GHz 3000 200 4 GHz-6 GHz 3000 200 6 GHz-8 GHz 1000 200 8 GHz-12 GHz 3000 300 12 GHz-18 GHz 2000 200 18 GHz-40 GHz 600 200 The field strengths are expressed in terms of peak of the root-mean-square (rms) over the complete modulation period. The threat levels identified above are the result of an FAA review of existing studies on the subject of HIRF, in light of the ongoing work of the Electromagnetic Effects Harmonization Working Group of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to Learjet Model 23 series airplanes modified by Avcon Industries, Inc. Should Avcon Industries, Inc., apply later for an STC to modify any other model included on TC No. A5CE to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply to that model as well under the provisions of § 21.101. Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on the Learjet 23 series airplanes modified by Avcon Industries, Inc. It is not a rule of general applicability and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of these features on the airplane. The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the notice and comment procedure 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. For this reason, and 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 23 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols. Citation The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40113, and 44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and 21.101; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19. 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 the Learjet Model 23 series airplanes modified by Avcon Industries, Inc. 1. Protection from Unwanted Effects of High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF). Each electrical and electronic system that performs critical functions must be designed and installed to ensure that the operation and operational capability of these systems to perform critical functions are not adversely affected when the airplane is exposed to high-intensity radiated fields. 2. For the purpose of these special conditions, the following definition applies: Critical Functions: Functions whose failure would contribute to or cause a failure condition that would prevent the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on August 17, 2006. David R. Showers, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-13995 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 14 CFR Part 1213 Notice: (06-060) RIN 2700-AD25 Release of Information to News and Information Media AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is amending NASA regulations on release of information to news and information media. These amendments will establish NASA policy, responsibility, and procedure for providing information to news media on NASA activities. DATES: Effective Date: August 24, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Andrew Falcon, Associate General Counsel, General Law Practice Group, Office of the General Counsel, NASA Headquarters, telephone (202) 358-2465, fax (202) 358-4355. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These amendments set forth procedures for internal review of public information, updates the designations of officials responsible for the accuracy of information contained in press releases and other forms of public information, and provides guidance to employees on authorities governing the release of information. Since this action concerns matters of internal Agency organization, practice, and procedure, no public comment period is required, and this rule becomes effective on the date of publication. This rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) since it will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Finally, this rule is not a major Federal action as defined in Executive Order 12866. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 1213 Administrative practice and procedure, News media. For the reasons set out in the preamble, NASA revises part 1213 of title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows: PART 1213—RELEASE OF INFORMATION TO NEWS AND INFORMATION MEDIA Sec. 1213.100 Scope. 1213.101 Applicability. 1213.102 Policy. 1213.103 Responsibilities. 1213.104 Public information coordination and concurrence. 1213.105 Interviews. 1213.106 Preventing release of classified information to the media. 1213.107 Preventing unauthorized release of sensitive but unclassified (SBU) information/material to the news media. 1213.108 Multimedia materials. 1213.109 News releases concerning international activities. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(a)(3). § 1213.100 Scope. This part sets forth policy governing the release of public information, which is defined as information in any form provided to news and information media, especially information that has the potential to generate significant media or public interest or inquiry. Examples include, but are not limited to, press releases, media advisories, news features, and Web postings. Not included under this definition are scientific and technical reports, Web postings designed for technical or scientific interchange, and technical information presented at professional meetings or in professional journals. § 1213.101 Applicability. (a) This policy applies to NASA Headquarters, NASA Centers, and Component Facilities. (b) In the event of any conflict between this policy and any other NASA policy, directive, or regulation, this policy shall govern and supersede any previous issuance or directive. (c) The requirements of this part do not apply to the Office of Inspector General regarding its activities. § 1213.102 Policy. (a) NASA, a scientific and technical Agency, is committed to a culture of openness with the media and public that values the free exchange of ideas, data, and information as part of scientific and technical inquiry. Scientific and technical information from or about Agency programs and projects will be accurate and unfiltered. (b) Consistent with NASA statutory responsibility, NASA will “provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.” Release of public information concerning NASA activities and the results of NASA activities will be made in a timely, equitable, accurate, and complete manner. (c) To ensure timely release of information, NASA will endeavor to ensure cooperation and coordination among the Agency's scientific, engineering, and public affairs communities. (d) In keeping with the desire for a culture of openness, NASA employees may, consistent with this policy, speak to the press and the public about their work. (e) This policy does not authorize or require disclosure of information that is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) or otherwise restricted by statute, regulation, Executive Order, or other Executive Branch policy or NASA policy (e.g., OMB Circulars, NASA Policy Directives). Examples of information not releasable under this policy include, without limitation, information that is, or is marked as, classified information, procurement sensitive information, information subject to the Privacy Act, other sensitive but unclassified information, and information subject to privilege, such as pre-decisional information or attorney-client communications. § 1213.103 Responsibilities. (a) The Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs is responsible for developing and administering an integrated Agency-wide communications program, establishing Agency public affairs policies and priorities, and coordinating and reviewing the performance of all Agency public affairs activities. The Assistant Administrator will develop criteria to identify which news releases and other types of public information will be issued nationwide by NASA Headquarters. Decisions to release public information nationwide by NASA Headquarters will be made by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs or his/her designee. (b) NASA's Mission Directorate Associate Administrators and Mission Support Office heads have ultimate responsibility for the technical, scientific, and programmatic accuracy of all information that is related to their respective programs and released by NASA. (c) Under the direction of the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs, Public Affairs Officers assigned to Mission Directorates are responsible for the timely and efficient coordination of public information covering their respective programs. This coordination includes review by appropriate Mission Directorate officials. It also includes editing by public affairs staff to ensure that public information products are well written and appropriate for the intended audience. However, such editing shall not change scientific or technical data or the meaning of programmatic content. (d) Center Public Affairs Directors are responsible for implementing their portion of the Agency's communications program, adhering to Agency policies, procedures, and priorities, and coordinating their activities with Headquarters (and others where appropriate). They are responsible for the quality of public information prepared by Center Public Affairs Officers. They also are responsible for the day-to-day production of public information covering their respective Center activities, which includes obtaining the necessary Center concurrences and coordinating, as necessary, with the appropriate Headquarters Public Affairs Officers. (e) Center Directors have ultimate responsibility for the accuracy of public information that does not require the concurrence of Headquarters. See § 1213.104(d). (f) All NASA employees are required to coordinate, in a timely manner, with the appropriate Public Affairs Officers prior to releasing information that has the potential to generate significant media or public interest or inquiry. (g) All NASA Public Affairs Officers are required to notify the appropriate Headquarters Public Affairs Officers, in a timely manner, about activities or events that have the potential to generate significant media or public interest or inquiry. (h) All NASA public affairs employees are expected to adhere to the following code of conduct: (1) Be honest and accurate in all communications. (2) Honor publication embargoes. (3) Respond promptly to media requests, and respect media deadlines. (4) Act promptly to notify the public of, and correct, erroneous information, either internally or externally. (5) Promote the free flow of scientific and technical information. (6) Protect non-public information. (i) All NASA employees are responsible for adhering to plans (including schedules) for activities established by public affairs offices and senior management for the coordinated release of public information. (j) All NASA-funded missions will have a public affairs plan, approved by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs, which will be managed by Headquarters and/or a designated NASA Center. (k) Public affairs activities for NASA-funded missions will not be managed by non-NASA institutions, unless authorized by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs. § 1213.104 Public information coordination and concurrence. (a) General . All NASA employees involved in preparing and issuing NASA public information are responsible for proper coordination among Headquarters and Center offices to include review and clearance by appropriate officials prior to issuance. Such coordination will be accomplished through procedures developed and published by the NASA Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs. (b) Coordination . To ensure timely release of public information, Headquarters and Center Public Affairs Officers are required to coordinate to obtain review and clearance by appropriate officials, keep each other informed of changes, delays, or cancellation of releases, and provide advance notification of the actual release. (c) All public information shall be coordinated through the appropriate Headquarters offices, including review by the appropriate Mission Directorate Associate Administrator and Mission Support Office head, or their designees, to ensure scientific, technical, and programmatic accuracy, and review by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs or his/her designee to ensure that public information products are well written and appropriate for the intended audience. (d) Centers may, however, without the full coordination of Headquarters, issue public information that is institutional in nature, of local interest, or has been deemed not to be a Headquarters release. These releases must be coordinated through the appropriate Center offices and approved by the Center Director and Center Public Affairs Director. The Center Public Affairs Director is required to provide proper notification to the Office of Public Affairs, NASA Headquarters, prior to release. The Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs or his/her designee will determine which public information will be issued nationwide by NASA Headquarters and shall publish guidelines for the release of public information that may be issued by Centers without clearance from Headquarters offices. (e) Dispute Resolution . Any dispute arising from a decision to proceed or not proceed with the issuance of a news release or other type of public information will be addressed and resolved by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs with the appropriate Mission Directorate Associate Administrator, Mission Support Office head, Center Director, and others, such as Center Public Affairs Directors, as necessary. However, the appropriate Mission Directorate Associate Administrator shall be the arbiter of disputes about the accuracy or characterization of programmatic, technical, or scientific information. Additional appeals may be made to the Chief of Strategic Communications and to the Office of the Administrator. When requested by a Center Public Affairs Director, an explanation of the resolution will be provided in writing to all interested Agency parties. § 1213.105 Interviews. (a) Only spokespersons designated by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs, or his/her designee, are authorized to speak for the Agency in an official capacity regarding NASA policy, programmatic, and budget issues. (b) In response to media interview requests, NASA will offer articulate and knowledgeable spokespersons who can best serve the needs of the media and the American public. However, journalists may have access to the NASA officials they seek to interview, provided those NASA officials agree to be interviewed. (c) NASA employees may speak to the media and the public about their work. When doing so, employees shall notify their immediate supervisor and coordinate with their public affairs office in advance of interviews whenever possible, or immediately thereafter, and are encouraged, to the maximum extent practicable, to have a Public Affairs Officer present during interviews. If Public Affairs Officers are present, their role will be to attest to the content of the interview, support the interviewee, and provide post-interview follow up with the media, as necessary. (d) NASA, as an Agency, does not take a position on any scientific conclusions. That is the role of the broad scientific community and the nature of the scientific process. NASA scientists may draw conclusions and may, consistent with this policy, communicate those conclusions to the media. However, NASA employees who present personal views outside their official area of expertise or responsibility must make clear that they are presenting their individual views—not the views of the Agency—and ask that they be sourced as such. (e) Appropriated funds may only be used to support Agency missions and objectives consistent with legislative or presidential direction. Government funds shall not be used for media interviews or other communication activities that go beyond the scope of Agency responsibilities and/or an employee's official area of expertise or responsibility. (f) Media interviews will be “on-the-record” and attributable to the person making the remarks, unless the interviewee is authorized to do otherwise by the Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs or Center Public Affairs Director, or their designees. Any NASA employee providing material to the press will identify himself/herself as the source. (g) Audio recordings may be made by NASA with consent of the interviewee. (h) NASA employees are not required to speak to the media. (i) Public information volunteered by a NASA official will not be considered exclusive to any one media source and will be made available to other sources, if requested. § 1213.106 Preventing release of classified information to the media. (a) Release of classified information in any form ( e.g. , documents, through interviews, audio/visual) to the news media is prohibited. The disclosure of classified information to unauthorized individuals may be cause for prosecution and/or disciplinary action against the NASA employee involved. Ignorance of NASA policy and procedures regarding classified information does not release a NASA employee from responsibility for preventing any unauthorized release. See NPR 1600.1, Chapter 5, Section 5.23 for internal NASA guidance on management of classified information. For further guidance that applies to all agencies, see Executive Order 12958, as amended, “Classified National Security Information,” and its implementing directive at 32 CFR parts 2001 and 2004. (b) Any attempt by news media representatives to obtain classified information will be reported through the Headquarters Office of Public Affairs or Installation Public Affairs Office to the Installation Security Office and Office of Security and Program Protection. (c) For classified operations and/or programs managed under the auspices of a DD Form 254, “Contract Security Classification Specification,” all inquiries concerning this activity will be responded to by the appropriate PAO official designated in Item 12 on the DD Form 254. (d) For classified operations and/or information owned by other Government agencies (e.g., DOD, DOE), all inquiries will be referred to the appropriate Agency Public Affairs Officer as established in written agreements. § 1213.107 Preventing unauthorized release of sensitive but unclassified (SBU) information/material to the news media. (a) All NASA SBU information requires accountability and approval for release. Release of SBU information to unauthorized personnel is prohibited. Unauthorized release of SBU information may result in prosecution and/or disciplinary action. Ignorance of NASA policy and procedures regarding SBU information does not release a NASA employee from responsibility for unauthorized release. See NPR 1600.1, Chapter 5, Section 5.24 for guidance on identification, marking, accountability and release of NASA SBU information. (b) Examples of SBU information include: proprietary information of others provided to NASA under nondisclosure or confidentiality agreement; source selection and bid and proposal information; information subject to export control under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) or the Export Administration Regulations (EAR); information subject to the Privacy Act of 1974; predecisional materials such as national space policy not yet publicly released; pending reorganization plans or sensitive travel itineraries; and information that could constitute an indicator of U.S. Government intentions, capabilities, operations, or activities or otherwise threaten operations security. (c) Upon request for access to information/material deemed SBU, coordination must be made with the information/material owner to determine if the information/material may be released. Other organizations that play a part in SBU information identification, accountability, and release (e.g., General Counsel, External Relations, Procurement) must be consulted for assistance and/or concurrence prior to release. (d) Requests for SBU information from other Government agencies must be referred to the NASA program or other office responsible for handling the information as SBU. § 1213.108 Multimedia materials. (a) NASA's multimedia material, from all sources, will be made available to the information media, the public, and to all Agency Centers and contractor installations utilizing contemporary delivery methods and emerging digital technology. (b) Centers will provide the media, the public, and as necessary, NASA Headquarters with: (1) Selected prints and original or duplicate files of news-oriented imagery and other digital multimedia material generated within their respective areas. (2) Selected video material in the highest quality format practical, which, in the opinion of the installations, would be appropriate for use as news feed material or features in pre-produced programs and other presentations. (3) Audio and/or video files of significant news developments and other events of historic or public interest. (4) Interactive multimedia features that can be incorporated into the Agency's Internet portal for use by internal and external audiences, including the media and the general public. (5) To the extent practicable, these products will be in forms and media accessible to the public at large, as well as to specific user groups requesting them, if any. § 1213.109 News releases concerning international activities. (a) Releases of information involving NASA activities, views, programs, or projects involving another country or an international organization require prior coordination and approval by the Headquarters offices of External Relations and Public Affairs. (b) NASA Centers and Headquarters offices will report all visits proposed by representatives of foreign news media to the Public Affairs Officer of the Office of External Relations for appropriate handling consistent with all NASA policies and procedures. Michael D. Griffin, Administrator. [FR Doc. E6-13980 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [TD 9272] RIN 1545-BE81 REMIC Residual Interests-Accounting for REMIC Net Income (Including Any Excess Inclusions) (Foreign Holders); Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to final regulations. SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to final regulations (TD 9272) that were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, August 1, 2006 (71 FR 43363) relating to income that is associated with a residual interest in a Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (REMIC) and that is allocated through certain entities to foreign persons who have invested in those entities. DATES: These corrections are effective August 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Collinson, (202) 622-3900 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The correction notice that is the subject of this document is under sections 860A, 860G(b), 863, 1441, and 1442 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, final regulations (TD 9272) contain errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the publication of the final regulations (TD 9272), which was the subject of FR Doc. E6-12363, is corrected as follows: 1. On page 43364, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “Background and Explanation of Provisions”, first full paragraph of the column, line 6, the language “furtherance of the congressional” is corrected to read “furtherance of the Congressional”. 2. On page 43365, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “Special Analyses”, line 5 from bottom of the paragraph, the language “Code, these temporary regulations will” is corrected to read “the Code, these temporary regulations will”. LaNita Van Dyke, Acting Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E6-14000 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [TD 9263] RIN 1545-BE33 Income Attributable to Domestic Production Activities; Correction Notice AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Final regulations; correction notice. SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to final regulations that were published in the Federal Register on Thursday, June 1, 2006 (71 FR 31268) concerning the deduction for income attributable to domestic production activities under section 199. DATES: These corrections are effective June 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning § 1.199-1, 1.199-3, 1.199-6, and 1.199-8, Paul Handleman or Lauren Ross Taylor, (202) 622-3040; concerning § 1.199-2, Alfred Kelley, (202) 622-6040; concerning § 1.199-4(c) and (d), Richard Chewning, (202) 622-3850; concerning all other provisions of § 1.199-4, Jeffery Mitchell, (202) 622-4970; concerning § 1.199-7, Ken Cohen, (202) 622-7790; concerning § 1.199-9, Martin Schaffer, (202) 622-3080 (not toll-free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The final regulations (TD 9263) that are the subject of these corrections are under section 199 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, final regulations (TD 9263) contains errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the final regulations (TD 9263), that was the subject of FR Doc. 06-4829, is corrected as follows: 1. On page 31270, column 3, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ Wage Limitation ”, first paragraph, line 6, the language “2006-22 (2006-22 I.R.B.) has been” is corrected to read “2006-22 (2006-23 I.R.B. 1033) has been”. 2. On page 31274, column 3, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ Derived From a Lease, Rental, License, Sale, Exchange, or Other Disposition ”, first paragraph of the column, line 10 from the bottom of the paragraph, the language “(3)(l)(1), the preamble example is not” is corrected to read “(3)(i)(1), the preamble example is not”. 3. On page 31278, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ Construction of Real Property ”, first full paragraph of the column, line 4, the language “exception of § 1.199-3(1)(5)(ii)” is corrected to read “exception of § 1.199-3(l)(5)(ii) of the proposed regulations”. 4. On page 31281, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ Pass-Thru Entities ”, first paragraph of the column, line 26 from the top of the paragraph, the language “members (and vice versa) for attribution” is corrected to read “members for attribution”. 5. On page 31282, column 2, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “ Effective Date ”, paragraph 2, line 10 from the top of the paragraph, the language “(of this chapter) for a taxable year” is corrected to read “for a taxable year”. LaNita Van Dyke, Acting Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E6-14005 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD05-06-062] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone upon certain waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, and Inner Harbor during the movement of the historic sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the tow of the vessel from its berth at the Inner Harbor in Baltimore, Maryland, to a point on the Patapsco River near the Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine in Baltimore, Maryland, and return. This action will restrict vessel traffic in portions of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, and Inner Harbor during the event. DATES: This rule is effective from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. local time on September 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket CGD05-06-062 and are available for inspection or copying at Commander, U. S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, Waterways Management Division, Baltimore, Maryland, 21226-1791 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, at telephone number (410) 576-2674 or (410) 576-2693. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On June 22, 2006, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled “Safety Zone; Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD” in the Federal Register (71 FR 35854). We received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard expects a large recreational boating fleet. For safety concerns, it is in the public interest to have a safety zone in place for the event, since immediate action is needed to protect mariners against potential hazards associated with the towing and turn-around of the historic USS CONSTELLATION. Background and Purpose The USS CONSTELLATION Museum is planning to conduct a “turn-around” ceremony involving the sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION in Baltimore, Maryland on Friday, September 8, 2006. Planned events include a three-hour, round-trip tow of the CONSTELLATION in the Port of Baltimore, with an onboard salute with navy pattern cannon while the historic vessel is positioned off Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Site. The historic Sloop-of-War USS CONSTELLATION will be towed “dead ship,” which means that the vessel will be underway without the benefit of mechanical or sail propulsion. The return dead ship tow of the CONSTELLATION to its berth in the Inner Harbor is expected to occur immediately upon execution of a tug-assisted turn-around of the CONSTELLATION on the Patapsco River near Fort McHenry. The Coast Guard anticipates a large recreational boating fleet during this event, scheduled on a late Friday afternoon during the summer in Baltimore, Maryland. Operators should expect significant vessel congestion along the planned route. The purpose of this rule is to promote maritime safety and protect participants and the boating public in the Port of Baltimore immediately prior to, during, and after the scheduled event. The rule will provide for a clear transit route for the participating vessels, and provide a safety buffer around the participating vessels while they are in transit. The rule will impact the movement of all vessels operating upon certain waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor and Inner Harbor. Discussion of Comments and Changes The Coast Guard received no comments on the proposed rule during the comment period published in the NPRM. No public meeting was requested and none was held. As a result, no change to the proposed regulatory text was made. Regulatory Evaluation This 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. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to operate, remain or anchor within certain waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor and Inner Harbor, in Baltimore, Maryland, from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. on September 8, 2006. Because the zone is of limited size and duration, it is expected that there will be minimal disruption to the maritime community. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories widely available to users of the river and harbors to allow mariners to make alternative plans for transiting the affected areas. In addition, smaller vessels not constrained by their draft, which are more likely to be small entities, may transit around the safety zone. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. However, we received no requests for assistance from any small entities. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Collection of Information This rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does 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 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide 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)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A final “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T05-062 to read as follows: § 165.T05-062 Safety Zone; Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD. (a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section: (1) Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland means the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to act on his or her behalf. (2) USS CONSTELLATION “turn-around” participants means the USS CONSTELLATION, its support craft and the accompanying towing vessels. (b) Location. The following area is a moving safety zone: all waters from surface to bottom within 200 yards ahead, 100 yards outboard, and 100 yards aft of the historic Sloop-of-War USS CONSTELLATION, while operating in the Inner Harbor, the Northwest Harbor or the Patapsco River. (c) Regulations . (1) The general regulations governing safety zones, found in § 165.23, apply to the safety zone described in paragraph (b) of this section. (2) With the exception of USS CONSTELLATION “turn-around” participants, entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland. (3) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the moving safety zone must first request authorization from the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to seek permission to transit the area. The Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland can be contacted at telephone number (410) 576-2693. The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio VHF Channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the person or vessel shall proceed as directed. If permission is granted, all persons or vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland, and proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course while within the zone. (d) Enforcement . The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State and local agencies. (e) Effective period . This section will be enforced from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. local time on September 8, 2006. Dated: August 11, 2006. Jonathan C. Burton, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland. [FR Doc. E6-14071 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD01-06-108] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Blasting Operations, Demolition of Mattabassett Outfall, Connecticut River, Cromwell, CT AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for the demolition of the Mattabassett Outfall from August 9, 2006 through August 30, 2006 in the waters of the Connecticut River off Cromwell, CT. The zone will temporarily close all waters in the vicinity of the Mattabessett Outfall within a three hundred (300) yard radius of the blasting operations. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect the maritime community transiting the area from the potential safety hazards associated with demolition and blasting operations. The safety zone temporarily prohibits entry into or movement within this portion of the Connecticut River during the closure period, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Long Island Sound or the COTP's designated representative. DATES: This rule is effective from 7 a.m. EDT August 9, 2006 through 6 p.m. EDT on August 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket CGD01-06-108 and will be available for inspection or copying at Sector Long Island Sound, New Haven, CT, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Junior Grade D. Miller, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound at (203) 468-4596. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM because the logistics of the blasting operations were not presented to the Coast Guard with sufficient time to draft and publish an NPRM. Any delay encountered in this regulation's effective date would be contrary to the public interest since the safety zone is needed to prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the Connecticut River during the blasting operations and to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters. For the same reasons, the Coast Guard finds, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register . The zone should have a minimal negative impact on the public and navigation as it will only be enforced for short periods of time during the actual blasting operations and not enforced during the entire effective period, allowing vessels to safely transit the Connecticut River off Cromwell, CT. Background and Purpose The Mattabassett Outfall located in Cromwell, CT, is currently being demolished. When detonated, spread of the debris will be minimized by blast matting. The blasting and demolition activities have been approved by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. This blasting will also require a Coast Guard explosives handling permit in accordance with 49 CFR 176 as the explosives being used are being loaded onto vessels prior to being placed on the respective piers. The loading of explosives onto vessels will be monitored by Coast Guard personnel. Discussion of Rule This regulation establishes a temporary safety zone on the waters of the Connecticut River, off Cromwell, CT, within a 300-yard radius of the blasting operations being conducted at the Mattabassett Outfall. This action is intended to prohibit vessel traffic in a portion of the Connecticut River of Cromwell, CT, and to provide for the protection of life and property of the maritime public. The safety zone will be enforced for relatively short periods of time during the actual blasting operations. Therefore, the zone will not be enforced during the entire effective period from 7 a.m. EDT August 9, 2006 through 6 p.m. EDT on August 30, 2006. Marine traffic may transit safely through the safety zone during the period when blasting operations are not underway. All blasting operations shall be preceded 5 minutes before the blast by 3 whistles; an additional 2 whistles will be given 1 minute prior to the blast with a final single whistle after the blast indicating the “all clear.” The Captain of the Port anticipates minimal negative impact on vessel traffic as the safety zone will only be enforced for short periods of time during the actual blasting operations and not enforced during the entire effective period. Public notifications will be made prior to the effective period via local notice to mariners and marine information broadcasts. Regulatory Evaluation This 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. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This rule will have minimal impact on the public for the following reasons: This zone covers only a small portion of the waters of the Connecticut River, and there is no impact on commercial vessels. Additionally, the safety zone will only be enforced for relatively short periods during blasting operations. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule will 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in those portions of the Connecticut River covered by the safety zone. For the reasons outlined in the Regulatory Evaluation section above, this rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Assistance for Small Entities Under subsection 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 rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If this rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call Lieutenant Junior Grade D. Miller, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Sector Long Island Sound, at (203) 468-4596. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Collection of Information This rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and will not concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it will 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 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide 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 the categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A final “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add temporary § 165.T01-108 to read as follows: § 165.T01-108 Safety Zone; Blasting Operations, Demolition of Mattabassett Outfall, Connecticut River, Cromwell, CT. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of the Connecticut River, from surface to bottom, within a three hundred (300) yard radius of the blasting operations at Mattabassett Outfall located off Cromwell, CT. (b) Enforcement period. This rule is effective from 7 a.m. EDT August 9, 2006 through 6 p.m. EDT on August 30, 2006. (c) Definitions. (1) As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP). (2) [Reserved] (d) Regulations. ( 1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone by any person or vessel is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Long Island Sound or the COTP's designated representative. (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic during blasting operations, except as may be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. Dated: August 3, 2006. P. J. Boynton, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound. [FR Doc. E6-14069 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service 36 CFR Part 242 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 100 RIN 1018-AU70 Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, Subpart A; Makhnati Island Area AGENCIES: Forest Service, Agriculture; Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This rule revises the jurisdiction of the Federal Subsistence Management Program by adding submerged lands and waters in the area of Makhnati Island, near Sitka, Alaska. This would then allow Federal subsistence users to harvest marine resources in this area under seasons, harvest limits, and methods specified in Federal Subsistence Management regulations. DATES: This rule will be effective September 25, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chair, Federal Subsistence Board, c/o U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Attention: Peter J. Probasco, Office of Subsistence Management; (907) 786-3888. For questions specific to National Forest System lands, contact Steve Kessler, Regional Subsistence Program Leader, USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region, (907) 786-3888. ADDRESSES: You may obtain additional information by contacting the Office of Subsistence Management, 3601 C Street, Suite 1030, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background In Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111-3126), Congress found that “the situation in Alaska is unique in that, in most cases, no practical alternative means are available to replace the food supplies and other items gathered from fish and wildlife which supply rural residents dependent on subsistence uses * * ” and that “continuation of the opportunity for subsistence uses of resources on public and other lands in Alaska is threatened * * * .” As a result, Title VIII requires, among other things, that the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaries) implement a program to provide for rural Alaska residents a priority for the taking for subsistence uses of fish and wildlife resources on public lands in Alaska, unless the State of Alaska enacts and implements laws of general applicability that are consistent with ANILCA and that provide for the subsistence definition, priority, and participation specified in Sections 803, 804, and 805 of ANILCA. The State implemented a program that the Department of the Interior previously found to be consistent with ANILCA. However, in December 1989, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled in McDowell v. State of Alaska that the rural priority in the State subsistence statute violated the Alaska Constitution. The Court's ruling in McDowell caused the State to delete the rural priority from the subsistence statute, an action which therefore negated State compliance with ANILCA. The Court stayed the effect of the decision until July 1, 1990. As a result of the McDowell decision, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture (Departments) assumed, on July 1, 1990, responsibility for implementation of Title VIII of ANILCA on public lands. On June 29, 1990, the Departments published the Temporary Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska in the Federal Register (55 FR 27114). Permanent regulations were jointly published on May 29, 1992 (57 FR 22940), and have been amended since then. As a result of this joint process between Interior and Agriculture, these regulations can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) both in title 36, “Parks, Forests, and Public Property,” and title 50, “Wildlife and Fisheries,” at 36 CFR 242.1-28 and 50 CFR 100.1-28, respectively. The regulations contain the following subparts: Subpart A, General Provisions; Subpart B, Program Structure; Subpart C, Board Determinations; and Subpart D, Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife. Consistent with Subparts A, B, and C of these regulations, as revised May 7, 2002 (67 FR 30559), and December 27, 2005 (70 FR 76400), the Departments established a Federal Subsistence Board (Board) to administer the Federal Subsistence Management Program, as established by the Secretaries. The Board's composition includes a Chair appointed by the Secretary of the Interior with concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture; the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. National Park Service; the Alaska State Director, U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM); the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs; and the Alaska Regional Forester, USDA Forest Service. Through the Board, these agencies participated in the development of regulations for Subparts A, B, and C, and the annual Subpart D regulations. Jurisdictional Perspective Federal Subsistence Management Regulations (50 CFR 100.3 and 36 CFR 242.3) currently specify that “The public lands described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section remain subject to change through rulemaking pending a Department of the Interior review of title and jurisdictional issues regarding certain submerged lands beneath navigable waters in Alaska.” In April 2005, the Board requested a review by the U.S. Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor to determine whether a Federal interest presently exists in certain areas of southeastern Alaska. The specific areas were originally identified by the Sitka Tribe of Alaska and presented before the Southeast Alaska Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, who forwarded a request for review to the Board. In November 2005, the Office of the Solicitor responded that the Makhnati Island area withdrawal in Executive Order 8877 (August 29, 1941) was not rescinded until after statehood, so the submerged land did not transfer to the State at statehood. Since this submerged land is not included in any other withdrawal, reservation, or administrative setaside, the marine submerged lands, including any filled lands owned by the United States, are under the administration of the BLM. Accordingly, the Solicitor's Office indicated that this area should be included within the jurisdiction of the Federal Subsistence Management Program. See 70 FR 76400 (December 27, 2005). Public Review and Comment The Secretaries published a proposed rule (71 FR 25528) on May 1, 2006, soliciting comments through June 15, 2006, on the proposed revision to jurisdiction in the Makhnati Island area. During a May 10, 2006, teleconference, the Southeast Alaska Regional Advisory Council (Council) provided the public an opportunity to offer comments so that the Council could develop its recommendation to the Board. During the public comment period, the Secretaries (we) received four comments: one from a State entity, one from a Native organization, one from a private citizen, and one from a Regional Council. All concurred with the proposal to include the Makhnati Island area under jurisdiction of the Federal Subsistence Management Program, and none offered comments needing to be addressed herein. Therefore, we are amending the Federal Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska to reflect Federal subsistence management jurisdiction in the area of Makhnati Island, near Sitka, Alaska. The specific area encompasses approximately 610 acres of land and water adjacent to Japonski Island. Whiting Harbor and numerous small islands are included within the boundary of the withdrawal. The Board recommends the inclusion of this area in the Federal Subsistence Management Program. A map is available for this area. The purpose of this map is to provide to the subsistence user an overall graphic representation of the extent of the area. To view the map, go to the Office of Subsistence Management Web site at http://alaska.fws.gov/asm/home.html. If you do not have access to the Internet, you may contact the Office of Subsistence Management at the phone number or address shown at FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or ADDRESSES , respectively, and we will send the map to you. We are amending § _.3(b), which includes those areas where marine waters are included, and where the regulations contained in 50 CFR 100 and 36 CFR 242 apply to both navigable and non-navigable waters. If additional marine submerged lands are determined in the future to be held by the United States, those additional lands would be the subject of future rulemakings. Because the Federal Subsistence Management Program relates to public lands managed by an agency or agencies in both the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior, we would propose to incorporate identical text into 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100. Required Determinations Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866), Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ), and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)) An economic analysis is not necessary for this rule because this rule will not have an economic impact on any entities, large or small. This rule is not a significant rule under E.O. 12866 and, therefore, was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. ) In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: (a) This rule will not “'significantly or uniquely”' affect small governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. (b) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or greater in any year; that is, it is not a “'significant regulatory action”' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. Takings In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rule does not have significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is not required. Federalism In accordance with Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not required. Civil Justice Reform In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has determined that this rule does not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. Government-to-Government Relations In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, “Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments” (59 FR 22951), 512 DM 2, and E.O. 13175, we have evaluated possible effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that there are no effects. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is a participating agency in this rulemaking. Energy Effects On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or use. This Executive Order requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. As this rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 13211, affecting energy supply, distribution, or use, this action is not a significant action and no Statement of Energy Effects is required. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) This rule does not contain any new information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Federal Agencies may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. National Environmental Policy Act An environmental assessment was prepared in 1997 on the expansion of Federal jurisdiction over fisheries and is available by contacting the office listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . The Secretary of the Interior with the concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture determined that the expansion of Federal jurisdiction did not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the human environment, and therefore, signed a Finding of No Significant Impact. We have determined that an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement as defined by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 need not be prepared for this rule. This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Compliance With Section 810 of ANILCA The intent of all Federal subsistence regulations is to accord subsistence uses of fish and wildlife on public lands a priority over the taking of fish and wildlife on such lands for other purposes, unless restriction is necessary to conserve healthy fish and wildlife populations. A Section 810 analysis was completed as part of the FEIS process. The final Section 810 analysis determination appeared in the April 6, 1992, ROD, which concluded that the Federal Subsistence Management Program may have some local impacts on subsistence uses, but that the program is not likely to significantly restrict subsistence uses. William Knauer drafted these regulations under the guidance of Peter J. Probasco of the Office of Subsistence Management, Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Dennis Tol and Chuck Ardizzone, Alaska State Office, Bureau of Land Management; Greg Bos, Carl Jack, and Jerry Berg, Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Sandy Rabinowitch and Nancy Swanton, Alaska Regional Office, National Park Service; Dr. Warren Eastland, Pat Petrivelli, and Dr. Glenn Chen, Alaska Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs; and Steve Kessler, Alaska Regional Office, USDA-Forest Service provided additional guidance. List of Subjects 36 CFR Part 242 Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Fish, National forests, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife. 50 CFR Part 100 Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Fish, National forests, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife. For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Secretaries amend title 36, part 242, and title 50, part 100, of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below. PART _—SUBSISTENCE MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC LANDS IN ALASKA 1. The authority citation for both 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd, 3101-3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551-3586; 43 U.S.C. 1733. Subpart A—General Provisions 2. In Subpart A of 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100, § _.3 is revised by adding paragraph (b)(5) to read as follows: § _.3 Applicability and scope. (b) * * * (5) Southeastern Alaska—Makhnati Island Area: Land and waters beginning at the southern point of Fruit Island, 5°02′35″north latitude, 135°21′07″ west longitude as shown on United States Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart No. 8244, May 21, 1941; from the point of beginning, by metes and bounds; S. 58° W., 2500 feet, to the southern point of Nepovorotni Rocks; S. 83° W., 5600 feet, on a line passing through the southern point of a small island lying about 150 feet south of Makhnati Island; N. 6° W., 4200 feet, on a line passing through the western point of a small island lying about 150 feet west of Makhnati Island, to the northwestern point of Signal Island; N. 24° E., 3000 feet, to a point, 5°03′15″ north latitude, 135°23′07″ west longitude; East, 2900 feet, to a point in course No. 45 in meanders of U.S. Survey No. 1496, on west side of Japonski Island; Southeasterly, with the meanders of Japonski Island, U.S. Survey No. 1496 to angle point No. 35, on the southwestern point of Japonski Island; S. 60° E., 3300 feet, along the boundary line of Naval reservation described in Executive Order No. 8216, July 25, 1939, to the point beginning. Dated: August 9, 2006. Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary of the Interior, Department of the Interior. Dated: August 15, 2006. Dennis E. Bschor, Regional Forester, USDA-Forest Service. [FR Doc. 06-7119 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am]_