Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-02-08 · Unknown

Unknown. Final special conditions; request for comments

46,772 words·~213 min read·/register/2007/02/08/07-550

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

--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2007-02-08.xml --- 72 26 Thursday, February 8, 2007 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Forest Service See Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5959-5960 E7-2091 Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5971-5974 E7-2070 E7-2071 E7-2072 Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.:
Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, 5974-5975 E7-2080 National Center for Health Statistics— Scientific Counselors Board, 5975 E7-2076 Meetings: Community Preventive Services Task Force, 5975 E7-2078 Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially exclusive: Ringpu (Baoding) Biologics and Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd., 5975-5976 E7-2077 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Organization, functions, and authority delegations:
Marine Safety Center; address change, 5930-5931 E7-2100 Commerce Commerce Department See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Copyright Copyright Office, Library of Congress RULES Copyright office and procedures: Special services and Licensing Division services; fees adjustment; technical amendment, 5931-5932 E7-2105 NOTICES Copyright office and procedures: Cable compulsory license; specialty station list, 6008-6010 E7-2104 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5964-5965 E7-2062 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5998-5999 07-553 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:
Senior Community Service Employment Program performance measures, 5999-6001 E7-2084 EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air pollution control; new motor vehicles and engines: Motor vehicles; fuel economy labeling and estimate calculations; correction, 6049 C6-9749 Air programs: Outer Continental Shelf regulations— Alaska; consistency update, 5936-5940 E7-2132 Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for designated facilities and pollutants: Florida, 5940-5942 E7-2117 Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States:
West Virginia, 5932-5936 E7-2126 PROPOSED RULES Air pollution control: Indian country; new sources and modifications review, 5944-5945 E7-2101 Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for designated facilities and pollutants: Florida, 5946-5947 E7-2118 Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: West Virginia, 5946 E7-2127 NOTICES Air pollution control: State operating permits programs— Georgia, 5965 E7-2131 Confidential business information and data transfer, 5965-5967 07-587 07-588 Meetings:
Science Advisory Board, 5967-5969 E7-2113 E7-2116 Water pollution control: Clean Water Act— VersaCold Corp., Class II consent agreement, 5969-5971 E7-2115 Executive Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness directives: Airbus, 5919-5921 E7-1883 Bombardier, 5925-5929 E7-1876 EADS SOCATA, 5921-5925 E7-1877 E7-1878 Airworthiness standards: Special conditions— Aviation Technology Group Javelin Model 100 airplane, 5917-5919 E7-2097 Quest Aircraft Co.
Kodiak Model 100 airplane, 5915-5917 E7-2098 NOTICES Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 6035-6036 E7-2048 07-546 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 6036 E7-2057 Highway planning and construction; licenses permits, approvals, etc.: Jackson and Clay Counties, MO, 6036-6037 E7-2074 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration PROPOSED RULES Motor carrier safety standards:
Household goods brokers; motor vehicle transportation regulations; interstate or foreign commerce, 5947-5958 E7-2106 NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks Program, 6037-6038 E7-2055 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES Endangered and threatened species: Gray wolf, 6052-6103 07-471 PROPOSED RULES Endangered and threatened species: Gray wolf, 6106-6139 07-487 NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.:
Bear Butte National Wildlife Refuge, SD; comprehensive conservation plan, 5990 E7-1988 Meetings: Lake Champlain Sea Lamprey Control Alternatives Workgroup, 5990-5991 E7-2073 Food Food and Drug Administration RULES Animal drugs, feeds, and related products: Gentamicin and betamethasone spray, 5929-5930 E7-2121 PROPOSED RULES Human drugs: Human drugs, biological products, and animal drugs; foreign and domestic establishment registration and listing requirements, 5944 E7-2123 NOTICES Meetings:
Medical Devices Advisory Committee, 5976 E7-2122 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Fixed dose combination, co-packaged human immunodeficiency virus drugs; user fee waivers, 5976-5977 E7-2124 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Appealable decisions; legal notice: Pacific Southwest Region, 5960-5962 E7-1599 Meetings: Southwest Washington Provincial Advisory Committee, 5962 07-550 GSA General Services Administration RULES Federal Management Regulation: Real property policies; update Correction, 5942-5943 E7-2066 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration See Health Resources and Services Administration See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department See National Institutes of Health See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5971 E7-2120 Health Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Meetings:
Rural Health and Human Services National Advisory Committee, 5977-5978 E7-2125 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5989 07-581 Inspector Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department NOTICES Program exclusions; list; correction, 5978-5982 E7-2081 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Land Management Bureau See National Park Service IRS Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 6044-6047 E7-2047 E7-2049 E7-2050 E7-2052 Meetings:
Taxpayer Advocacy Panels, 6047-6048 E7-2051 E7-2054 E7-2056 E7-2059 E7-2065 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Import investigations: Pasta from— Italy and Turkey, 5996-5997 E7-2075 Justice Justice Department NOTICES Pollution control; consent judgments: Duro Textiles, LLC, 5997 07-543 Joyner, Orlyn et al., 5997 07-544 Westwood Chemical Corp., 5997-5998 07-542 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration See Occupational Safety and Health Administration Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Oil and gas leases:
Wyoming, 5991-5992 E7-2109 E7-2111 E7-2112 E7-2114 Public land orders: Alaska, 5992 E7-2060 Recreation management restrictions, etc.: Simpson Springs Recreation Area, UT; supplementary rules, 5993-5995 E7-2064 Library Library of Congress See Copyright Office, Library of Congress National Credit National Credit Union Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 6010 E7-2096 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Motor vehicle defect proceedings; petitions, etc.:
Lisoni & Lisoni; petition denied, 6038-6042 E7-2103 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee to Director, 5982 07-567 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 5982 07-559 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 5983 07-562 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 5983 07-558 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 5983 07-557 07-561 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5982-5983 07-556 National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, 5983-5984 07-564 National Library of Medicine, 5984-5985 07-565 07-566 Scientific Review Center, 5985-5988 07-560 07-563 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Meetings:
New England Fishery Management Council, 5963 E7-2038 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 5963-5964 E7-2039 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Native American human remains, funerary objects; inventory, repatriation, etc.: Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 5995-5996 E7-2067 NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Manila-Washam Salinity Control Project, UT and WY, 5962-5963 E7-2058 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Regulatory guides; issuance, availability, and withdrawal, 6010-6012 E7-2088 E7-2089 Occupational Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 6001 E7-2095 Variance applications, etc.:
Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC, et al., 6002-6008 E7-2046 Pension Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation NOTICES Single-employer plans: Interest rates and assumptions, 6012-6013 E7-2087 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Pipeline safety: Special permit requests— CenterPoint Energy et al., 6042-6044 E7-2094 Presidential Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS *Special observances:* National Consumer Protection Week (Proc. 8105), 5913-5914 07-596 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 6013 E7-2086 Joint Industry Plan:
International Securities Exchange, LLC, 6016-6017 E7-2093 Securities: Suspension of trading— CyberKey Solutions, Inc., 6017 07-552 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 6017-6021 E7-2083 New York Stock Exchange LLC, 6021-6028 E7-2061 E7-2085 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Country Investors Life Assurance Co., et al., 6013-6016 07-554 State State Department NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Fulbright U.S.
Student Program, 6028-6035 E7-2107 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5988 E7-2082 Meetings: Substance Abuse Treatment Center National Advisory Council, 5988 E7-2079 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Treasury Treasury Department See Internal Revenue Service MISSING FOR:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 5989-5990 E7-2053 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 6052-6103 07-471 Part III Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 6106-6139 07-487 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 72 26 Thursday, February 8, 2007 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 23 [Docket No. CE267, Special Condition 23-207-SC] Special Conditions: Quest Aircraft Company; Kodiak Model 100;
Protection of Electronic Flight Instrument System From the Effects of High Intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF)AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments. SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued to Quest Aircraft Company, LLC; 1200 Turbine Drive; Sandpoint, ID 83864 for a type certificate for the Kodiak Model 100 airplane. These airplanes will have novel and unusual design features when compared to the state of technology envisaged in the applicable airworthiness standards. These novel and unusual design features include the installation of electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions for which the applicable regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate airworthiness 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 the airworthiness standards applicable to these airplanes. DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is January 31, 2007. Comments must be received on or before March 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: Mail comments in duplicate to: Federal Aviation Administration, Regional Counsel, ACE-7, Attention: Rules Docket Clerk, Docket No. CE267, Room 506, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Mark all comments: Docket No. CE267. You may inspect comments in the Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Brady, Aerospace Engineer, Standards Office (ACE-110), Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone
(816)329-4132. 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 upon issuance. Comments Invited We invite interested persons to take part in this rulemaking by sending written data, views, or comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of the written comments. Communications should identify the regulatory docket or notice number and be submitted in duplicate to the address specified above. We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel about these special conditions. You can inspect the docket before and after the closing date. If you wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive. If you want us to let you know we received your comments on these special conditions, send us a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it back to you. Background On March 6, 2000, Quest Aircraft Company, LLC; 1200 Turbine Drive; Sandpoint, ID 83864 applied to the FAA for a type certificate for the Kodiak Model 100. Changes in technology have given rise to advanced airplane electrical and electronic systems and higher energy levels from high-power radio frequency transmitters such as radio and television broadcast stations, radar and satellite uplink transmitters. The combined effect of these developments has been an increased susceptibility of electrical and electronic systems to electromagnetic fields. The proposed modification incorporates a novel or unusual design feature, such as electrical and electronic systems, that are vulnerable to HIRF external to the airplane. Type Certification Basis Under the provisions of 14 CFR part 21, § 21.17, Quest Aircraft Company must show that the Kodiak Model 100 airplane meets the type certification basis for the airplane, as applicable, and § 23.1301 of Amendment 23-20; §§ 23.1309, 23.1311, and 23.1321 of Amendment 23-49; and § 23.1322 of Amendment 23-43; exemptions, if any; and the special conditions adopted by this rulemaking action. Discussion If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness standards do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards because of novel or unusual design features of an airplane, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16. Special conditions, as appropriate, as defined in § 11.19, are issued in accordance with § 11.38 after public notice and become part of the type certification basis in accordance with § 21.17. Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model already included on the same type certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model under the provisions of § 21.101. Novel or Unusual Design Features Quest Aircraft Company plans to incorporate certain novel and unusual design features into the Kodiak Model 100 airplanes for which the airworthiness standards do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for protection from the effects of HIRF. These features include electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions, which are susceptible to the HIRF environment, that were not envisaged by the existing regulations for this type of airplane. *Protection of Systems from High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF):* Recent advances in technology have given rise to the application in aircraft designs of advanced electrical and electronic systems that perform functions required for continued safe flight and landing. Due to the use of sensitive solid state advanced components in analog and digital electronics circuits, these advanced systems are readily responsive to the transient effects of induced electrical current and voltage caused by the HIRF. The HIRF can degrade electronic systems performance by damaging components or upsetting system functions. Furthermore, the HIRF environment has undergone a transformation that was not foreseen when the current requirements were developed. Higher energy levels are radiated from transmitters that are used for radar, radio, and television. Also, the number of transmitters has increased significantly. There is uncertainty concerning the effectiveness of airframe shielding for HIRF. Furthermore, coupling to cockpit-installed equipment through the cockpit window apertures is undefined. The combined effect of the technological advances in airplane design and the changing environment has resulted in an increased level of vulnerability of electrical and electronic systems required for the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. Effective measures against the effects of exposure to HIRF must be provided by the design and installation of these systems. The accepted maximum energy levels in which civilian airplane system installations must be capable of operating safely are based on surveys and analysis of existing radio frequency emitters. These special conditions require that the airplane be evaluated under these energy levels for the protection of the electronic system and its associated wiring harness. These external threat levels, which are lower than previous required values, are believed to represent the worst case to which an airplane would be exposed in the operating environment. These special conditions require qualification of systems that perform critical functions, as installed in aircraft, to the defined HIRF environment in paragraph 1 or, as an option to a fixed value using laboratory tests, in paragraph 2, as follows:
(1)The applicant may demonstrate that the operation and operational capability of the installed electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions are not adversely affected when the aircraft is exposed to the HIRF environment defined below: 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 root-mean-square
(rms)values. or,
(2)The applicant may demonstrate by a system test and analysis that the electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions can withstand a minimum threat of 100 volts per meter, electrical field strength, from 10 kHz to 18 GHz. When using this test to show compliance with the HIRF requirements, no credit is given for signal attenuation due to installation. A preliminary hazard analysis must be performed by the applicant, for approval by the FAA, to identify either electrical or electronic systems that perform critical functions. The term “critical” means those functions whose failure would contribute to, or cause, a failure condition that would prevent the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. The systems identified by the hazard analysis that perform critical functions are candidates for the application of HIRF requirements. A system may perform both critical and non-critical functions. Primary electronic flight display systems, and their associated components, perform critical functions such as attitude, altitude, and airspeed indication. The HIRF requirements apply only to critical functions. Compliance with HIRF requirements may be demonstrated by tests, analysis, models, similarity with existing systems, or any combination of these. Service experience alone is not acceptable since normal flight operations may not include an exposure to the HIRF environment. Reliance on a system with similar design features for redundancy as a means of protection against the effects of external HIRF is generally insufficient since all elements of a redundant system are likely to be exposed to the fields concurrently. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the Quest Aircraft Company, LLC Kodiak Model 100. Should Quest Aircraft Company, LLC apply at a later date for a supplemental type certificate for a type design change that incorporates the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that change as well under the provisions of § 21.101. Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on one model of airplane. 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 period in several prior instances and has been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change from the substance contained herein. 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 21.17; 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 Quest Aircraft Company Kodiak Model 100. 1. *Protection of Electrical and Electronic Systems from High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF).* Each system that performs critical functions must be designed and installed to ensure that the operations, and operational capabilities of these systems to perform critical functions, are not adversely affected when the airplane is exposed to high intensity radiated electromagnetic fields external to the airplane. 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 January 31, 2007. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-2098 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 23 [Docket No. CE265, Special Condition 23-205-SC] Special Conditions; Aviation Technology Group (ATG); Javelin Model 100; Protection of Systems for High Intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF)AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments. SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued to Aviation Technology Group (ATG), 8001 S. InterPort Blvd., Englewood, CO 80112 for a type certificate for the Javelin Model 100 airplane. These airplanes will have novel and unusual design features when compared to the state of technology envisaged in the applicable airworthiness standards. These novel and unusual design features include the installation of electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions for which the applicable regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate airworthiness 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 the airworthiness standards applicable to these airplanes. DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is January 31, 2007. Comments must be received on or before March 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: Mail comments in duplicate to: Federal Aviation Administration, Regional Counsel, ACE-7, Attention: Rules Docket Clerk, Docket No. CE265, Room 506, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Mark all comments: Docket No. CE265. You may inspect comments in the Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Brady, Aerospace Engineer, Standards Office (ACE-110), Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone
(816)329-4132. 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 upon issuance. Comments Invited We invite interested persons to take part in this rulemaking by sending written data, views, or comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of the written comments. Communications should identify the regulatory docket or notice number and be submitted in duplicate to the address specified above. We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel about these special conditions. You can inspect the docket before and after the closing date. If you wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive. If you want us to let you know we received your comments on these special conditions, send us a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it back to you. Background On February 15, 2005, Aviation Technology Group (ATG), 8001 S. InterPort Blvd., Englewood, CO 80112 applied to the FAA for a type certificate for the Javelin Model 100. Changes in technology have given rise to advanced airplane electrical and electronic systems and higher energy levels from high-power radio frequency transmitters such as radio and television broadcast stations, radar and satellite uplink transmitters. The combined effect of these developments has been an increased susceptibility of electrical and electronic systems to electromagnetic fields. The proposed modification incorporates a novel or unusual design feature, such as electrical and electronic systems, that are vulnerable to HIRF external to the airplane. Type Certification Basis Under the provisions of 14 CFR part 21, § 21.17, Aviation Technology Group must show that the Javelin Model 100 airplane meets the type certification basis for the airplane, as applicable, and § 23.1301 of Amendment 23-20; §§ 23.1309, 23.1311, and 23.1321 of Amendment 23-49; and § 23.1322 of Amendment 23-43; exemptions, if any; and the special conditions adopted by this rulemaking action. Discussion If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness standards do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards because of novel or unusual design features of an airplane, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16. Special conditions, as appropriate, as defined in § 11.19, are issued in accordance with § 11.38 after public notice and become part of the type certification basis in accordance with § 21.17. Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model already included on the same type certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model under the provisions of § 21.101. Novel or Unusual Design Features Aviation Technology Group plans to incorporate certain novel and unusual design features into the Javelin Model 100 airplanes for which the airworthiness standards do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for protection from the effects of HIRF. These features include electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions, which are susceptible to the HIRF environment, that were not envisaged by the existing regulations for this type of airplane. *Protection of Systems from High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF):* Recent advances in technology have given rise to the application in aircraft designs of advanced electrical and electronic systems that perform functions required for continued safe flight and landing. Due to the use of sensitive solid state advanced components in analog and digital electronics circuits, these advanced systems are readily responsive to the transient effects of induced electrical current and voltage caused by the HIRF. The HIRF can degrade electronic systems performance by damaging components or upsetting system functions. Furthermore, the HIRF environment has undergone a transformation that was not foreseen when the current requirements were developed. Higher energy levels are radiated from transmitters that are used for radar, radio, and television. Also, the number of transmitters has increased significantly. There is uncertainty concerning the effectiveness of airframe shielding for HIRF. Furthermore, coupling to cockpit-installed equipment through the cockpit window apertures is undefined. The combined effect of the technological advances in airplane design and the changing environment has resulted in an increased level of vulnerability of electrical and electronic systems required for the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. Effective measures against the effects of exposure to HIRF must be provided by the design and installation of these systems. The accepted maximum energy levels in which civilian airplane system installations must be capable of operating safely are based on surveys and analysis of existing radio frequency emitters. These special conditions require that the airplane be evaluated under these energy levels for the protection of the electronic system and its associated wiring harness. These external threat levels, which are lower than previous required values, are believed to represent the worst case to which an airplane would be exposed in the operating environment. These special conditions require qualification of systems that perform critical functions, as installed in aircraft, to the defined HIRF environment in paragraph 1 or, as an option to a fixed value using laboratory tests, in paragraph 2, as follows:
(1)The applicant may demonstrate that the operation and operational capability of the installed electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions are not adversely affected when the aircraft is exposed to the HIRF environment defined below: 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 root-mean-square
(rms)values. or,
(2)The applicant may demonstrate by a system test and analysis that the electrical and electronic systems that perform critical functions can withstand a minimum threat of 100 volts per meter peak root-mean-square (rms), electrical field strength, from 10 kHz to 18 GHz. When using this test to show compliance with the HIRF requirements, no credit is given for signal attenuation due to installation. A preliminary hazard analysis must be performed by the applicant, for approval by the FAA, to identify either electrical or electronic systems that perform critical functions. The term “critical” means those functions whose failure would contribute to, or cause, a failure condition that would prevent the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. The systems identified by the hazard analysis that perform critical functions are candidates for the application of HIRF requirements. A system may perform both critical and non-critical functions. Primary electronic flight display systems, and their associated components, perform critical functions such as attitude, altitude, and airspeed indication. The HIRF requirements apply only to critical functions. Compliance with HIRF requirements may be demonstrated by tests, analysis, models, similarity with existing systems, or any combination of these. Service experience alone is not acceptable since normal flight operations may not include an exposure to the HIRF environment. Reliance on a system with similar design features for redundancy as a means of protection against the effects of external HIRF is generally insufficient since all elements of a redundant system are likely to be exposed to the fields concurrently. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the ATG Javelin Model 100. Should ATG apply at a later date for a supplemental type certificate for a type design change that incorporates the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that change as well under the provisions of § 21.101. Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on one model of airplane. 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 period in several prior instances and has been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change from the substance contained herein. 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 21.17; 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 ATG Javelin Model 100. 1. *Protection of Electrical and Electronic Systems from High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF).* Each system that performs critical functions must be designed and installed to ensure that the operations, and operational capabilities of these systems to perform critical functions, are not adversely affected when the airplane is exposed to high intensity radiated electromagnetic fields external to the airplane. 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 January 31, 2007. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-2097 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-27150; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-288-AD; Amendment 39-14929; AD 2007-03-18] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 and A300-600 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as cracking in the wing main landing gear
(MLG)rib 5 aft bearing forward lug, which could affect the structural integrity of the MLG attachment. This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: This AD becomes effective February 23, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of February 23, 2007. We must receive comments on this AD by March 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *DOT Docket Web Site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. • *Mail:* Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *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. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)227-1622; fax
(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Streamlined Issuance of AD The FAA is implementing a new process for streamlining the issuance of ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined process will allow us to adopt MCAI safety requirements in a more efficient manner and will reduce safety risks to the public. This process continues to follow all FAA AD issuance processes to meet legal, economic, Administrative Procedure Act, and **Federal Register** requirements. We also continue to meet our technical decision-making responsibilities to identify and correct unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated products. This AD references the MCAI and related service information that we considered in forming the engineering basis to correct the unsafe condition. The AD contains text copied from the MCAI and for this reason might not follow our plain language principles. Discussion The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2006-0372-E, dated December 14, 2006 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states that during routine visual inspection, a crack has been found in the wing MLG (main landing gear) rib 5 aft bearing forward lug on two Model A310 in-service aircraft. Laboratory examination of one of the cracked ribs confirmed that the crack is due to the presence of pitting corrosion in the forward lug holes. Also, on both aircraft medium to heavy corrosion was found in the forward lugs on the opposite wing after removal of the bushings. Similar to Model A310 aircraft, Model A300 and A300-600 aircraft are also affected by this situation, which, if not detected, could affect the structural integrity of the MLG attachment. The aim of the MCAI is to mandate repetitive detailed visual inspections of wing MLG rib 5 aft bearing forward lugs for detection of through cracks and corrective action (contacting Airbus and replacing cracked lugs if necessary). The MCAI notes that for Airbus Model A310 aircraft, refer to EASA Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2006-0335-E, issued November 3, 2006. In response to that MCAI, on December 7, 2006, we issued AD 2007-02-09, amendment 39-14896 (72 FR 2612, January 22, 2007), to address this unsafe condition on Model A310 airplanes. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A300-57A0248, including Appendix 01, dated December 12, 2006; and A300-57A6105, including Appendix 01, dated December 12, 2006. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the information provided by the State of Design Authority and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are described in a separate paragraph of the AD. These requirements take precedence over the actions copied from the MCAI. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because following routine visual inspection, two through cracks have been found in the wing MLG rib 5 lug on a Model A310 airplane. The cracks were extended through the entire thickness of the forward lug. Failure of this attachment could result in gear collapse upon landing. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-27150; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-288-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because 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 we receive about this AD. 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 determined that this AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This 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 this 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 AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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 FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-03-18 Airbus:** Amendment 39-14929. Docket No. FAA-2007-27150; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-288-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective February 23, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 and A300-600 airplanes; certificated in any category, all certified models, all serial numbers except for those where LH (left-hand) and RH (right-hand) wing MLG (main landing gear) rib 5 forward lugs have been repaired by installation of oversized interference fit bushings as per drawing R57240221. Reason
(d)The MCAI states that during routine visual inspection, a crack has been found in the wing MLG rib 5 aft bearing forward lug on two Model A310 in-service aircraft. Laboratory examination of one of the cracked ribs confirmed that the crack is due to the presence of pitting corrosion in the forward lug holes. Also, on both aircraft medium to heavy corrosion was found in the forward lugs on the opposite wing after removal of the bushings. On December 7, 2006, we issued AD 2007-02-09, amendment 39-14896 (72 FR 2612, January 22, 2007), to address this unsafe condition on Model A310 airplanes. Similar to Model A310 aircraft, the Model A300 and A300-600 aircraft are also affected by this situation, which, if not detected, could affect the structural integrity of the MLG attachment. The aim of the MCAI is to mandate repetitive detailed visual inspections of wing MLG rib 5 aft bearing forward lugs for detection of through cracks and corrective action (contacting Airbus and replacing cracked lugs if necessary). The MCAI notes that for Airbus Model A310 aircraft, refer to EASA Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2006-0335-E, issued November 3, 2006. Actions and Compliance
(e)Unless already done, do the following actions specified in paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) of this AD in accordance with instructions defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57A6105, dated December 12, 2006; or A300-57A0248, dated December 12, 2006; as applicable.
(1)Before the accumulation of 12,000 total flight cycles since new or since the most recent MLG rib 5 replacement if applicable, or within 10 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs latest: Perform a detailed visual inspection of the LH and RH wing MLG rib 5 aft bearing forward lugs.
(2)If a crack is detected at the LH and/or RH aft bearing forward lug, contact Airbus immediately and proceed with the replacement before further flight.
(3)Repeat the inspection at intervals not to exceed 100 flight cycles. Other FAA AD Provisions
(f)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, ATTN: Tom Stafford, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 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.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
(4)*Special Flight Permits:* We are not allowing special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199). Related Information
(g)Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2006-0372-E, dated December 14, 2006; and Airbus Service Bulletins A300-57A0248 and A300-57A6105, both including Appendix 01, both dated December 12, 2006, for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference
(h)You must use Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57A0248, excluding Appendix 01, dated December 12, 2006; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57A6105, excluding Appendix 01, dated December 12, 2006; as applicable; to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 26, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-1883 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-26191 Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-60-AD; Amendment 39-14927; AD 2007-03-16] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; EADS SOCATA Model TBM 700 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as an excessive lateral play caused by a nonconforming washer that might lead to the deterioration of the elevator trim tab bearing fatigue resistance. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective March 15, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 15, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4119; fax:
(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Streamlined Issuance of AD The FAA is implementing a new process for streamlining the issuance of ADs related to MCAI. The streamlined process will allow us to adopt MCAI safety requirements in a more efficient manner and will reduce safety risks to the public. This process continues to follow all FAA AD issuance processes to meet legal, economic, Administrative Procedure Act, and **Federal Register** requirements. We also continue to meet our technical decision-making responsibilities to identify and correct unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated products. This AD references the MCAI and related service information that we considered in forming the engineering basis to correct the unsafe condition. The AD contains text copied from the MCAI and for this reason might not follow our plain language principles. Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on November 20, 2006 (71 FR 67084). That NPRM proposed to require a check for lateral play of the elevator trim tabs and installation, if necessary, of a setting washer. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We have considered the comments received. Comment Issue: Summary EADS SOCATA comments that the proposed AD specifies an excessive lateral play caused by a nonconforming washer, but the excessive lateral play was caused by a nonconforming stop ring manufactured too short. The commenter states that the installation of a washer was the solution for this unsafe condition and not the cause. The AD wording was taken directly from the associated MCAI (Direction générale de l'aviation civile
(DGAC)France AD No. F-2006-028/1 February 2006; Approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)on January 24, 2006; EASA Reference No. 2006-0024). France is the State of Design for these airplanes and the FAA determined that AD action was necessary in the United States. For continuity, we will retain this language as specified in the MCAI. Comment Issue: Cost of Compliance EADS SOCATA comments that the required parts are washers and cotters pins; the cost of the required part is negligible; and that it would take 1 work-hour to comply. We will revise the work-hours estimate from 2 work-hours to 1 work-hour and the parts cost from $500 to $5 per EADS SOCATA's comments. Conclusion We reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are described in a separate paragraph of the AD, and take precedence over the actions copied from the MCAI. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect about 52 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take 1 work-hour per product to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $5 per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $4,420 or $85 per product. 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 determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)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 AD and placed it in the AD Docket. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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 FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-03-16 EADS SOCATA:** Amendment 39-14927; Docket No. FAA-2006-26191; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-60-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective March 15, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to EADS SOCATA TBM 700 airplanes, serial numbers 271 through 328, certificated in any category. Reason
(d)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)states an excessive lateral play caused by a nonconforming washer might lead to the deterioration of the elevator trim tab bearing fatigue resistance. Actions and Compliance
(e)Unless already done, within the next 100 hours time-in-service or 12 months, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, verify there is no lateral play for both elevator trim tabs and correct, as necessary, by installing a setting washer as instructed in the EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70-135, ATA No. 55, dated December 2005. FAA AD Differences Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions
(f)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, Standards Staff, FAA, ATTN: Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4119; fax:
(816)329-4090, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information
(g)Refer to Direction générale de l'aviation civile
(DGAC)Airworthiness Directive No.: F-2006-028, dated February 1, 2006, approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)on January 24, 2006; and EADS SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70-135, ATA No. 55, dated December 2005, for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference
(h)You must use EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70-135, ATA No. 55, dated December 2005, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact EADS SOCATA, Direction des Services, 65921 Tarbes Cedex 9, France; telephone: 33 (0)5 62.41.73.00; fax: 33 (0)5 62.41.76.54; or SOCATA Aircraft, INC., North Perry Airport, 7501 Airport Road, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023; telephone:
(954)893-1400; fax:
(954)964-4141.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 31, 2007. Margaret Kline, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-1878 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-26234 Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-64-AD; Amendment 39-14928; AD 2007-03-17] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; EADS SOCATA Model TBM 700 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as loose rivets on frames C18 BIS and C19, which could result in a reduced structural integrity of the tail area. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective March 15, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 15, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4119; fax:
(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Streamlined Issuance of AD The FAA is implementing a new process for streamlining the issuance of ADs related to MCAI. The streamlined process will allow us to adopt MCAI safety requirements in a more efficient manner and will reduce safety risks to the public. This process continues to follow all FAA AD issuance processes to meet legal, economic, Administrative Procedure Act, and **Federal Register** requirements. We also continue to meet our technical decision-making responsibilities to identify and correct unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated products. This AD references the MCAI and related service information that we considered in forming the engineering basis to correct the unsafe condition. The AD contains text copied from the MCAI and for this reason might not follow our plain language principles. Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on November 20, 2006 (71 FR 67084). That NPRM proposed to require an inspection of the rivets on frames C18 BIS and C19, and, if necessary, application of corrective actions. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We have considered the comment received. Comment Issue: Cost of Compliance EADS SOCATA comments that the inspection would take 0.5 work-hours. If necessary, rivets replacement would never take more than 5 work-hours and if parts are necessary, only rivets and shims are required, and their cost is negligible. We will revise the work-hours estimate from 18 work-hours to 6 work-hours and the parts cost from $2,300 to $5 per EADS SOCATA's comments. Conclusion We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are described in a separate paragraph of the AD, and take precedence over the actions copied from the MCAI. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect about 272 products of U.S. Registry. We also estimate that it will take 6 work-hours per product to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $5 per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $131,920 or $485 per product. 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 determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)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 AD and placed it in the AD Docket. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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 FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-03-17 EADS SOCATA Model TBM 700 Airplanes:** Amendment 39-14928; Docket No. FAA-2006-26234; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-64-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective March 15, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to EADS SOCATA TBM 700 airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category. Reason
(d)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)states that loose rivets on frames C18 BIS and C19 were found, which, if not corrected, could result in a reduced structural integrity of the tail area. Actions and Compliance
(e)Unless already done, within the next 100 hours time-in-service
(TIS)or 12 months, whichever occurs later, after the effective date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, accomplish a detailed inspection of the area and apply corrective actions as necessary by doing all the applicable actions in accordance with the accomplishment instructions of the EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70-129, ATA No. 53, dated June 2005. FAA AD Differences Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions
(f)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, Standards Staff, FAA, ATTN: Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4119; fax:
(816)329-4090, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.), the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information
(g)Refer to Direction générale de l'aviation civile Airworthiness Directive No F-2005-132, dated August 3, 2005; and EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70-129, ATA No. 53, dated June 2005, for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference
(h)You must use EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70-129, ATA No. 53, dated June 2005, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact EADS SOCATA, Direction des Services, 65921 Tarbes Cedex 9, France; telephone: 33 (0)5 62.41.73.00; fax: 33 (0)5 62.41.76.54; or SOCATA Aircraft, INC., North Perry Airport, 7501 Airport Road, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023; telephone:
(954)893-1400; fax:
(954)964-4141.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 30, 2007. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-1877 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-25192; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-004-AD; Amendment 39-14930; AD 2007-03-19] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD), which applies to certain Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. That AD currently requires repetitive detailed and eddy current inspections of the main fittings of the main landing gears
(MLG)to detect discrepancies, and related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. The AD also currently requires servicing the shock strut of the MLGs; inspecting the shock strut of the MLGs for nitrogen pressure, visible chrome dimension, and oil leakage; and servicing any discrepant strut. This new AD requires installing a new, improved MLG main fitting, which terminates the repetitive inspection and servicing requirements of the existing AD. This AD results from stress analyses that showed certain main fittings of the MLGs are susceptible to premature cracking, starting in the radius of the upper lug. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct premature cracking of the main fittings of the MLGs, which could result in failure of the fittings and consequent collapse of the MLGs during landing. DATES: This AD becomes effective March 15, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of March 15, 2007. On August 13, 2004 (69 FR 41421, July 9, 2004), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R-32-088, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC. Contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada, for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Beckwith, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone
(516)228-7302; fax
(516)794-5531. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Examining the Docket You may examine the airworthiness directive
(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 street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2004-14-16, amendment 39-13725 (69 FR 41421, July 9, 2004). The existing AD applies to certain Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on June 27, 2006 (71 FR 36495). That NPRM proposed to continue to require installing a new, improved main landing gear
(MLG)main fitting, which would terminate the repetitive inspection and servicing requirements of the existing AD. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments that have been received on the NPRM. Request To Change Compliance Time to Cite Dates Bombardier notes that the proposed compliance time for the corrective action is quite different from that of the parallel Canadian airworthiness directive. The parallel Canadian airworthiness directive specifies a fixed compliance date of December 31, 2008, for MLG main fittings that have part numbers 601R85001-81 and -82. Bombardier calculates that operators of U.S.-registered airplanes would have 12 months beyond that date to accomplish the proposed actions. Bombardier requests that we harmonize the compliance time in the NPRM with the compliance date in Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2003-09R1, dated September 21, 2005, which is the parallel Canadian airworthiness directive referred to in the NPRM. Bombardier points out that it worked with Messier-Dowty and Transport Canada Civil Aviation
(TCCA)to consider carefully that date as it relates to fleet safety, MLG supplier capability/logistics, and the capacity of operators and overhaul facilities. Bombardier considers that the different compliance time will create confusion among U.S. operators and cause an unnecessary burden for all parties involved. We partially agree. We agree that we should harmonize the compliance times in the NPRM with the compliance dates in the Canadian airworthiness directive. To that end, we developed the compliance time of “within 39 months after the effective date of this AD.” This 39-month compliance time will give U.S. operators until May 2009 to comply with the AD. This amount of elapsed time is equivalent to that allowed by the Canadian airworthiness directive's compliance date of December 31, 2008. However, we find that this longer compliance time will not adversely affect the level of safety of the affected U.S.-registered airplanes. This issue has been coordinated with TCCA. No change has been made to the AD in this regard. Request To Incorporate by Reference
(IBR)the Service Information The Modification and Replacement Parts Association (MARPA) requests that we either publish the relevant service information with the AD in the Docket Management System (DMS), or IBR it with the NPRM. MARPA states that the purpose of the IBR system is brevity, to keep from expanding the **Federal Register** needlessly by publishing documents already in the hands of the affected individuals. Traditionally, “affected individuals” have been aircraft owners and operators who are generally provided service information by the manufacturer. MARPA states that the group of affected individuals has expanded because aircraft maintenance is now performed by specialty shops instead of aircraft owners and operators. This new class includes maintenance and repair organizations, component servicing and repair shops, parts purveyors and distributors, and organizations that manufacture or service alternatively certified parts under 14 CFR 21.303 (parts manufacturer approval (PMA)), which do not possess the proprietary service information referenced in the NPRM. MARPA states that the concept of brevity is now nearly archaic as documents exist more frequently in electronic format than on paper. MARPA also comments on our practice of IBR and referencing propriety service information. MARPA asserts that if we IBR proprietary service information with a public document, such as an AD, then that service information loses its protected status and becomes a public document. MARPA further states that “If a service document is used as a mandatory element of compliance it should not simply be referenced, but should be incorporated into the regulatory document. Public laws by definition must be public, which means they cannot rely upon private writings.” We do not agree that documents should be incorporated by reference during the NPRM phase of rulemaking. The Office of the Federal Register
(OFR)requires that documents that are necessary to accomplish the requirements of the AD be incorporated by reference during the final rule phase of rulemaking. This final rule incorporates by reference the document necessary for the accomplishment of the requirements mandated by this AD. Further, we point out that while documents that are incorporated by reference do become public information, they do not lose their copyright protection. For that reason, we advise the public to contact the manufacturer to obtain copies of the referenced service information. In regard to the commenter's request that service documents be made available to the public by publication in the **Federal Register** , we agree that incorporation by reference was authorized to reduce the volume of material published in the **Federal Register** and the Code of Federal Regulations. However, as specified in the **Federal Register** Document Drafting Handbook, the Director of the OFR decides when an agency may incorporate material by reference. As the commenter is aware, the OFR files documents for public inspection on the workday before the date of publication of the rule at its office in Washington, DC. As stated in the **Federal Register** Document Drafting Handbook, when documents are filed for public inspection, anyone may inspect or copy file documents during the OFR's hours of business. Further questions regarding publication of documents in the **Federal Register** or incorporation by reference should be directed to the OFR. In regard to the commenter's request to post service bulletins on the Department of Transportation's DMS, we are currently in the process of reviewing issues surrounding the posting of service bulletins on the DMS as part of an AD docket. Once we have thoroughly examined all aspects of this issue and have made a final determination, we will consider whether our current practice needs to be revised. No change to the final rule is necessary in response to this comment. Request To Reference PMA Parts MARPA also states that type certificate holders in their service documents universally ignore the possible existence of PMA parts. According to MARPA, this is especially true with foreign manufacturers where the concept may not exist or be implemented in the country of origin. MARPA states that frequently the service bulletin upon which an AD is based will require the removal of a certain part number and the installation of a different part number as a corrective action. MARPA states that this practice runs afoul of 14 CFR 21.303, which permits the development, certification, and installation of alternatively certified parts (PMA). MARPA states that mandating the installation of a certain part number to the exclusion of all other parts is not a favored general practice. According to MARPA, such action has the dual effect of preventing, in some cases, the installation of perfectly good parts, while at the same time prohibiting the development of new parts permitted under 14 CFR 21.303. MARPA states that such a prohibition runs the risk of taking the AD out of the realm of safety and into the world of economics since prohibiting the development, sale, and use of a perfectly airworthy part has nothing to do with safety. We infer that the commenter would like the AD to permit installation of any equivalent PMA parts so that it is not necessary for an operator to request approval of an alternative method of compliance
(AMOC)in order to install an “equivalent” PMA part. Whether an alternative part is “equivalent” in adequately resolving the unsafe condition can only be determined on a case-by-case basis based on a complete understanding of the unsafe condition. We are not currently aware of any such parts. Our policy is that, in order for operators to replace a part with one that is not specified in the AD, they must request an AMOC. This is necessary so that we can make a specific determination that an alternative part is or is not susceptible to the same unsafe condition. In response to the commenter's statement regarding a practice that “runs afoul of 14 CFR 21.303,” under which the FAA issues PMAs, this statement appears to reflect a misunderstanding of the relationship between ADs and the certification procedural regulations of part 21 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 21). Those regulations, including section 21.303 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.203), are intended to ensure that aeronautical products comply with the applicable airworthiness standards. But ADs are issued when, notwithstanding those procedures, we become aware of unsafe conditions in these products or parts. Therefore, an AD takes precedence over design approvals when we identify an unsafe condition, and mandating installation of a certain part number in an AD is not at variance with section § 21.303. The AD provides a means of compliance for operators to ensure that the identified unsafe condition is addressed appropriately. For an unsafe condition attributable to a part, the AD normally identifies the replacement parts necessary to obtain that compliance. As stated in section 39.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.7), “Anyone who operates a product that does not meet the requirements of an applicable airworthiness directive is in violation of this section.” Unless an operator obtains approval for an AMOC, replacing a part with one not specified by the AD would make the operator subject to an enforcement action and result in a civil penalty. We have not changed the final rule in this regard. Request for Compliance With FAA Order 8040.2/Agreement on Parts Replacement MARPA points out that this AD, as written, does not comply with proposed Order 8040.2 (AD Process for Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)), which states in the PMA section: “MCAI that require replacement or installation of certain parts could have replacement parts approved under 14 CFR 21.303 based on a finding of identicality. We have determined that any parts approved under this regulation and installed should be subject to the actions of our AD and included in the applicability of our AD.” MARPA points out that the Small Airplane Directorate has developed a blanket statement that resolves this issue. The statement includes words similar to those in the proposed Order 8040.2. We recognize the need for standardization on this issue and currently are in the process of reviewing it at the national level. The Transport Airplane Directorate considers that to delay this particular AD action would be inappropriate, since we have determined that an unsafe condition exists and that replacement of certain parts must be accomplished to ensure continued safety. Therefore, no change has been made to the final rule in this regard. The NPRM did not address PMA parts, as provided in draft FAA Order 8040.2, because the Order was only a draft that was out for comment at the time. After issuance of the NPRM, the Order was revised and issued as FAA Order 8040.5 with an effective date of September 29, 2006. FAA Order 8040.5 does not address PMA parts in ADs. We acknowledge the need to ensure that unsafe PMA parts are identified and addressed in MCAI-related ADs. We are currently examining all aspects of this issue, including input from industry. Once we have made a final determination, we will consider how our policy regarding PMA parts in ADs needs to be revised. We consider that to delay this AD action would be inappropriate, since we have determined that an unsafe condition exists and that replacement of certain parts must be accomplished to ensure continued safety. Therefore, no change has been made to the final rule in this regard. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments that have been submitted, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed. Costs of Compliance The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this AD. There are approximately 278 airplanes of U.S. registry that are affected by this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Fleet cost Inspections (required by AD 2004-14-16) 4 None $320, per inspection cycle $88,960, per inspection cycle. Replacement (new action) 46 $105,732 $109,412 $30,416,536. 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 AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)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 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, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-13725 (69 FR 41421, July 9, 2004) and by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-03-19 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair):** Amendment 39-14930. Docket No. FAA-2006-25192; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-004-AD. Effective Date
(a)This AD becomes effective March 15, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)This AD supersedes AD 2004-14-16. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, serial numbers 7003 and subsequent; certificated in any category; equipped with main landing gear
(MLG)main fittings, part numbers (P/N) 601R85001-81 and 601R85001-82 (Messier Dowty Incorporated P/Ns 17064-105 and 17064-106). Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from stress analyses that showed certain main fittings of the MLGs are susceptible to premature cracking, starting in the radius of the upper lug. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct premature cracking of the main fittings of the MLGs, which could result in failure of the fittings and consequent collapse of the MLGs during landing. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Restatement of the Requirements of AD 2004-14-16 Detailed Inspection of Main Fittings of the MLGs
(f)Before the accumulation of 2,500 total flight cycles on the MLGs, or within 250 flight cycles after August 13, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-14-16), whichever occurs later: Do a detailed inspection on the main fittings of the MLGs to detect discrepancies ( *i.e.* , linear paint cracks or lack of paint (paint peeling), any other paint damage, adhesion, paint bulging, or corrosion), in accordance with Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB)A601R-32-088, dated February 20, 2003; or Bombardier ASB 601R-32-088, Revision A, dated June 16, 2005, including Appendices, A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 flight cycles until paragraph
(k)of this AD is accomplished. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is defined as: “An intensive visual examination of a specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate access procedures may be required.” Related Investigative/Corrective Actions
(g)If any discrepancy is detected during any inspection required by paragraph
(f)of this AD, before further flight: Do the related investigative/corrective actions in accordance with Part B or F of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, including Appendices A and C, dated February 20, 2003; or Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, Revision A, dated June 16, 2005, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003. If an eddy current inspection (a related investigative action specified in Part B) is used to confirm the detailed inspection findings, the next eddy current required by paragraph
(h)of this AD must be conducted within 500 flight cycles after the eddy current inspection specified in this paragraph, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles until paragraph
(k)of this AD is accomplished. Eddy Current Inspection of Main Fittings of the MLGs
(h)At the time specified in paragraph
(f)of this AD, do an eddy current inspection on the main fittings of the MLGs to detect cracks, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, including Appendix A, dated February 20, 2003; or Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, Revision A, dated June 16, 2005, including Appendixes, A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003. Repeat the eddy current inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles, until paragraph
(k)of this AD is accomplished. If any crack is found, before further flight, replace the affected main fittings of the MLGs with new or serviceable fittings in accordance with paragraph E.(5) of Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin or in accordance with paragraph
(k)of this AD. If any crack is found after the effective date of this AD, do the replacement in accordance with paragraph
(k)of this AD. Servicing of Shock Struts
(i)Before the accumulation of 2,500 total flight cycles on the MLGs, or within 500 flight cycles after August 13, 2004, whichever occurs later, service the shock strut of the MLGs in accordance with Part C or D, as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, including Appendix B, dated February 20, 2003; or Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, Revision A, dated June 16, 2005, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003. Shock Strut Inspection
(j)Within 500 flight cycles after completing the servicing required by paragraph
(i)of this AD, inspect the shock strut of the MLGs for nitrogen pressure, visible chrome dimension, and oil leakage, in accordance with Part E of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, including Appendix B, dated February 20, 2003; or Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, Revision A, dated June 16, 2005, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles, until paragraph
(k)of this AD is accomplished. If the nitrogen pressure and visible chrome dimensions are found outside the limits (the service bulletin refers to the airplane maintenance manual as the source of defined limits) and/or oil leakage is found, before further flight, service the affected shock strut of the MLGs in accordance with Part C or D, as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. New Requirements of This AD Replacement
(k)Within 39 months after the effective date of this AD: Replace the main fittings of the MLGs, P/Ns 601R85001-81 and 601R85001-82 (Messier Dowty Incorporated P/Ns 17064-105 and 17064-106), with new main fittings, P/Ns 601R85001-83 and 601R85001-84 (Messier Dowty Incorporated P/Ns 17064-107 and 17064-108), in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-093, Revision B, dated July 14, 2005. Doing this replacement terminates all requirements of paragraphs (f), (g), (h), (i), and
(j)of this AD. Note 2: Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-093, Revision B, refers to Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin M-DT SB17002-32-25, Revision 1, dated October 17, 2003, as an additional source of service information for replacing the main fittings. Parts Installation
(l)As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a main fitting of the MLG, P/Ns 601R85001-81 and 601R85001-82 (Messier Dowty Incorporated P/Ns 17064-105 and 17064-106), on any airplane. No Reporting Required
(m)Although the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier ASB A601R-32-088, dated February 20, 2003; and ASB 601R-32-088, Revision A, dated June 16, 2005; specify to report certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that action. Actions Accomplished in Accordance with Previous Revisions of Service Bulletin
(n)Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in accordance with the service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the actions in paragraph
(k)of this AD. Table 1.—Previous Revisions of Service Bulletin Bombardier Service Bulletin Revision level Date 601R-32-093 Original October 17, 2003. 601R-32-093 A September 21, 2004. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (o)(1) The Manager, New York 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. Related Information
(p)Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2003-09R1, dated September 21, 2005, also addresses the subject of this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(q)You must use the applicable service information in Table 2 of this AD to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. Table 2.—All Material Incorporated by Reference Service Bulletin Revision level Date Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R-32-088, including Appendices A, B, and C Original February 20, 2003. Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R-32-088, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003 A June 16, 2005. Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-093 B July 14, 2005.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the documents in Table 3 of this AD, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Table 3.—New Material Incorporated by Reference Service Bulletin Revision level Date Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R-32-088, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003 A June 16, 2005. Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-093 B July 14, 2005.
(2)On August 13, 2004 (69 FR 41421, July 9, 2004), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R-32-088, including Appendices A, B, and C, dated February 20, 2003.
(3)Contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room PL-401, Nassif Building, Washington, DC; on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* ; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at the NARA, call
(202)741-6030, or go to *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html* . Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 29, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-1876 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 524 Ophthalmic and Topical Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Gentamicin and Betamethasone Spray AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval of an abbreviated new animal drug application (ANADA) filed by First Priority, Inc. The ANADA provides for topical use of a gentamicin sulfate and betamethasone valerate topical spray on dogs for the treatment of infected superficial lesions. DATES: This rule is effective February 8, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Harshman, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-104), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301-827-0169, e-mail: *john.harshman@fda.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: First Priority, Inc., 1585 Todd Farm Dr., Elgin, IL 60123, filed ANADA 200-415 for Gentamicin Sulfate Topical Spray (gentamicin sulfate, USP with betamethasone valerate, USP) for use on dogs for the treatment of infected superficial lesions caused by bacteria sensitive to gentamicin. First Priority's Gentamicin Sulfate Topical Spray is approved as a generic copy of Schering-Plough Animal Health Corp.'s GENTOCIN Topical Spray, approved under NADA 132-338. The ANADA is approved as of January 12, 2006, and 21 CFR 524.1044f is amended to reflect the approval and a current format. The basis of approval is discussed in the freedom of information summary. In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of 21 CFR part 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a summary of safety and effectiveness data and information submitted to support approval of this application may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.33(a)(1) that this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. This rule does not meet the definition of “rule” in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because it is a rule of “particular applicability.” Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements in 5 U.S.C. 801-808. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 524 Animal drugs. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 524 is amended as follows: PART 524—OPHTHALMIC AND TOPICAL DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 524 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. 2. In § 524.1044f, revise the section heading and paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 524.1044f Gentamicin and betamethasone spray.
(b)See Nos. 000061, 054925, and 058829 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter. Dated: January 29, 2007. Stephen F. Sundlof, Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. [FR Doc. E7-2121 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Parts 104 and 120 [USCG-2007-26953] RIN 1625-ZA12 Technical Amendments; Marine Safety Center Address Change AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: By this final rule, the Coast Guard is making non-substantive changes to the address of delivery for all private mail to the United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Center as it appears in Coast Guard regulations. This rule will have no substantive effect on the regulated public. DATES: This rule is effective February 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: Any comments and material received from the public will be made part of docket, USCG-2006-26953, and will be available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this amendment, call Commander Hung Nguyen, Executive Officer, United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Center, telephone 202-475-3406. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-493-0402. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory History We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)for this amendment. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that this technical amendment is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking requirements because the amendment only makes non-substantive mailing address changes. These changes will have no substantive effect on the public; therefore, it is unnecessary to publish an NPRM. 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** . Background and Purpose The office of the United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Center will change their procedure for receiving private courier mail, resulting in the need for an address change in the Code of Federal Regulations. 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. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Because this amendment makes only address changes, we expect the economic impact to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. 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. It is not expected that this amendment will have a significant economic impact on any small entities. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this technical amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Collection of Information This amendment 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 amendment 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 amendment will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this amendment elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This amendment 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 amendment 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 amendment under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This amendment 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 amendment 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 amendment 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 amendment 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 DHS 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)(a), of the Instruction from further environmental documentation. Paragraph (34)(a) excludes regulatory actions that are editorial or procedural, such as those updating addresses. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(a), of the Instruction, an Environmental Analysis Check List and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are not required for this technical amendment. List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 104 Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Vessels. 33 CFR Part 120 Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Terrorism. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR parts 104 and 120 as follows: PART 104—VESSEL SECURITY 1. The authority citation for part 104 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. § 104.400 [Amended] 2. Amend § 104.400, by revising paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 104.400 General.
(b)The VSP must be submitted to the Commanding Officer (MSC), USCG Marine Safety Center, 1900 Half Street, SW., Suite 1000, Room 525, Washington, DC 20024 for visitors. Send all mail to Commanding Officer (MSC), United States Coast Guard, JR10-0525, 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593, in a written or electronic format. Information for submitting the VSP electronically can be found at *http://www.uscg.mil/HQ/MSC* . Owners or operators of foreign flag vessels that are subject to SOLAS Chapter XI-1 or Chapter XI-2 must comply with this part by carrying on board a valid International Ship Security Certificate that certifies that the verifications required by Section 19.1 of part A of the ISPS Code (Incorporated by reference, see § 101.115 of this subchapter) have been completed. As stated in Section 9.4 of the ISPS Code, part A requires that, in order for the ISSC to be issued, the provisions of part B of the ISPS Code need to be taken into account. PART 120—SECURITY OF PASSENGER VESSELS 3. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170. § 120.305 [Amended] 4. Amend § 120.305, by revising paragraph
(a)to read as follows: § 120.305 What is the procedure for examination?
(a)You must submit two copies of each Vessel Security Plan required by § 120.300, or of any Terminal Security Plan or annex required or permitted under § 120.303 or § 128.305 of this chapter, to the Commanding Officer (MSC), USCG Marine Safety Center, 1900 Half Street, SW., Suite 1000, Room 525, Washington, DC 20024 for visitors. Send all mail to Commanding Officer (MSC), United States Coast Guard, JR10-0525, 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593, for examination at least 60 days before embarking passengers on a voyage described in § 120.100. Dated: January 30, 2007. Steve Venckus, Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States Coast Guard. [FR Doc. E7-2100 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Office 37 CFR Part 201 [Docket No. RM 2007-2] Fees AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of Congress. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is making a technical amendment in the regulations regarding fees for recordation of an interim or amended designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringement under the Copyright Act. EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tanya M. Sandros, Acting General Counsel, P.O. Box 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0977. Telephone:
(202)707-8380. Telefax:
(202)252-3423. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sec. 512(c) of the Copyright Act, title 17 of the United States Code, provides limitations on service provider liability for storage, at the direction of a user, of copyrighted material residing on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider. The liability limitations apply if, among other things, the service provider has designated an agent to receive notifications of claimed infringement by providing contact information to the Copyright Office and by posting such information on the service provider’s publicly accessible website. In this connection, the Copyright Office maintains a directory of service providers’ designated agents. On June 1, 2006, in accordance with the applicable provisions of title 17, the Copyright Office published a final rule adjusting the Copyright Office fees for recordation of an interim or amended designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringement under sec. 512(c) of the Copyright Act. The June 1, 2006, final rule included the fee adjustment designation of $80.00 for recordation of an interim designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringement under sec. 512(c) of the Copyright Act in the new § 201.3(c) fee schedule. However, other technical amendments meant to bring all fees within § 201.3 did not address recordation of an interim or amended designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringement under sec. 512(c) of the Copyright Act. In order to correct this oversight, we are amending § § 201.38(e) and 201.38(f) to reference the established § 201.3(c) fee schedule for recordation of an interim designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringement under sec. 512(c)(2). Because this amendment is being issued simply for purposes of correcting an oversight associated with implementation of the new fee schedule, the Office finds that there is good cause to make the amendment effective immediately. List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 201 Copyright, General provisions. Final Rule In consideration of the foregoing, part 201 of 37 CFR, chapter II is amended in the following manner: PART 201--GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows: Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702. 2. Amend § 201.38 by revising paragraphs
(e)and
(f)to read as follows: § 201.38 Designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringement.
(e)*Filing.* A service provider may file the Interim Designation of Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement with the Public Information Office of the Copyright Office, Room LM-401, James Madison Memorial Building, Library of Congress, 101 Independence Avenue, SE, Washington, DC, during normal business hours, 9 am to 5 pm. If mailed, the Interim Designation should be addressed to: Copyright GC/I&R, PO Box 70400, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024. Each designation shall be accompanied by a filing fee for Recordation of an Interim Designation of Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement under section 512(c)(2) in the amount prescribed in § 201.3(c). Designations and amendments will be posted online on the Copyright Office’s website (http://www.loc.gov/copyright).
(f)*Amendments.* In the event of a change in the information reported in an Interim Designation of Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement, a service provider shall file with the Public Information Office of the Copyright Office an amended Interim Designation of Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement, containing the current information required by § 201.38(c). The amended Interim Designation shall be signed in accordance with the requirements of § 201.38(d) and shall be accompanied by a fee equal to the amount prescribed in § 201.3(c) for Recordation of an Interim Designation of Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement under section 512(c)(2). Dated: February 2, 2007 Tanya M. Sandros Acting General Counsel [FR Doc. E7-2105 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410-30-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915; FRL-8276-3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Amendments to the Minor New Source Review Program AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions set forth the procedures for stationary source reporting and the criteria for obtaining a permit to construct and operate a new stationary source which is not a major stationary source. The rule establishes the requirements for obtaining an administrative update to an existing permit, temporary permit or a general permit, and for filling notifications and maintaining records of changes not otherwise subject to the permit requirements of this rule. The rule establishes public participation requirements as well as procedures for the transfer, suspension and revocation of permits. EPA is approving these revisions to West Virginia's SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act. DATES: This rule is effective on April 9, 2007 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by March 12, 2007. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** and inform the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915 by one of the following methods: A. *www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. B. *E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov* . C. *Mail:* EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915, David Campbell, Chief, Permits and Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP11, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. D. *Hand Delivery:* At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* , your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE, Charleston, WV 25304. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemarie Nino,
(215)814-3377, or by e-mail at *nino.rose@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On September 10, 2003, the West Virginia Department of the Environmental Protection (WVDEP) submitted a formal revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revision consists of amendments to West Virginia Legislative Rule 45 CSR 13 issued by the State of West Virginia on March 6, 2003, and effective June 1, 2003. The State amended the regulations in order to
(1)set forth the procedures for stationary source reporting and the criteria for obtaining a permit to construct and operate a new stationary source which is not a major stationary source and to modify a non-major stationary source;
(2)establishes the requirements for obtaining an administrative update to an existing permit, temporary permit or a general permit, and for filling notification and maintaining records of changes not otherwise subject to the permit requirements of this rule; and
(3)establishes public participation requirements as well as procedures for the transfer, suspension and revocation of permits. West Virginia is seeking approval of these amendments to this rule pursuant to Sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 112(l) of the Clean Air Act, and 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.164. II. Summary of SIP Revision and Program Review A. What is being addressed in this document? West Virginia Legislative Rule 45 CSR 13 is part of the West Virginia SIP approved by the USEPA to assure attainment and maintenance of attainment with the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The proposed revision were initiated by the West Virginia Department of the Environment Protection (WVDEP) as part of an effort to streamline the permitting program by eliminating unnecessary permitting requirements for insignificant sources, broadening the general permit mechanism, reducing agency review timeframes for permit action, modifying applicability thresholds and reducing application fees for general permits. B. What are the program changes that EPA is approving? The amendments are summarized as follows: 1. Permitting thresholds for modification and stationary sources have been revised from six
(6)pounds per hour
(pph)or more or ten
(10)tons per year
(tpy)or more to six
(6)pph and ten
(10)tpy or more, or more than 144 pounds per calendar day
(ppd)in any regulated air pollutant (Section 2.17.a) and (Section 2.24.b). WVDEP recognizes that both thresholds, the 6 pph and 10 tpy and the 144 ppd have the potential to allow some sources to emit up to 26 tons a year without obtaining a permit, but WVDEP believes the 144 ppd threshold and the Department's authority to prevent “statutory air pollution” will serve as useful backstops in those relatively uncommon situations. 2. The de minimis list in Table 45-13B has been expanded to include additional commercial and residential maintenance and upkeep activities. (Table 45-13B, Nos. 39 and 40). 3. WVDEP review times have been shortened from 180 day to 90 days for Class II general permit registrations; 180 days to 60 days for temporary permits; and, 180 days to 45 days for Class I general permits (Section 5.7). WVDEP will be able to meet the deadlines in this rule. 4. Revisions to general permit language to expand authority by removing “facility-wide” restriction. Also, a provision for simpler general permits (Class I) has been added which does not require public notice for each Class I registration and requires a smaller fee. WVDEP has added general permit requirements to Section 5.12. 5. A revision to provide authority to revise general permit registrations through administrative updates. (Section 4.) 6. A revision to public notice requirements, from a 45-day notice at draft permit stage, to a 30-day notice and restored 30-day notice by applicant at application stage. (Section 8.4.) 7. A reduction of registration application fees for general permits from $1,000 to $250 for Class I and $500 for Class II general permits, with an exception for “small businesses” applying for Class I general permits. Also, an exemption for Class I general permits from the additional fees for NSPS, NESHAPs, etc. (Section 12.1.) 8. Revised language which clarifies that commercial display ad and sign requirements occur contemporaneously with the WVDEP's legal ad (at draft permit stage), unless the applicant wishes to place the ad/sign earlier. (Section 8.4.a and 8.5.a.) 9. Various technical revisions to the rule, i.e., changed Director to Secretary. III. Final Action EPA is approving these amendments to West Virginia 45 CSR 13—Permits for Construction, Modification, Relocation and Operation of Stationary sources of Air Pollutants, Notification Requirements, Administrative Updates, Temporary Permits, General Permits and Procedures for Evaluation as a revision to the state's minor new source review program. The amendments are consistent with 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.164 and sections 110 and 112(l) of the Clean Air Act. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in the “Proposed Rules” section of today's **Federal Register** , EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on April 9, 2007 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 12, 2007. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the **Federal Register** informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications 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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 9, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) EPA is approving these amendments to West Virginia 45 CSR 13—Permits for Construction, Modification, Relocation and Operation of Stationary sources of Air Pollutants, Notification Requirements, Administrative Updates, Temporary Permits, General Permits and Procedures for Evaluation as a revision to the state's minor new source review program. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: January 31, 2007. James W. Newsom, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart XX—West Virginia 2. In § 52.2520, the table in paragraph
(c)is amended by revising the entry 45 CSR 13 to read as follows: § 52.2520 Identification of plan.
(c)* * * EPA-Approved Regulations in the West Virginia SIP State citation [Chapter 16-20 or 45 CSR] Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Additional explanation/citation at 40 CFR 52.2565 45 CSR 13 Permits for Construction, Modification, Relocation and Operation of Stationary Sources of Air Pollutants, Notification Requirements, Administrative Updates, Temporary Permits, General Permits, and Procedures for Evaluation * * * * * * * Section 45-13-1 General 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-2 Definitions 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-3 Reporting Requirements for Stationary Sources 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-4 Administrative Updates to Existing Permits and General Permit Registrations 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section Title Changed. Section 45-13-5 Permit Application and Reporting Requirements for Construction of and Modifications to Stationary Sources 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-6 Determination of Compliance of Stationary Sources 6/01/03 2/08/07 Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-7 Modeling 6/01/03 2/08/07 Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-8 Public Review Procedures 6/01/03 2/08/07 Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-9 Public Meetings 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-10 Permit Transfer, Suspension, Revocation and Responsibility 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-11 Temporary Construction or Modification Permits 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-12 Permit Application Fees 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-13 Inconsistency Between Rules 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-14 Statutory Air Pollution 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Section 45-13-15 Hazardous Air Pollutants 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Table 45-13A Potential Emission Rate 6/01/00 2/28/03, 68 FR 9559 (c)(52). Table 45-13B De Minimis Sources 6/01/03 2/08/07 [Insert page number where the document begins] Table Title Change. * * * * * * * [FR Doc. E7-2126 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 55 [EPA-R10-OAR-2006-0377; FRL-8249-2] Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations Consistency Update for Alaska AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule-consistency update. SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the updates of the Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”) Air Regulations proposed in the **Federal Register** on August 22, 2006. Requirements applying to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries must be updated periodically to remain consistent with the requirements of the corresponding onshore area (“COA”), as mandated by section 328(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (“the Act”). The portion of the OCS air regulations that is being updated pertains to the requirements for OCS sources in the State of Alaska. The intended effect of approving the OCS requirements for the State of Alaska is to regulate emissions from OCS sources in accordance with the requirements onshore. The change to the existing requirements discussed below is incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations and is listed in the appendix to the OCS air regulations. DATES: *Effective Date:* This rule is effective on March 12, 2007. This incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2006-0377. All documents in the docket are listed on the *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natasha Greaves, Federal and Delegated Air Programs Unit, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Mail Stop: AWT-107, Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number:
(206)553-7079; e-mail address: *greaves.natasha@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background Information II. Public Comment and EPA Response III. EPA Action IV. Administrative Requirements >A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory Flexibility Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Government G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act J. Congressional Review Act K. Petitions for Judicial Review I. Background Information Throughout this document, the terms “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to the U.S. EPA. On September 4, 1992, EPA promulgated 40 CFR part 55, 1 which established requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources in order to attain and maintain Federal and State ambient air quality standards and to comply with the provisions of part C of title I of the Act. Part 55 applies to all OCS sources offshore of the States except those located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87.5 degrees longitude. Section 328 of the Act requires that for such sources located within 25 miles of a State's seaward boundary, the requirements shall be the same as would be applicable if the sources were located in the COA. Because the OCS requirements are based on onshore requirements, and onshore requirements may change, section 328(a)(1) requires that EPA update the OCS requirements as necessary to maintain consistency with onshore requirements. 1 The reader may refer to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and the preamble to the final rule promulgated September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further background and information on the OCS regulations. On August 22, 2006, (71 FR 48879), EPA proposed to approve requirements into the OCS Air Regulations pertaining to the State of Alaska. These requirements are being promulgated in response to the submittal of a Notice of Intent on March 22, 2006, by Shell Offshore, Inc. of Houston, Texas. EPA has evaluated the proposed requirements to ensure that they are rationally related to the attainment or maintenance of Federal or State ambient air quality standards or Part C of title I of the Act, that they are not designed expressly to prevent exploration and development of the OCS and that they are applicable to OCS sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also evaluated the rules to ensure that they are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 55.12(e). In addition, EPA has excluded administrative or procedural rules. Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. This limits EPA's flexibility in deciding which requirements will be incorporated into part 55 and prevents EPA from making substantive changes to the requirements it incorporates. As a result, EPA may be incorporating rules into part 55 that do not conform to all of EPA's State Implementation Plan (“SIP”) guidance or certain requirements of the Act. Consistency updates may result in the inclusion of State or local rules or regulations into part 55, even though the same rules may ultimately be disapproved for inclusion as part of the SIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does not imply that a rule meets the requirements of the Act for SIP approval, nor does it imply that the rule will be approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP. II. Public Comment and EPA Response EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period which closed on September 21, 2006. During this period, we received one comment on the proposed action. This comment was submitted by the Alaska Oil and Gas Association
(AOGA)by letter dated September 20, 2006. *Comment:* AOGA concurs with the Alaska rules identified by EPA as applicable for incorporation into 40 CFR part 55. However, while the proposed rule states that the State of Alaska requirements as of December 3, 2005, are applicable, almost all of the specific sections then listed in Appendix A contain out-of-date effective dates. *Response:* EPA reviewed the applicable dates in Appendix A and noted that some of the proposed rules contained out-of-date effective dates. These have been corrected and all the rules now reflect current effective dates. III. EPA Action In this document, EPA takes final action to incorporate the proposed changes into 40 CFR part 55. Changes were made to the effective dates of the proposed changes to accurately reflect the State of Alaska's Air Quality Control Regulations. EPA is approving the proposed actions under section 328(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7627. Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. IV. Administrative Requirements A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines “significant regulatory action” as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1)Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2)create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3)materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4)raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. This action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB Review. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. B. Paperwork Reduction Act The OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in 40 CFR part 55, and by extension this update to the rules, under the provisions of the *Paperwork Reduction Act* 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0249. Notice of OMB's approval of EPA Information Collection Request (“ICR”) No. 1601.06 was published in the **Federal Register** on March 1, 2006 (71 FR 10499-10500). The approval expires January 31, 2009. As EPA previously indicated (70 FR 65897-65898 (November 1, 2005)), the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collection of information under 40 CFR part 55 is estimated to average 549 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency 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. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and are identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable. In addition, EPA is amending the table in 40 CFR part 9 of currently approved OMB control numbers for various regulations to list the regulatory citations for the information requirements contained in this final rule. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have had a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (“UMRA”), Public Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare written statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with “Federal mandates” that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million of more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. Today's final rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector in any one year. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. This rule does not amend the existing provisions within 40 CFR part 55 enabling delegation of OCS regulations to a COA, and this rule does not require the COA to implement the OCS rules. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249 (November 9, 2000)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” This final rule 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 and thus does not have “tribal implications,” within the meaning of Executive Order 13175. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. In addition, this rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Consultation with Indian tribes is therefore not required under Executive Order 13175. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks Executive Order 13045: “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885 (April 23, 1997)), applies to any rule that:
(1)is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under Executive Order 12866, and
(2)concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866. In addition, the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportional risk to children. H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (“NTTAA”), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable laws or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decided not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. As discussed above, this rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this final rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. In the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards and in light of the fact that EPA is required to make the OCS rules consistent with current COA requirements, it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in this action. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards. J. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This action will be effective March 12, 2007. K. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 9, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2.) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 55 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Outer Continental Shelf, Ozone, Particulate matter, Permits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. Dated: November 20, 2006. Elin D. Miller, Regional Administrator, Region 10. Title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations, is to be amended as follows: PART 55—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows: Authority: Section 328 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.) as amended by Public Law 101-549. 2. Section 55.14 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(2)(i)(A) to read as follows: § 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries, by State.
(e)* * *
(2)* * *
(i)* * *
(A)State of Alaska Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, December 3, 2005. 3. Appendix A to CFR part 55 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) under the heading “Alaska” to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 55—Listing of State and Local Requirements Incorporated By Reference Into Part 55, By State Alaska
(a)* * *
(1)The following State of Alaska requirements are applicable to OCS Sources, December 3, 2005, Alaska Administrative Code—Department of Environmental Conservation. The following sections of Title 18, Chapter 50: Article 1. Ambient Air Quality Management 18 AAC 50.005. Purpose and Applicability of Chapter (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.010. Ambient Air Quality Standards (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.015. Air Quality Designations, Classification, and Control Regions (effective 10/10/04) except (d)(2) Table 1. Air Quality Classifications 18 AAC 50.020. Baseline Dates and Maximum Allowable Increases (effective 10/1/04) Table 2. Baseline Dates Table 3. Maximum Allowable Increases 18 AAC 50.025. Visibility and Other Special Protection Areas (effective 6/21/98) 18 AAC 50.030. State Air Quality Control Plan (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.035. Documents, Procedures, and Methods Adopted by Reference (effective 12/3/05) 18 AAC 50.040. Federal Standards Adopted by Reference (effective 12/3/05) except (b),
(c)(d), and
(g)18 AAC 50.045. Prohibitions (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.050. Incinerator Emissions Standards (effective 5/3/02) Table 4. Particulate Matter Standards for Incinerators 18 AAC 50.055. Industrial Processes and Fuel-Burning Equipment (effective 10/1/04) except (a)(3) through (a)(9), (b)(4) through (b)(6),
(e)and
(f)18 AAC 50.065. Open Burning (effective 1/18/97) except
(g)and
(h)18 AAC 50.075. Wood-Fired Heating Device Visible Emission Standards (effective 1/18/97) 18 AAC 50.080. Ice Fog Standards (effective 1/18/97) 18 AAC 50.085. Volatile Liquid Storage Tank Emission Standards (effective 1/18/97) 18 AAC 50.090. Volatile Liquid Loading Racks and Delivery Tank Emission Standards (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.100 Nonroad Engines (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.110. Air Pollution Prohibited (effective 5/26/72) Article 2. Program Administration 18 AAC 50.200. Information Requests (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.201. Ambient Air Quality Investigation (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.205. Certification (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.215. Ambient Air Quality Analysis Methods (effective 10/1/04) Table 5. Significant Impact Levels
(SILs)18 AAC 50.220. Enforceable Test Methods (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.225. Owner-Requested Limits (effective 1/29/05) 18 AAC 50.230. Preapproved Emission Limits (effective 1/29/05) 18 AAC 50.235. Unavoidable Emergencies and Malfunctions (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.240. Excess Emissions (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.245. Air Episodes and Advisories (effective 10/1/04) Table 6. Concentrations Triggering an Air Episode Article 3. Major Stationary Source Permits 18 AAC 50.301. Permit Continuity (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.302. Construction Permits (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.306. Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)Permits (effective 10/1/04) except
(e)18 AAC 50.311. Nonattainment Area Major Stationary Source Permits (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.316. Preconstruction Review for Construction or Reconstruction of a Major Source of Hazardous Air Pollutants (effective 12/1/04) except
(c)18 AAC 50.326. Title V Operating Permits (effective 12/1/04) except (j)(1), (k)(3), (k)(5), and (k)(6) 18 AAC 50.345. Construction and Operating Permits: Standard Permit Conditions (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.346. Construction and Operating Permits: Other Permit Conditions (effective 10/1/04) Table 7. Emission Unit or Activity, Standard Permit Condition Article 4. User Fees 18 AAC 50.400. Permit Administration Fees (effective 1/29/05) except (a), (b), (c)(1), (c)(3), (c)(6), (i)(2), (i)(3), (m)(3) and (m)(4) 18 AAC 50.403. Negotiated Service Agreements (effective 12/3/05) except
(8)and
(9)18 AAC 50.405. Transition Process for Permit Fees (effective 1/29/05) 18 AAC 50.410. Emission Fees (effective 12/3/05) 18 AAC 50.499. Definition for User Fee Requirements (effective 1/29/05) Article 5. Minor Permits 18 AAC 50.502. Minor Permits for Air Quality Protection (effective 12/3/05) except (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3) and (b)(5) 18 AAC 50.508. Minor Permits Requested by the Owner or Operator (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.509. Construction of a Pollution Control Project without a Permit (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.540. Minor Permit: Application (effective 12/3/05) 18 AAC 50.542. Minor Permit: Review and Issuance (effective 12/1/04) except (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), and
(d)18 AAC 50.544. Minor Permits: Content (effective 1/29/05) 18 AAC 50.546. Minor Permits: Revisions (effective 10/1/04) 18 AAC 50.560. General Minor Permits (effective 10/1/04) except
(b)Article 9. General Provisions 18 AAC 50.990. Definitions (effective 12/3/05) [FR Doc. E7-2132 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140-200605(a); FRL-8276-7] Approval and Promulgation of State Plan for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Florida: Emissions Guidelines for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is approving the Clean Air Act
(CAA)section 111(d)/129 State Plan submitted by the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Florida DEP) for the State of Florida on November 29, 2001, and subsequently updated on March 11, 2005. The State Plan is for implementing and enforcing the Emissions Guidelines
(EG)applicable to existing Small Municipal Waste Combustion
(SMWC)units that commenced construction on or before August 30, 1999. DATES: This direct final rule is effective April 9, 2007 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 12, 2007. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** and inform the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: Majumder.joydeb@epa.gov.* 3. *Fax:*
(404)562-9195. 4. *Mail:* “EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140,” Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 5. *Hand Delivery or Courier:* Deliver your comments to: Joydeb Majumder, Air Toxics and Monitoring Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. “EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140.” EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The *www.regulations.gov* website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov,* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.* *Docket:* All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available (i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute). Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joydeb Majumder, Air Toxics and Monitoring Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404)562-9121. Mr. Majumder can also be reached via electronic mail at *Majumder.joydeb@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On December 6, 2000, pursuant to CAA sections 111 and 129, EPA promulgated new source performance standards
(NSPS)applicable to new SMWC units and EG applicable to existing SMWC units. The NSPS and EG are codified at 40 CFR part 60, subparts AAAA and BBBB, respectively. Subparts AAAA and BBBB regulate the following: Particulate matter, opacity, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium, mercury, and dioxins and dibenzofurans. For existing sources, CAA section 129(b)(2) requires states to submit to EPA for approval State Plans that implement and enforce the EG contained in 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB. State Plans must be at least as protective as the EG, and become Federally enforceable upon approval by EPA. Pursuant to subpart BBBB, State Plans must include the following items: An inventory of affected SMWC units including those that have ceased operation but have not been dismantled and inventory of emissions; compliance schedules for each affected SMWC unit; Good combustion practices and emission limits for affected SMWC units that are at least as protective as the emission guidelines; Stack testing, continuous emission monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements; Certification that the hearing on the State Plan was held, a list of witnesses and their organizational affiliations, if any, appearing at the hearing, and a brief written summary of each presentation or written submission; Provision for State progress reports to EPA; Identification of enforceable State mechanisms for implementing the Emission Guidelines; and a demonstration of the State's legal authority to carry out the State Plan. The procedures for adoption and submittal of State Plans are codified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. In this action, EPA is approving the State Plan for existing SMWC units submitted by Florida DEP because it meets the requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB. II. Discussion Florida DEP's 111(d) / 129 State Plan for implementing and enforcing the EG for existing SMWC units includes the following: Public Participation—Demonstration that the Public Had Adequate Notice and Opportunity to Submit Written Comments and Attend Public Hearing; Emissions Standards and Compliance Schedules; Emission Inventories, Source Surveillance, and Reports; and Legal Authority. EPA's approval of the State Plan is based on our finding that it meets the nine requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB. *Requirements
(1)and (2):* Inventory of affected SMWC units, including those that have ceased operation but have not been dismantled and inventory of emissions. Florida DEP submitted an emissions inventory of all designated pollutants for existing SMWC units under their jurisdiction in the State of Florida. This portion of the State Plan has been reviewed and approved as meeting the Federal requirements for existing SMWC units. *Requirement (3):* Compliance schedules for each affected SMWC unit. Florida DEP submitted the compliance schedule for existing SMWC units under their jurisdiction in the State of Florida. This portion of the State Plan has been reviewed and approved as being at least as protective as Federal requirements for existing SMWC units. *Requirement (4):* Good combustion practices and emission limits for affected SMWC units that are at least as protective as the emission guidelines contained in this subpart. Florida DEP adopted good combustion practice and all emission standards and limitations applicable to existing SMWC units. These combustion practice and emission limitations have been approved as being at least as protective as the Federal requirements contained in subpart BBBB for existing SMWC units. *Requirement (5):* Stack testing, continuous emission monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The State Plan contains requirements for stack testing, continuous emission monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. This portion of the State Plan has been reviewed and approved as being at least as protective as the Federal requirements for existing SMWC units. The Florida DEP State Plan also includes its legal authority to require owners and operators of designated facilities to maintain records and report on the nature and amount of emissions and any other information that may be necessary to enable Florida DEP to judge the compliance status of the facilities in the State Plan. Florida DEP also submitted its legal authority to provide for periodic inspection and testing and provisions for making reports of existing SMWC unit emissions data, correlated with emission standards that apply, available to the general public. *Requirement (6):* Certification that the hearing on the State Plan was held, a list of witnesses and their organizational affiliations, if any, appearing at the hearing, and a brief written summary of each presentation or written submission. Florida DEP held a public hearing on November 27, 2001. The record of the hearing has been prepared and will be retained for public inspection in accordance with 40 CFR 60.23(e). The only comments received on the plan were from EPA Region 4, and certification of the hearing as required has been provided to EPA Region 4. *Requirement (7):* Provision for State progress reports to EPA. The Florida DEP State Plan provides for progress reports of plan implementation updates to EPA on an annual basis. These progress reports will include the required items pursuant to 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. This portion of the State Plan has been reviewed and approved as meeting the Federal requirement for State Plan reporting. *Requirement (8):* Identification of enforceable State mechanisms for implementing the Emission Guidelines. An enforcement mechanism is a legal instrument by which the Florida DEP can enforce a set of standards and conditions. The Florida DEP has adopted 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB, into Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Chapter 62-204. Therefore, Florida DEP's mechanism for enforcing the standards and conditions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB, is Rule 62-204.800(9)(e). On the basis of this rule and the rules identified in Requirement
(9)below, the State Plan is approved as being at least as protective as the Federal requirements for existing SMWC units. *Requirement (9):* Demonstration of the State's legal authority to carry out the State Plan. Florida DEP demonstrated legal authority to adopt emissions standards and compliance schedules for designated facilities; authority to enforce applicable laws, regulations, standards, and compliance schedules, and authority to seek injunctive relief; authority to obtain information necessary to determine whether designated facilities are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, standards, and compliance schedules, including authority to require record keeping and to make inspections and conduct tests at designated facilities; authority to require owners or operators of designated facilities to install, maintain, and use emission monitoring devices and to make periodic reports to the State on the nature and amount of emissions from such facilities; and authority to make emissions data publicly available. Florida DEP cites the following references for the legal authority noted above: Florida Statutes (F.S.) 403.031—Definitions, F.S. § 403.061—Department powers and duties, F.S. § 403.0872—Title V air operating permits, and F.S. § 403.8055—Authority to adopt Federal Standards by reference; and Subsections F.S. §§ 403.061(6), (7), (8), and
(13)give the authority for obtaining information and for requiring recordkeeping, use of monitors. F.S. § 403.061(35) gives the department authority to exercise the duties, powers, and responsibilities required of the State under the federal Clean Air Act. The sections of the Florida Statues that give authority for compliance and enforcement are 403.121—Judicial and administrative remedies, F.S. § 403.131—Injunctive relief, F.S. § 403.141—Civil remedies, and F.S. § 403.161—Civil and criminal penalties. Finally, F.S. § 119.07 is the authority for making the information available to the public. EPA is approving the State Plan for existing SMWC units submitted by Florida DEP because it meets the requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB. III. Final Action In this action, EPA approves the 111(d)/129 State Plan submitted by Florida DEP for the State of Florida to implement and enforce 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB, as it applies to existing SMWC units. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this **Federal Register** publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the State Plan should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective April 9, 2007 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by March 12, 2007. If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on April 9, 2007 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on any paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications 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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This rule also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. In reviewing 111(d)/129 plan submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a 111(d)/129 plan submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a 111(d)/129 plan submission, to use VCS in place of a 111(d)/129 plan submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 9, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This rule may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 Environmental protection, Air pollution control. Dated: January 19, 2007. J.I. Palmer, Jr., Regional Administrator, Region 4. Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulation is amended as follows: PART 62—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart K—Florida 2. Subpart K is amended by adding an undesignated center heading and § 62.2390 to read as follows: Air Emissions From Small Municipal Waste Combustion
(SMWC)Units—Section 111(d)/129 Plan § 62.2390 Identification of sources. The Plan applies to existing Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units that Commenced Construction On or Before August 30, 1999. [FR Doc. E7-2117 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 41 CFR Part 102-76 [FMR Amendment 2005-03; FMR Case 2005-102-8; Docket 2007-0001, Sequence 2] RIN 3090-AI17 Federal Management Regulation; Real Property Policies Update; Technical Amendment AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide Policy, General Services Administration. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends the Federal Management Regulation
(FMR)to correct an omission from the amended final rule that was published in the **Federal Register** at 71 FR 52498, September 6, 2006. The original final rule, which was published initially in the **Federal Register** at 70 FR 67786, November 8, 2005, broadly applied GSA’s accessibility standards to the design, construction and alteration of buildings subject to the Architectural Barriers Act (other than residential structures subject to the Architectural Barriers Act and facilities of the Department of Defense and the Postal Service), as provided by statute. When the implementation dates for the accessibility standards were amended on September 6, 2006, the amendment inadvertently deleted reference to facilities other than those that were Federally-owned or leased. Accordingly, this final rule corrects this oversight. Except as expressly modified by this final rule, all other terms and conditions of the Architectural Barriers Act standards remain in full force and effect. DATES: *Effective Date* : February 8, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Regulatory Secretariat, Room 4035, GSA Building, 1800 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20405,
(202)501-4755, for information pertaining to status or publication schedules. For clarification of content, contact Mr. Stanley C. Langfeld, Director, Regulations Management Division, General Services Administration, at
(202)501-1737, or by e-mail at *stanley.langfeld@gsa.gov* . Please cite FMR Case 2005-102-8, Amendment 2005-03, Technical Amendment. List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 102-76 Federal buildings and facilities. Dated: January 25, 2007 Lurita Doan, Administrator of General Services. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, GSA amends 41 CFR chapter 102 as set forth below: PART 102-76—DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 1. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 102-76 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c) (in furtherance of the Administrator’s authorities under 40 U.S.C. 3301-3315 and elsewhere as included under 40 U.S.C. 581 and 583); 42 U.S.C. 4152; E.O. 12411, 48 FR 13391, 3 CFR, 1983 Comp., p. 155; E.O. 12512, 50 FR 18453, 3 CFR, 1985 Comp., p. 340. 2. Amend section 102-76.5 by adding a sentence to the end of the section to read as follows: § 102-76.5 What is the scope of this part? * * * The accessibility standards in Subpart C of this part apply to Federal agencies and other entities whose facilities are subject to the Architectural Barriers Act. 3. Amend section 102-76.65 by revising the second sentence in the introductory text of paragraph
(a)and paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: § 102-76.65 What standards must facilities subject to the Architectural Barrier Act meet?
(a)* * * Facilities subject to the Architectural Barriers Act (other than facilities described in paragraphs
(b)and
(c)of this section) must comply with ABAAS as set forth below:
(1)For construction or alteration of facilities subject to the Architectural Barriers Act (other than Federal lease-construction and other lease actions described in paragraphs (a)(2) and (3), respectively, of this section), compliance with ABAAS is required if the construction or alteration commenced after May 8, 2006. If the construction or alteration of such a facility commenced on or before May 8, 2006, compliance with the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards
(UFAS)is required. [FR Doc. E7-2066 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-RH-S 72 26 Thursday, February 8, 2007 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 20, 201, 207, 314, 330, 514, 515, 601, 607, 610, and 1271 [Docket No. 2005N-0403] RIN 0910-AA49 Requirements for Foreign and Domestic Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Drugs, Including Drugs That Are Regulated Under a Biologics License Application, and Animal Drugs; Reopening of Comment Period AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is reopening to February 26, 2007, the comment period for the proposed rule published in the **Federal Register** of August 29, 2006 (71 FR 51276). The proposed rule would amend the agency's current regulations governing establishment registration and drug listing. The initial comment period was extended (71 FR 63726, October 31, 2006) until January 26, 2007. We recently learned that, on January 26, 2007, the last day of the comment period, technical problems prevented some persons from submitting electronic comments. Therefore, FDA is reopening the comment period until February 26, 2007, to allow interested persons to submit comments for this rulemaking. DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on the proposed rule by February 26, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. 2005N-0403 and RIN 0910-AA49, by any of the following methods: *Electronic Submissions* Submit electronic comments in the following ways: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Agency Web site: *http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the agency Web site. *Written Submissions* Submit written submissions in the following ways: • FAX: 301-827-6870. • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions]: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. To ensure more timely processing of comments, FDA is no longer accepting comments submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages you to continue to submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal or the agency Web site, as described previously in the ADDRESSES portion of this document under *Electronic Submissions* . *Instructions* : All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket No. and Regulatory Information Number
(RIN)for this rulemaking. All comments received may be posted without change to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* , including any personal information provided. For additional information on submitting comments, see the “Request for Comments” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket* : For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: *For information concerning drugs regulated by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research* : John W. Gardner, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-330), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-8920, *john.gardner@fda.hhs.gov* . *For information concerning products regulated by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research* : Valerie A. Butler, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM-17), Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, 301-827-6210, *valerie.butler@fda.hhs.gov* . *For information concerning animal drugs* : Lowell Fried (HFV-212) or Isabel W. Pocurull (HFV-226), Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9059 or 240-453-6853, *lowell.fried@fda.hhs.gov* or *isabel.pocurull@fda.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) written or electronic comments on the proposed rule (see DATES ). Submit a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any mailed comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments are to be identified with Docket No. 2005N-0403. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Dated: February 1, 2007. Jeffrey Shuren, Assistant Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. E7-2123 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 49 and 51 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0076, FRL-8276-8] RIN 2060-AH37 Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule; announcement of reopening of comment period. SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing a reopening of the public comment period on our proposed amendments for the Review of New Sources and Modification in Indian Country (August 21, 2006). The EPA is reopening the comment period that originally ended on January 19, 2007. The reopened comment period will close on March 20, 2007. The EPA is reopening the comment period because of the number of requests we received in a timely manner. DATES: *Comments.* Comments must be received on or before March 20, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0076, by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epamail.epa.gov.* • *Fax:* 202-566-1741. • *Mail:* Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0076, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest, Mailcode: 6102T, Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of 2 copies. In addition, please mail a copy of your comments on the information collection provisions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue, Northwest, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0076. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions.* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0076. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *http://www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *http://www.regulations.gov* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is
(202)566-1742. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information, contact Jessica Montanez, Air Quality Policy Division, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (C504-03), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number
(919)541-3407, facsimile number
(919)541-5509, electronic mail e-mail address: *montanez.jessica@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI.* Do not submit this information to EPA through *http://www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0076. 2. *Tips for Preparing Your Comments.* When submitting comments, remember to: • Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). • Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)part or section number. • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. B. Where Can I Get a Copy of This Document and Other Related Information? In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this proposal will also be available on the World Wide Web (WWW). Following signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of this notice will be posted in the regulations and standards section of our NSR home page located at *http://www.epa.gov/nsr* and on the tribal air home page at *http://www.epa.gov/oar/tribal.* Dated: January 30, 2007. Jenny Noonan Edmonds, Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. [FR Doc. E7-2101 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915; FRL-8276-4] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Amendments to the Minor New Source Review Program AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP)revision submitted by the State of West Virginia for the purpose of this rule is to set forth the procedures for stationary source reporting and the criteria for obtaining a permit to construct and operate a new stationary source which is not a major stationary source. The rule establishes the requirements for obtaining an administrative update to an existing permit, temporary permit or a general permit, and for filling notifications and maintaining records of changes not otherwise subject to the permit requirements of this rule. The rule establishes public participation requirements as well as procedures for the transfer, suspension and revocation of permits. EPA is approving these revisions to West Virginia's SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act. In the Final Rules section of this **Federal Register** , EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A more detailed description of the state submittal and EPA's evaluation are included in a Technical Support Document
(TSD)prepared in support of this rulemaking action. A copy of the TSD is available, upon request, from the EPA Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. DATES: Comments must be received in writing by March 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915 by one of the following methods: A. *www.regulations.gov* . B. *E-Mail:* *campbell.dave@epa.gov* . C. *Mail:* EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915, David Campbell, Chief, Permits and Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP11, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. D. *Hand Delivery:* At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0915. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* , your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston, WV 25304. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemarie Nino,
(215)814-3377, or by e-mail at *nino.rose@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the information provided in the direct final action, with the same title, that is located in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this **Federal Register** publication. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. Dated: January 31, 2007. James W. Newsom, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. [FR Doc. E7-2127 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140-200605(b); FRL-8276-6] Approval and Promulgation of State Plan for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Florida: Emissions Guidelines for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the Clean Air Act
(CAA)section 111(d)/129 State Plan submitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Florida DEP) for the State of Florida on November 29, 2001, and subsequently updated on March 11, 2005. The State Plan is for implementing and enforcing the Emissions Guidelines applicable to existing Small Municipal Waste Combustion
(SMWC)units. The State Plan was submitted by Florida DEP to satisfy CAA requirements. In the Rules Section of this **Federal Register** , EPA is approving Florida's State Plan revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial plan and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to the direct final rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail:* *Majumder.joydeb@epa.gov.* 3. *Fax:*
(404)562-9195. 4. *Mail:* “EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0140,” Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 5. *Hand Delivery or Courier.* Deliver your comments to: Joydeb Majumder, Air Toxics and Monitoring Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business is Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holiday's comments. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joydeb Majumder, Air Toxics and Monitoring Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404)562-9121. Mr. Majumder can also be reached via electronic mail at *Majumder.joydeb@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct final rule which is published in the Rules Section of this **Federal Register** . Dated: January 19, 2007. J.I. Palmer, Jr., Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. E7-2118 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 371, 375, 386, and 387 [Docket No. FMCSA-2004-17008] RIN 2126-AA84 Brokers of Household Goods Transportation by Motor Vehicle AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); request for comments. SUMMARY: FMCSA proposes to amend its regulations to require brokers who arrange the transportation of household goods in interstate or foreign commerce for consumers to comply with additional consumer protection requirements. This rulemaking is in response to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and a petition for rulemaking from the American Moving and Storage Association. This rulemaking is intended to educate and inform consumers and brokers about fair and competitive business practices proposed by the FMCSA. DATES: FMCSA must receive your comments by May 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DOT DMS Docket Number FMCSA-2004-17008, by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Agency Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site. • *Fax:* 1-202-493-2251. • *Mail:* Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *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. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the agency name and docket number (FMCSA-2004-17008) or Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN)for this rulemaking (RIN 2126-AA84). Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading for further information. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://dms.dot.gov* at any time or to 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. *Privacy Act:* Anyone is able to search the electronic form for all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Comments received after the comment closing date will be included in the docket and we will consider late comments to the extent practicable. FMCSA may, however, issue a final rule at any time after the close of the comment period. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Dorothea Grymes, Household Goods Team, Commercial Enforcement Division,
(202)385-2400, FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Legal Basis for the Rulemaking The Secretary of Transportation's (Secretary) general jurisdiction to establish regulations concerning the procurement by property brokers of for-hire transportation in interstate or foreign commerce is found at 49 U.S.C. 13501. Brokers of household goods are a subset of all property brokers but specifically register with FMCSA as household goods brokers. This rulemaking applies only to household goods brokers procuring for-hire transportation in interstate or foreign commerce. The Secretary is authorized to collect from household goods brokers “information the Secretary decides is necessary” to ensure a transportation system that meets the needs of the United States. (49 U.S.C. 13101 and 13301). Brokers of household goods are required to register with the Secretary by 49 U.S.C. 13904(a)(1). Section 4142 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59), which made changes to certain other registration requirements, did not change registration requirements for household goods brokers. The Secretary also has authority to adopt regulations applicable to registered household goods brokers which “shall provide for the protection of shippers by motor vehicle.” (49 U.S.C. 13904(c)) The Secretary's authority to inspect and copy household goods broker records is found at 49 U.S.C. 14122. The Secretary has delegated these various authorities to the FMCSA Administrator. (49 CFR 1.73(a)). This rulemaking is based on the statutory provisions cited above and on the Household Goods Mover Oversight Enforcement and Reform Act of 2005, otherwise known as Title IV, Subtitle B of SAFETEA-LU. This rulemaking focuses on the business practices of household goods brokers engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. Household goods brokers arrange, but do not perform, the transportation of household goods shipments. FMCSA will address the SAFETEA-LU provisions specifically directed to household goods motor carriers in separate rulemakings, as appropriate. While section 4205 of SAFETEA-LU contains estimating requirements for household goods motor carriers, the general authority cited above allows FMCSA to establish such requirements for household goods brokers. Section 4212 of SAFETEA-LU directs the Secretary to require a household goods broker to provide shippers with the following information whenever the broker has contact with a shipper or a potential shipper: 1. The broker's U.S. DOT number. 2. The FMCSA pamphlet titled, “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move.” 3. A list of all motor carriers providing transportation of household goods used by the broker and a statement that the broker is not a motor carrier providing transportation of household goods. Section 4209 adds new civil penalties for unlawful broker estimating practices and increases existing civil penalties for providing motor carrier or broker services subject to FMCSA jurisdiction without being registered with FMCSA. Existing FMCSA Regulations Applicable to Household Goods Brokers Household goods brokers have been regulated by FMCSA and its predecessor agencies for many years and a number of regulations apply to them, including registration requirements (49 CFR part 365), process agent requirements (49 CFR part 366) and financial responsibility requirements (49 CFR part 387). Section 387.307 requires property brokers, including household goods brokers, to maintain a surety bond or trust fund agreement in the amount of at least $10,000 to provide for payments to motor carriers or shippers if the broker fails to carry out its agreement to supply transportation by authorized motor carriers. Part 371 specifies general property broker transaction record requirements, prohibits misrepresentation of the broker's name or non-carrier status, and prohibits certain rebating and compensation practices. Part 379 specifies general recordkeeping time periods. FMCSA can also issue orders to compel compliance, impose civil monetary penalties, revoke the broker's license, or seek federal court orders to stop statutory and/or regulatory violations. Because household goods brokers do not provide the actual transportation, they are not subject to FMCSA's safety jurisdiction. Previous Household Goods Rulemaking FMCSA regulations on household goods motor carriers and the proposed regulations for household goods brokers are intended for the protection of individual shippers (as defined in 49 U.S.C. 13102(13) added by section 4202 of SAFETEA-LU). FMCSA regulations on household goods motor carriers and the proposed regulations for household goods brokers do not apply to corporate, government, or military-arranged and paid moves. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), one of FMCSA's predecessor agencies, concluded that household goods brokers may not provide estimates directly to shippers. 1 The ICC reasoned that shippers aggrieved by an act or omission of a broker would be unprotected by the household goods consumer protection regulations (currently codified at 49 CFR part 375) because only motor carriers were required to comply with these regulations. This problem was addressed in the Household Goods; Consumer Protection Regulations issued by FMCSA in 2003 (68 FR 35064; June 11, 2003), which substantially revised part 375. 2 1 See *Entry Control of Brokers* , 126 M.C.C. 476 (1977); *Exec-Van Systems, Inc., Broker Application* , 128 M.C.C. 669 (1978); and *Ward Moving & Storage Co., Inc., Household Goods Broker Application* , 132, M.C.C. 589 (1981). 2 These regulations were interim final rules. Following several technical amendments, the regulations became final rules in July 2005 (70 FR 39949, July 12, 2005). In its 2003 rulemaking, FMCSA added a new § 375.409 that allowed a household goods broker to provide an estimate to a shipper if the following requirements are met: 1. There must be a written agreement between the broker and the motor carrier. 2. The written agreement must provide that the motor carrier adopts the broker's estimate as its own. 3. The motor carrier must ensure compliance with all the requirements of part 375 pertaining to estimates, including the requirement that the motor carrier must relinquish possession of the shipment if the shipper pays the motor carrier 110 percent of a non-binding estimate at the time of delivery. In the preamble to the 2003 rulemaking FMCSA explained that the individual shipper would not be deprived of the protections provided in part 375, even if the broker could not be held directly responsible for compliance, because the motor carrier would still be held accountable for complying with part 375. Petition for Rulemaking On March 6, 2003, the American Moving and Storage Association
(AMSA)petitioned FMCSA to initiate a rulemaking to amend 49 CFR part 371, “Brokers of Property,” to impose specific additional requirements on household goods brokers. AMSA's main argument for additional rulemaking was its assertion that there were an increasing number of “moving-related” Web sites hosted by household goods brokers engaging in unfair business practices. AMSA's petition states a significant number of the complaints it receives involve the same Internet companies, many of which are based in Florida. AMSA argues the fact these companies are involved in moves having no connection to Florida as an origin or destination demonstrates the impact of the Internet on these household goods broker arrangements and how the Internet is being used to entrap unsuspecting consumers. AMSA states it often receives complaints from consumers who have dealt with a Florida-based Internet broker, who in turn arranged a move from a non-Florida origin to another non-Florida destination. AMSA states once these brokers establish a business relationship with the consumer, they require payment of a deposit of several hundred dollars or more, fade from the picture, and leave the consumer to deal with, in most cases, a motor carrier who has failed to register with FMCSA. AMSA believes that a significant network of unscrupulous household goods brokers and household goods motor carriers is functioning with the sole purpose of bilking the moving public by demanding charges that bear no relation to the legitimate costs of moving, or by collecting charges for services that are not performed. AMSA provided ten additional examples of complaints it has received to illustrate the nature of the problems being experienced by the moving public. The examples generally involve circumstances similar to the Florida example discussed in the previous paragraph. *AMSA wants FMCSA to amend our regulations to:* • Specifically name and include household goods brokers in 49 CFR part 371, Brokers of Property; • Require a household goods broker to identify itself as a broker and provide its location and telephone number; • Add a requirement for household goods brokers to provide consumers with 49 CFR part 375, Appendix A, the pamphlet “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move;” • Add a requirement that a household goods broker must only use FMCSA-registered household goods motor carriers (those with a U.S. DOT identification number, insurance on file with us, and registered to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce); • Add a requirement for full written disclosure concerning estimates in advance of the move; • Add a requirement that the broker will refund consumer deposits if the consumer cancels the shipment; • Add a requirement to advise the consumer about the existence of the household goods broker's surety bond/trust fund; and • Add a requirement to report illegal operations of household goods carriers to us. FMCSA granted AMSA's petition and issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in 2004 (69 FR 76664; December 22, 2004), which is also available in docket FMCSA-2004-17008. In the ANPRM, FMCSA sought answers to 36 questions related to household goods broker issues. The questions sought to determine the extent to which the public believes a problem exists and, if so, whether regulatory or non-regulatory solutions would best solve the problem. The ANPRM also addressed potential cost-benefit estimates, potential information collection burdens, and other potential impacts. The agency also requested comments on an array of specific regulatory requirements that should be considered. Summary of Responses to ANPRM *FMCSA received comments from the following nine entities:* AMSA; the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, Inc. (OOIDA), an international trade association representing independent owner-operators and professional drivers; the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO), the regulator of intrastate household goods brokers in the State of Ohio; James Lamb, a household goods broker registered with FMCSA under the name Carrier Authority.com, Inc.; Tom Kizer, an FMCSA-registered broker doing business as Absolute Transportation Logistics; Timothy Walker, owner of the Web site MovingScam.com; Norman S. Marshall, an attorney; Noble Mountain Tree Farm, a shipper of Christmas trees; and Roger A. Bauer of Western Wholesale Distributing. Generally, the commenters did not express support for rulemaking action and they did not address many of the specific questions raised in the ANPRM. For example, none of the commenters submitted specific information relating to the questions about the estimated number of household goods brokers, or questions about details of the household goods broker business. Commenters did, however, offer useful information and suggestions in other areas to assist FMCSA to develop this proposal. Commenters expressed concern that household goods shippers may not be aware they are dealing with a household goods broker rather than a household goods carrier and that FMCSA should require household goods brokers to disclose their status and provide information to facilitate contacting household goods brokers in the event of problems with a shipment. Certain commenters also urged FMCSA to require household goods brokers to deal solely with FMCSA-registered household goods motor carriers to minimize potential problems with a move. Timothy Walker recommends FMCSA require household goods brokers to disclose which household goods carriers they have agreements with or, at a minimum, which household goods carrier the household goods broker intends to tender the customer's shipment to before the move so customers have adequate time to research the carrier's license status and business history. James Lamb and PUCO believe that although household goods brokers could play some role in providing written estimates, the primary responsibility for issuing and honoring estimates should continue to remain with the household goods carrier and the household goods broker should be required to advise the customer of this fact. PUCO and AMSA believe household goods brokers should be required to refund a deposit required by a household goods broker, minus the reasonable cost of any services provided, if the shipper cancels the shipment. James Lamb believes that if a household goods broker requests deposits for a planned shipment, the household goods broker should disclose the deposit's terms to the shipper. FMCSA has adopted some of the commenters' suggestions in the proposed rule, as discussed in more detail in the section headed “Proposed Rule”. Continuing Problems With Household Goods Brokers While FMCSA has addressed certain household goods broker issues in recent years, a number of problems remain. Based on FMCSA's review of the responses to the ANPRM and complaints about household goods brokers, the agency believes some household goods brokers are acting deceptively, particularly on the Internet. These broker operations use various disguises and facades to mislead vulnerable consumers into believing that they are complying with FMCSA regulations. For example, a consumer may visit a Web site and be presented with misleading information for moving services. The Web sites may list a number of motor carriers that are performing transportation services, however, the list on the Web site may include some motor carriers that do not have operating authority from FMCSA to engage in the interstate transportation of household goods. There are several factors contributing to the problems experienced by shippers in using household goods brokers: *1. Minimal or no requirement to disclose contact and nature of operations information.* The Internet has provided an easy way for companies to advertise; however, it also makes it possible for unscrupulous companies to effectively conceal their identities, avoid disclosing the true nature of their operations, make misrepresentations to consumers, and defraud the moving public. *2. No protection of consumers from unlicensed, illegal motor carriers.* Evidence from complaints filed with FMCSA by some consumers show household goods brokers have arranged for transportation by unregistered motor carriers. Such carriers are frequently not accountable to customers, whose attempts to obtain redress for problems associated with the move may be ignored or otherwise undermined. *3. The practice of quoting estimates of charges without providing written documents.* Unscrupulous brokers often fail to give consumers written estimates of charges, which permit them to avoid accountability when conflicts later arise. This is compounded by the fact that consumers are often persuaded to do business with the broker on the basis of an unrealistically low estimate, but may be required to pay substantially higher transportation charges under the tariff of the motor carrier transporting the shipment. *4. No requirement for brokers to disclose refund policy for customers' deposits when shipments are cancelled.* Shippers have alleged household goods brokers have consistently not made clear their customer deposit refund policies. *5. No significant identifiable capital investment, reputation and standing in the community, or insurance concerns.* Because many household goods brokers make such small investments in their business, there is a lack of incentive to protect this investment by following generally accepted business practices of fair and honest dealings with their customers. *6. Consumer lack of knowledge and experience with moving transactions.* Household goods brokers are dealing with a relatively unsophisticated group of shippers who may not be familiar with the applicable regulatory requirements, thus highlighting the need for specific corrective actions to better educate consumers so they can better protect themselves against substantial financial and property losses. *7. Internet brokers providing false or inaccurate information on their Web sites.* A number of Internet brokers are providing false or misleading information on their Web sites, contrary to current “advertising” requirements in part 371. The Proposed Rule This proposal addresses the problems identified above and incorporates requirements mandated by SAFETEA-LU, recommended by AMSA in its petition, and some of the recommendations made by commenters to the ANPRM. FMCSA proposes to amend the current broker regulations in part 371 by adding a new subpart B specifically for household goods brokers; amending appendix B of part 386 to incorporate the civil penalties applicable to household goods brokers added by SAFETEA-LU; and amending part 387 to increase the amount of surety bond or trust fund currently required for household goods brokers. This proposed rule is intended to educate and inform consumers and household goods brokers about fair and competitive business practices the FMCSA believes should be a part of every transaction between individual shippers and household goods brokers. Impact on Competition The proposed rule consists of five basic elements: • It would require household goods brokers to disclose to individual shippers critical information designed to educate the shipper and facilitate a satisfactory moving experience. • It would require household goods brokers to use only household goods motor carriers that are properly licensed and insured. • It would impose additional requirements governing estimates, consistent with those statutorily imposed on household goods motor carriers. • It would incorporate new statutory penalties for providing estimates without a contract with a household goods motor carrier and for operating without being registered with FMCSA. • It would adjust for inflation the current minimum level of financial responsibility required of household goods brokers. The proposed disclosure requirements are intended to result in better-educated individual shippers who, armed with information about the household goods moving process, the regulations governing that process, and household goods broker cancellation, deposit and refund policies, will be in a better position to evaluate whether a particular household goods broker or household goods motor carrier best serves their moving needs. A more sophisticated population of customers encourages service providers to compete for their business by offering better quality service, adopting more customer-friendly policies or offering lower prices. The proposed disclosure requirements, therefore, would tend to be pro-competitive. The proposal to require household goods brokers to verify that the motor carriers they use are properly licensed and registered to transport household goods is intended to ensure that motor carriers compete on a level playing field and customers receive better service. Interstate household goods carriers are required by law to register with FMCSA, maintain minimum levels of public liability and cargo insurance and charge only published tariff rates. Unregistered carriers are more likely to lack the necessary insurance and tariff and to ignore the consumer protection regulations in 49 CFR part 375. It is generally cheaper to operate if a carrier does not comply with the regulatory requirements applicable to its industry. Permitting, or failing to discourage, use of illegal motor carriers penalizes competitors who comply with the regulations and incur the additional costs associated with compliance. By requiring household goods brokers to use registered, compliant carriers, the proposed rule will encourage non-compliant motor carriers to register with FMCSA, thus creating a level playing field that should result in better customer service through the promotion of fair competition and the elimination of unlawful activity. By requiring household goods brokers to put all estimates in writing based on a physical survey of the household goods (unless the household goods broker or its agent is located more than 50 air-miles from the shipper's location or the shipper waives a physical survey), the proposed rule intends to subject household goods brokers to the same estimating requirements imposed by statute on household goods motor carriers by section 4205 of SAFETEA-LU. Having several written estimates will allow consumers to make more informed choices and level the playing field. Household goods brokers commonly provide telephone estimates without ever viewing the household goods. Experience has shown that such estimates are less reliable than estimates based on a physical survey. Many consumers may not realize this and choose a household goods broker based on a low-ball telephone estimate. However, the ultimate price, based on the shipment's weight, may be considerably higher. By promoting more reliable estimates, the proposal will encourage competition by standardizing the estimating rules and reducing the “sticker shock” experienced by consumers at their new residence after receiving and ordering moving services based on unreasonably low estimates. FMCSA recognizes that SAFETEA-LU did not prescribe estimating requirements for household goods brokers as it did for household goods motor carriers. Nevertheless, we believe that we have existing statutory authority in 49 U.S.C. 13904(c) to do this and that an individual shipper's protection against unreliable estimates should not depend upon whether the shipper uses a broker or carrier to provide the estimate. We also recognize that unlike household goods motor carriers, who maintain office and/or agency locations in reasonable proximity to most shippers, household good brokers commonly transact business over the Internet, commonly do not have agents, and, in most cases, are located more than 50 miles from the shipping site. Although household goods broker James Lamb commented his company arranges for on-site inspections as a part of its business practices, FMCSA believes most household goods brokers do not arrange for such on-site inspections. The Agency invites public comment on the impact to shippers, brokers and motor carriers of applying or removing the 50 air-mile provision for household goods broker estimates. FMCSA would also like comments on alternatives to the 50-mile requirement. One such alternative might be to require that all estimates provided by household goods brokers and motor carriers be based on a physical survey, regardless of shipper location, unless the individual shipper specifically waives the physical survey requirement. FMCSA also invites comment on whether permitting individual shippers to waive a physical survey by checking an “opt-out” box on-line would satisfy the SAFETEA-LU requirement that physical survey waivers be in the form of a signed, written agreement. The Agency is not specifically proposing an opt-out waiver procedure at this time, but will consider an opt-out waiver or other waiver suggestions aimed at making the waiver process more flexible and convenient, consistent with statutory requirements. Comments should also address whether electronic waivers can be provided consistent with the provisions of 15 U.S.C. 7001 *et seq.* , the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, Pub. L. 106-229, 114 Stat. 464 (June 30, 2000). The penalties incorporated by the proposed rule are mandated by statute and are effective even without rulemaking. They are intended to make the cost of noncompliance with the statute significantly higher than the cost of compliance. By encouraging compliance by illegal operators, they are designed to eliminate unfair competitive disadvantages to legitimate operators who must bear the cost of compliance. The inflation adjustment to the household goods broker minimum financial responsibility requirement applies to all household goods brokers and is based on the fact that the protection provided by the current required surety bond or trust agreement has significantly diminished because the minimum amount has not changed in over 25 years. The proposed change in the requirement should not have an anti-competitive impact. Legitimate household goods brokers who honor their legal obligations will continue to remain in business. FMCSA invites comments regarding the potential impact of the proposed rule on competition within the household goods moving industry. Subpart B—Special Rules for Household Goods Brokers Proposed new subpart B of part 371 for the most part contains new requirements mandated by SAFETEA-LU or suggested by the AMSA Petition for Rulemaking. A few of the proposed requirements in part 371 would echo certain provisions of part 375 applicable to motor carriers of household goods. Section 371.101 If I operate as a household goods broker in interstate or foreign commerce, must I comply with subpart B of this part? This proposed section requires household goods brokers that operate in interstate or foreign commerce to comply with all of the provisions of subpart B. Section 371.103 What are the definitions of terms used in this subpart? This section contains a definition of “household goods broker” and cross references the definitions of “household goods” and “individual shipper” in § 375.103. Section 371.105 Must I use a motor carrier that has a valid U.S. DOT number and valid operating authority issued by FMCSA to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce? This proposed section makes it clear that a household goods broker may only act as a household goods broker for a household goods motor carrier that has a valid U.S.DOT number and valid operating authority issued by FMCSA. This proposed requirement was requested by AMSA in its Petition for Rulemaking and was suggested by some of the commenters to the ANPRM. The use of FMCSA-registered household goods motor carriers to provide the transportation will provide a greater degree of assurance that the household goods motor carrier will comply with applicable FMCSA regulations. FMCSA will provide household goods brokers with instructions on the use of the agency's Internet Web site ( *http://www.protectyourmove.gov* ) to help them quickly locate the registration, insurance, and safety records of household goods motor carriers before tendering a shipment to a household goods carrier. These instructions will be provided in compliance guides to implement this provision, if the agency publishes a final rule. These instructions may also be provided in small entity compliance guides, 3 if the agency must publish such guides in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 3 For each final rule requiring a final regulatory flexibility analysis, section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (codified at 5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) requires Federal agencies to publish one or more small entity compliance guides. FMCSA has determined preliminarily in its analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), discussed later in this NPRM, that this proposed rule will most likely not have a significant economic impact on all 690 small entity household goods brokers (and any future small entity household goods brokers), but there remains some uncertainty as to the impacts to individual brokers. The agency has prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. FMCSA invites comments on its initial regulatory flexibility analysis. Section 371.107 What information must I display in my advertisements and Internet web homepage? Proposed § 371.107 implements the section 4212 of SAFETEA-LU requirements that household goods brokers disclose to potential shippers their Department of Transportation number and that they are not motor carriers providing transportation of household goods. FMCSA is also proposing that household goods brokers disclose additional information not required by SAFETEA-LU, but which FMCSA believes is necessary to properly educate and assist individual shippers. This section would require a household goods broker to prominently display in its advertisements and on its Web site the following: 1. The physical location of the business. 2. Its “MC” operating authority number and U.S.DOT registration number. 4 4 FMCSA has proposed eliminating the “MC” operating authority number in its NPRM of May 19, 2005 (70 FR 28990) regarding the Unified Registration System mandated by the ICC Termination Act of 1995. Until FMCSA publishes a final rule in that proceeding, we propose to include a requirement for the household goods broker to display the “MC” number in its advertisements. 3. Its status as a household goods broker. 4. A statement that the broker does not transport household goods but that it can arrange for such transportation. Section 371.109 Must I inform individual shippers which motor carriers I use? Proposed § 371.109 requires a household goods broker to provide each shipper or potential shipper who has contact with the household goods broker with a list of all household goods motor carriers used by the broker (including their U.S.DOT and MC numbers) and a statement that the household goods broker is not a motor carrier providing transportation of household goods. This requirement is specifically mandated by section 4212(3) of SAFETEA-LU. Section 371.111 Must I provide individual shippers with Federal consumer protection information? Proposed § 371.111 would require a household goods broker to provide potential shippers with one copy of each of the two FMCSA consumer pamphlets: “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move,” and “Ready to Move?—Tips for a Successful Interstate Move.” Section 4212 of SAFETEA-LU requires household goods brokers to distribute publication ESA 03005, entitled “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move”. However, the publication number used in the statute actually refers to “Ready to Move?—Tips for a Successful Interstate Move”. “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move” is publication OCE 100. Section 4205 of SAFETEA-LU requires household goods motor carriers to distribute both pamphlets and we propose to impose the same requirement on household goods brokers. Although section 4212 requires household goods brokers to provide consumer protection information “whenever they have contact with a shipper or potential shipper”, we do not interpret this language to mean that the information must be provided every time there is contact. We believe that Congress intended that this information be furnished to individual shippers at the time an estimate is given and the shipper may not have come into contact with a carrier at that stage of the move. This section permits the household goods broker to make the information available through an Internet home page hyperlink as suggested by PUCO in its comments or by physical distribution to each potential shipper. Providing an Internet home page hyperlink as an option to physical distribution will reduce regulatory burdens on the small entities subject to this proposal. The household goods broker may distribute each of the two publications in the form published by FMCSA or in a modified format published by the household goods motor carrier the household goods broker intends to use to provide the transportation, provided the modifications comply with 49 CFR 375.213. This section would also require a household goods broker to obtain and retain for three years an electronic or paper receipt showing that the shipper received copies of both documents. This will enable household goods brokers to demonstrate compliance with the distribution requirement. Section 371.113 May I provide individual shippers with a written estimate? This proposed section requires that, if the household goods broker provides an estimate, it must be in writing and must be based on a physical survey of the shipper's household goods if the household goods are located within a 50 air-mile radius of the broker or its estimating agent. This proposed section is consistent with 49 U.S.C. 14104(b), as amended by section 4205 of SAFETEA-LU. In accordance with section 4209 of SAFETEA-LU, proposed § 371.113(a) also requires the household goods broker to prepare the estimate in accordance with a signed written agreement with the motor carrier who will actually transport the shipper's household goods. Proposed § 371.113(b) requires household goods brokers to base their estimates upon the published tariffs of the authorized household goods motor carriers they use. Proposed § 371.113(c) permits shippers to waive the physical survey requirement. Proposed § 371.113(d) requires that the records of transactions conducted under this section be retained for as long as a household goods broker provides estimates on behalf of an authorized household goods motor carrier and for three years thereafter for shipments actually arranged for the individual shipper. Section 371.115 Must I maintain agreements with motor carriers before providing written estimates on behalf of these carriers? Proposed § 371.115(a) requires household goods brokers to maintain written agreements with authorized household goods motor carriers before providing estimates and lists the items that must be included in these agreements. Proposed § 371.115(b) states that the signed written agreement required under the section is considered to be public information to be produced on reasonable request of the public. Proposed § 371.115(c) requires that the agreements required by this section be retained for as long as a household goods broker provides estimates on behalf of the authorized household goods motor carrier and for three years thereafter. Section 371.117 Must I provide individual shippers with my policies for canceling a shipment? This proposed section requires a household goods broker to disclose its cancellation policy, deposit policy, and refund policy on its Web site and in its customer agreements. The proposed section also requires the household goods broker to maintain records that document requests for cancellation and the disposition of cancellations, i.e., proof of refunds when made. FMCSA has found that household goods brokers have consistently retained customer deposits even when the customer cancels the shipment well in advance of the planned moving date. In its Petition for Rulemaking and comments to the ANPRM, AMSA proposed that, before a deposit can be demanded by the household goods broker, the broker must make full disclosure of the terms governing deposits and forfeitures in the event of cancellations. This would add an additional layer of protection for the consumer. FMCSA does not believe it should mandate the specifics of a household goods broker's refund policies nor require household goods brokers to refund deposits, as the household goods broker may have incurred legitimate costs on behalf of shippers who subsequently decide to not use the household goods broker's services. Section 371.119 What must I do before I arrange with a motor carrier to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce? This proposed section requires that each household goods broker must “inspect, verify, and document” the household goods motor carrier's U.S.DOT registration and MC operating authority validity each month. The household goods broker would comply with this requirement by using FMCSA's Internet Web site ( *http://www.protectyourmove.gov* ) to check whether the motor carrier has active for-hire authority to transport household goods and evidence of the necessary financial responsibility on file with FMCSA. The household goods broker must print or electronically save a copy of the on-line report(s) showing the information it has verified and must maintain the information for at least three years. FMCSA will provide detailed instructions on how to navigate FMCSA's Internet Web site ( * http:// www.protectyourmove.gov * ) in its compliance guides to implement this provision, if the agency publishes a final rule. These instructions may also be provided in small entity compliance guides. 5 5 See footnote 3 above for a discussion of the small entity compliance guide. In developing this proposal, FMCSA considered requiring household goods brokers to inspect, verify, and document each household goods motor carrier's U.S.DOT registration and MC operating authority numbers before giving a shipper every estimate and before arranging any shipment with a household goods motor carrier. The agency decided not to propose this option because the costs to the 690 registered household goods brokers would increase from approximately $42,400 to about $220,000 per year. The agency is proposing to minimize costs imposed on responsible small household goods brokers to the extent practicable by proposing the checks be made on a monthly basis. See the agency's draft Regulatory Evaluation in docket FMCSA-2004-17008 for more information. FMCSA encourages comments and data, including cost data, on whether any potential final rule on checking carriers' registrations should be more or less frequent than this proposal. Section 371.121 What penalties may FMCSA impose for violations of this part? This proposed section states that household goods brokers who violate the provisions of subpart B would be subject to the penalty provisions of 49 U.S.C. chapter 149. It also confirms that these penalty provisions would not deprive a shipper of any other remedies provided by law. Section 4209 of SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 14901(d) by adding new penalties and increasing existing penalties applicable to household goods brokers. See the discussion below under part 386, appendix B. Proposed § 371.121 would parallel current § 375.901. Part 375—transportation of Household Goods in Interstate Commerce; Consumer Protection Regulations Section 375.409 May household goods brokers provide estimates? We propose changing § 375.409 to state that the written agreement between the household goods broker and the household goods motor carrier must contain all of the items required in proposed § 371.115. Part 386—Rules of Practice for Motor Carrier, Broker, Freight Forwarder, and Hazardous Materials Proceedings Appendix B to Part 386—Penalty Schedule; Violations and Maximum Monetary Penalties FMCSA proposes to amend paragraph
(g)of appendix B by adding two new provisions to specify the minimum civil penalties for:
(1)household goods brokers who make estimates without the necessary contracts with household goods motor carriers in effect; and
(2)household goods brokers and household goods motor carriers who operate in interstate commerce without the necessary FMCSA registration. These proposed new paragraphs incorporate into our rules the penalties established in section 4209 of SAFETEA-LU. Part 387—Minimum Levels of Financial Responsibility for Motor Carriers Section 387.307 Property broker surety bond or trust fund FMCSA proposes to add specific language to § 387.307(a) to require household goods brokers to have a surety bond or trust fund in effect for $25,000. The ICC created the financial responsibility requirements for household goods brokers in 1980. The requirement was set at $10,000 to ensure shippers or motor carriers would be paid if the household goods broker failed to carry out its contracts, agreements, or arrangements for the supplying of transportation by authorized household goods motor carriers. Although commenters to the ANPRM stated that the $10,000 requirement for the surety bond/trust fund should be raised, FMCSA does not have adequate data to determine the appropriate amount of increase necessary for the protection of carriers or shippers. Accordingly, FMCSA is proposing to raise the surety bond/trust fund requirement for household goods brokers from $10,000 to $25,000, based on adjustments for inflation. Adjusting the $10,000 minimum figure for inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index, results in purchasing power of $24,490.29 in 2006. Because a final rule based on this NPRM may not be in effect until 2008, it is reasonable to round up to $25,000. When FMCSA obtains adequate data to propose raising the limit higher than $25,000, FMCSA will consider proposing that higher limit in a future rulemaking or supplemental proposal. We invite public comment on the appropriate level of the surety bond or trust fund. Regulatory Analyses Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review); DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures FMCSA has determined that this action is a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 and the U.S. Department of Transportation regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979) because there is substantial public interest in the interstate transportation of household goods and related consumer protection regulations. FMCSA estimates that the maximum first-year discounted costs to the industry of the proposed rule would be about $1.691 million, while maximum first-year discounted costs to society of the proposed rule would be about $1.841 million. Costs in additional years would be dependent on new household goods brokers entering the marketplace, but would be less than incurred during the first year. As such, the costs of this proposal do not exceed the $100 million annual threshold as defined in Executive Order 12866. FMCSA's full draft Regulatory Evaluation is in the docket for this NPRM. It explains in detail how we estimated cost impacts of the proposal. This proposal would establish additional consumer protection regulations specifically for household goods brokers to supplement the regulations at 49 CFR part 375, which apply to motor carriers transporting household goods by commercial motor vehicle in interstate commerce. FMCSA estimates these regulatory changes will produce three primary cost impacts on household goods brokers:
(1)Costs of training certain employees on the proper application of the regulatory changes;
(2)costs to revise broker marketing materials, forms, and orders for service, including technical writing and printing costs associated with incorporating mandated consumer information pamphlets; and
(3)additional information collection burdens associated with the new regulations, especially information collection burdens to travel to and perform on-site physical surveys for written estimates, information collection burdens to make written agreements with household goods motor carriers, and information collection burdens to verify household goods motor carrier authority/insurance validity. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA)(5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857), requires Federal agencies, as a part of each rulemaking, to consider regulatory alternatives that minimize the impact on small entities while achieving the objectives of the rulemaking. FMCSA has evaluated the effects of this proposed rule on small entities as required by the RFA. This proposed rule directly affects all household goods brokers required to register with FMCSA, of which there are approximately 690 active, registered household goods brokers. FMCSA estimates 100 percent of these registered household goods brokers are small entities. FMCSA believes, based on its draft Regulatory Evaluation, that this proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, but there remains some uncertainty as to the impacts to individual household goods brokers. FMCSA has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. A copy of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis can be found attached to the draft Regulatory Evaluation in docket FMCSA-2004-17008. (See the last three pages of the Regulatory Evaluation.) FMCSA has chosen not to certify at this stage of the rulemaking that a significant impact will not occur and welcomes comments on our analysis and findings. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This proposed rule does not impose a Federal mandate resulting in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $128.1 million or more in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). National Environmental Policy Act The agency analyzed this proposed rule for the purpose of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ) and determined under our environmental procedures Order 5610.1 published March 1, 2004 (69 FR 9680), that this action is categorically excluded
(CE)under Appendix 2, paragraphs 6.d, 6.m, and 6.q of the Order from further environmental documentation. These categorical exclusions relate to rulemaking actions affecting household goods brokers. In addition, the agency believes that the action includes no extraordinary circumstances that would have any effect on the quality of the environment. Thus, the action does not require an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. We have also analyzed this proposed rule under the Clean Air Act, as amended
(CAA)section 176(c), (42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* ) and implementing regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Approval of this action is exempt from the CAA's general conformity requirement since it involves rulemaking and policy development and issuance. See 40 CFR 93.153(c)(2). It would not result in any emissions increase nor would it have any potential to result in emissions that are above the general conformity rule's *de minimis* emission threshold levels. Moreover, it is reasonably foreseeable that the rule would not increase total CMV mileage, change the routing of CMVs, how CMVs operate, or the CMV fleet-mix of motor carriers. This action merely establishes regulations applicable to the business practices of household goods brokers, who do not operate CMVs. We seek comment on these determinations. Privacy Impact Assessment FMCSA conducted a privacy impact assessment of this proposed rule as required by Section 522(a)(5) of the FY 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act, Pub. L. 108-447, 118 Stat. 3268 (Dec. 8, 2004) [set out as a note to 5 U.S.C. § 552a]. The assessment considers any impacts of the proposed rule on the privacy of information in an identifiable form and related matters. FMCSA has determined this proposal contains no privacy impacts. Paperwork Reduction Act Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), a Federal agency must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for each collection of information it conducts, sponsors, or requires through regulations. FMCSA will seek approval of the information collection requirements in a new information collection to be entitled “Practices of Household Goods Brokers.” The collected information encompasses that which is generated, maintained, retained, disclosed, and provided to, or for, the agency under 49 CFR part 371. It will assist shippers in their commercial dealings with interstate household goods brokers. The collection of information will be used by prospective shippers to make informed decisions about contracts and services to be ordered, executed, and settled within the interstate household goods motor carrier industry. These information collection items were required by regulations issued by the former ICC; however, that agency was not required to comply with the PRA. When these items transferred from the ICC to the Federal Highway Administration, and ultimately to FMCSA, no OMB control number was assigned to cover this information collection transfer. It was therefore necessary to calculate the old information collection burden hours for these items approved under the ICC rules and to add the new burden that may be generated by this proposal. Assumptions used for calculation of the information collection burden include the following:
(1)There are currently approximately 690 interstate household goods brokers; and
(2)FMCSA estimates 125 new household goods brokers will register with FMCSA each year, making them subject to FMCSA regulations. Table 1 summarizes the information collection burden hours by correlating the information collection activities with the sections of part 371 in which they appear. See attachment A of the supporting statement for the Paperwork Reduction Act Submission in docket FMCSA-2004-17008 for the detailed FMCSA analysis. The table shows whether each information collection activity was required under ICC regulations in 1995. Table 1 Type of burden Proposed section First yr. burden Annual hourly burden New burden? Household Goods Broker Transactions Old 371.3 41,400 41,400 No. Separate accounting system 6 Old 371.13 1,000 1,000 No. Web site and Advertisement Information 371.107 173 32 Yes. List and Statement 371.109 173 32 Yes. Adding Hyperlinks on Household Goods Broker Web site to FMCSA Booklet Information “Ready to Move” and “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move” 371.111(a)(1) 311 57 Yes. Distribute FMCSA's Booklets 371.111(a)(2) 1,250 1,250 Yes. Distribute Household Goods Motor Carrier's Booklets 371.111(a)(3) 1,250 1,250 Yes. Shipper's Signed and Dated Statement 371.111(b)&(c) 29,140 29,140 Yes. Travel to location within 50 air miles of broker and physically survey household goods 371.113 37,500 37,500 Yes. Written agreement with household goods motor carrier 371.115 13,800 2,500 Yes. Disclose cancellation, deposit, and refund policies 371.117(a) 173 32 Yes. Disposition of shipper's cancel request 371.117(b) 250 250 Yes. Carrier monthly operating authority status check 371.119 1,400 1,400 Yes. “Old” Burden Hours 42,400 42,400 New Burden Hours 85,420 73,450 Total Burden Hours for This Information Collection 127,820 115,850 6 FMCSA believes setting up the first accounting system for a new business is a usual and customary business practice. The PRA regulations at 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2) allows FMCSA to calculate no burden when the agency demonstrates to OMB that the activity needed to comply with the specific regulation is usual and customary. The supporting statement in the docket demonstrates that setting up and accounting system is a usual and customary practice when starting a new business. FMCSA seeks comment on whether setting up the first accounting system for a new business is a usual and customary business practice. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) This rulemaking meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, entitled “Civil Justice Reform,” to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children) FMCSA has analyzed this proposal under Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks.” The agency does not believe this proposed rulemaking would be economically significant, nor does it concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may disproportionately affect children. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property) This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, entitled “Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.” Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) This proposed action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. The FMCSA has determined that this rulemaking would not have a substantial direct effect on States, nor would it limit the policy-making discretion of the States. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) FMCSA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.” The agency has determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it does not appear to be economically significant (i.e., a cost of more than $100 million in a single year) based upon analyses performed at this stage of the rulemaking process, and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review) The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this program. List of Subjects 49 CFR Part 371 Brokers, Motor carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 375 Advertising, Arbitration, Consumer protection, Freight, Highways and roads, Insurance, Motor carriers, Moving of household goods, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 386 Administrative practice and procedure, Brokers, Freight forwarders, Hazardous materials transportation, Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Penalties. 49 CFR Part 387 Buses, Freight, Freight forwarders, Hazardous materials transportation, Highway safety, Insurance, Intergovernmental relations, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Moving of household goods, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surety bonds. For the reasons discussed above, FMCSA proposes to amend title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, chapter III, subchapter B, as set forth below: PART 371—BROKERS OF PROPERTY 1. Revise the authority citation for part 371 to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13301, 13501, and 14122; subtitle B, title IV of Pub. L. 109-59; and 49 CFR 1.73. 2. Amend part 371, by adding a new subpart B to read as follows: Subpart B—Special Rules for Household Goods Brokers Sec. 371.101 If I operate as a household goods broker in interstate or foreign commerce, must I comply with subpart B of this part? 371.103 What are the definitions of terms used in this subpart? 371.105 Must I use a motor carrier that has a valid U.S. DOT number and valid operating authority issued by FMCSA to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce? 371.107 What information must I display in my advertisements and Internet web homepage? 371.109 Must I inform individual shippers which motor carriers I use? 371.111 Must I provide individual shippers with Federal consumer protection information? 371.113 May I provide individual shippers with a written estimate? 371.115 Must I maintain agreements with motor carriers before providing written estimates on behalf of these carriers? 371.117 Must I provide individual shippers with my policies for canceling a shipment? 371.119 What must I do before I arrange with a motor carrier to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce? 371.121 What penalties may FMCSA impose for violations of this part? Subpart B—Special Rules for Household Goods Brokers § 371.101 If I operate as a household goods broker in interstate or foreign commerce, must I comply with subpart B of this part? Yes, you must comply with all regulations in this subpart if you operate as a household goods broker in interstate or foreign commerce. § 371.103 What are the definitions of terms used in this subpart? *Household goods* has the same meaning as the term is defined in § 375.103 of this subchapter. *Household goods broker* means a person, other than a motor carrier or an employee or bona fide agent of a motor carrier, that as a principal or agent sells, offers for sale, negotiates for, or holds itself out by solicitation, advertisement, or otherwise as selling, providing, or arranging for, transportation of household goods by motor carrier for compensation. *Individual shipper* has the same meaning as the term is defined in § 375.103 of this subchapter. § 371.105 Must I use a motor carrier that has a valid U.S. DOT number and valid operating authority issued by FMCSA to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce? You may only act as a household goods broker for a motor carrier that has a valid U.S. DOT number and valid operating authority issued by FMCSA to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce. § 371.107 What information must I display in my advertisements and Internet web homepage?
(a)You must prominently display in your advertisements and Internet web homepage(s) the physical location(s) (street or highway address) where you conduct business.
(b)You must prominently display your U.S. DOT registration number(s) and MC license number issued by the FMCSA in your advertisements and Internet web homepage(s).
(c)You must prominently display your status as a household goods broker in your advertisements and Internet web homepage(s).
(d)You must prominently display in your advertisements and Internet web homepage(s) that you will not transport an individual shipper's household goods, but that you will arrange for the transportation of the household goods by an FMCSA-authorized household goods motor carrier, whose charges will be determined by its published tariff. § 371.109 Must I inform individual shippers which motor carriers I use?
(a)You must provide to each potential individual shipper who contacts you a list of all authorized household goods motor carriers you use, including their U.S. DOT registration number(s) and MC license numbers.
(b)You must provide to each potential individual shipper who contacts you a statement stating you are not a motor carrier authorized by the Federal Government to transport the individual shipper's household goods, and you are only arranging for an authorized household goods motor carrier to perform the transportation services and, if applicable, additional services. § 371.111 Must I provide individual shippers with Federal consumer protection information?
(a)You must provide potential individual shippers with Federal consumer protection information by one of the following three methods:
(1)Provide a hyperlink on your Internet web home page to the FMCSA Web page containing the information in FMCSA's publications “Ready to Move?—Tips for a Successful Interstate Move” and “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move.”
(2)Distribute to each shipper and potential shipper at the time you provide an estimate, copies of FMCSA's publications “Ready to Move?—Tips for a Successful Interstate Move” and “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move.”
(3)Distribute to each shipper and potential shipper at the time you provide an estimate, copies of “Ready to Move?—Tips for a Successful Interstate Move” and “Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move” as modified and produced by the authorized, lawful motor carrier you intend to provide the shipment to under your written agreement required by § 371.115.
(b)You must obtain a signed, dated electronic or paper receipt showing the individual shipper has received both booklets.
(c)You must maintain the signed receipt required by paragraph
(b)of this section for three years from the date the individual shipper signs the receipt. § 371.113 May I provide individual shippers with a written estimate?
(a)You may provide each individual shipper with an estimate of transportation and accessorial charges. If you provide an estimate, it must be in writing and must be based on a physical survey of the household goods if the household goods are located within a 50 air-mile radius of your or your agent's location. The estimate must be prepared in accordance with a signed, written agreement, as specified in § 371.115 of this subpart.
(b)You must base your estimate upon the published tariffs of the authorized motor carrier who will transport the shipper's household goods.
(c)A shipper may elect to waive the physical survey required in paragraph
(a)of this section by written agreement signed by the shipper before the shipment is loaded. A copy of the waiver agreement must be retained as an addendum to the bill of lading and is subject to the same record inspection and preservation requirements as are applicable to bills of lading.
(d)You must keep the records required by this section for three years following the date you provide the written estimate for an individual shipper who accepts the estimate and has you procure the transportation. § 371.115 Must I maintain agreements with motor carriers before providing written estimates on behalf of these carriers?
(a)In order to provide estimates of charges for the transportation of household goods, you must do so in accordance with the written agreement required by § 375.409 of this subchapter. Your written agreement with the motor carrier(s) must include the following items:
(1)Your broker name as shown on your FMCSA registration, your physical address, and your U.S. DOT registration number or MC license number;
(2)The authorized motor carrier's name as shown on its FMCSA registration, its physical address, and its U.S. DOT registration number and MC license number;
(3)A concise, easy to understand statement that your written estimate or quote to the individual shipper:
(i)Will be exclusively on behalf of the authorized household goods motor carrier;
(ii)Will be based on the authorized household goods motor carrier's published tariff; and
(iii)Will serve as the authorized household goods motor carrier's estimate for purposes of complying with the requirements of part 375 of this chapter, including the requirement that the authorized household goods motor carrier relinquish possession of the shipment upon payment of no more than 110 percent of the estimate at the time of delivery;
(4)Your owner's, corporate officer's, or corporate director's signature lawfully representing your household goods broker operation and the date;
(5)The signature of the authorized household goods motor carrier's owner, corporate officer, or corporate director lawfully representing the household goods motor carrier's operation and the date; and
(6)A notary public's signature, date, and seal notarizing and attesting to the validity of the signatures on the agreement between the household goods broker and household goods motor carrier.
(b)The signed written agreement required by this section is public information and you must produce it for review upon reasonable request by a member of the public.
(c)You must keep copies of the agreements required by this section for as long as you provide estimates or quotes on behalf of the authorized household goods motor carrier and for three years thereafter. § 371.117 Must I provide individual shippers with my policies for canceling a shipment?
(a)You must disclose prominently on your Internet Web site and in your agreements with prospective shippers your cancellation policy, deposit policy, and policy for refunding deposited funds in the event the shipper cancels an order for service before the date an authorized household goods motor carrier has been scheduled to pick up the shipper's property.
(b)You must maintain records showing each individual shipper's request to cancel a shipment and the disposition of each request for a period of three years after the date of a shipper's cancellation request. If you refunded a deposit, your records must include:
(1)Proof that the individual shipper cashed or deposited the check or money order, if the financial institution provides documentary evidence; or
(2)Proof that you delivered the refund check or money order to the individual shipper. § 371.119 What must I do before I arrange with a motor carrier to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce?
(a)Using the FMCSA's database systems, you must verify and document each month that household goods motor carriers with whom you arrange transportation have an active U.S. DOT registration number, active for-hire operating authority from FMCSA to transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce, and that the household goods motor carrier has evidence of the necessary insurance coverage on file with FMCSA.
(b)You must maintain the verification documents in paragraph
(a)of this section for three years from the date you arrange for a shipment on behalf of an individual shipper by a household goods motor carrier. § 371.121 What penalties may FMCSA impose for violations of this part? The penalty provisions of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 149, *Civil and Criminal Penalties* apply to this subpart. These penalties do not overlap. Notwithstanding these civil penalties, nothing in this section deprives an individual shipper of any remedy or right of action under existing law. PART 375—TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE; CONSUMER PROTECTION REGULATIONS 3. Revise the authority citation for part 375 to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 49 U.S.C. 13301, 13704, 13707, 14104, 14706; subtitle B, title IV of Pub. L. 109-59; and 49 CFR 1.73. 4. Revise § 375.409 to read as follows: § 375.409 May household goods brokers provide estimates?
(a)Household goods brokers may provide estimates provided there is a written agreement between the broker and you, the motor carrier, adopting the broker's estimate as your own estimate. If you, the motor carrier, make such an agreement with a household goods broker, you must ensure compliance with all requirements of this part pertaining to estimates, including the requirement that you must relinquish possession of the shipment if the shipper pays you no more than 110 percent of a non-binding estimate at the time of delivery.
(b)Your written agreement with the household goods broker(s) must include the items required in § 371.115(a) of this subchapter. PART 386—RULES OF PRACTICE FOR MOTOR CARRIER, BROKER, FREIGHT FORWARDER, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROCEEDINGS 5. Revise the authority citation for part 386 to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, chapters 5, 51, 59, 131-141, 145-149, 311, 313, and 315; sec. 206, Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1763; subtitle B, title IV of Pub. L. 109-59; and 49 CFR 1.45 and 1.73. 6. Amend appendix B to part 386 by revising the heading and by adding paragraphs (g)(21) and
(22)to read as follows: Appendix B to Part 386—Penalty Schedule; Violations and Monetary Penalties
(g)* * *
(21)A broker for transportation of household goods who makes an estimate of the cost of transporting any such goods before entering into an agreement with a motor carrier to provide transportation of household goods subject to FMCSA jurisdiction is liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 for each violation.
(22)A person who provides transportation of household goods subject to jurisdiction under 49 U.S.C. chapter 135, subchapter I, or provides broker services for such transportation, without being registered under 49 U.S.C. chapter 139 to provide such transportation or services as a motor carrier or broker, as the case may be, is liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not less than $25,000 for each violation. PART 387—MINIMUM LEVELS OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MOTOR CARRIERS 7. The Authority citation for part 387 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13101, 13301, 13906, 14701, 31138, and 31139; and 49 CFR 1.73. 8. Amend § 387.307 by redesignating paragraph
(a)as paragraph (a)(1) and adding new paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: § 387.307 Property broker surety bond or trust fund.
(a)*Security.*
(1)* * *
(2)A household goods broker must have a surety bond or trust fund in effect for $25,000. The FMCSA will not issue a household goods broker license until a surety bond or trust fund for the full limits of liability prescribed herein is in effect. The household goods broker license remains valid or effective only as long as a surety bond or trust fund remains in effect and ensures the financial responsibility of the household goods broker. Issued on: February 2, 2007. John H. Hill, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-2106 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P 72 26 Thursday, February 8, 2007 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request February 2, 2007. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Rural Utilities Service *Title:* RUS Form 444, “Wholesale Power Contracts.” *OMB Control Number:* 0572-0089. *Summary of Collection:* The Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (RE Act) as amended (7 U.S.C. 901 *et seq.* ), authorizes the Rural Utilities Service
(RUS)to make and guarantee loans that will enable rural consumers to obtain electric power. Rural consumers formed non-profit electric distribution cooperatives, groups of these distribution cooperatives banded together to form Generation and Transmission cooperatives (G&T's) that generate or purchase power and transmit the power to the distribution systems. All RUS and G&T borrowers will enter into a Wholesale Power Contract with their distribution members by using RUS Form 444. *Need and Use of the Information:* To fulfill the purposes of the RE Act RUS will collect information to improve the credit quality and credit worthiness of loans and loan guarantees to G&T borrowers. RUS works closely with lending institutions that provide supplemental loan funds to borrowers. *Description of Respondents:* Not-for profit institutions; Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 33. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: Quarterly. *Total Burden Hours:* 198. Rural Utility Service *Title:* Water and Waste Disposal Programs Guaranteed Loans. *OMB Control Number:* 0572-0122. *Summary of Collection:* The Rural Utilities Service
(RUS)is authorized by Section 306 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926) to make loans to public agencies, nonprofit corporations, and Indian tribes for the development of water and waste disposal facilities primarily servicing rural residents. The Waste and Water Disposal Programs
(WW)of RUS provide insured loan and grant funds through the WW program to finance many types of projects varying in size and complexity. The Waste and Water Disposal Guaranteed Program is implemented through 7 CFR 1779. The guaranteed loan program encourages lender participation and provides specific guidance in the processing and servicing of guaranteed WW loans. *Need and Use of the Information:* Rural Development's field offices will collect information from applicants/borrowers, lenders, and consultants to determine eligibility, project feasibility and to ensure borrowers operate on a sound basis and use loan funds for authorized purposes. There are agency forms required as well as other requirements that involve certifications from the borrower, lenders, and other parties. Failure to collect proper information could result in improper determinations of eligibility, improper use of funds and or unsound loans. *Description of Respondents:* Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal Government. *Number of Respondents:* 15. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 858. Rural Utilities Service *Title:* Technical Assistance Program, 7 CFR part 1775. *OMB Control Number:* 0572-0112. *Summary of Collection:* Section 306 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (CONACT), 7 U.S.C. 1926, authorizes Rural Utilities Service
(RUS)to make loans and grants to public agencies, American Indian tribes, and nonprofit corporations. The loans and grants fund the development of drinking water, wastewater, and solid waste disposal facilities in rural areas with populations of up to 10,000 residents. Nonprofit organizations receive Technical Assistance and Training
(TAT)and Solid Waste Management
(SWM)grants to help small rural communities or areas identify and solve problems relating to community drinking water, wastewater, or solid waste disposal systems. The technical assistance is intended to improve the management and operation of the systems and reduce or eliminate pollution of water resources. TAT and SWM are competitive grant programs administered by RUS. *Need and Use of the Information:* Nonprofit organizations applying for TAT and SWM grants must submit a pre-application, which includes an application form, narrative proposal, various other forms, certifications and supplemental information. RUS will collect information to determine applicant eligibility, project feasibility, and the applicant's ability to meet the grant and regulatory requirements. RUS will review the information, evaluate it, and, if the applicant and project are eligible for further competition, invite the applicant to submit a formal application. Failure to collect proper information could result in improper determinations of eligibility, improper use of funds, or hindrances in making grants authorized by the TAT and SWM program. *Description of Respondents:* Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 118. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion; Quarterly. *Total Burden Hours:* 5,556. Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-2091 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Newspapers of Record for the Pacific Southwest Region; California AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice lists the newspapers that will be used by all Ranger Districts, Forests, and the Regional Office of the Pacific Southwest Region to publish legal notices of all decisions subject to appeal under 36 CFR parts 215 and 217 and to publish notices for public comment and notice of decision subject to the provisions of 36 CFR part 215. Further these newspapers will become the newspapers of record for planning as defined in 36 CFR 219.16 and by notification required under 36 CFR part 218. The intended effect of this action is to inform interested members of the public which newspapers will be used to publish legal notices for public comment or decisions; thereby allowing them to receive constructive notice of a decision, to provide clear evidence of timely notice, and to achieve consistency in administering the appeals and objection processes. DATES: Publication of legal notices in the listed newspapers will begin with decisions subject to appeal that are made after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . The list of newspapers will remain in effect until another notice is published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue Danner, Regional Appeals and Litigation Manager, Pacific Southwest Region, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, California 94592, 707-562-8945. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 4, 2003, updated CFR part 215 was published requiring publication of legal notice of decisions subject to appeal. On January 5, 2005, a final rule concerning 36 CFR part 219 was published requiring publication of legal notices as required by 36 CFR 215.5. The newspaper(s) of record for projects in a plan area is
(are)the newspaper(s) of record for notices related to planning. Sections 215.5, 217.5, 218.2, and 219.16 require notice published in the **Federal Register** advising the public of the principal newspapers to be utilized for publishing legal notices. This newspaper publication of notices of decisions is in addition to direct notice to those who have requested notice in writing and to those known to be interested and affected by a specific decision. In addition to the primary newspaper listed for each unit, some Forest Supervisors and District Rangers have listed newspapers providing additional notice of their decisions. The timeframe for appeal shall be based on the date of publication of the notice in the first (primary) newspaper listed for each unit. The newspapers to be used are as follows: Pacific Southwest Regional Office Regional Forester Decisions *Sacramento Bee,* published daily in Sacramento, Sacramento County, California, for decisions affecting National Forest System lands and for any decision of Region-wide impact. Angeles National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Los Angeles Times,* published daily in Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. District Rangers Decisions Los Angeles River Ranger District: *Daily News,* published daily in Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. Newspapers providing additional notice of Los Angeles River District Ranger decisions: *Pasadena Star News,* published in Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California; and *Foothill Leader,* published in Glendale, Los Angeles County, California. San Gabriel River Ranger District: *Inland Valley Bulletin,* published daily in Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. Newspaper providing additional notice of San Gabriel River District Ranger decisions: *San Gabriel Valley Tribune,* published in the eastern San Gabriel Valley, West Covina, Los Angeles County, California. Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers Ranger District: *Daily News,* published daily in Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. Newspapers providing additional notice of Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers District Ranger decisions: *Antelope Valley Press,* published in Palmdale, Los Angeles County, California; and *Mountaineer Progress,* published in Wrightwood, California. Cleveland National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *San Diego Union-Tribune,* published daily in San Diego, San Diego County, California. District Rangers Decisions Descanso Ranger District: *San Diego Union-Tribune,* published daily in San Diego, San Diego County, California. Palomar Ranger District: *San Diego Union-Tribune,* published daily in San Diego, San Diego County, California. Newspaper providing additional notice of Palomar District Ranger decisions: *Riverside Press Enterprise,* published daily in Riverside, Riverside County, California. Trabuco Ranger District: *Riverside Press Enterprise,* published daily in Riverside, Riverside County, California. Newspaper providing additional notice of Trabuco District Ranger decisions: *Orange County Register,* published daily in Santa Ana, Orange County, California. Eldorado National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Mountain Democrat* published four-times weekly in Placerville, El Dorado County, California. District Rangers Decisions *Mountain Democrat* published four-times weekly in Placerville, El Dorado County, California. Inyo National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Inyo Register* published three-times weekly in Bishop, Inyo County, California. District Rangers Decisions *Inyo Register* published three-times weekly in Bishop, Inyo County, California. Klamath National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Siskiyou Daily News,* published daily in Yreka, Siskiyou County, California. District Rangers Decisions *Siskiyou Daily News,* published daily in Yreka, Siskiyou County, California. Newspaper sometimes providing additional notice of Goosenest District Ranger decisions: *Klamath Falls Herald and News,* published daily in Klamath Falls, Klamath County, Oregon. Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, California and Nevada Forest Supervisor Decisions *Tahoe Daily Tribune,* published daily (five-times weekly) in South Lake Tahoe, El Dorado County, California. Lassen National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Lassen County Times,* published weekly in Susanville, Lassen County, California. District Rangers Decisions Eagle Lake Ranger District: *Lassen County Times,* published weekly in Susanville, Lassen County, California. Almanor Ranger District: *Chester Progressive,* published weekly in Chester, Plumas County, California. Hat Creek Ranger District: *Intermountain News,* published weekly in Burney, Shasta County, California. Los Padres National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Santa Barbara News Press,* published daily in Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara County, California. District Rangers Decisions Monterey Ranger District: *Monterey County Herald,* published daily in Monterey, Monterey County, California. Santa Lucia Ranger District: *Telegram Tribune,* published daily in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Santa Barbara Ranger District: *Santa Barbara News Press,* published daily in Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara County, California. Ojai Ranger District: *Ventura County Star,* published daily in Ventura, Ventura County, California. Mt. Pinos Ranger District: *The Bakersfield Californian,* published daily in Bakersfield, Kern County, California. Mendocino National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Chico Enterprise-Record,* published daily in Chico, Butte County, California. District Rangers Decisions Grindstone Ranger District: *Chico Enterprise-Record,* published daily in Chico, Butte County, California. Upper Lake and Covelo Districts: *Ukiah Daily Journal,* published daily in Ukiah, Mendocino County, California. Modoc National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Modoc County Record,* published weekly in Alturas, Modoc County, California. District Rangers Decisions Warner Mountain Ranger District: *Modoc County Record,* published weekly in Alturas, Modoc County, California. Devil's Garden Ranger District: *Modoc County Record,* published weekly in Alturas, Modoc County, California. Big Valley Ranger District: *Modoc County Record,* published weekly in Alturas, Modoc County, California. Doublehead Ranger District: *Herald and News,* published daily in Klamath Falls, Klamath County, Oregon. Newspaper providing additional notice of Doublehead District Ranger decisions: *Modoc County Record,* published weekly in Alturas, Modoc County, California. Plumas National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Feather River Bulletin,* published weekly in Quincy, Plumas County, California. District Rangers Decisions Beckwourth Ranger District: *Portola Reporter,* published weekly in Portola, Plumas County, California. Newspaper occasionally providing additional notice of Beckwourth District Ranger decisions: *Feather River Bulletin,* published weekly in Quincy, Plumas County, California. Feather River Ranger District: *Oroville Mercury Register,* published daily in Oroville, Butte County, California. Newspaper occasionally providing additional notice of Feather River District Ranger decisions: *Feather River Bulletin,* published weekly in Quincy, Plumas County, California. Mt. Hough Ranger District: *Feather River Bulletin,* published weekly in Quincy, Plumas County, California. Newspapers occasionally providing additional notice of Mt. Hough District Ranger decisions: *Portola Reporter,* published weekly in Portola, Plumas County, California; *Chester Progressive,* published weekly in Plumas County, California; and *Lassen County Times,* published weekly in Lassen County, California. San Bernardino National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *San Bernardino Sun,* published daily in San Bernardino, San Bernardino County, California. District Rangers Decisions Mountaintop Ranger District—Arrowhead Area: *Mountain News,* published weekly in Blue Jay, San Bernardino County, California. Mountaintop Ranger District—Big Bear Area: *Big Bear Life and Grizzly,* published weekly in Big Bear, San Bernardino County, California. Front Country Ranger District: *San Bernardino Sun,* published daily in San Bernardino, San Bernardino County, California. San Jacinto Ranger District: *Idyllwild Town Crier,* published weekly in Idyllwild, Riverside County, California. Sequoia National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Porterville Recorder,* published daily (except Sunday) in Porterville, Tulare County, California. Newspaper occasionally providing additional notice of Forest Supervisor decisions: *The Bakersfield Californian,* published daily in Bakersfield, Kern County, California; District Rangers Decisions *Porterville Recorder,* published daily (except Sunday) in Porterville, Tulare County, California. Newspaper occasionally providing additional notice of District Rangers decisions: *The Bakersfield Californian,* published daily in Bakersfield, Kern County, California; Shasta-Trinity National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Record Searchlight,* published daily in Redding, Shasta County, California. District Rangers Decisions *Record Searchlight,* published daily in Redding, Shasta County, California. Sierra National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Fresno Bee,* published daily in Fresno, Fresno County, California. District Rangers Decisions *Fresno Bee,* published daily in Fresno, Fresno County, California. Six Rivers National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *Times Standard,* published daily in Eureka, Humboldt County, California. District Rangers Decisions Smith River National Recreation Area: *Del Norte Triplicate,* published daily (five-times weekly) in Crescent City, Del Norte County, California. Mad River, Orleans, and Lower Trinity Districts: *Times-Standard,* published daily in Eureka, Humboldt County, California. Stanislaus National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Union Democrat,* published daily (five-times weekly) in Sonora, Tuolumne County, California. District Rangers Decisions *The Union Democrat,* published daily (five-times weekly) in Sonora, Tuolumne County, California. Newspaper sometimes providing additional notice of Groveland District Ranger decisions: *Mariposa Gazette,* published weekly in Mariposa, Mariposa County, California. Newspaper sometimes providing additional notice of Calaveras District Ranger decisions: *Calaveras Enterprise,* published twice weekly in San Andreas, Calaveras County, California. Tahoe National Forest, California Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Union,* published daily (except Sunday) in Grass Valley, Nevada County, California. District Rangers Decisions American River Ranger District: *Auburn Journal,* published daily in Auburn, Placer County, California. Sierraville Ranger District: *Mountain Messenger,* published weekly in Downieville, Sierra County, California. Newspapers providing additional notice of Sierraville District Ranger decisions: *Sierra Booster,* published weekly in Loyalton, Sierra County, California; and *Portola Recorder,* published weekly in Portola, Plumas County, California. Truckee Ranger District: *Sierra Sun,* published five-times weekly in Truckee, Nevada County, California. Yuba River Ranger District: *The Union,* published daily (except Sunday) in Grass Valley, Nevada County, California. Newspaper providing additional notice of Yuba River District Ranger decisions: *Mountain Messenger,* published weekly in Downieville, Sierra County, California. Dated: January 25, 2007. Thomas L. Tidwell, Deputy Regional Forester. [FR Doc. E7-1599 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Southwest Washington Province Advisory Committee Meeting Notice AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The Southwest Washington Province Advisory Committee will meet on Friday, March 9, 2007, at the Gifford Pinchot National Forest Headquarters, 10600 NE 51st Circle, Vancouver, WA 98682. The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. and continue until 4 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to share information and receive feedback on: Northwest Forest Plan monitoring ten-year results; Gifford Pinchot National Forest's Fiscal Year 2007 and 2008 timber sale plan; flood and storm damage within the Gifford Pinchot National Forest; and to share information among Committee members. All Southwest Washington Province Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend. The “open forum” provides an opportunity for the public to bring issues, concerns, and discussion topics to the Advisory Committee. The “open forum” is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Interested speakers will need to register prior to the open forum period. The committee welcomes the public's written comments on Committee business at any time. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Strebig, Public Affairs Officer, at
(360)891-5005, or write Forest Headquarters Office: Gifford Pinchot National Forest, 10600 NW. 51st Circle, Vancouver, WA 98682. Dated: February 1, 2007. Claire Lavendel, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 07-550 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 55
Traces to 55 documents
U.S. Code
55 references not yet in our index
  • 14 CFR 23
  • 14 CFR 21
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 14 CFR 21.203
  • 21 CFR 524
  • 21 CFR 524.1044
  • 21 CFR 20
  • 5 USC 801-808
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • 44 USC 3501-3520
  • 2 USC 1531-1538
  • 42 USC 4321-4370f
  • 33 CFR 104
  • 33 CFR 120
  • 33 USC 1231
  • 37 CFR 201
  • 40 CFR 52
  • Pub. L. 104-4
  • 40 CFR 55
  • 40 CFR 9
  • Pub. L. 104-113
  • Pub. L. 101-549
  • 40 CFR 62
  • 40 CFR 60
  • 41 CFR 102
  • 40 USC 3301-3315
  • 40 CFR 2
  • Pub. L. 109-59
  • 49 CFR 1.73(a)
  • 49 CFR 365
  • 49 CFR 366
  • 49 CFR 387
  • 49 CFR 375
  • 49 CFR 371
  • Pub. L. 106-229
  • Pub. L. 104-121
  • 110 Stat. 857
  • 49 CFR 375.213
  • 40 CFR 93.153(c)(2)
+ 15 more
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final special conditions; request for comments
U.S.C.§ 106
C.F.R.§ 21.16
C.F.R.§ 11.38
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
C.F.R.§ 39.19
C.F.R.§ 21.197
U.S.C.§ 552
U.S.C.§ 3501
Cite14 CFR 23
Cite14 CFR 21
Cite14 CFR 39
Cites 110 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.