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 · 2007-07-02 · PROPOSED RULES · Agriculture Agriculture Department See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 35967 E7-12737 Air Force Air · Unknown

Unknown. Affirmation of interim rule as final rule

55,562 words·~253 min read·/register/2007/07/02/07-3210

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-2007-07-02.xml --- 72 126 Monday, July 2, 2007 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 35967 E7-12737 Air Force Air Force Department RULES Licensing of government-owned inventions in custody of Air Force; CFR part removed, 35931-35932 E7-12721 Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RULES Export certification:
Wood packaging material, 35915-35917 E7-12770 Phytosanitary treatments; cold treatment enclosures and requirements, 35909-35915 E7-12768 Plant-related quarantine, domestic: Asian longhorned beetle, 35909 E7-12754 Army Army Department NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 35980 07-3230 Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 35993-35997 E7-12682 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 35997-36009 E7-12677 E7-12679 E7-12680 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Coast Guard sector realignment; technical amendment, 36316-36331 07-3189 NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.:
Gulf of Mexico Area Maritime Security Committee, 36012-36013 E7-12684 Meetings: Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee, 36013 E7-12685 Towing Safety Advisory Committee; teleconference, 36013-36014 E7-12689 Commerce Commerce Department See Foreign-Trade Zones Board See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commodity Commodity Futures Trading Commission RULES Commodity Exchange Act: Intermediaries registration; online annual review requirement, 35918-35920 E7-12767 Defense Defense Acquisition Regulations System PROPOSED RULES Acquisition regulations:
Commercially available off-the-shelf items; specialty metals restriction waiver, 35960-35961 E7-12763 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 35980-35981 E7-12745 E7-12747 Defense Defense Department See Air Force Department See Army Department See Defense Acquisition Regulations System NOTICES Meetings: Electron Devices Advisory Group, 35974-35975 07-3210 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin, 35975-35980 07-3212 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration RULES Records and reports of listed chemicals and certain machines:
Iodine crystals and chemical mixtures containing over 2.2 percent iodine, 35920-35931 E7-12736 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 35981-35983 E7-12669 E7-12670 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Vocational and adult education— Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions Program, 35983 E7-12759 Election Election Assistance Commission NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 35983 07-3232 Employee Employee Benefits Security Administration NOTICES Employee benefit plans; individual exemptions: DeRose Dental Offices Inc., 36045 E7-12674 Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance Co., 36045-36048 E7-12673 Wells Fargo & Co. et al., 36048-36061 E7-12672 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36061-36062 E7-12719 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:
Rural Industrialization Loan and Grant Program; compliance certification requests, 36062-36063 E7-12739 Energy Energy Department See Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 35983-35984 E7-12732 Meetings: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board— Idaho National Laboratory, 35984-35985 E7-12731 Northern New Mexico, 35985 E7-12734 Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, KY, 35984 E7-12730 Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office NOTICES Consumer products; energy conservation program:
Daikin U.S. Corp.; residential and commercial package air conditioner and heat pump test procedures waiver, 35986-35991 E7-12733 EPA Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES Meetings: Pollution prevention through nanotechnology conference, 35991-35992 E7-12764 Executive Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Restricted areas, 35917-35918 E7-12703 NOTICES Aeronautical land-use assurance; waivers: Roanoke Regional Airport, VA, 36096 07-3200 Meetings:
RTCA, Inc., 36096 07-3199 FCC Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 35992-35993 07-3234 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency RULES Flood elevation determinations: Maryland, 35937-35938 E7-12700 Various States, 35932-35946 E7-12690 E7-12693 E7-12698 PROPOSED RULES Flood elevation determinations: Various States, 35947-35960 E7-12691 E7-12692 E7-12697 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36014-36016 E7-12722 E7-12725 Disaster and emergency areas:
Iowa, 36016 E7-12726 Kansas, 36016-36017 E7-12695 E7-12699 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULES Electric utilities (Federal Power Act): Wholesale competition in regions with organized electric markets, 36276-36298 E7-12550 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36097 E7-12687 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Davie County, NC, 36097-36098 E7-12724 Pope County et al., AR, 36098-36099 07-3198 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Motor carrier safety standards:
Driver qualifications; diabetes exemptions, 36101-36102 E7-12702 Driver qualifications; vision requirement exemptions, 36099-36101 E7-12701 Financial Financial Management Service See Fiscal Service Fiscal Fiscal Service NOTICES Surety companies acceptable on Federal bonds: Acadia Insurance Co. et al., 36241 07-3163 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Incidental take permits— Cochise County, AZ and Hidalgo County, NM; nine listed species, 36020-36021 E7-12720 Foreign Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Sanctions, blocked persons, specially-designated nationals, terrorists, narcotics traffickers, and foreign terrorist organizations:
Weapons of mass destruction proliferators and their supporters; additional designations, 36103-36104 E7-12761 MISSING FOR: Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Michigan, 35968 E7-12758 North Carolina, 35968 E7-12757 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Health Resources and Services Administration See Indian Health Service See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Health Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36009-36010 07-3219 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See Federal Emergency Management Agency See U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36018-36019 E7-12694 E7-12696 Regulatory waiver requests; quarterly listing, 36300-36314 07-3215 Indian Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Indian tribes acknowledgment of existence determinations, etc.: St. Francis/Sokoki Band of Abenakis of Vermont, 36022-36025 E7-12727 Indian Indian Health Service NOTICES Inpatient and outpatient medical care; reimbursement rates (2007 CY); correction, 36010 07-3203 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Indian Affairs Bureau See National Park Service See Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36019-36020 E7-12658 International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping:
Stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings from— Taiwan, 35970-35974 E7-12750 Antidumping and countervailing duties: Five year (sunset) reviews— Advance notification, 35969 E7-12760 Initiation of reviews, 35968-35969 E7-12744 Export trade certificates of review, 35974 E7-12756 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Import investigations: Brake rotors from— China, 36037-36040 E7-12668 Inkjet supplies and components, 36040 E7-12752 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36040-36041 E7-12639 Justice Justice Department See Drug Enforcement Administration Labor Labor Department See Employee Benefits Security Administration See Employment and Training Administration See Labor-Management Standards Office See Mine Safety and Health Administration See Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36041-36044 E7-12704 E7-12710 E7-12729 Labor Labor-Management Standards Office RULES Labor-management standards:
Labor organization officer and employee report; Form LM-30, instructions, and related provisions revised, 36106-36190 07-3155 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36102-36103 E7-12688 Maritime Security Program: Maintenance and Repair Reimbursement Pilot Program, 36103 E7-12686 Mine Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36063-36064 E7-12671 Petitions for safety standards modification; application, processing, disposition, etc., 36064-36066 E7-12755 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: 2008 FY funds availability; omnibus notice, 36244-36274 E7-12653 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent:
Civil War Battle of Franklin, TN; Special Resource Study, 36025-36026 07-3205 Fort Pulaski National Monument, GA; general management plan, 36026 07-3204 Environmental statements; record of decision: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, OH; general management plan, 36026-36027 E7-12715 Point Reyes National Seashore, Marin County, CA; restoration project, 36027-36030 E7-12714 Native American human remains, funerary objects; inventory, repatriation, etc.: Pierce College District, Lakewood, WA; correction, 36030 E7-12712 University of Colorado Museum, Boulder, CO, 36030-36032 E7-12711 E7-12713 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 36069 E7-12746 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Staff assessment of proposed agreement between NRC and Pennsylvania, 36069-36073 07-3195 Occupational Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36066-36069 E7-12705 E7-12708 Overseas Overseas Private Investment Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36073-36074 07-3229 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration PROPOSED RULES Hazardous materials:
Shipping papers and other documentation; emergency response telephone numbers requirements, 35961-35966 E7-12665 Presidential Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Government agencies and employees: John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007; assignment of functions (Memorandum of June 26, 2007), 36333-36335 07-3254 Personnel Management, Office of; assignment of reporting function to the Director (Memorandum of June 28, 2007), 35907 07-3233 Public Public Debt Bureau See Fiscal Service Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36032-36036 E7-12716 E7-12717 E7-12718 Environmental statements; availability, etc.:
Lower Yuba River Accord, Yuba County, CA, 36036-36037 E7-12728 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E7-12661 36074-36077 E7-12662 E7-12663 E7-12664 Meetings: Improvements to Financial Reporting Advisory Committee, 36077-36078 E7-12740 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: American Stock Exchange LLC, 36078-36082 E7-12681 E7-12709 E7-12742 Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., 36082-36083 E7-12675 International Securities Exchange, LLC, 36083-36084 E7-12741 New York Stock Exchange LLC, 36084-36091 E7-12676 OneChicago, LLC, 36091-36092 E7-12743 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Privacy Act; computer matching programs, 36092-36093 E7-12666 State State Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36093-36094 E7-12748 E7-12749 Meetings:
Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement Environmental Affairs Council, 36095 E7-12751 International Telecommunication Advisory Committee, 36095-36096 07-3216 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36010-36012 07-3207 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration See Maritime Administration See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Treasury Treasury Department See Fiscal Service See Foreign Assets Control Office MISSING FOR:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 36017-36018 E7-12723 Veterans Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Meetings: CARES Business Plan Studies Advisory Committee, 36104 07-3208 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Labor Department, Labor-Management Standards Office, 36106-36190 07-3155 Part III Treasury Department, Fiscal Service, 36241 07-3163 Part IV Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 36244-36274 E7-12653 Part V Energy Department, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 36276-36298 E7-12550 Part VI Housing and Urban Development Department, 36300-36314 07-3215 Part VII Homeland Security Department, Coast Guard, 36316-36331 07-3189 Part VIII Executive Office of the President, Presidential Documents, 36333-36335 07-3254 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. 72 126 Monday, July 2, 2007 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 301 [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0105] Asian Longhorned Beetle; Removal of Quarantined Area in Illinois AGENCY:
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final rule, without change, an interim rule that amended Asian longhorned beetle regulations by removing the Oz Park area in Cook County, IL, from the list of quarantined areas and removing restrictions on the interstate movement of regulated articles from those areas. We have determined that the Asian longhorned beetle no longer presents a risk of spread from that area and that the quarantine and restrictions are no longer necessary.
With that action, there are no longer any areas in Illinois that are quarantined because of the Asian longhorned beetle. DATES: Effective on July 2, 2007, we are adopting as a final rule the interim rule that was published at 71 FR 40879-40880 on July 19, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael B. Stefan, National Coordinator, Pest Detection and Management Programs, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236;
(301)734-7338. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The regulations in 7 CFR 301.51-1 through 301.51-9 (referred to below as the regulations) restrict the interstate movement of regulated articles from quarantined areas in order to prevent the artificial spread of the Asian longhorned beetle
(ALB)into noninfested areas of the United States. Quarantined areas are listed in § 301.51-3 of the regulations. In an interim rule 1 effective July 13, 2006, and published in the **Federal Register** on July 19, 2006 (71 FR 40879-40880, Docket No. APHIS-2006-0105), we amended the regulations in § 301.51-3(c) by removing the entry for Cook County, IL, from the list of quarantined areas. 1 To view the interim rule, go to *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&d=APHIS-2006-0105-0001* . Comments on the interim rule were required to be received on or before September 18, 2006. We did not receive any comments. Therefore, for the reasons given in the interim rule, we are adopting the interim rule as a final rule. This action also affirms the information contained in the interim rule concerning Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Orders 12372 and 12988, and the Paperwork Reduction Act. Further, for this action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review under Executive Order 12866. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301 Agricultural commodities, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation. PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE NOTICES Accordingly, we are adopting as a final rule, without change, the interim rule that amended 7 CFR part 301 and that was published at 71 FR 40879-40880 on July 19, 2006. Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of June 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7-12754 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 305 [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0050] Cold Treatment Regulations AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Interim rule and request for comments. SUMMARY: We are amending the phytosanitary treatment regulations by making several changes to the requirements for cold treatment enclosures and the requirements for conducting cold treatment. The changes include: Adding more specific and stringent requirements for precooling fruit prior to cold treatment, requiring the use of temperature recording devices that are password-protected and tamperproof, adding requirements to increase the effectiveness of cold treatment conducted in vessel holds, and providing for officials authorized by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to conduct audits of the cold treatment process. We are making these changes in response to the results of external and internal reviews of the cold treatment requirements that have been in place. The changes we are making will improve the effectiveness of cold treatment and thus will help to prevent the introduction of quarantine plant pests into the United States. DATES: This interim rule is effective on August 31, 2007. We will consider all comments that we receive on or before August 31, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov,* select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0050 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0050, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0050. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call
(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Inder P. S. Gadh, Senior Risk Manager—Treatments, Phytosanitary Issues Management, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236;
(301)734-8758. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The phytosanitary treatments regulations contained in 7 CFR part 305 set out standards and schedules for treatments required in 7 CFR parts 301, 318, and 319 for fruits, vegetables, and articles to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests or noxious weeds into or through the United States. Within 7 CFR part 305, the cold treatments subpart (§§ 305.15 and 305.16, referred to below as the regulations) sets out requirements for performing cold treatment and cold treatment schedules for imported fruits and vegetables and for regulated articles moved interstate from quarantined areas within the United States. Section 305.15 sets out the requirements for performing cold treatment. These include standards that must be met by the facility performing cold treatment and the enclosure in which cold treatment is performed; monitoring requirements; procedural requirements for performing cold treatment; and a required compliance agreement or workplan to ensure that these requirements are followed, under appropriate oversight from the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Industry representatives and other interested parties have expressed concern that the procedural requirements that were in place prior to the publication of this interim rule were not adequate to prevent the development of “hot spots,” which are areas in the treatment enclosure in which the temperature of fruit being treated rises above the temperature required by a cold treatment schedule for extended periods. Fruit in these hot spots would thus not be treated at the proper temperature to neutralize pests of concern. To assess this risk, APHIS commissioned an evaluation of the process and design of cold treatment from the firm Cannon Design. Their report, dated June 30, 2004, and titled “Supplementary Guidelines for Cold Treatment Application,” included specific recommended changes to the cold treatment requirements to prevent the development of hot spots and other failures of the treatment process. 1 In addition, an internal review of the cold treatment procedures by the Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) of APHIS' Plant Protection and Quarantine program indicated that additional changes were necessary to ensure that cold treatment is effective and to better allow officials authorized by APHIS to verify that treatment has been conducted properly. 1 Copies of this report are available from the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or on Regulations.gov; see the ADDRESSES block for instructions on accessing Regulations.gov. If you access the report through Regulations.gov, please be aware that the PDF file of the report is approximately 17 megabytes in size and may take a long time to download. In this interim rule, we are amending the regulations to incorporate the changes recommended by the Supplementary Guidelines for Cold Treatment Application and by CPHST. The key change we are making is to require that fruit intended for in-transit cold treatment be precooled to the temperature at which it will be treated, as verified by an official authorized by APHIS. If treatment is conducted at a cold treatment facility in the United States, the fruit must be precooled to the temperature at which it will be treated, as verified by an official authorized by APHIS, prior to beginning treatment. Other changes we are making include requiring that fruit pulp temperature be maintained following the treatment schedule and within a specific temperature range; requiring the use of temperature recording devices that are password-protected and tamperproof; requiring the use of a minimum of four temperature probes or sensors when cold treatment is conducted in a vessel hold; prohibiting the use of hanging decks or hatch coamings as treatment enclosures without prior written approval from APHIS; and providing for officials authorized by APHIS to conduct audits of the cold treatment process. 2 2 Officials authorized by APHIS may include inspectors as defined in § 305.1 (any individual authorized by the Administrator of APHIS or the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, to enforce the regulations in part 305) or officials employed by or authorized by foreign national plant protection organizations and authorized by APHIS to supervise treatment. Within § 305.15, this interim rule revises paragraph (b), which sets out performance requirements for cold treatment enclosures, and paragraph (f), which sets out procedural requirements for cold treatment. We are retaining most provisions that have been in paragraph (f), while adding many provisions to it; we are also reorganizing paragraph
(f)so that the procedural requirements for performing cold treatment are set out in roughly the order in which they should be followed while performing cold treatment. As an aid to the reader, the derivation of each subparagraph of the new paragraph
(f)is listed in table 1. We have set out the entire text of the new paragraph
(f)in the regulatory text at the end of this document. Table 1.—Derivation of New § 305.15( f ) New subparagraph Derived from (f)(1) (f)(1). (f)(2) First sentence of (f)(2). (f)(3) New language. (f)(4) (f)(3) and new language. (f)(5) (f)(6) and new language. (f)(6) New language. (f)(7) (f)(4) and new language. (f)(8) New language. (f)(9) (f)(5). (f)(10) Last two sentences of (f)(7) and new language. (f)(11) (f)(8) and new language. (f)(12) (f)(10). (f)(13) New language. We are removing the second sentence of former paragraph (f)(2), which had addressed precooling of fruit to be cold treated, and replacing it with new paragraph (f)(3), which sets out substantially more rigorous precooling requirements. We are also removing the first sentence of former paragraph (f)(7) and all of former paragraph (f)(9). The new requirements and our reasons for adopting them are discussed in detail directly below. Precooling In the Supplementary Guidelines for Cold Treatment Application, Cannon Design found that hot spots developed in cold treatment loads due to heat generated by respiration of the fruit and respiration of any insects that may have infested the fruit. (Fruit that is being shipped continues to convert oxygen to carbon dioxide during shipping. This process generates heat.) Given common fruit stacking configurations, respiration could produce areas within the fruit stacks in which some fruit reach a temperature significantly warmer than the temperature required by the cold treatment schedule. The goal of the Supplementary Guidelines for Cold Treatment Application was to determine methods by which the risk of development of such hot spots could be minimized. Cannon Design used both temperature observations from a simulation of real-world cold treatment conditions and observations from computational fluid dynamics modeling to draw its conclusions. The key measure to mitigate the risk of hot spots that was identified by the Supplementary Guidelines for Cold Treatment Application is cooling fruit that is intended for cold treatment to the temperature required by the intended cold treatment schedule prior to beginning treatment, a process known as precooling. While the regulations have contained a precooling requirement, the requirement was not sufficiently stringent; prior to loading in cold treatment containers, fruit had been allowed to be either precooled to a uniform temperature up to 4.5 °C (40 °F), or precooled at the terminal to 2.2 °C (36 °F). However, the cold treatment schedules in § 305.16 require temperatures as low as 0 °C (32 °F), and most schedules require temperatures at or below 2.2 °C (36 °F). The cold treatment requirements that had been in the regulations also did not include any measures allowing officials authorized by APHIS to ensure that the precooling had been properly performed. This interim rule adds a new paragraph (f)(3) to § 305.15 that sets out detailed requirements for precooling prior to cold treatment. These requirements are as follows: • Fruit intended for in-transit cold treatment must be precooled to the temperature at which the fruit will be treated prior to beginning treatment. The in-transit treatment enclosure may not be used for precooling unless an official authorized by APHIS approves the loading of the fruit in the treatment enclosure as adequate to allow for fruit pulp temperatures to be taken prior to beginning treatment. Previously, the regulations required precooling to be performed either at an APHIS-approved dockside refrigeration warehouse or in an APHIS-approved enclosure aboard a vessel. However, when precooling is performed outside the treatment enclosure, we do not believe that it is necessary to specify the facility in which precooling is performed, as long as the other precooling requirements are fulfilled. We are only allowing the use of in-transit enclosures for precooling subject to APHIS approval because the typical loading of fruit in an in-transit treatment enclosure does not allow for sampling fruit pulp temperatures prior to beginning treatment. If precooling is performed in the treatment enclosure, the loading of the fruit must be adequate to accommodate this essential step in the cold treatment process. • If the fruit is precooled outside the treatment enclosure, an official authorized by APHIS will take pulp temperatures manually from a sample of the fruit as the fruit is loaded for in-transit cold treatment to verify that precooling was completed. If the pulp temperatures for the sample are 0.28°C (0.5°F) or more above the temperature at which the fruit will be treated, the pallet from which the sample was taken will be rejected and returned for additional precooling until the fruit reaches the treatment temperature. These requirements allow officials authorized by APHIS to verify that precooling has been properly conducted and that the temperature of the fruit pulp has been reduced to the treatment temperature prior to beginning treatment. • If fruit is precooled in the treatment enclosure, or if treatment is conducted at a cold treatment facility in the United States, the fruit must be precooled to the temperature at which it will be treated, as verified by an official authorized by APHIS, prior to beginning treatment. In treatment enclosures that are approved for precooling and in cold treatment facilities, the loading of fruit allows fruit temperatures to be sampled, meaning that an official authorized by APHIS can verify that the fruit has been precooled to the treatment temperature. Since fruit in an approved enclosure or a cold treatment facility can simply be cooled for additional time if it has not yet reached the treatment temperature, we do not believe it is necessary to specify conditions under which precooling would be rejected if it takes place in an approved enclosure or a cold treatment facility in the United States. We believe that precooling is essential to ensuring that cold treatment is effective, and these requirements will ensure that precooling is conducted properly. In a related change, this interim rule also revises paragraph (b)(1) in § 305.15. This paragraph has required that cold treatment enclosures be capable of precooling, cooling, and holding fruit at temperatures less than or equal to 2.2 °C (36 °F). However, under this interim rule, some enclosures, such as vessel holds and containers, may only be used to precool fruit prior to in-transit cold treatment subject to APHIS approval. Additionally, we believe that the requirements for cold treatment enclosures should refer to holding fruit at or below the temperature that is required by the relevant cold treatment schedule, to avoid any possible confusion. Therefore, we are revising paragraph (b)(1) to require that cold treatment enclosures be capable of maintaining the treatment temperature before the treatment begins and holding fruit at or below the treatment temperature during the treatment. Loading of Fruit in Treatment Enclosures Paragraph (f)(3) of § 305.15 has required that breaks, damage, or other problems in the treatment enclosure that preclude maintaining correct temperatures be repaired before use and that an official authorized by APHIS approve loading of compartment, number and placement of sensors, and initial fruit temperature readings before beginning the treatment. In this interim rule, we are moving these requirements to paragraph (f)(4). We are also adding two more specific requirements regarding the loading of fruit within the treatment enclosure. Specifically, we are prohibiting the use of hanging decks and hatch coamings within vessels as enclosures for in-transit cold treatment without prior written approval from APHIS. If additional cargo is loaded into these enclosures above the fruit that is stacked for cold treatment, it can be difficult to ensure that airflow around the fruit is sufficient to maintain temperature properly during the cold treatment. Additionally, some of these spaces have structures that make it difficult to generate sufficient airflow. While some hanging decks and hatch coamings are suitable for use as cold treatment enclosures, we believe it is necessary to verify that prior to authorizing their use. In addition, we are prohibiting the double-stacking of pallets. As stated earlier, hot spots are more likely to develop when large quantities of fruit are stacked together; prohibiting double-stacking of pallets is one way to help ensure that this does not occur. Sealing of Cold Treatment Containers Paragraph (f)(6) of § 305.15 has required that only the same type of fruit in the same type of package be treated together in a container, with no treatment of any mixture of fruits in a container. In this interim rule, we are moving this requirement to paragraph (f)(5) and adding a new requirement that a numbered seal be placed on the doors of the loaded container. The seal may be removed only at the port of destination by an official authorized by APHIS. This is a standard requirement for shipment of containers that prevents tampering with the fruit loaded in the container during transit. Adding this requirement to the cold treatment procedures will help to ensure the integrity of the cold treatment process. Requirements for Temperature Recording Devices Paragraph
(c)in § 305.15 requires that APHIS approve the recording devices and sensors used to monitor temperatures during cold treatment. However, the regulations in § 305.15 have not contained any more specific requirements for temperature recording devices. In this interim rule, we are adding a new paragraph (f)(6) that contains requirements intended to ensure the integrity of temperature recording devices used during cold treatment. (A temperature recording device records the temperatures from each of the temperature probes or sensors that are used in the cold treatment enclosure.) Specifically, paragraph (f)(6) requires that: • Temperature recording devices used during treatment must be password-protected and tamperproof. • The devices must be able to record the date, time, sensor number, and temperature during all calibrations and during treatment. Additionally, paragraph (f)(6) provides that, if records of calibrations or treatments are found to have been manipulated, the vessel or container in which the treatment is performed may be suspended from conducting cold treatments until proper equipment is installed and an official authorized by APHIS has recertified it. APHIS' decision to recertify a vessel or container will take into account the severity of the infraction that led to suspension. This provision ensures that APHIS is able to take action in the event that the integrity of the temperature recording devices is compromised. Use of Additional Temperature Probe or Sensor in Vessel Holds Paragraph (f)(4) has required that a minimum of three temperature sensors be used in the treatment compartment during treatment. In this interim rule, we are moving this requirement to paragraph (f)(7) and additionally requiring that a minimum of four temperature probes or sensors be used when cold treatment is conducted in vessel holds, while retaining the requirement that a minimum of three temperature probes or sensors be used in other enclosures. (We are adding “probe” as a synonym for “sensor” in the regulations because both terms are commonly used.) Vessel holds are larger than containers, and thus more temperature probes or sensors must be used in vessel holds to ensure that treatment is being conducted at the proper temperatures. Paragraph (f)(7) also provides that an official authorized by APHIS will have the option to require that additional temperature probes or sensors be used, depending on the size of the treatment enclosure. Maintaining Fruit Pulp Temperatures In this interim rule, we are revising paragraph (b)(2), which has required cold treatment enclosures to maintain fruit pulp temperatures according to treatment schedules with no more than a 0.3 °C (0.54 °F) variation in temperature, to refer instead to maintaining no more than a 0.39 °C (0.7 °F) variation in temperature. In addition, we are adding a new paragraph (f)(8) that requires that fruit pulp temperatures be maintained at the temperature specified in the treatment schedule with no more than a 0.39 °C (0.7 °F) variation in temperature between two consecutive hourly readings. Maintaining fruit pulp temperatures at the treatment temperature is essential to ensuring that cold treatment is effective. We have determined that allowing fruit pulp temperatures to vary by up to 0.39 °C (0.7 °F) will not threaten the effectiveness of the treatment while accounting for normal variation in fruit pulp temperatures. We are amending the temperature variation for cold treatment enclosures allowed by paragraph (b)(1) to make it consistent with the temperature variation allowed by the new paragraph (f)(8). Paragraph (f)(8) also explicitly provides that failure to comply with this requirement will result in invalidation of the treatment unless an official authorized by APHIS can verify that the pulp temperature was maintained at or below the treatment temperature for the duration of the treatment. An official authorized by APHIS has the option to accept a treatment in which fruit pulp temperature varies by amounts greater than those required in the regulations if the official authorized by APHIS can determine from other evidence that the fruit was adequately treated. If there is no evidence confirming that the fruit was adequately treated, an official authorized by APHIS will invalidate the treatment. Auditing Cold Treatment We are adding a new paragraph (f)(13) that provides for officials authorized by APHIS to perform audits to ensure that the treatment procedures comply with the regulations. The official authorized by APHIS must be given the appropriate materials and access to the facility, container, or vessel necessary to perform the audits. This provision will ensure that, if officials authorized by APHIS become concerned about whether cold treatment is being conducted according to the regulations, they will be able to gather any necessary information in order to investigate the matter. Other Changes The first sentence of paragraph (f)(7) has read as follows: “Fruit must be stacked to allow cold air to be distributed throughout the enclosure, with no pockets of warmer air, and to allow random sampling of pulp temperature in any location in the load.” The random sampling requirement did not reflect the conditions under which in-transit cold treatment is typically performed. To maximize the volume of fruit that can be treated during shipment, fruit is typically packed tightly into the treatment enclosure, leaving a crawl space above the fruit for circulation of air. Random sampling of the fruit during treatment thus could not take place. Instead, we have relied on data gathered from temperature probes or sensors to determine whether cold treatment is being effectively administered, as described earlier. In addition, the requirement that fruit be stacked to allow cold air to be distributed throughout the enclosure is unnecessary given the specific requirement for maintaining a constant fruit pulp temperature added by this interim rule. Therefore, the revised paragraph
(f)set out by this interim rule does not include the first sentence of former paragraph (f)(7). Paragraph (f)(9) has read as follows: “Pretreatment conditioning (heat shock or 100.4 °F for 10 to 12 hours) of fruits is optional and is the responsibility of the shipper.” Because this step is optional, we would prefer to convey information about pretreatment conditioning through the guidance provided in the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual rather than through the regulations. We have therefore not included any information about pretreatment conditioning in the revised paragraph
(f)set out by this interim rule. This interim rule moves the temperature recording requirements that had previously been in the last two sentences of paragraph (f)(7) to a new (f)(10). In addition, we are amending the sentence “Gaps of longer than 1 hour may invalidate the treatment or indicate treatment failure” to indicate that the treatment will be invalidated unless an official authorized by APHIS can verify that the pulp temperature was maintained at or below the treatment temperature for the duration of the treatment, for reasons discussed earlier under the heading “Maintaining Fruit Pulp Temperatures.” This interim rule moves the requirements that had previously been in paragraph (f)(8) to a new paragraph (f)(12). We are also amending the sentence “Cold treatment is not completed until so designated by an official authorized by APHIS or the certifying official of the foreign country” by replacing the word “designated” with the word “declared.” We believe this word more clearly indicates that an official authorized by APHIS must serve as the final authority in determining whether cold treatment has been completed. The changes we are making in this interim rule are designed to ensure that cold treatment neutralizes the target pests in shipments of fruit and to ensure that officials authorized by APHIS are able to review accurate records of treatment and take action if the cold treatment is not being conducted in accordance with the regulations. We welcome public comment on any aspect of these changes. Immediate Action Immediate action is necessary to ensure that cold treatment is effective at neutralizing quarantine plant pests and thus preventing their introduction into the United States. This rule is being made effective 60 days after publication because affected parties will need time to prepare for the changes in operations that will become necessary on the effective date of this rule. Because prior notice and other public procedures with respect to this action are impracticable and contrary to the public interest under these circumstances, we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 to make this rule effective 60 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . We will consider comments we receive during the comment period for this interim rule (see DATES above). After the comment period closes, we will publish another document in the **Federal Register** . The document will include a discussion of any comments we receive and any amendments we are making to the rule. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. For this action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review under Executive Order 12866. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603, we have performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis, which is set out below, regarding the economic effects of this interim rule on small entities. Based on the information we have, there is no reason to conclude that adoption of this interim rule will result in any significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. However, we do not currently have all of the data necessary for a comprehensive analysis of the effects of this interim rule on small entities that may incur benefits or costs from the implementation of this interim rule. Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 *et seq.* ), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to regulate the importation of plants, plant products, and other articles to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or the dissemination of plant pests within the United States. This interim rule amends the cold treatment regulations by making several changes to the requirements for cold treatment enclosures and the requirements for conducting cold treatment. The changes include: Adding more specific and stringent requirements for precooling fruit prior to cold treatment, requiring the use of temperature recording devices that are password-protected and tamperproof, adding requirements to increase the effectiveness of cold treatment conducted in vessel holds, and providing for officials authorized by APHIS to conduct audits of the cold treatment process. We are making these changes in response to the results of external and internal reviews of the cold treatment requirements that have been in place. These changes will improve the effectiveness of cold treatment and thus will help to prevent the introduction of quarantine plant pests into the United States. Operational costs of precooling under this interim rule are expected to be largely the same as they were prior to the publication of this interim rule, when precooling was allowed to be conducted on vessels without APHIS approval of the treatment enclosure. There may be a cost increase per quantity of fruit shipped due to the pulp temperature sampling requirements, but we do not have information that would enable us to quantify the increase. Similarly, precooling costs for fruit that undergoes cold treatment at a facility in the United States are expected to be largely the same as they are under the regulations that have been in place. Fruit intended for cold treatment may still be precooled in the treatment enclosure subject to APHIS approval of the loading of the fruit. However, because loading of fruit in the treatment enclosure is, in most cases, not adequate to allow an official authorized by APHIS to sample the pulp temperatures of the precooled fruit, we expect that most fruit intended for cold treatment will be precooled outside the treatment enclosures. If countries decide to construct dockside refrigeration warehouses to meet these requirements, the warehouses themselves could be a potential additional cost. (To find the additional cost, one would subtract any ship utilization costs forgone by not conducting the precooling in ship holds from the total cost of constructing and using a dockside refrigeration warehouse.) Based on costs for the construction of such facilities in the United States, a medium-sized refrigerated facility (between 60,000 square feet and 100,000 square feet) may cost between $7 million and $10 million. 3 3 The Port of Corpus Christi, TX, completed, in July 2000, a new 99,520-square-foot refrigerated warehouse at a total cost of $9.2 million (about $92.5 per square foot) for importing and exporting fruits, vegetables, meats, and other commodities. See *http://www.mgn.com/pressreleasedetails.cfm?id=1200* and *http://www.expansionmanagement.com/cmd/articledetail/articleid/15068/default.asp.* As another example, a new 60,000-square-foot refrigerated warehouse at the Port of Wilmington, DE, was completed at a total cost of $7.5 million (about $125 per square foot). The facility will be used primarily for fresh fruit. ( *See http://www.drba.net/press/releases/files/20040615drbarowanuniversity.pdf.)* In theory, if exporters do experience a cost increase because of this interim rule, the quantity of fruit supplied may decrease. This decrease could result in an increase in the price of fruit, benefiting U.S. producers and suppliers. However, these impacts are expected to be negligible; any additional precooling costs will represent a small fraction of the price of the fruit. Nine countries (Chile, Mexico, Spain, New Zealand, Argentina, South Africa, Canada, Australia, and Italy) supplied over 95 percent of total U.S. fruit imports in 2005. These nine countries have large worldwide markets, accounting for 54 percent of world exports of fresh fruits. About 10.3 percent of their fruit exports in 2005 were shipped to the United States. 4 We expect that many if not all of these major fruit-exporting countries already have facilities available for precooling, and that any cost increases attributable to the interim rule will be minimal. 4 Fruit imports from other countries were much smaller, with 22 countries shipping less than a single bulk shipment (8,000 metric tons). Impact on Small Entities If the price of imported fruit increases because of this rule, U.S. entities that may be affected include producers of crops that are hosts for fruit flies, many of which are categorized within the following North American Industry Classification System [NAICS] subsectors: NAICS 111310 Orange Groves, NAICS 111320 Citrus (except Orange) Groves, NAICS 111331 Apple Orchards, NAICS 111332 Grape Vineyards, NAICS 111333 Strawberry Farming, NAICS 111334 Berry (except Strawberry) Farming, NAICS 111335 Tree Nut Farming, NAICS 111336 Fruit and Tree Nut Combination Farming, and NAICS 111339 Other Noncitrus Fruit Farming. These entities would benefit from the price effects, which would reduce the supply of imported crops that are hosts for fruit flies. Affected entities may also include fruit and vegetables wholesalers (NAICS 422480), supermarkets and other grocery stores (NAICS 445110), warehouse clubs and superstores (NAICS 452910), and fruit and vegetable markets (NAICS 445230). If the theoretical price effects associated with this interim rule actually occur, these entities would experience negative effects from the higher prices and smaller supply of imported fruit. The vast majority of the businesses that comprise these industries are small entities. The Small Business Administration
(SBA)classifies the farming operations identified above as small entities if their annual receipts are not more than $750,000. 5 According to the 2002 Census of Agriculture, there were over 119,000 operations that were engaged in the production of citrus and noncitrus fruits. Over 98 percent of these entities were designated as small entities. The SBA classifies fresh fruit and vegetable merchant wholesalers (NAICS 422480) as small entities if they employ 100 or fewer employees. According to the 2002 Economic Census, there were 4,644 of these entities, with 484 (or 10.4 percent) of them considered to be large. SBA classifies supermarkets and other grocery stores as small entities if their annual receipts are not more than $23 million. There were 56,577 supermarkets and other grocery stores in 2002. Of these, only 3,477, or 6.1 percent, are considered to be large. There were 2,761 warehouse clubs and superstores (NAICS 452910), and these are considered small if their annual sales are less than $25 million. Of the above total, 2,593, or 93.9 percent, are considered to be large. Fruit and vegetable markets (NAICS 445230) are considered small if their annual sales are less than $6.5 million. In 2002, the most recent year for which data are available, there were 2,257 fruit and vegetable markets. 6 Approximately 96 percent of these are considered to be small entities under the SBA's standards. However, for all of these categories of businesses, we do not know what proportion of them will be affected by this interim rule. We welcome comments on the economic effects of this interim rule on small entities and on how many small entities might be affected by the rule. 5 SBA, Small Business Size Standards matched to North American Industry Classification System 2002, Effective January 2006 ( *www.sba.gov/size/sizetable2002.html* ). 6 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census Geographic Area Series: Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade, Revised January 2006 ( *http://www.census.gov/econ/census02/guide/geosumm.htm* ). No significant alternatives were identified that would meet the objectives of the interim rule. Executive Order 12372 This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.) Executive Order 12988 This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule:
(1)Preempts all State and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule;
(2)has no retroactive effect; and
(3)does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. Paperwork Reduction Act This interim rule contains no new information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 305 Irradiation, Phytosanitary treatment, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR part 305 as follows: PART 305—PHYTOSANITARY TREATMENTS 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 305 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. 2. In § 305.15, paragraphs
(b)and
(f)are revised to read as follows: § 305.15 Treatment requirements.
(b)*Cold treatment enclosures.* All enclosures in which cold treatment is performed, including refrigerated containers, must:
(1)Be capable of maintaining the treatment temperature before the treatment begins and holding fruit at or below the treatment temperature during the treatment.
(2)Maintain fruit pulp temperatures according to treatment schedules with no more than a 0.39 °C (0.7 °F) variation in temperature.
(f)*Treatment procedures.*
(1)All material, labor, and equipment for cold treatment performed on vessels must be provided by the vessel or vessel agent. An official authorized by APHIS monitors, manages, and advises in order to ensure that the treatment procedures are followed.
(2)Fruit that may be cold treated must be safeguarded to prevent cross-contamination or mixing with other infested fruit.
(3)Fruit intended for in-transit cold treatment must be precooled to the temperature at which the fruit will be treated prior to beginning treatment. The in-transit treatment enclosure may not be used for precooling unless an official authorized by APHIS approves the loading of the fruit in the treatment enclosure as adequate to allow for fruit pulp temperatures to be taken prior to beginning treatment. If the fruit is precooled outside the treatment enclosure, an official authorized by APHIS will take pulp temperatures manually from a sample of the fruit as the fruit is loaded for in-transit cold treatment to verify that precooling was completed. If the pulp temperatures for the sample are 0.28 °C (0.5 °F) or more above the temperature at which the fruit will be treated, the pallet from which the sample was taken will be rejected and returned for additional precooling until the fruit reaches the treatment temperature. If fruit is precooled in the treatment enclosure, or if treatment is conducted at a cold treatment facility in the United States, the fruit must be precooled to the temperature at which it will be treated, as verified by an official authorized by APHIS, prior to beginning treatment.
(4)Breaks, damage, etc., in the treatment enclosure that preclude maintaining correct temperatures must be repaired before the enclosure is used. An official authorized by APHIS must approve loading of compartment, number and placement of temperature probes or sensors, and initial fruit temperature readings before beginning the treatment. Hanging decks and hatch coamings within vessels may not be used as enclosures for in-transit cold treatment without prior written approval from APHIS. Double-stacking of pallets is not allowed.
(5)Only the same type of fruit in the same type of package may be treated together in a container; no mixture of fruits in containers may be treated. A numbered seal must be placed on the doors of the loaded container and may be removed only at the port of destination by an official authorized by APHIS.
(6)Temperature recording devices used during treatment must be password-protected and tamperproof. The devices must be able to record the date, time, sensor number, and temperature during all calibrations and during treatment. If records of calibrations or treatments are found to have been manipulated, the vessel or container in which the treatment is performed may be suspended from conducting cold treatments until proper equipment is installed and an official authorized by APHIS has recertified it. APHIS' decision to recertify a vessel or container will take into account the severity of the infraction that led to suspension.
(7)A minimum of four temperature probes or sensors is required for vessel holds used as treatment enclosures. A minimum of three temperature probes or sensors is required for other treatment enclosures. An official authorized by APHIS will have the option to require that additional temperature probes or sensors be used, depending on the size of the treatment enclosure.
(8)Fruit pulp temperatures must be maintained at the temperature specified in the treatment schedule with no more than a 0.39 °C (0.7 °F) variation in temperature between two consecutive hourly readings. Failure to comply with this requirement will result in invalidation of the treatment unless an official authorized by APHIS can verify that the pulp temperature was maintained at or below the treatment temperature for the duration of the treatment.
(9)The time required to complete the treatment begins when all temperature probes reach the prescribed cold treatment schedule temperature.
(10)Temperatures must be recorded at intervals no longer than 1 hour apart. Gaps of longer than 1 hour will invalidate the treatment or indicate treatment failure unless an official authorized by APHIS can verify that the pulp temperature was maintained at or below the treatment temperature for the duration of the treatment.
(11)Cold treatment is not completed until so declared by an official authorized by APHIS or the certifying official of the foreign country; shipments of treated commodities may not be discharged until APHIS clearance has been fully completed, including review and approval of treatment record charts.
(12)Cold treatment of fruits in break bulk vessels or containers must be initiated by an official authorized by APHIS if there is not a treatment technician who has been trained to initiate cold treatments for either break bulk vessels or containers.
(13)An official authorized by APHIS may perform audits to ensure that the treatment procedures comply with the regulations in this subpart. The official authorized by APHIS must be given the appropriate materials and access to the facility, container, or vessel necessary to perform the audits. Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of June 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7-12768 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 353 [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0122] RIN 0579-AC43 Export Certification for Wood Packaging Material AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Interim rule and request for comments. SUMMARY: We are amending the export certification regulations to clarify that an International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 15 (ISPM 15) quality/treatment mark is an industry-issued certificate within the meaning of 7 CFR part 353 and thus may only be issued when the organization applying the certification mark has entered into an agreement with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. We are also removing all references to a certificate of heat treatment from the regulations because those certificates have been replaced by the ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark. These changes are necessary in order to ensure the appropriate issuance of the ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark. DATES: This interim rule is effective July 2, 2007. We will consider all comments that we receive on or before August 31, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov,* select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0122 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. • *Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:* Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0122, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0122. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call
(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John Tyrone Jones II, Export Specialist, Phytosanitary Issues Management Team, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 140, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;
(301)734-8860. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The export certification regulations in 7 CFR part 353 (referred to below as the regulations) contain provisions for export certification of plant and plant products. The export certification program does not require certification of any exports, but does provide for certification of plants and plant products as a service to exporters. After assessing the phytosanitary condition of the plants or plant products intended for export relative to the receiving country's regulations, an inspector issues an internationally recognized phytosanitary certificate (PPQ Form 577), a phytosanitary certificate for reexport (PPQ Form 579), an export certificate for processed plant products (PPQ Form 578), or a certificate of heat treatment (PPQ Form 553), if warranted. The regulations in § 353.7(d) also provide for industry-issued certification of certain plant products under the terms of a written agreement between the concerned agricultural or forestry company and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Each agreement specifies the articles subject to the agreement and the measures necessary to prevent the introduction of specified plant pests into the foreign countries specified in the agreement. One form of an industry-issued certificate that is being issued under these regulations is an approved international quality/treatment mark that certifies wood packaging material as having been either heat treated or fumigated with methyl bromide in accordance with the guidelines contained in International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 15 (ISPM 15), “Guidelines for Regulating Wood Packaging Material in International Trade.” ISPM 15 is a standard that describes the application of phytosanitary measures to reduce the risk of introduction and dissemination of quarantine pests associated with wood packaging material (including dunnage) made of coniferous and non-coniferous raw wood that is in use in international trade. As the national plant protection organization
(NPPO)of the United States, APHIS is responsible for ISPM 15 certification of wood packaging material that is exported from the United States. As provided for under the regulations in § 353.7(d), APHIS currently has agreements with two private organizations to issue certificates of compliance with ISPM 15 for wood packaging material for export. Certification of compliance with ISPM 15 comes in the form of a quality/treatment mark that is applied to each regulated article. Since the adoption of ISPM 15, we have encountered several cases where private firms have developed and applied ISPM 15 quality/treatment marks to wood packaging material for export without entering into an agreement with APHIS and, it appears, without applying the treatments that are required under ISPM 15. These companies have developed a mark similar to what is described and pictured in ISPM 15 and are using this mark outside of the export certification regulatory program. Although we acknowledge that the regulations do not explicitly state that the certification of compliance with ISPM 15 (the mark) is an industry-issued certificate, this practice is clearly not in conformity with the purpose and intent of the regulations. In order to ensure integrity of our export certification program and to fulfill our responsibilities under the Plant Protection Act and our international obligations as the NPPO of the United States, we are amending the regulations in part 353 to make it clear that certificates of compliance with ISPM 15 are *industry-issued certificates* and thus may only be issued when the person, company, or entity applying the certification mark has first entered into a written agreement with APHIS and applies the mark in accordance with all applicable requirements. Specifically, we are amending § 353.1, the definition for *industry-issued certificate;* § 353.2; and § 353.7(d) by adding the following sentence to each: “An industry-issued certificate includes an ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark.” Now that the ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark is the international standard for confirming that wood packaging material has been treated, we no longer issue a certificate of heat treatment (PPQ Form 553). This form is, therefore, obsolete, so we are amending the regulations to remove all references to PPQ Form 553. Immediate Action Immediate action is necessary to ensure the integrity of our export certification program and to fulfill our responsibilities under the Plant Protection Act and our international obligations as the NPPO for the United States. Under these circumstances, the Administrator has determined that prior notice and opportunity for public comment are contrary to the public interest and that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 for making this action effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . We will consider comments we receive during the comment period for this interim rule (see DATES above). After the comment period closes, we will publish another document in the **Federal Register** . The document will include a discussion of any comments we receive and any amendments we are making to the rule. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. We are amending the export certification regulations to clarify that an ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark is an industry-issued certificate within the meaning of our export certification regulations and thus may only be issued when the organization applying the certification mark has entered into an agreement with APHIS and applies the mark in accordance with all applicable requirements. We are also removing all references to a certificate of heat treatment from the regulations because those certificates have been replaced by the ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark. These changes are necessary in order to ensure the appropriate issuance of the ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark. The pallet industry in the United States is characterized by many small firms and a few larger firms. No one firm is able to dominate the market. U.S. Census data show that there are approximately 3,000 firms in the wood pallet and container industry. Other estimates of the number of firms in the industry range up to 3,500 pallet manufacturers in the U.S. National Wooden Pallet and Container Association. Most firms sell their products within a 350-mile radius. The average number of employees is fewer than 20. Thirty-two percent of the firms had fewer than five employees. The average yearly sales were $1.7 million. The Small Business Administration
(SBA)classifies wood container and pallet manufacturers as small businesses if they have fewer than 500 employees. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census (the most recent one available), all pallet manufacturers are considered small businesses. In 2002, there were 2,948 establishments that produced wooden containers and pallets employing 51,003 persons. The total value of shipments was $5.5 billion dollars. This rule will affect only those firms that have been using an ISPM 15 compliance mark without entering into an agreement with APHIS in accordance with the export certification regulations of 7 CFR part 353. There have been cases where the mark has been applied in these circumstances. Given that there are nearly 3,000 firms that produce wooden containers and pallets, only a very small percentage will be affected by this interim rule. This rule will not have a significant economic impact nor will it affect a substantial number of small entities. This rule does not impose any additional costs on firms; it only clarifies that the ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark may be applied only in accordance with the requirements of the regulations regarding the use of industry-issued certificates. The benefits of this rule are derived from ensuring APHIS' ability to fulfill its responsibilities under the Plant Protection Act and its international obligations as the NPPO of the United States and the reduced risk due to better compliance with existing international standards. We do not expect to see any measurable adverse economic impact as a result of this rule. Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Executive Order 12372 This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.) Executive Order 12988 This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule:
(1)Preempts all State and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule;
(2)has no retroactive effect; and
(3)does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule contains no new information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 353 Exports, Plant diseases and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR part 353 as follows: PART 353—EXPORT CERTIFICATION 1. The authority citation for part 353 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. § 353.1 [Amended] 2. In § 353.1, the definition for *certificate of heat treatment* is removed and the definition for *industry-issued certificate* is amended by adding the sentence “An industry-issued certificate includes an ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark.” after the last sentence. § 353.2 [Amended] 3. Section 353.2 is amended by adding the word “or” before the words “an export”; by removing the words “, or a certificate of heat treatment (PPQ Form 553)”; and by adding the sentence “An industry-issued certificate includes an ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark.” after the last sentence. 4. In § 353.5, paragraph
(a)is revised to read as follows: § 353.5 Application for certification.
(a)To request the services of an inspector, a written application (PPQ Form 572) shall be made as far in advance as possible, and shall be filed in the office of inspection at the port of certification. § 353.7 [Amended] 5. Section 353.7 is amended as follows: a. In the introductory text of paragraph (d), by adding the sentence “An industry-issued certificate includes an ISPM 15 quality/treatment mark.” immediately before the last sentence. b. By removing paragraph (e). Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of June 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7-12770 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 73 [Docket No. FAA-2004-17774; Airspace Docket No. 04-ACE-32] RIN 2120-AA66 Modification of Restricted Areas 3601A and 3601B; Brookville, KS AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action revises Restricted Areas 3601A (R-3601A) and 3601B (R-3601B), at Brookville, KS, in response to a request from the United States Air Force (USAF). Specifically, this action revises R-3601A and R-3601B by combining their lateral boundaries, expanding the ceiling to flight level 230 (FL230), and re-designating the lower portion of the combined area as R-3601A and the upper portion as R-3601B. Additionally, this action changes the using agency of R-3601A and R-3601B from “Commander, Kansas ANG, McConnell AFB, KS” to “Air National Guard, 184th Air Refueling Wing, Detachment 1, Smoky Hill ANG Range, Salina, KS.” These revisions will fulfill new USAF requirements for high altitude release bomb training for fighter aircraft and medium-to-high altitude release bomb training for bombers. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, August 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Rohring, Airspace and Rules Group, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:
(202)267-8783. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On July 21, 2004, the FAA published in the **Federal Register** a notice of proposed rulemaking to modify the ceiling and lateral boundaries, and change the using agency of R-3601A and R-3601B to assist the USAF in fulfilling new high altitude release bomb training requirements for fighter aircraft and new medium-to-high altitude release bomb training requirements for bombers (69 FR 43539). The current altitude structure is not sufficient to meet these new training requirements. Interested parties were invited to participate in the rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on this proposal to the FAA. The FAA received no comments in response to the proposal. With the exception of editorial changes, this amendment is the same as that proposed in the notice. Section 73.36 of Title 14 CFR part 73 was republished in FAA Order 7400.8N, dated February 16, 2007. The Rule This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 73 by revising R-3601A and R-3601B at Brookville, KS, and changing the using agency. Specifically, this action revises R-3601A and R-3601B by combining their lateral boundaries, expanding the ceiling, and re-designating the lower portion (surface to but not including FL 180) as R-3601A and the upper portion (FL 180 to FL 230) as R-3601B. The FAA is taking this action to assist the USAF in meeting new training requirements that call for practicing the release of bombs from higher altitudes than are currently available within the existing restricted areas. Additionally, this action will change the using agency of R-3601A and R-3601B from “Commander, Kansas ANG, McConnell AFB, KS” to “Air National Guard, 184th Air Refueling Wing, Detachment 1, Smoky Hill ANG Range, Salina, KS.” This action does not change the times of use or the controlling agency for R-3601A and R-3601B. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation
(DOT)Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Environmental Review The FAA has determined that the Final Environmental Assessment
(FEA)prepared by the Kansas Air National Guard for the proposed changes to the Smoky, Smokey High, and Bison MOAs and Restricted Areas 3601A and 3601B meet the criteria for adoption. The FAA has also determined that the proposed actions are consistent with existing national environmental policies and objectives as set forth in section 101 of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)and other applicable environmental requirements and will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of NEPA. Therefore, on May 10, 2007, the FAA adopted the FEA and issued a Finding of No Significant Impact/Record of Decision in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73 Airspace, Navigation (air). The Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 73.36 [Amended] 2. § 73.36 is amended as follows: R-3601A Brookville, KS [Revised] By removing the current boundaries, designated altitudes, and using agency, and substituting the following: Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 38°45′20″ N., long. 97°46′01″ W.; to lat. 38°39′45″ N., long. 97°46′01″ W.; then southwest along the Missouri Pacific Railroad Track; to lat. 38°38′20″ N., long. 97°47′31″ W.; to lat. 38°38′20″ N., long. 97°50′01″ W.; to lat. 38°35′00″ N., long. 97°50′01″ W.; to lat. 38°35′00″ N., long. 97°56′01″ W.; to lat. 38°45′20″ N., long. 97°56′01″ W.; to the point of beginning. Designated altitudes. Surface to but not including FL180. Using Agency. Air National Guard, 184th Air Refueling Wing, Detachment 1, Smoky Hill ANG Range, Salina, KS. R-3601B Brookville, KS [Revised] By removing the current boundaries, designated altitudes, and using agency and substituting the following: Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 38°45′20″ N., long. 97°46′01″ W.; to lat. 38°39′45″ N., long. 97°46′01″ W.; then southwest along the Missouri Pacific Railroad Track; to lat. 38°38′20″ N., long. 97°47′31″ W.; to lat. 38°38′20″ N., long. 97°50′01″ W.; to lat. 38°35′00″ N., long. 97°50′01″ W.; to lat. 38°35′00″ N., long. 97°56′01″ W.; to lat. 38°45′20″ N., long. 97°56′01″ W.; to the point of beginning. Designated altitudes. FL180 to FL230. Using Agency. Air National Guard, 184th Air Refueling Wing, Detachment 1, Smoky Hill ANG Range, Salina, KS. Issued in Washington, DC, June 18, 2007. Kenneth McElroy, Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. [FR Doc. E7-12703 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 3 RIN 3038-AC37 Registration of Intermediaries AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”) has amended Commission Regulation 3.10 to require certain registered intermediaries, *i.e.* , futures commission merchants (“FCMs”), introducing brokers (“IBs”), commodity pool operators (“CPOs”), commodity trading advisors (“CTAs”) and leverage transaction merchants (“LTMs”), to complete an online annual review of their registration information maintained with the National Futures Association (“NFA”). This amendment is intended to ensure that NFA will have accurate and current information about such registrants. The Commission also has made a technical and conforming amendment to Commission Regulation 3.33(f) in order to remove an unnecessary reference to Regulation 3.10(d). EFFECTIVE DATE: August 1, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helene D. Schroeder, Special Counsel, Compliance and Registration Section, Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581, telephone number:
(202)418-5450; facsimile number:
(202)418-5528; and electronic mail: *hschroeder@cftc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Part 3 of the Commission's regulations sets forth the regulations relating to the registration of intermediaries and other futures industry professionals. 1 The Commission adopted Part 3 pursuant to the authority set forth in Sections 4c, 4d, 4f(a)(1), 4m, 4n(1) and 19 of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”). 2 These statutory provisions require the registration of firms seeking to act as intermediaries for exchange-traded futures and commodity options. Section 4f(a)(1) contains the framework for the registration of FCMs and IBs. 3 Section 4n(1) governs the registration of CPOs and CTAs. 4 Sections 4c 5 and 19 of the Act, 6 respectively, grant the Commission plenary authority, including registration authority, over commodity options and leverage transactions. 1 17 CFR Part 3. The Commission's regulations can be accessed at *http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_06/17cfrv1_06.html* . 2 7 U.S.C. 1 *et seq.* (2000). The Act can be accessed at *http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title7/chapter1_.html* . 3 7 U.S.C. 6f(a)(1). 4 7 U.S.C. 6n(1). 5 7 U.S.C. 6c. 6 7 U.S.C. 23. Commission Regulation 31.5, 17 CFR 31.5 (2007), was promulgated under this provision and along with Regulation 3.10, 17 CFR 3.10, governs the registration of LTMs. Commission Regulation 3.10(a) specifies that an application for registration as an FCM, IB, CPO, CTA or LTM must be on a Form 7-R, completed and filed with NFA in accordance with the instructions thereto. 7 Commission Regulation 3.31(a)(1) requires such intermediaries to correct promptly deficiencies or inaccuracies contained in the person's Form 7-R or any Form 8-R filed on behalf of a principal or an associated person. 8 7 17 CFR 3.10(a). 8 17 CFR 3.31(a)(1). In 2002, NFA altered its registration procedures by shifting from paper-based registration to an online or electronic registration system. Pursuant to these new procedures, NFA requires, with limited exceptions, 9 that all registration (and membership) forms, including the completed Form 7-R and 3-R, must be filed with NFA electronically through NFA's Online Registration System (“ORS”). Shortly after the new procedures were implemented, the Commission deleted Regulation 3.10(d), pursuant to which intermediary firms would conduct an annual review of a pre-printed copy of the registrant's 7-R. 10 9 For example, NFA requires that any securities broker or dealer that is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission that becomes a notice-registered FCM or IB must submit a hardcopy version of its Form 7-R. 10 *See* 67 FR 38869 (June 6, 2002). II. Proposal In order to ensure that the registration information it maintains is accurate and up-to-date, NFA developed an online registration update protocol for firms to review and update their registration records. In addition to providing an updated list of persons authorized to enter data in ORS, the protocol would require registrants to provide updated disciplinary, branch office and firm contact information. 11 11 Under the protocol, a firm could modify the title given for a particular principal of a firm, but it could not identify a new principal, as this would require separate application. To facilitate NFA's efforts in implementing this new protocol, on April 26, 2007, the Commission published in the **Federal Register** a proposal to require firms to conduct an annual review of registration information. (“Proposal”). 12 The Proposal, which included a proposed new paragraph
(d)of Regulation 3.10 (“Proposed Amendment”) was designed to ensure that NFA would be in possession of current and accurate information regarding intermediaries. 13 Specifically, the Proposed Amendment would require that each FCM, IB, CPO, CTA and LTM, in accordance with procedures established by NFA, complete an online annual review of the registration information maintained by NFA. Pursuant to procedures established by NFA, registrants would be required to correct any deficiencies or inaccuracies contained therein. 12 72 FR 20788. 13 Paragraph
(d)of Regulation 3.10 had been reserved. The Proposed Amendment also would provide that the failure to complete the review and update within 30 days of the date established by NFA for completion would be deemed to be a request for withdrawal from registration. As further provided therein, NFA would be required to process the request in accordance with the existing procedures for withdrawal of registration set forth in Commission Regulation 3.33(f). The Commission's Proposal also included a technical and conforming amendment to Commission Regulation 3.33(f) in order to remove unnecessary language that referenced Regulation 3.10(d). III. Comments Regarding the Proposal The Commission received only one comment letter on its Proposal, and this comment, which was from NFA, expressed full support for the amendment. In light of this fact, and the foregoing, the Commission has determined to adopt the amendments to Regulations 3.10 and 3.33(f) as set forth in the Proposal. IV. Related Matters A. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) 14 requires that agencies, in proposing regulations, consider the impact of those regulations on small businesses. The amendment to Regulation 3.10 will affect persons that are registered as FCMs, IBs, CPOs, CTAs and LTMs. The Commission has previously established certain definitions of “small entities” to be used by the Commission in evaluating the impact of its regulations on such entities in accordance with the RFA. 15 The Commission previously determined that registered FCMs, CPOs and LTMs are not small entities for the purpose of the RFA. 16 14 5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* 15 47 FR 18618 (Apr. 30, 1982). 16 47 FR 18618, 18619. With respect to the remaining persons, CTAs and IBs, the Commission stated in the Proposal that it did not believe that the economic impact of the Proposed Amendment would be significant. First, the information that would be required under the Proposed Amendment already is required to be collected under the existing registration framework, *to wit,* Regulation 3.31(a)(1). Second, the Proposed Amendment and NFA's new protocol would focus each registrant on the specific areas that must be reviewed and, if needed, updated. Third, the Proposed Amendment would permit review and updating via electronic means in keeping with the current registration procedures. Accordingly, in accordance with Section 3(a) of the RFA, 17 the Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, certified that the Proposed Amendment would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 17 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The Commission invited the public to comment regarding its analysis of the application of the RFA to the Proposal. The Commission did not receive any such comments. B. Cost-Benefit Analysis Section 15(a) of the Act 18 requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of its action before issuing a new regulation under the Act. By its terms, Section 15(a) does not require the Commission to quantify the costs and benefits of a new regulation or to determine whether the benefits of the proposed regulation outweigh its costs. Rather, Section 15(a) simply requires the Commission to “consider the costs and benefits” of its action. 18 7 U.S.C. 19(a). Section 15(a) further specifies that costs and benefits shall be evaluated in light of five broad areas of market and public concern:
(1)Protection of market participants and the public;
(2)efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of futures markets;
(3)price discovery;
(4)sound risk management practices; and
(5)other public interest considerations. The Commission, in its discretion, may choose to give greater weight to any one of the five enumerated areas and determine that, notwithstanding its costs, a particular regulation is necessary or appropriate to protect the public interest or to effectuate any of the provisions or to accomplish any of the purposes of the Act. The Commission has evaluated the costs and benefits of its Proposal, in particular, new Regulation 3.10(d) in light of the specific considerations identified in Section 15(a) of the Act. Regulation 3.10(d) concerns the registration of intermediaries, in particular, FCMs, IBs, CPOs, CTAs and LTMs. Specifically, it will require these intermediaries to complete an online annual review of their registration information, including disciplinary information, firm contacts and lists of authorized users. By ensuring that NFA, the self-regulatory organization that oversees the activities of these registrants, will have accurate and current information regarding registrants, Regulation 3.10(d) will maximize the protection of market participants and the public. Such intermediaries already are under an ongoing obligation to provide updated information to NFA pursuant to Commission Regulation 3.31(a)(1). Regulation 3.10(d) will require these registrants to comply with an online review protocol established by NFA. This protocol will provide a straightforward process for registrants to electronically update their registration information. It will focus and guide registrants on the particular areas that need updating. By facilitating NFA's efforts to adopt this protocol, Regulation 3.10(d) will result in efficiency enhancements for registrants and NFA. Regulation 3.10(d) also will have no effect on the following three enumerated areas:
(1)Efficiency, competitiveness or the financial integrity of futures markets;
(2)price discovery; and
(3)sound risk management practices. After considering these factors, the Commission has determined to adopt the amendment to Regulation 3.10 set forth below. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) imposes certain obligations on federal agencies, including the Commission, in connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of information as defined by the PRA. 19 In its Proposal, the Commission noted that the Proposed Amendment would require intermediaries to conduct an annual review of their registration information maintained with NFA and that this information is part of an approved collection of information. The Commission further noted that the Proposed Amendment would not result in any material modifications to this approved collection. Accordingly, for purposes of the PRA, the Commission certified that the Proposed Amendment did not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements. 19 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* The Commission did not receive any comments regarding its analysis relative to the PRA. List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 3 Administrative practice and procedure, Brokers, Commodity futures, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission amends 17 CFR part 3 as follows: PART 3—REGISTRATION 1. The authority citation for part 3 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 522, 522b; 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 6, 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d, 6e, 6f, 6g, 6h, 6i, 6k, 6m, 6n, 6o, 6p, 8, 9, 9a, 12, 12a, 13b, 13c, 16a, 18, 19, 21, 23. 2. Section 3.10 is amended by adding paragraph
(d)to read as follows: § 3.10 Registration of futures commission merchants, introducing brokers, commodity trading advisors, commodity pool operators and leverage transaction merchants.
(d)On a date to be established by the National Futures Association, and in accordance with procedures established by the National Futures Association, each registrant as a futures commission merchant, introducing broker, commodity trading advisor, commodity pool operator or leverage transaction merchant shall, on an annual basis, review and update registration information maintained with the National Futures Association. The failure to complete the review and update within thirty days following the date established by the National Futures Association shall be deemed to be a request for withdrawal from registration, which shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of § 3.33(f). 3. Section 3.33 is amended by revising paragraph
(f)introductory text to read as follows: § 3.33 Withdrawal from registration.
(f)A request for withdrawal from registration will become effective on the thirtieth day after receipt of such request by the National Futures Association, or earlier upon written notice from the National Futures Association (with the written concurrence of the Commission) of the granting of such request, unless prior to the effective date: Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2007, by the Commission. Eileen Donovan, Acting Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-12767 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration 21 CFR Parts 1309 and 1310 [Docket No. DEA-257F] RIN 1117-AA93 Changes in the Regulation of Iodine Crystals and Chemical Mixtures Containing Over 2.2 Percent Iodine AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Justice. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This rulemaking changes the regulation of the listed chemical iodine under the chemical regulatory provisions of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA)believes that this action is necessary to remove deficiencies in the existing regulatory controls, which have been exploited by drug traffickers who divert iodine (in the form of iodine crystals and iodine tincture) for the illicit production of methamphetamine in clandestine drug laboratories. This rulemaking moves iodine from List II to List I; reduces the iodine threshold from 0.4 kilograms to zero kilograms; adds import and export regulatory controls; and controls chemical mixtures containing greater than 2.2 percent iodine. This rulemaking establishes regulatory controls that will apply to iodine crystals and iodine chemical mixtures that contain greater than 2.2 percent iodine. This regulation therefore controls iodine crystals and strong iodine tinctures/solutions (e.g., 7 percent iodine) that do not have common household uses and instead have limited application in livestock, horses, and for disinfection of equipment. Household products such as 2 percent iodine tincture/solution and household disinfectants containing iodine complexes will not be adversely impacted by this regulation. Additionally, the final rule exempts transactions of up to one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) of Lugol's Solution. Persons handling regulated iodine materials are required to register with DEA, are subject to the import/export notification requirements of the CSA, and are required to maintain records of all regulated transactions involving iodine regardless of size. DATES: This rulemaking becomes effective on August 1, 2007. Persons seeking registration must apply on or before August 31, 2007 in order to continue their business pending final action by DEA on their application. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief, Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537 at
(202)307-7183. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Information on Iodine This rulemaking finalizes an August 11, 2006, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM)[71 FR 46144] in which DEA proposed
(1)the movement of iodine from List II to List I;
(2)a reduction in the iodine threshold from 0.4 kilograms to zero kilograms;
(3)the addition of import and export regulatory controls; and
(4)the control of chemical mixtures containing greater than 2.2 percent iodine. This action is being taken because of the continued use of iodine for the illicit production of the schedule II controlled substances amphetamine and methamphetamine. Methamphetamine is the leading controlled substance clandestinely manufactured in the United States. Faced with the growing threat of methamphetamine abuse in the United States and the ease with which methamphetamine is clandestinely produced using iodine, the DEA is increasing the regulatory controls on iodine in an effort to prevent the diversion of iodine to clandestine drug laboratories. Need for Increased Regulation This rulemaking changes the regulatory control of iodine in an effort to prevent the diversion of iodine for the illicit production of methamphetamine and amphetamine. The August 11, 2006, NPRM went into great detail regarding the scope of the domestic and international clandestine laboratory problem, use of iodine in the production of methamphetamine/amphetamine, and the need to increase regulatory controls on iodine. As stated in the NPRM, due to the regulatory controls placed on the listed chemical hydriodic acid, drug traffickers began using iodine as a substitute chemical in the illicit production of methamphetamine and amphetamine, both schedule II controlled substances. Hydriodic acid became a regulated chemical upon enactment of the Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-690). Hydriodic acid, like iodine, was initially regulated as a List II chemical. Hydriodic acid was reclassified as a List I chemical by enactment of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-647). The Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993 (DCDCA) (Pub. L. 103-200) required that handlers of List I chemicals be registered. This increased regulatory control and made it more difficult for traffickers to acquire hydriodic acid. Faced with this difficulty, traffickers began to substitute iodine for hydriodic acid for the illicit production of methamphetamine and amphetamine. Iodine is commonly used with the List I chemicals phosphorus or hypophosphorous acid and ephedrine or pseudoephedrine to manufacture methamphetamine, which is now the most prevalent method used by traffickers. The List I chemicals phenylpropanolamine or norpseudoephedrine can be made into amphetamine by the same method. In response to the increased use of iodine in clandestine drug laboratories, Congress controlled iodine as a List II chemical by amending Section 102(35) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 802(35)) by passage of Pub. L. 104-237, the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996
(MCA)on October 3, 1996. Although iodine became subject to CSA chemical regulatory controls, traffickers have exploited certain deficiencies in these controls to divert iodine. Only certain domestic distributions are regulated transactions, and distributions below the 0.4 kilogram cumulative threshold (about one pound), within a calendar month, are not regarded as regulated transactions. Import and export transactions of iodine are not regulated, regardless of the quantity distributed. Additionally, because iodine is a List II chemical, handlers of iodine are not required to register with DEA. These loopholes have been exploited by drug traffickers and the businesses that supply them. While the regulatory controls placed on iodine apply to iodine crystals, they have not pertained to iodine tinctures (solutions of iodine and iodide in alcohol), which are considered chemical mixtures. Drug traffickers are currently circumventing CSA regulatory controls via the diversion of iodine tinctures. Traffickers have learned that the tinctures can serve as a ready source of iodine crystals when the tincture is subjected to the appropriate chemical reaction. Existing regulations pertaining to iodine have proved to be inadequate to prevent diversion. Traffickers have been able to make undocumented purchases of iodine crystals (up to the existing threshold of 0.4 kilograms), make unlimited purchases of iodine tincture, and make undocumented import and export shipments of iodine. Additionally, because iodine is a List II chemical and distributors are not registered, it is difficult for DEA to identify all handlers of regulated material. International Scope of Problem The illicit production of methamphetamine is also an international problem. Mexican drug trafficking organizations operating out of Mexico and California began to dominate the illicit production and distribution of methamphetamine in the United States around 1994. This followed years of control by independent, regional outlaw motorcycle gangs, supplemented by numerous independent, smaller-scale producers. Mexican organizations now produce and supply the majority of the methamphetamine illicitly available in the United States, using large-scale laboratories based in Mexico and the Southwestern United States. These large-scale laboratories often rely upon a ready source of iodine. Outlaw motorcycle gangs and small independent producers remain active in domestic methamphetamine production, but not on the same scale as the Mexican traffickers. The Mexican organizations' ready access to essential chemicals on the international market has greatly facilitated their ability to produce large amounts of methamphetamine. DEA, therefore, believes that enhanced controls on iodine are necessary to prevent the diversion of iodine (in the form of iodine crystals and iodine tincture) for the illicit production of methamphetamine/amphetamine in clandestine drug laboratories. Comments In response to the August 11, 2006, NPRM, DEA received comments from thirteen interested parties. While commenters were generally supportive of DEA's need to prevent the diversion of iodine for the illicit production of methamphetamine, the comments raised concerns regarding the potential adverse impact upon the availability of specific iodine products intended for legitimate use. Comments Regarding Iodine Products Used for Nutritional Supplementation Twelve comments expressed concerns that the proposed regulations would adversely impact the availability of products for use as a dietary source of iodine. These comments detailed the use of iodine products as part of a nutritional program to supplement iodine levels for various health purposes (e.g., the normalization of thyroid function, prevention of breast cancer recurrence, or supplementation during pregnancy as a program to prevent autism in offsprings.) Eleven of these comments expressed concern that the regulation would adversely impact the availability of a specific formulation known as Lugol's Solution. Lugol's Solution is a 5 percent aqueous solution of iodine in combination with 10 percent potassium iodide. Most of these comments detailed the importance of Lugol's Solution as a source of milligram doses of iodine as part of a daily health program of disease prevention. Commenters noted how several drops of Lugol's Solution per day served as an inexpensive source of dietary iodine. Commenters detailed multiple uses for Lugol's Solution and expressed concerns that such material should remain available to end users in small quantities. In response to comments, DEA conducted further review of the legitimate uses for Lugol's Solution. These uses include
(1)the staining of slides in microbiology,
(2)the staining of cervical and esophageal tissue in diagnosis of disease,
(3)use in aquariums,
(4)use in pre-treating the thyroid gland prior to ingestion of radiolabeled I 131 so that the thyroid gland will not take up large quantities of radioactive material,
(5)use as a dietary source of iodine, and
(6)use in educational science test kits for identification of starches. For each of these uses, the quantities of Lugol's Solution needed are small. In most cases, the Lugol's Solution is used in small 8 milliliter
(ml)bottles or in one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) bottles. Because of the numerous legitimate uses and small quantities involved, DEA is adding a provision to this final rule that will exempt Lugol's Solution when packaged in bottles/containers of one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) or smaller, and involve distribution of only a single package per transaction. While this final rule provides an exemption for Lugol's Solution when packaged in small bottles, larger packages are subject to regulatory controls. DEA is aware of the availability of 16 fluid ounce bulk packages of Lugol's Solution. These larger bulk packages are subject to regulatory control provisions including registration, import/export notification, and recordkeeping. DEA review indicates that only 2-6 drops a day of Lugol's Solution are used for nutritional purposes. Additionally, the quantities used in the healthcare field, microbiology, and in the testing of starches, require only very small amounts of Lugol's Solution and the sale of 8 ml and one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) bottles is common. When used in an aquarium, the labeled directions indicate that only 1 drop of Lugol's Solution per 25 gallons should be used weekly. Therefore, one-fluid-ounce package of Lugol's Solution should be adequate for most legitimate purposes. A one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) package size contains 1.5 grams of iodine and has potential utility for use in the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine. Therefore, DEA is adding the provision to exempt individual transactions involving one one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) package/bottle. Individuals that distribute more than one package/bottle of Lugol's Solution (of any size) per transaction, are subject to CSA recordkeeping and import/export requirements. This final rulemaking includes a waiver of the registration requirement under 21 CFR 1309.24 for “Lugol's Solution (consisting of 5 percent iodine and 10 percent potassium iodide in an aqueous solution) in original manufacturer's packaging of one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) or less per package.” Additionally, this rulemaking includes an exclusion from the definition of regulated transaction under 21 CFR 1310.08 for “Domestic and international transactions of Lugol's Solution (consisting of 5 percent iodine and 10 percent potassium iodide in an aqueous solution) in original manufacturer's packaging of one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) or less, and no greater than one package/bottle per transaction.” DEA currently has no evidence that Lugol's Solution is diverted as a source of iodine for illicit purposes. However, should clandestine laboratory operators begin to exploit the exemption for small packages of Lugol's Solution as a source of iodine for the manufacture of methamphetamine, DEA may remove these exemption provisions. One comment received from a physician expressed concerns regarding the possible control of an iodine product (Iodoral) that contains 5 milligrams iodine and 7.5 milligrams potassium iodide per tablet. The physician stated that this product is used in patients with thyroid disease and therefore requested that this product remain exempt from CSA regulatory provisions. In response to this comment, DEA obtained samples of Iodoral and determined that the concentration of iodine in the product is below the 2.2 percent concentration level for chemical mixtures as specified in 21 CFR 1310.12. Therefore, Iodoral 5 mg tablets are not subject to CSA regulatory control provisions following implementation of this final rule. Comment Relating to Commercial Use of Iodine One comment was received from a manufacturer of injectable products and medical delivery systems. The commenter expressed support for the proposed exemption of iodophor products (iodine complexes), but requested clarification that the exemption includes organically bound iodine products which are non-ionic complexes. The commenter provided specific examples of organically bound products (e.g., iopamidol, iohexol and amiodarone.) The proposed exemption for iodophors was intended to include organically bound iodine compounds. DEA has evaluated these products and determined that these organically bound compounds cannot serve as a source of iodine for methamphetamine laboratories and therefore are not at risk of diversion. As clarification, DEA has added a new paragraph under 21 CFR 1310.12(d)(5) which specifies that “Iodine products that consist of organically bound iodine (a non-ionic complex) (e.g., iopamidol, iohexol, and amiodarone)” are chemical mixtures that are automatically exempt from CSA regulatory provisions. This commenter also requested that certain laboratory reagents (e.g., Karl Fischer Reagent and Aquastar Composite 5), be considered for exemption from regulation. The commenter stated it was not the manufacturer or distributor of such products, but used these reagents frequently for laboratory testing. The commenter expressed concern that the new regulation would potentially subject such reagents to CSA regulatory control. DEA conducted a review of such laboratory reagents, but the iodine concentration in these chemical mixtures appears to be proprietary and was not disclosed on product labeling. DEA wishes to clarify that end users of such material are not subject to CSA regulatory requirements, except the requirement to provide identification for purchase of List I chemicals (21 CFR 1310.06), as long as they do not distribute regulated material. Such laboratory reagents would only be considered regulated material if they are chemical mixtures containing greater than 2.2 percent iodine, and not considered either an iodophor or organically bound iodine. DEA recognizes that the 2.2 percent iodine concentration criteria cannot identify all mixtures that should receive exemption status. DEA notes that an application process already exists to exempt additional mixtures (21 CFR 1310.13). This application process was finalized in a previous final rule regarding chemical mixtures (68 FR 23195, May 1, 2003). Under the application process, manufacturers may submit an application for exemption for those mixtures that do not qualify for automatic exemption. Exemption status can be granted if DEA determines that the mixture is formulated in such a way that it cannot be easily used in the illicit production of a controlled substance and the listed chemical cannot be readily recovered (i.e., it meets the conditions in 21 U.S.C. 802(39)(A)(vi)). Under these provisions, the manufacturer of these reagents may apply for exemption if their products are above the 2.2 percent iodine level. Additionally, the commenter expressed concern regarding the ability to obtain iodine crystals for laboratory analytical use following implementation of this final rule. However, transactions involving iodine crystals have been regulated as List II chemicals since implementation of the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act
(MCA)in 1996. This final rule only requires that handlers of such material register with DEA and maintain records of transactions. Most of the chemical houses that supply high-grade material to analytical laboratories are already registered with DEA to handle List I chemicals. The regulatory requirement only pertains to distribution of regulated material. DEA does not believe that these regulations will adversely impact the availability of such material. Iodine Products Subject to This Final Rule Iodine is important to the chemical and allied industries primarily as a chemical intermediate used to make new chemical products for industry and research. These products have application in sanitation (as disinfectants), animal feed, pharmaceuticals, as catalysts, heat stabilizers, and in various other industrial applications. Most iodine is consumed by industry. Those who purchase iodine for end use, whether they are individuals or businesses, will be subject to CSA chemical regulatory controls to the extent that they must present identification and provide other information that helps assure the seller that the end user's proposed use of the chemical is legitimate. See 21 U.S.C. 830 and 21 CFR 1310.07. Iodine has powerful bactericidal action and is used for disinfecting unbroken skin before surgery. Iodine may also be employed as a weak solution for the first-aid treatment of small wounds and abrasions. The standard definition for iodine topical solutions, and other iodine containing products, is specified in the United States Pharmacopeia (U.S.P.). The U.S.P. lists two strengths of iodine solution and two strengths of iodine tincture. The U.S.P. specifies formulations for iodine topical solution, strong iodine solution, iodine tincture, and strong iodine tincture in the official monographs. Commercially available iodine solutions and tinctures are summarized in the following table: Concentration of Iodine in Products per 100 ml Iodine (gm.) Sodium iodide (gm.) Potassium iodide (gm.) Iodine Topical (w/water) 1.8-2.2 2.1-2.6 Strong Iodine (w/water) 4.5-5.5 9.5-10.5 Iodine Tincture (w/alcohol @ 44-50%) 1.8-2.2 2.1-2.6 Strong Iodine Tincture (w/alcohol @ 82.5-88.5%) 6.8-7.5 4.7-5.5 Source: U.S. Pharmacopoeia (U.S.P.) As shown in the table, the solutions are formulated in two concentrations of iodine. They are specifically named as iodine topical solution and strong iodine solution. Iodine topical solution two percent U.S.P. is defined as having in each 100 ml, not less than 1.8 grams and not more than 2.2 grams of iodine, and not less than 2.1 grams and not more than 2.6 grams of sodium iodide in water. Strong iodine solution U.S.P. contains in each 100 ml, not less than 4.5 grams and not more than 5.5 grams of iodine and not less than 9.5 grams and not more than 10.5 grams of potassium iodine. The U.S.P. defines iodine tincture as containing, in each 100 ml, not less than 1.8 grams and not more than 2.2 grams of iodine, and not less than 2.1 grams and not more than 2.6 grams of sodium iodide. The same weight amounts of iodine and sodium iodide are used as in the iodine topical solution except that alcohol is used in 44 to 50 percent concentration. The target concentration of iodine is 2 percent. Strong iodine tincture is defined by the U.S.P. as containing, in each 100 ml, not less than 6.8 grams and not more than 7.5 grams of iodine and not less than 4.7 grams and not more than 5.5 grams of potassium iodide. The alcohol content is between 82.5 and 88.5 percent. The target iodine concentration is 7 percent. Iodine two percent tincture and solution U.S.P. are sold at a wide variety of retail outlets and have household application as antiseptic and antimicrobial products. These products are not subject to this regulation. In contrast, iodine crystals and iodine chemical mixtures containing over 2.2 percent iodine have no household use and are available only from specialty retailers. Iodine solutions (in excess of 2.2 percent iodine) are used as an antiseptic in the care of livestock and horses and as disinfectants for equipment and areas where livestock are kept. Some iodine solutions (e.g., Lugol's Solution) are used in saltwater aquariums, used as a dietary source of iodine, used to test for the presence of starch, and as stains in some laboratory tests. This rulemaking exempts small transactions of these chemical mixtures, as discussed elsewhere in this rule. Iodine crystals have also been historically used by campers to purify water. Today, however, most of the water treatment products available to campers use iodide salts and are not the subject of this regulation. DEA, however, has identified two marketed products that contain iodine for water purification. Under this rulemaking, these products will be subject to control. Iodine Products Not Regulated Under This Rulemaking There are other iodine-containing products that have household use and are widely sold in retail settings. Iodine products classified as iodophors consist of iodine complexed with surfactant compounds (e.g., poloxamer-iodine complex) or with nonsurfactant compounds (e.g., polyvinyl pyrrolidone-iodine complex (povidone-iodine)). These complexes allow the iodine to be delivered continuously. Such complex solutions in water or alcohol are better tolerated than iodine tincture and solutions with comparable efficacy. Considering the necessary time of application and the correct dilution, these complexes are used for general disinfection, hand disinfection, as well as for skin disinfection prior to surgery or venipuncture. Some of these iodine complexes are also used for the treatment of burns and of different skin lesions. Since these complex products do not have applicability as a source of iodine at clandestine drug laboratories, DEA is exempting these products in 21 CFR 1310.12(d)(4). This provision will automatically exempt from CSA controls “Iodine products classified as iodophors, which exist as an iodine complex to include poloxamer-iodine complex, polyvinyl pyrrolidone-iodine complex (i.e. povidone-iodine), undecoylium chloride iodine, nonylphenoxypoly (ethyleneoxy) ethanol-iodine complex, iodine complex with phosphate ester of alkylaryloxy polyethylene glycol, and iodine complex with ammonium ether sulfate/polyoxyethylene sorbitan monolaurate.” Additionally, DEA wishes to clarify that organically bound iodine products that are non-ionic complexes (e.g., iopamidol, iohexol and amiodarone) are not subject to CSA regulatory controls. These organically bound compounds cannot serve as a source of iodine for methamphetamine laboratories and therefore are not at risk of diversion. As clarification, DEA has added a new paragraph under 21 CFR 1310.12(d)(5), which specifies that “Iodine products that consist of organically bound iodine (a non-ionic complex) (e.g., iopamidol, iohexol, and amiodarone)” are chemical mixtures that are automatically exempt from CSA regulatory provisions. DEA is aware that the element iodine is a constituent in certain pharmaceutical products (e.g., potassium iodide and others) sold over-the-counter or under a prescription. Potassium iodide is available for use in the event of a nuclear incident to protect the thyroid gland of exposed individuals. The element iodine is also a constituent in products sold as radioisotopes (e.g., radioactive iodine), which find widest use in the treatment of hyperthyroidism and in the diagnosis of certain disorders (e.g., thyroid dysfunction), and in general scientific research. The greatest use has been made of sodium iodide I 131 . DEA is also aware of other radiolabeled material, such as sodium iodide I 123 , which is available for scanning/imaging purposes in disease diagnosis. Note that these iodide compounds are not the subject of this rulemaking. As such, the regulatory controls of the CSA do not apply to any of these iodide salts or radiolabeled iodine/iodide salts. Additionally, these regulatory controls do not apply to any iodide material commonly dispensed under a prescription. Instead, this regulation is limited only to iodine crystals and chemical mixtures that contain iodine in the form of the iodine tinctures and iodine solutions described above. This rulemaking implements regulatory controls that apply to iodine crystals and iodine chemical mixtures that contain greater than 2.2 percent iodine. The vast majority of products having household application are not adversely impacted by this regulation. II. Changes to the Regulation of Iodine as a Result of This Rulemaking Moving Iodine Into 21 CFR 1310.02(a) (List I) The Controlled Substances Act
(CSA)and its implementing regulations, specifically 21 U.S.C. 802(34) and
(35)and 21 CFR 1310.02, provide the Attorney General with the authority to specify, by regulation, the addition or deletion of any chemicals as listed chemicals. Listed chemicals that are classified as List I chemicals are important to the manufacture of controlled substances. Those classified as List II chemicals may be used to manufacture controlled substances in violation of the Act. This authority has been delegated to the Administrator of DEA by 28 CFR 0.100 and redelegated to the Deputy Administrator by 28 CFR 0.104, Appendix to Subpart R, § 12. The definition in 21 CFR 1300.02(b)(19), defines “List II chemical” as a chemical, other than a List I chemical, specifically designated by the Administrator in 21 CFR 1310.02(b), that “is used in manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of the Act.” 21 CFR 1300.02(b)(18) defines the term “List I chemical” to mean “a chemical specifically designated by the Administrator in 21 CFR 1310.02(a) * * * that * * * is used in manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of the Act and is important to the manufacture of a controlled substance.” In this final rule, the DEA is removing iodine from 21 CFR 1310.02(b) (List II) and placing it in 1310.02(a) (List I) because, based on the information provided above, and discussed in greater detail in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for this rule, iodine is a chemical that is important to the manufacture of the controlled substances methamphetamine and amphetamine in violation of the Act. Placement in List I, 21 U.S.C. 822(a)(1) requires that persons who distribute iodine must be registered with DEA. Based on its experience with hydriodic acid and other List I chemicals, DEA believes that List I regulatory controls for iodine will help curtail its widespread use in the clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine and amphetamine. List I regulatory controls dictate that handlers of iodine, including persons who manufacture, import, export, or distribute iodine, must register with DEA. Retail and wholesale outlets that sell iodine crystals and covered tinctures/solutions are also required to register. Prior to receiving a DEA chemical registration, applicants are subject to a pre-registration investigation by DEA to determine whether their registration is consistent with the public interest pursuant to the criteria set forth in 21 U.S.C. 823(h). Registration also provides the DEA with the identity of all businesses that handle List I chemicals. A business that sells a List I chemical in violation of the law or regulations can have its registration revoked and be prevented from handling List I chemicals. Regulation of Import and Export Transactions When iodine was controlled as a List II chemical by the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 (MCA), the law specifically exempted it from import and export controls. The MCA, however, also explicitly provided that Congress was not limiting the authorization of the Attorney General to impose the import and export provisions of the CSA on iodine. See Pub. L. 104-237, § 204. Because of the international commerce in iodine, and iodine's documented use in the clandestine production of methamphetamine, DEA has determined that the addition of import and export controls on iodine is necessary. Therefore, 21 CFR 1310.08 is amended to remove imports and exports of iodine as excluded transactions. Thus, iodine will become subject to the import and export notification provisions of the CSA. Elimination of the Iodine Threshold Transactions involving listed chemicals (including cumulative transactions in a single calendar month) below a quantity threshold, specified pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 802(39)(A), are excluded from the definition of “regulated transaction.” Historically, the threshold for iodine has been 400 grams (0.4 kilograms). Thresholds denote a quantity below which regulation is not necessary for law enforcement purposes. However, DEA has determined that the regulation of all transactions of regulated iodine products is necessary to prevent diversion. Thus, DEA is removing the threshold for iodine under this final rule. Therefore, all transactions of regulated iodine products are considered regulated transactions regardless of size, unless specifically exempted. Iodine Chemical Mixtures The CSA (21 U.S.C. 802(40)) defines the term “chemical mixture” as “a combination of two or more chemical substances, at least one of which is not a List I chemical or a List II chemical, except that such term does not include any combination of a List I chemical or a List II chemical with another chemical that is present solely as an impurity.” Therefore, a chemical mixture contains any one or more listed chemicals along with any number of non-listed chemicals. DEA does not consider a chemical mixture to mean the combination of a listed chemical with an inert carrier. An inert carrier can be any chemical that does not interfere with the listed chemical's function, but is present to aid in the delivery of the listed chemical so it can be used in some chemical process. Examples include, but are not limited to, solutions of listed chemicals such as methylamine in water or hydrogen chloride dissolved in water or alcohol. Iodine tinctures and solutions are considered chemical mixtures because they require the addition of iodine and an iodide salt into a water or water/alcohol solution. It is not simply iodine dissolved in an inert carrier. These iodine tinctures and solutions are therefore chemical mixtures. Regulation of Chemical Mixtures The Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993 (DCDCA), enacted in April 1994, amended 21 U.S.C. 802(39)(A)(v) [current 21 U.S.C. 802(39)(A)(vi)] to provide the Attorney General with the authority to establish regulations exempting chemical mixtures from the definition of a “regulated transaction.” However, exclusion from this definition can be made “based on a finding that the mixture is formulated in such a way that it cannot be easily used in the illicit production of a controlled substance and that the listed chemical or chemicals contained in the mixture cannot be readily recovered.” As noted previously, DEA has established the following three-tiered approach to identify which chemical mixtures qualify for automatic exemption:
(1)The mixture contains a listed chemical at or below an established concentration limit; or
(2)the mixture falls within a specifically defined category; or
(3)the manufacturer of the mixture applies for and is granted a specific exemption for the product (68 FR 23195, May 1, 2003). This final rule implements regulations that identify which iodine chemical mixtures qualify for automatic exemption because they meet the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 802(39)(A)(vi). Those iodine chemical mixtures that do not qualify for automatic exemption are regulated chemicals, unless the manufacturer applies for, and is granted, specific exemption for their product(s) by DEA via an application process (21 CFR 1310.13). Since seven percent iodine tincture and solutions are the predominant iodine-containing chemical mixtures diverted by traffickers, DEA has determined that these chemical mixtures should be subject to CSA chemical regulatory controls. Two percent iodine tincture and solutions are also diverted, but DEA has not documented the frequent diversion of these materials at clandestine laboratories. Therefore, DEA is not regulating the two percent iodine tincture or solution at this time. As discussed previously, DEA is also aware of other materials that contain iodine. Examples include iodophor complexes such as poloxamer-iodine and povidone-iodine and organically bound iodine complexes such as iopamidol, iohexol, and amiodarone. These materials are not of concern to DEA as a source of iodine for clandestine laboratories. This final rule specifies that these materials be specifically exempted from CSA chemical regulatory controls under 21 CFR 1310.12 by adding new paragraphs (d)(4) and (d)(5). Exemption by Application Process DEA recognizes that the 2.2 percent iodine concentration limit and category exemption criteria cannot identify all mixtures that should receive exemption status. DEA has implemented an application process to exempt additional mixtures (21 CFR 1310.13). This application process was finalized in a final rule (68 FR 23195) published May 1, 2003. Under the application process, manufacturers may submit an application for exemption for those mixtures that do not qualify for automatic exemption. Exemption status can be granted if DEA determines that the mixture is formulated in such a way that it cannot be easily used in the illicit production of a controlled substance and the listed chemical cannot be readily recovered (i.e., it meets the conditions in 21 U.S.C. 802(39)(A)(vi)). An application may be for a single or a multiple number of formulations. All chemical mixtures that are granted exemption via the application process will be listed in 21 CFR 1310.13(i). III. Requirements That Apply to Regulated List I Chemicals and Their Regulated Chemical Mixtures as a Result of This Rulemaking Any chemical mixture that is regulated because it contains greater than 2.2 percent iodine is treated as a List I chemical. Therefore, the same requirements for registration, records and reports, imports/exports, and administrative inspection, as outlined below, apply to handlers of regulated chemical mixtures. In light of the placement of iodine in 21 CFR 1310.02(a) (List I) and to control chemical mixtures containing greater than 2.2 percent iodine, the following requirements for List I chemicals are outlined. Chemical mixtures that are not exempt or excluded under any provision of these regulations, either by concentration limit, general category, or as a result of DEA action on a specific application for exemption, are considered regulated chemical mixtures. Persons interested in handling List I chemicals, including regulated chemical mixtures containing List I chemicals, must comply with the following: 1. *Registration.* Any person who manufactures or distributes a List I chemical, or proposes to engage in the manufacture or distribution of a List I chemical, must obtain a registration pursuant to the CSA (21 U.S.C. 822). Regulations describing registration for List I chemical handlers are set forth in 21 CFR part 1309. Separate registration is required for manufacturing, distribution, importing, and exporting. Different locations operated by a single entity require separate registration if any location is involved with the manufacture, distribution, import, or export of a List I chemical. Any person manufacturing, distributing, importing, or exporting a regulated List I chemical mixture is subject to the registration requirement under the CSA. DEA recognizes, however, that it is not possible for persons who manufacture, distribute, import, or export iodine, upon its placement in List I, to immediately complete and submit an application for registration and for DEA to issue registrations immediately for those activities. Therefore, to allow continued legitimate commerce in iodine, DEA is establishing in 21 CFR 1310.09 a temporary exemption from the registration requirement for persons desiring to manufacture, distribute, import, or export iodine, provided that DEA receives a properly completed application for registration on or before August 31, 2007. The temporary exemption for such persons will remain in effect until DEA takes final action on their application for registration. The temporary exemption applies solely to the registration requirement; all other chemical control requirements, including recordkeeping and reporting, will remain in effect. Additionally, the temporary exemption does not suspend applicable federal criminal laws relating to iodine, nor does it supersede state or local laws or regulations. All handlers of iodine must comply with their state and local requirements in addition to the CSA and other federal regulatory controls. 2. *Records and Reports.* The CSA (21 U.S.C. 830) requires that certain records be kept and reports be made that involve listed chemicals. Regulations describing recordkeeping and reporting requirements are set forth in 21 CFR part 1310. A record must be made and maintained for two years after the date of a transaction involving a listed chemical, provided the transaction is a regulated transaction. Each regulated bulk manufacturer of a regulated mixture shall submit manufacturing, inventory and use data on an annual basis (21 CFR 1310.05(d)). Bulk manufacturers producing the mixture solely for internal consumption, e.g., formulating a non-regulated mixture, are not required to submit this information. Existing standard industry reports containing the required information are acceptable, provided the information is readily retrievable from the report. Section 1310.05 requires that each regulated person shall report to DEA any regulated transaction involving an extraordinary quantity of a listed chemical, an uncommon method of payment or delivery, or any other circumstance that the regulated person believes may indicate that the listed chemical will be used in violation of the CSA. 3. *Import/Export.* All imports/exports of a listed chemical shall comply with the CSA (21 U.S.C. 957 and 971). Regulations for importation and exportation of List I chemicals are described in 21 CFR part 1313. Separate registration is necessary for each activity (21 CFR 1309.22). 4. *Security.* All applicants and registrants shall provide effective controls against theft and diversion of chemicals as described in 21 CFR 1309.71. 5. *Administrative Inspection.* Places, including factories, warehouses, or other establishments and conveyances, where regulated persons may lawfully hold, manufacture, or distribute, dispense, administer, or otherwise dispose of a regulated chemical/chemical mixture, or where records relating to those activities are maintained, are controlled premises as defined in 21 CFR 1316.02(c) where original or other records or documents required under the Act, are kept or required to be kept. The CSA (21 U.S.C. 880) allows for administrative inspections of these controlled premises as provided in 21 CFR part 1316 subpart A. The goal of this rulemaking is to deny traffickers access to iodine while minimizing the burden on legitimate industry. Persons who obtain a regulated chemical, but do not distribute the chemical, are end users. End users are not subject to CSA chemical regulatory control provisions such as registration or recordkeeping requirements. Some examples of end users are those who chemically react iodine and change it into a non-listed chemical, formulate iodine into an exempt chemical mixture or consume it in some industrial process, or use it for water treatment or sanitation. Regulatory Certifications Regulatory Flexibility and Small Business Concerns The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 600-612) requires agencies to determine whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If an agency finds that there is a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the agency must consider whether alternative approaches could mitigate the impact on small entities. The size criteria for small entities are defined by the Small Business Administration
(SBA)in 13 CFR 121.201. As discussed below, DEA has researched the production and marketing of iodine to determine whether this rulemaking could have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The majority of firms potentially subject to this rulemaking are considered small entities under the Small Business Administration definitions for the affected sectors. 1 The only firms for which the rulemaking would have a significant economic impact are those with revenues or sales of less than about $125,000 a year; the initial registration time and fee would represent one percent of their revenues. Economic Census data indicate that even the smallest firms in the affected sectors have sales well above the $125,000 a year level. 2 Consequently, DEA concludes that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. DEA recognizes, however, that there may be a very small number of firms marketing specialty products that may be adversely affected because they offer no other alternative products. DEA sought comments on whether there could be a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities in the NPRM. DEA did not receive any comments on this issue from any distributors of such products. 1 See Table 3 for the SBA size standards for affected entities. 2 See Table 3 for the average revenue for the smallest firms. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Potential Universe of All Affected Entities In broad terms, three companies produce iodine in bulk and distribute it to other companies that either use it in chemical manufacturing, purify it and repackage it, or simply repackage it for further sale. There may be a third step at the manufacturing level where iodine crystals or solutions are purchased in bulk from companies that purified it and are then repackaged for retail sales. Although some iodine products are likely to follow the normal distribution chain of manufacturer to wholesaler to retailer, others do not. Most chemical manufacturers are likely to purchase iodine directly from other manufacturers. Some of the “manufacturers” of iodine products appear to sell both to retail outlets and directly to consumers. Many of the manufacturers offer catalogue and Internet sales. In addition to the three manufacturers that produce iodine as a bulk chemical, DEA identified 43 firms that have developed material safety data sheets (MSDSs) for iodine products that will be covered by this rule; five of these are already registered as chemical manufacturers. It is not possible to determine whether the DEA registrants produce iodine at registered locations or whether any of the 43 firms produce iodine products at multiple locations. 3 Eight other chemical manufacturers list iodine as a product; one of these is registered as a chemical importer and exporter. There may be other firms producing iodine for industrial uses for which MSDSs are not publicly available. 4 DEA sought comments on whether such information exists that could help in further identifying the entities this final rule will potentially impact. The only comments received were from end-users. 3 The CSA requires that each location where a controlled substance or List I chemical is handled have a separate registration. 4 OSHA requires the manufacturer of a chemical to develop an MSDS. Other firms that package or distribute the chemical must provide the MSDS, but generally use the MSDS acquired from the original manufacturer. MSDSs must be made available to employees and to firms that purchase the chemical, but publishing them for the general public is not required. DEA identified 15 other manufacturers of iodine products. It is likely that these firms purchase iodine crystals and repackage them or purchase crystals or concentrated solutions and dilute them prior to repackaging. Because some of these firms may operate at multiple locations and because it is likely that not all manufacturers have been identified, the analysis estimates that there are between 75 and 90 manufacturers of iodine products. Iodine products may be handled by a variety of wholesalers. The livestock and science kit products could be handled by drug, chemical, or agricultural wholesalers. Distributors of science kits will still need to keep records if quantities exceed a single one-fluid-ounce package of Lugol's Solution per transaction. Current Duns data indicate that 267 wholesalers distribute animal medicines; these are the wholesalers most likely to be distributing iodine products for horses. Some of these distributors may already be registered to handle controlled substances. The 2002 Economic Census for the wholesale industry indicated that about 1,115 agricultural wholesalers/retailers may carry tack shop materials. It is possible that other chemical wholesalers may be providing iodine to manufacturers of iodine products, but DEA considers it more likely that these manufacturers purchase iodine in bulk directly from chemical manufacturers. DEA has not identified any data that indicate the number of wholesalers who distribute aquarium chemicals, but as there appears to be only one such covered product marketed specifically for aquariums (Kent Marine Lugol's Solution), it may not be handled by a large number of wholesalers. DEA has exempted distributors of Lugol's Solution in the manufacturers' packages containing 1 fluid ounce (30 ml) or less from registration, so these distributors will simply have to retain normal sales records. Census classifications do not cover camping goods at the wholesale level. The web site for Polar Pure, a water purification system involving iodine regulated by this rule, lists only two wholesale distributors. Overall, DEA estimates that the number of wholesalers may range from 300 to 1,400. At the retail level, tinctures are sold by tack shops; 2005 Duns data list about 4,080 such retailers. Agricultural retailers may also sell these products for livestock, but these are included in the wholesale estimate because the Census combines agricultural wholesalers and retailers in a single classification. Veterinarians may also sell the products, but would not be subject to registration because they are already registered to handle controlled substances. The 2002 Census indicated that there were 5,039 pet stores that sold aquarium supplies. A check of two large chains, which have more than 1,400 stores between them, indicates that although both stock some iodine supplements, neither stock Lugol's solution. DEA estimates that between one percent and five percent of pet stores would carry iodine either as crystals or strong tinctures. Although nursery/garden retailers and building supplies/garden retailers sell pet supplies, it is unlikely that any of them carry covered iodine products. Since DEA has provided for the unregulated sale of single small packages of Lugol's Solution, the potential impact upon pet stores should be greatly reduced or eliminated. The Census listed about 1,524 sporting good specialty stores that carry camping supplies. DEA has included 5 percent to 10 percent of them in its estimates regarding the impact of this rule. Mail order and Internet outlets sell all of the iodine products. DEA has no basis for estimating how many of these outlets sell iodine products without being associated with either wholesale or retail outlets that would be included in other counts. DEA has included 50 to 100 of these, but recognizes that these numbers could be either too low or too high. Table 1 presents the estimated low to high range of potentially regulated entities. Table 1.—Potentially Regulated Universe Low High New Manufacturers 75 90 Wholesalers 300 1,400 Tack Shops 2,040 4,080 Pet Supplies 50 250 Camping Supplies 75 150 Other 50 100 Total 2,590 6,070 The estimates in Table 1 represent the number of outlets that may currently handle products that are subject to this rule. The regulated universe will likely be smaller (especially for pet supplies, given that DEA has provided the exemption for single small packages of Lugol's Solution in this final rule). In estimating the number of new registrants, however, DEA has to consider whether these outlets will elect to register and continue selling the products. For almost all of the entities listed in Table 1, iodine products are a minor item. The manufacturers, wholesalers, and mail order/Internet suppliers routinely collect the information DEA would require under this rule; this information is necessary for them to ship the product. Other than the registration fees, the rulemaking would not impose a burden on them although it is possible that some of these outlets may elect to drop iodine products rather than be subject to DEA regulations. Store retailers face a different situation. Not only are their revenues usually lower than those of manufacturers and wholesalers, but they are also unlikely to collect all of the information DEA requires for these transactions routinely. Because the cost of the iodine products is low ($5 to $20), many of the transactions may be in cash. To teach their clerks what is required, explain to customers why the information is needed, transcribe the data, and maintain the record may be too great a burden for a specialty product that is unlikely to be in high demand and for which reasonable substitutes exist. DEA expects, therefore, that most store retailers will stop carrying these products and direct their customers to substitutes or to mail order or Internet sources. This shift would, in turn, likely reduce the number of wholesale distributors handling the products. Table 2 provides a more likely estimate of the potential number of new registrants, but even these estimates are likely to be high because most wholesale and retail outlets may elect to avoid DEA regulation. Table 2.—Potential Number of Registrants Low High New manufacturers 75 90 Chemical wholesalers 150 700 Other 50 100 Total 275 890 Small Entities Likely To Be Affected by This Rule The SBA standards for the potentially affected sectors are shown in Table 3 as are the average sales or value of shipments (for manufacturers) for the smallest firms reported in the 2002 Economic Census: Table 3.—Small Business Standards for Sectors Size standard Av. sales/smallest firms ** Inorganic chemical manufacturers 1,000 FTE* $4.25 million. Pharmaceutical manufacturers 750 FTE $824,000. Miscellaneous manufacturers 500 FTE Chemicals wholesalers 100 FTE $1 million. Sporting goods and pet stores $6.5 million $345,000 (sporting), $274,000 (pet). Electronic/mail order shopping $23 million $528,000 (electronic), $497,000 (mail). * FTE is an abbreviation for Full Time Equivalent (Employees). ** 1 to 4 FTE except for inorganic chemical, where data available only for 5-9 FTE. Because of the size standards, it is highly likely that a substantial number of the firms that will be regulated will be considered small businesses. DEA has no information on the number of potentially regulated entities that will be classified as small and did not receive any comments on this issue. The three main manufacturers of iodine are large firms; two of the three are also foreign-owned and the third is a joint venture with foreign firms. Specific Requirements Imposed That Will Impact Small Entities Firms that handle iodine will be required to register with DEA. At present, the registration fee for manufacturers is $2,293 and for distributors is $1,147. Each of the firms will also be required to become familiar with DEA's regulations, to maintain records of each sale, and to report to DEA on unusual sales and thefts/losses. Bulk manufacturers must file annual reports, but these reports already apply to iodine as a List II chemical, so impose no new burden. DEA specifies that normal business records may be used to meet the requirements of records of sales. Importers and exporters will be required to file an advance notification for each importation or exportation. DEA estimates that it takes a firm a half hour to complete and submit a registration application, which can be done online, and a half hour to become familiar with the rule. DEA assumes that rule familiarization and registration will be done by managerial staff. The cost for initial compliance for firms in manufacturing, wholesale, and retail sectors is shown in Table 4. Wage rates are based on May 2005 BLS industry data and loaded with fringe and overhead. Fringe rates are based on BLS “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation—December 2005” for management for goods producing and service industries, as applicable. Overhead is loaded at 56 percent of compensation, based on the most recent Grant Thornton survey. Table 4.—Initial Compliance Cost per Firm Sector Wage rate Total labor Total cost with fee Manufacturing $126 $126 $2,419 Wholesale 98 98 1,245 Retail 62 62 1,209 Mail order/Electronic 93 93 1,240 A comparison of the initial compliance costs in Table 4 with the annual revenues or sales of the smallest firms shown in Table 3 indicates that the costs do not approach one percent of sales or revenues of the smallest firms in each sector and, therefore, do not impose a significant economic burden on firms. The recurring costs for renewal are slightly lower (a half hour of labor plus the registration fee). DEA estimates that completing the advance notification (Form 486) for imports and exports requires less than 15 minutes. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Firms subject to this rulemaking will be required to maintain records of sales. The records required include the date of the sale; the name, quantity, and form of packaging of the chemical; the method of transfer; and the type of identification used by the purchaser and any unique number on that identification. Routine sales records for credit card or mail order sales will include the required information. Manufacturers and wholesalers, which normally sell products through purchase orders, will not have to create any additional records. Retailers that have cash sales will have to create new records if they continue to sell the products. Because these products represent such a small percentage of any store's sales and there are products that can be substituted for them, DEA considers that it is unlikely that retailers will register and continue to sell iodine products other than exempted quantities of Lugol's Solution. Importers and exporters will have to file a Form 486 15 days in advance of any importation or exportation. If the importer meets the requirements to be a regular importer, the person must file the form on or before the date of importation, but does not require DEA approval. Similarly, exporters that have an established business relationship with a foreign customer need to file the form by the date of exportation. Alternatives Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Account, DEA evaluated alternatives to this rulemaking and determined that no reasonable alternatives exist. This rulemaking establishes changes to the regulatory control of iodine in an effort to prevent the diversion of iodine for the illicit production of methamphetamine and amphetamine. Providing small businesses with alternatives and/or exemptions from this rulemaking would eliminate the regulatory objective behind the rule. DEA has explored ways to lessen the regulations' economic impact on all entities covered by the rule. This rulemaking establishes regulatory controls that apply to iodine crystals and iodine chemical mixtures that contain greater than 2.2 percent iodine, thereby eliminating the majority of products that use iodine from the requirements of this regulation. 5 DEA, after reviewing comments, has also provided an exemption for individual transactions involving small packages of Lugol's Solution. Additionally, this rulemaking allows manufacturers to seek exemption for additional mixtures of iodine that do not qualify for automatic exemption under 21 CFR 1310.13. DEA sought comments on reasonable alternatives to this rulemaking that would serve to lessen its impact on small businesses while maintaining the regulatory objective of regulating iodine crystals and strong tinctures and chemical mixtures containing over 2.2 percent iodine. DEA has incorporated new the exemption for individual transactions involving one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) packages of Lugol's Solution in response to these comments. 5 See the section in this regulation on the legitimate uses of iodine. Additional Impact Issues Raised DEA expects that most store retailers will elect not to sell iodine crystals or strong tinctures rather than registering and maintaining sales records. Most iodine products with household applications will not be subject to the rule. DEA considered whether the loss of product sales would have a significant economic impact on retailers. These products make up a very small part of the sales of any sporting goods store. Eliminating the product line is unlikely to have a noticeable effect on sales even if customers continue to seek the products from online or mail order sources. In most cases, customers will be able to purchase substitutes that are no more expensive, and in some cases, are less expensive. DEA, therefore, expects that the impact on sales at the retail level will be minimal. Where cost effective substitutes were not available DEA has provided an exemption (i.e., individual transactions involving one-fluid-ounce (30 ml) packages of Lugol's Solution, where certain alternative products cost more than ten times that of Lugol's Solution). The impact on manufacturers, with one possible exception, is also likely to be minimal. DEA's research indicates that the manufacturers who produce iodine tinctures and crystals for use with livestock and fish also produce and market the substitutes. If sales of these iodine products decline, it is likely that the sales of substitutes will increase. Many of these companies also sell directly to customers through catalogues and online. Because the sales records required under the rules are the same records the companies create for mail order or online sales, there is no burden beyond registration for these firms to meet these requirements. The one exception is a small company that apparently markets a single product using iodine crystals. To the extent that in-store sales of its product decline and are not replaced with online sales, the rulemaking could have a significant impact on the firm. Executive Order 12866 The Deputy Administrator hereby certifies that this rulemaking has been drafted in accordance with Executive Order 12866, Section 1(b). It has been determined that this rulemaking is a “significant regulatory action”. Therefore, this action has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This final rule imposes new regulatory requirements on businesses choosing to handle iodine tinctures, iodine crystals and chemical mixtures containing iodine including registration with DEA, recordkeeping, the submission of certain reports regarding import and export transactions to DEA, and security requirements. DEA believes that the requirement of recordkeeping for regulated transactions involving iodine tinctures, crystals and chemical mixtures containing iodine are already accomplished through the maintenance of business records as a usual and customary business practice. Likewise, security occurs as a normal part of good business practice. DEA believes these new regulatory requirements are necessary to prevent the diversion of iodine to the illicit production of methamphetamine and amphetamine. Based on the costs and number of regulated entities discussed in the previous section, DEA estimates that the total cost of initial compliance with the final rule ranges from $430,000 to $1.21 million; annual costs thereafter range from $416,000 to $1.16 million. Costs of Methamphetamine Abuse/Benefits of Rulemaking Methamphetamine is the most prevalent controlled substance illicitly synthesized in the United States. The clandestine manufacture, distribution and abuse of methamphetamine are serious public health problems. Despite considerable efforts by federal, state, and local law enforcement, the illicit trafficking and abuse of methamphetamine continue. According to the 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, approximately 10.36 million Americans ages 12 and older reported trying methamphetamine at least once during their lifetimes, representing 4.3% of the population ages 12 and older. Approximately 1.3 million (0.5%) reported past year methamphetamine use and 512,000 (0.2%) reported past month methamphetamine use. In 2005, the Monitoring the Future Study which assesses the extent of drug use among adolescents indicated that 3.1 percent of 8th graders, 4.1 percent of 10th graders and 4.5 percent of 12th graders reported some prior lifetime use of methamphetamine. The Drug Abuse Warning Network
(DAWN)data indicate that the estimated number of emergency department
(ED)visits for methamphetamine was 108,905 in 2005. The El Paso Intelligence Center
(EPIC)reports that there were 12,484 methamphetamine laboratories seized (including laboratories, dump sites and equipment seizures) in the U.S. in CY2005 (as reported through November 2006). Another rising cost of the methamphetamine problem is the cost of cleaning up the toxic side effects of methamphetamine production. Clandestine laboratory sites must be cleaned up and chemicals seized at clandestine laboratories must be removed, and that removal is very expensive. During FY 2005, DEA administered 8,639 state and local clandestine laboratory cleanups at a cost of $17 million. The total social and monetary costs from trafficking and abuse of methamphetamine are abundant. Costs include those incurred to treat medical consequences of abuse, loss of life and injury to users and by users to bystanders, abandonment of the children of methamphetamine abusers (and corresponding cost of social services), theft and property damage resulting from abuse, loss of employment and productivity, increased costs to law enforcement, cost of prosecution and incarceration for crimes associated with drug use, and increased costs due to cleanups of lab sites. Benefits obtained from implementation of iodine controls, to counter illicit methamphetamine production, greatly exceed costs necessary to implement such controls. Executive Order 12988 This regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice Reform. Executive Order 13132 This rulemaking does not preempt or modify any provision of state law; nor does it impose enforcement responsibilities on any state; nor does it diminish the power of any state to enforce its own laws. Accordingly, this rulemaking does not have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Order 13132. Paperwork Reduction Act This rulemaking implements changes in the regulation of iodine and implements regulations to identify iodine chemical mixtures that are exempt from CSA regulatory controls pertaining to chemicals. Under this rulemaking, persons who handle chemical mixtures with concentration levels of iodine 2.2 percent and less will not be subject to CSA regulatory controls, including the requirement to register with DEA. This rulemaking will require persons handling iodine crystals, strong iodine tinctures and chemical mixtures containing iodine to register with DEA and to report import and export transactions involving regulated transactions in these chemicals to DEA. For purposes of this rulemaking, DEA has estimated the population of persons potentially required to register with DEA to handle iodine and its chemical mixtures to be between 275 and 890. However, some of these persons may already be registered with DEA and others may decide to no longer handle such products rather than registering. DEA notes that it solicited, but did not receive, comment regarding the number of persons who would be required to register with DEA as a result of this rule. Accordingly, by separate notice, DEA is amending its information collection regarding chemical registration [OMB information collection 1117-0031 “Application for Registration under Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993 and Renewal Application for Registration under Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993”] to increase the burden associated with this collection by 275 respondents annually. Further, this rulemaking will require persons importing and exporting products containing iodine crystals, tinctures, and chemical mixtures controlled by this rulemaking to report such imports and exports to DEA. DEA sought comment from the regulated industry regarding the impact of this regulation; however, no comments addressed this issue. Therefore by separate notice DEA is amending its information collection regarding the reporting of import and export transactions [OMB information collection 1117-0023 “Import/Export Declaration: List I and List II Chemicals”] to estimate that DEA will receive new DEA Forms 486 annually. DEA notes that DEA already receives DEA Forms 486 for the importation and exportation of iodine; the only new reporting results from chemical mixtures containing over 2.2 percent iodine. DEA also solicited comments on the impact of recordkeeping requirements upon handlers of regulated iodine products and any potential impact upon public health given any reduction in availability of regulated products, especially where it can be quantified. The majority of comments addressed these issues. In response, DEA is providing an exemption for individual transactions involving Lugol's Solution in small packages so that such product will remain available to end-users. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This rulemaking will not result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $118,000,000 or more in any one year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. Congressional Review Act This rulemaking is not a major rule as defined by Section 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Congressional Review Act). This rulemaking will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; a major increase in cost or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets. List of Subjects 21 CFR Part 1309 Administrative practice and procedure, Drug Traffic Control, List I and List II chemicals, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 21 CFR Part 1310 Drug traffic control, List I and List II chemicals, Reporting requirements. For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR parts 1309 and 1310 are amended as follows: PART 1309—REGISTRATION OF MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS, IMPORTERS AND EXPORTERS OF LIST I CHEMICALS [AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 1309 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 821, 822, 823, 824, 830, 871(b), 875, 877, 886a, 958. 2. § 1309.24 is amended by redesignating paragraphs
(h)through
(k)as paragraphs
(i)through
(l)and by adding a new paragraph
(h)to read as follows: § 1309.24 Waiver of registration requirement for certain activities.
(h)The requirement of registration is waived for any person whose activities with respect to List I chemicals are limited solely to the distribution of Lugol's Solution (consisting of 5 percent iodine and 10 percent potassium iodide in an aqueous solution) in original manufacturer's packaging of one fluid ounce (30 ml) or less. PART 1310—RECORDS AND REPORTS OF LISTED CHEMICALS AND CERTAIN MACHINES [AMENDED] 3. The authority citation for part 1310 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 802, 827(h), 830, 871(b), 890. 4. § 1310.02 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(28), removing paragraph (b)(11), and redesignating paragraph (b)(12) as paragraph (b)(11) to read as follows: § 1310.02 Substances covered.
(a)* * *
(28)Iodine 6699 5. § 1310.04 is amended by removing paragraph (f)(2)(ii)(H); redesignating (f)(2)(ii)(I) as (f)(2)(ii)(H); and adding a new paragraph (g)(1)(vi) to read as follows: § 1310.04 Maintenance of records.
(g)* * *
(1)* * *
(vi)Iodine 6. § 1310.08 is amended by revising paragraph
(f)to read as follows: § 1310.08 Excluded transactions.
(f)Domestic and international transactions of Lugol's Solution (consisting of 5 percent iodine and 10 percent potassium iodide in an aqueous solution) in original manufacturer's packaging of one-fluid-ounce (30 milliliters) or less, and no greater than one package per transaction. 7. § 1310.09 is amended by adding new paragraph
(h)to read as follows: § 1310.09 Temporary exemption from registration.
(h)Each person required by section 302 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 822) to obtain a registration to manufacture, distribute, import, or export regulated iodine, including regulated iodine chemical mixtures pursuant to §§ 1310.12 and 1310.13, is temporarily exempted from the registration requirement, provided that the Administration receives a proper application for registration or application for exemption for a chemical mixture containing iodine on or before August 31, 2007. The exemption will remain in effect for each person who has made such application until the Administration has approved or denied that application. This exemption applies only to registration; all other chemical control requirements set forth in the Act and parts 1309, 1310, and 1313 of this chapter remain in full force and effect. Any person who distributes, imports, or exports a chemical mixture containing iodine whose application for exemption is subsequently denied by the Administration must obtain a registration with the Administration. A temporary exemption from the registration requirement will also be provided for these persons, provided that the Administration receives a properly completed application for registration on or before 30 days following the date of official Administration notification that the application for exemption has not been approved. The temporary exemption for such persons will remain in effect until the Administration takes final action on their registration application. 8. § 1310.12 is amended by adding an entry for “iodine” in alphabetical order in the table of paragraph (c), and adding new paragraphs (d)(4) and (d)(5) to read as follows: § 1310.12 Exempt chemical mixtures.
(c)* * * Table of Concentration Limits List I chemicals DEA chemical code No. Concentration (percent) Special conditions * * * * * * * Iodine 6699 2.2 Calculated as weight/volume (w/v). * * * * * * *
(d)* * *
(4)Iodine products classified as iodophors that exist as an iodine complex to include poloxamer-iodine complex, polyvinyl pyrrolidone-iodine complex (i.e., povidone-iodine), undecoylium chloride iodine, nonylphenoxypoly (ethyleneoxy) ethanol-iodine complex, iodine complex with phosphate ester of alkylaryloxy polyethylene glycol, and iodine complex with ammonium ether sulfate/polyoxyethylene sorbitan monolaurate.
(5)Iodine products that consist of organically bound iodine (a non-ionic complex) (e.g., iopamidol, iohexol, and amiodarone.) Dated: June 19, 2007. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-12736 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Air Force 32 CFR Part 841 [No. USAF-2007-0010] Licensing Government-Owned Inventions in the Custody of the Department of the Air Force AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DoD. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document removes the Department of the Air Force rule concerning the licensing of Government-owned inventions in the custody of the Air Force. The part has served the purpose for which it was intended for the Code of Federal Regulations, and is no longer necessary. DATES: *Effective Date:* July 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Dzara at
(703)588-5092, *David.Dzara@pentagon.af.mil.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 32 CFR Part 841,“Licensing Government-Owned Inventions in the Custody of the Department of the Air Force,” is directed towards Air Force patent licensing. This regulation is no longer needed given the government-wide patent licensing regulation found at 37 CFR Part 404 and is also obsolete. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 841 Inventions and patents. PART 841—[REMOVED] Accordingly, by the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301 and 10 U.S.C. 8013, 32 CFR part 841 is removed. Bao-Anh Trinh, Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of the Air Force. [FR Doc. E7-12721 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-05-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 65 Changes in Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: Modified Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs)are finalized for the communities listed below. These modified BFEs will be used to calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents. DATES: The effective dates for these modified BFEs are indicated on the following table and revise the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in effect for the listed communities prior to this date. ADDRESSES: The modified BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)makes the final determinations listed below of the modified BFEs for each community listed. These modified BFEs have been published in newspapers of local circulation and ninety
(90)days have elapsed since that publication. The Mitigation Division Director of FEMA resolved any appeals resulting from this notification. The modified BFEs are not listed for each community in this notice. However, this final rule includes the address of the Chief Executive Officer of the community where the modified BFEs determinations are available for inspection. The modified BFEs are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq* ., and with 44 CFR part 65. For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals. The modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required to either adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). These modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These modified BFEs are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for the contents in these buildings. The changes in BFEs are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. *National Environmental Policy Act* . This final rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act* . As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification* . This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. *Executive Order 13132, Federalism* . This final rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132, Federalism. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform* . This final rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 Flood insurance, Floodplains, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is amended to read as follows: PART 65—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 65 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq* .; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p.376. § 65.4 [Amended] 2. The tables published under the authority of § 65.4 are amended as follows: State and county Location and case No. Date and name of newspaper where notice was published Chief executive officer of community Effective date of modification Community No. Alabama: Shelby (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Pelham (07-04-1305P) February 14, 2007; February 21, 2007; *Shelby County Reporter* The Honorable Bobby Hayes, Mayor, City of Pelham, P.O. Box 1419, Pelham, AL 35124 May 23, 2007 010193 Arkansas: Benton (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Lowell (07-06-0172P) February 8, 2007; February 15, 2007; *Arkansas Democrat Gazette* The Honorable Perry Long, Mayor, City of Lowell, P.O. Box 979, Lowell, AR 72745 May 10, 2007 050342 Colorado: Adams (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City of Thornton (06-08-B537P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *Golden Transcript* The Honorable Noel Busck, Mayor, City of Thornton, 9500 Civic Center Drive, Thornton, CO 80229 May 10, 2007 080007 Adams (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) Unincorporated areas of Adams County (06-08-B537P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *Golden Transcript* The Honorable Alice J. Nichol, Chairman, Adams County Board of Commissioners, 450 South Fourth Avenue, Brighton, CO 80601 May 10, 2007 080001 Adams and Jefferson (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City of Westminster (06-08-B537P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *Golden Transcript* The Honorable Nancy McNally, Mayor, City of Westminster, 4800 West 92nd Avenue, Westminster, CO 80031 May 10, 2007 080008 Broomfield (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City of Broomfield and Unincorporated areas of Broomfield County (06-08-B537P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *Golden Transcript* The Honorable Karen Stuart, Mayor, City and County of Broomfield, One DesCombes Drive, Broomfield, CO 80020 May 10, 2007 085073 Florida: Miami-Dade (FEMA Docket No.: B-7717) City of Miami (07-04-1922P) February 22, 2007; March 1, 2007; *Miami New Times* The Honorable Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor, City of Miami, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 February 7, 2007 120650 Georgia: Gwinnett (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) Unincorporated areas of Gwinnett County (06-04-BY93P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *Gwinnett Daily Post* The Honorable Charles E. Bannister, Chairman, Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners, 75 Langley Drive, Lawrenceville, GA 30045 May 10, 2007 130322 Maine: Cumberland (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) Town of Gorham (07-01-0160P) January 18, 2007; January 25, 2007; *Portland Press Herald* The Honorable Michael J. Phinney, Chairman, Gorham Town Council, Gorham Municipal Center, 75 South Street, Gorham, ME 04038 April 26, 2007 230047 York (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Biddeford (06-01-B015P) January 11, 2007; January 18, 2007; *York County Coast Star* The Honorable Wallace H. Nutting, Mayor, City of Biddeford, 205 Main Street, Biddeford, ME 04005 December 15, 2006 230145 Mississippi: Rankin (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) Pearl River Valley Water Supply District (06-04-BN09P) February 7, 2007; February 14, 2007; *Rankin County News* Mr. Benny French, P.E., PLS, General Manager, Pearl River Valley Water Supply District, P.O. Box 2180, Ridgeland, MS 39158 February 12, 2007 280338 Rankin (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) Unincorporated areas of Rankin County (06-04-BN09P) February 7, 2007; February 14, 2007; *Rankin County News* Mr. Norman McLeod, County Administrator, Rankin County, 211 East Government Street, Suite A, Brandon, MS 39042 February 12, 2007 280142 Nevada: Clark (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) Unincorporated areas of Clark County (06-09-B934P) December 14, 2006; December 21, 2006; *Las Vegas Review-Journal* The Honorable Rory Reid, Chair, Clark County, Board of Commissioners, 500 South Grand Central Parkway, Las Vegas, NV 89106 March 22, 2007 320003 New Mexico: Bernalillo (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City of Albuquerque (07-06-0332P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *The Albuquerque Journal* The Honorable Martin J. Chavez, Mayor, City of Albuquerque, P.O. Box 1293, Albuquerque, NM 87103 May 10, 2007 350002 North Carolina: Lee (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Sanford (06-04-BM79P) January 18, 2007; January 25, 2007; *The Sanford Herald* The Honorable Cornelia Olive, Mayor, City of Sanford, P.O. Box 3729, Sanford, NC 27331 December 21, 2006 370143 Mecklenburg (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Charlotte (06-04-BP55P) January 18, 2007; January 25, 2007; *The Charlotte Observer* The Honorable Patrick McCrory, Mayor, City of Charlotte, 600 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, NC 28202 September 29, 2006 370159 Orange (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) Unincorporated areas of Orange County (06-04-BQ22P) January 17, 2007; January 24, 2007; *The Chapel Hill News* The Honorable Barry Jacobs, Chairman, Orange County Board of Commissioners, 2105 Moorefields Road, Hillsborough, NC 27278 February 3, 2007 370342 Oklahoma: Carter North Carolina: Orange (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City or Ardmore (06-06-B689P) December 21, 2006; December 28, 2006; *Daily Ardmoreite* The Honorable Bob Clark, Mayor, City of Ardmore, P.O. Box 249, Ardmore, OK 73401 November 30, 2006 400031 Texas: Galveston (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City of Hitchcock (06-06-BK83P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *The Galveston County Daily News* The Honorable Lee A. Sander, Mayor, City of Hitchcock, 7423 Highway 6, Hitchcock, TX 77563 May 10, 2007 485479 Galveston (FEMA Docket No.: B-7712) City of La Marque (06-06-BK38P) February 1, 2007; February 8, 2007; *The Galveston County Daily News* The Honorable Larry Crow, Mayor, City of La Marque, 1111 Bayou Road, La Marque, TX 77568 May 10, 2007 485486 Hays (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of San Marcos (06-06-B107P) January 17, 2007; January 24, 2007; *The Free Press* The Honorable Susan Clifford-Narvaiz, Mayor, City of San Marcos, 630 East Hopkins, San Marcos, TX 78666 January 22, 2007 485505 Hays (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) Unincorporated areas of Hays County (06-06-B107P) January 17, 2007; January 24, 2007; *The Free Press* The Honorable Jim Powers, Hays County Judge, 111 East San Antonio Street, Suite 300, San Marcos, TX 78666 January 22, 2007 480321 Hood (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Granbury (06-06-BG36P) February 14, 2007; February 21, 2007; *Hood County News* The Honorable David Southern, Mayor, City of Granbury, 116 West Bridge Street, Granbury, TX 76048 January 23, 2007 480357 Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Fort Worth (06-06-BG38P) October 26, 2006; November 2, 2006; *North West Tarrant County Times-Record* The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102 February 1, 2007 480596 Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-7716) City of Saginaw (06-06-BG38P) October 26, 2006; November 2, 2006; *North West Tarrant County Times-Record* The Honorable Gary Brinkley, Mayor, City of Saginaw, 333 West McLeroy Boulevard, Saginaw, TX 76179 February 1, 2007 480610 Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-7717) City of Fort Worth (07-06-0091P) February 15, 2007; February 22, 2007; *Fort Worth Star-Telegram* The Honorable Michael J. Moncrief, Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 761028 May 24, 2007 480596 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-12690 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 65 [Docket No. FEMA-B-7719] Changes in Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Interim rule. SUMMARY: This interim rule lists communities where modification of the Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs)is appropriate because of new scientific or technical data. New flood insurance premium rates will be calculated from the modified BFEs for new buildings and their contents. DATES: These modified BFEs are currently in effect on the dates listed in the table below and revise the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in effect prior to this determination for the listed communities. From the date of the second publication of these changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has ninety
(90)days in which to request through the community that the Mitigation Assistant Administrator of FEMA reconsider the changes. The modified BFEs may be changed during the 90-day period. ADDRESSES: The modified BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The modified BFEs are not listed for each community in this interim rule. However, the address of the Chief Executive Officer of the community where the modified BFE determinations are available for inspection is provided. Any request for reconsideration must be based on knowledge of changed conditions or new scientific or technical data. The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* , and with 44 CFR part 65. For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals. The modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required to either adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). These modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established by the other Federal, State, or regional entities. The changes BFEs are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. *National Environmental Policy Act.* This interim rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification.* This interim rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. *Executive Order 13132, Federalism.* This interim rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132, Federalism. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform.* This interim rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 Flood insurance, Floodplains, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is amended to read as follows: PART 65—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 65 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. § 65.4 [Amended] 2. The tables published under the authority of § 65.4 are amended as follows: State and county Location and case No. Date and name of newspaper where notice was published Chief executive officer of community Effective date of modification Community No. Arizona: Cochise City of Sierra Vista (06-09-BA33P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *Sierra Vista Herald* The Honorable Bob Strain, Mayor, City of Sierra Vista City Hall, 1011 North Coronado Drive, Sierra Vista, AZ 85635 March 30, 2007 040017 Coconino City of Williams (07-09-0666P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *Arizona Daily Sun* The Honorable Kenneth Edes, Mayor, City of Williams, 113 South First Street, Williams, AZ 86046 March 29, 2007 040027 Arkansas: Baxter City of Mountain Home (07-06-0816P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Baxter Bulletin* The Honorable David Osmon, Mayor, City of Mountain Home, 720 South Hickory Street, Mountain Home, AR 72653 July 26, 2007 050531 Craighead City of Jonesboro (07-06-0264P) April 27, 2007; May 4, 2007; *Jonesboro Sun* The Honorable Doug Formon, Mayor, City of Jonesboro, 515 West Washington, Jonesboro, AR 72401 April 30, 2007 050048 California: Placer City of Roseville 06-09-BA39P) April 11, 2007; April 18, 2007; *Roseville Press-Tribune* The Honorable Jim Gray, Mayor, City of Roseville, 311 Vernon Street, Suite 208, Roseville, CA 95678 July 18, 2007 060243 Placer Unincorporated areas of Placer County (06-09-BA39P) April 11, 2007; April 18, 2007; *Roseville Press-Tribune* The Honorable Bruce Kranz, Chairman, Placer County, Board of Supervisors, 175 Fulweiler Avenue, Auburn, CA 95603 July 18, 2007 060239 Sacramento Unincorporated areas of Sacramento County (07-09-0205P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Daily Recorder* The Honorable Don Nottoli, Chairman, Board of Supervisors Sacramento County, 700 H Street, Suite 2450, Sacramento, CA 95814 July 26, 2007 060262 Colorado: Adams City of Aurora (07-08-0252P) April 20, 2007; April 27, 2007; *Eastern Colorado News* The Honorable Ed Tauer, Mayor, City of Aurora, 15151 East Alameda Parkway, Aurora, CO 80012 July 27, 2007 080002 Adams Unincorporated areas of Adams County (07-08-0252P) April 20, 2007; April 27, 2007; *Eastern Colorado News* The Honorable Alice J. Nichol, Chairman, Adams County Board of Commissioners, 450 South Fourth Avenue, Brighton, CO 80601 July 27, 2007 080001 Arapahoe City of Englewood (06-08-B392P) April 6, 2007; April 13, 2007; *The Englewood Herald* The Honorable Olga Wolosyn, Mayor, City of Englewood, 1000 Englewood Parkway, Englewood, CO 80110-2373 July 13, 2007 085074 Araphaoe City of Littleton (06-08-B392P) April 6, 2007; April 13, 2007; *The Englewood Herald* The Honorable Jim Taylor, Mayor, City of Littleton, 2255 West Barry Avenue, Littleton, CO 80165 July 13, 2007 080017 El Paso City of Colorado Springs (06-08-A647P) December 27, 2006; January 3, 2007 *El Paso County Advertiser and News* The Honorable Lionel Rivera Mayor, City of Colorado Springs, P.O. Box 1575, Colorado Springs, CO 80901 April 4, 2007 080060 El Paso City of Colorado Springs (05-08-0368P) February 14, 2007; February 21, 2007; *El Paso County Advertiser and News* The Honorable Lionel Rivera Mayor, City of Colorado Springs, P.O. Box 1575, Colorado Springs, CO 80901 May 23, 2007 080060 El Paso Unincorporated areas of El Paso County (05-08-0368P) February 14, 2007; February 21, 2007; *El Paso County Advertiser and News* The Honorable Sallie Clark Chair, El Paso County Board of Commissioners, 27 East Vermijo Avenue, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 May 23, 2007 080059 Georgia: Forsyth Unincorporated areas of Forsyth County (06-04-C359P) March 21, 2007; March 28, 2007; *Forsyth County News* The Honorable Jack Conway, Chairman, Forsyth County Board of Commissioners, 110 East Main Street, Cumming, GA 30040 June 27, 2007 130312 Gwinnett Unincorporated areas of Gwinnett County (06-04-B747P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *Gwinnett Daily Post* The Honorable Charles Bannister, Chairman, Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners, 75 Langley Drive, Lawrenceville, GA 30045 July 26, 2007 130322 Indiana: Allen City of New Haven (07-05-1901P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *Journal Gazette* The Honorable Terry E. McDonald, Mayor, City of New Haven, 815 Lincoln Highway East, New Haven, IN 46774 July 26, 2007 180004 Illinois: Cook Village of Matteson (06-05-B267P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *Daily Herald* The Honorable Mark W. Stricker, Village President, Village of Matteson, 4900 Village Commons, Matteson, IL 60443 July 19, 2007 170123 Du Page Village of Lisle (07-05-1672P) April 27, 2007; May 4, 2007; *Lisle Sun* The Honorable Joseph Broda Mayor, Village of Lisle, 925 Burlington Avenue, Lisle, IL 60532 March 30, 2007 170211 McHenry Village of Hebron (07-05-0618P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Northwest Herald* The Honorable Frank Beatty President, Village of Hebron, P.O. Box 372 Hebron, IL 60034 July 26, 2007 170086 McHenry Unincorporated areas of McHenry County (07-05-0618P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Northwest Herald.* The Honorable Kenneth D. Koehler, County Board Chairman, McHenry County, 2200 North Seminary Avenue, Woodstock, IL 60098 July 26, 2007 170732 Kansas: Sedgwick City of Wichita (07-07-0461P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Wichita Eagle* The Honorable Carlos Mayans, Mayor, City of Wichita, City Hall, First Floor, 455 North Main, Wichita, KS 67202 March 30, 2007 200328 Sedgwick Unincorporated areas of Sedgwick County (07-07-0461P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Wichita Eagle* The Honorable Dave Unruh, Chairman, Sedgwick County Board of Commissioners, 525 North Main, Suite 320, Wichita, KS 67203 March 30, 2007 200321 Louisiana: Livingston Unincorporated areas of Livingston Parish (06-06-BJ93P) April 5, 2007; April 12, 2007; *The Livingston Parish News* The Honorable Mike Grimmer, President, Livingston Parish, P.O. Box 427, Livingston, LA 70754 July 12, 2007 220113 Maine: Cumberland Town of Harpswell (07-01-0567P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *Portland Press Herald* The Honorable Samuel W. Alexander Chair, Board of Selectmen, Town of Harpswell, P.O. Box 39, Harpswell, ME 04079 April 2, 2007 230169 Knox Town of Rockport (07-01-0131P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Courier Gazette* The Honorable Robert H. Nichols, Chairman, Board of Selectmen, Town of Rockport, P.O. Box 10, Rockport, ME 04856 April 2, 2007 230077 Massachusetts: Norfolk Town of Westwood (07-01-0169P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *Westwood Press* The Honorable Anthony Antonellis, Chairman, Board of Selectmen, Town of Westwood, 580 High Street, Westwood, MA 02090 March 30, 2007 255225 Michigan: Oakland City of Troy (06-05-BZ47P) April 13, 2007; April 20, 2007; *Oakland County Legal News* The Honorable Louise E. Schilling, Mayor, City of Troy, 500 West Big Beaver Road, Troy, MI 48084 April 19, 2007 260180 Minnesota: Hennepin City of Golden Valley (06-05-BK37P) April 18, 2007; April 25, 2007; *Star Tribune* The Honorable Linda Loomis, Mayor, City of Golden Valley, 6677 Olson Memorial Highway, Golden Valley, MN 55427 July 25, 2007 270162 Nebraska: Lancaster Village of Firth (06-07-B874P) March 26, 2007; April 3, 2007; *Lincoln Journal Star* The Honorable David Hobelman, Chairman, Village of Firth Board, P.O. Box 38, Firth, NE 68358 August 2, 2007 310135 North Dakota: Grand Forks City of Grand Forks (07-08-0331P) April 26, 2007; May 3, 2007; *Grand Forks Herald* The Honorable Michael R. Brown, Mayor, City of Grand Forks, P.O. Box 5200, Grand Forks, ND 58206 August 2, 2007 85365 Ohio: Franklin City of Columbus (06-05-B004P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *The Columbus Dispatch* The Honorable Michael B. Coleman Mayor, City of Columbus, City Hall, 2nd Floor, 90 West Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43215 March 26, 2007 390170 Franklin Unincorporated areas of Franklin County (06-05-B004P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *The Columbus Dispatch* Mr. Don L. Brown, Franklin County Administrator, 373 South High Street, 26th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215-6314 March 26, 2007 390167 Warren Unincorporated areas of Warren County (07-05-0021P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *The Pulse-Journal* The Honorable C. Michael Kilburn, President, Warren County, Board of Commissioners, 406 Justice Drive, Lebanon, OH 45036 July 19, 2007 390757 Oklahoma: Oklahoma City of Midwest City (06-06-BI13P) April 18, 2007; April 25, 2007; *The Sun* The Honorable Russell Smith Mayor, City of Midwest City, 100 North Midwest Boulevard, Midwest City, OK 73110 April 30, 2007 400405 Pottawatomie Citizen Potawatomi Nation (06-06-B458P) April 26, 2007; May 3, 2007; *The Shawnee News-Star* The Honorable John A. Barrett Chairman, Citizen Potawatomi Nation, 1601 South Gordon Cooper Drive, Shawnee, OK 74801 April 6, 2007 400553 Pottawatomie City of Shawnee (06-06-B458P) April 26, 2007; May 3, 2007; *The Shawnee News-Star* The Honorable Pierre Taron, Mayor, City of Shawnee, P.O. Box 1448, Shawnee, OK 74802 April 6, 2007 400178 Pottawatomie Unincorporated areas of Pottawatomie County (06-06-B458P) April 26, 2007; May 3, 2007; *The Shawnee News-Star* Mr. Bob Guinn, Pottawatomie County Commissioner, 14101 Acme Road, County Courthouse, Shawnee, OK 74804 April 6, 2007 400496 Tulsa City of Broken Arrow (05-06-0076P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *Tulsa World* The Honorable Richard Carter, Mayor, City of Broken Arrow, 220 South First Street, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 July 26, 2007 400236 Pennsylvania: Chester Borough of South Coatesville (07-03-0540P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Daily Local* The Honorable Gregory V. Hines, Council President, Borough of South Coatesville, 136 Modena Road, South Coatesville, PA 19320 March 30, 2007 420288 Montgomery Township of East Norriton (07-03-0101P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *The Times Herald* The Honorable Donald J. Gracia, Chairman, Board of Supervisors, East Norriton Township, 2501 Stanbridge Street, East Norriton, PA 19401 March 23, 2007 420950 Puerto Rico: Puerto Rico Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (06-02-B737P) April 5, 2007; April 12, 2007; *The San Juan Star* The Honorable Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Governor of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, P.O. Box 82, La Fortaleza, San Juan, PR 00901 July 12, 2007 720000 South Carolina: Jasper City of Hardeeville (06-04-C661P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *The Beaufort Gazette* The Honorable Rodney Cannon, Mayor, City of Hardeeville, 205 East Main Street, Hardeeville, SC 29927 July 26, 2007 450113 Richland Unincorporated areas of Richland County (07-04-1972P) April 27, 2007; May 4, 2007; *The Columbia Star* The Honorable Joseph McEachern, Chairman, Richland County Council, Richland County Administration Building, 2020 Hampton Street, Second Floor, Columbia, SC 29202 April 12, 2007 450170 Tennessee: Rutherford City of Murfreesboro (07-04-2511P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *Daily News Journal* The Honorable Tommy Bragg, Mayor, City of Murfreesboro, 111 West Vine Street, Murfreesboro, TN 37130 July 26, 2007 470168 Rutherford Unincorporated areas of Rutherford County (07-04-2511P) April 19, 2007; April 26, 2007; *Daily News Journal* The Honorable Ernest Burgess, Mayor, Rutherford County, County Courthouse, Room 101, Murfreesboro, TN 37130 July 26, 2007 470165 Texas: Collin City of Plano (07-06-0426P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *Plano Star Courier* The Honorable Pat Evans, Mayor, City of Plano, 1520 Avenue K, Plano, TX 75074 July 19, 2007 480140 Tarrant City of Fort Worth (07-06-0368P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *Fort Worth Star-Telegram* The Honorable Mike J. Moncrief, Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102 July 19, 2007 480596 Virginia: Independent City City of Norton (06-03-B601P) April 12, 2007; April 19, 2007; *The Coalfield Progress* The Honorable B. Robert Raines, Mayor, City of Norton, Municipal Building, P. O. Box 618, Norton, VA 24273 July 19, 2007 510108 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.” Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-12693 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 65 Changes in Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Final rule; removal. SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)removes the final flood elevation determination published at 72 FR 27746 on May 17, 2007 for the Unincorporated areas of Frederick County, Maryland, Case No. 06-03-B384P, Community Number 240027. DATES: *Effective Date:* This rule is effective July 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 7, 2007, FEMA published at 72 FR 31460 a removal of the interim change in flood elevation determination for the Unincorporated areas of Frederick County, Maryland, Case No. 06-03-B384P, Community Number 240027, published at 72 FR 271 on January 4, 2007. Inadvertently, the change in flood elevation for the Unincorporated areas of Frederick County, Maryland, Case No. 06-03-B384P, Community Number 240027, was published as a final rule in 72 FR 27746 on May 17, 2007. As previously stated in 72 FR 31460, during the 90-day appeal period, FEMA received an appeal submitted by a property owner located within the revised area. After further investigation, it was found that the aforementioned flooding sources had been revised for the countywide map revision for Frederick County, Maryland, currently scheduled to go into effect in September 2007. When comparing the Letter of Map Revision
(LOMR)modeling to the countywide restudy, it was determined that the modeling for the countrywide restudy more accurately represented existing conditions. Therefore, the LOMR was rescinded to eliminate the potential of incorrect flood insurance determinations along the revised flooding sources. Accordingly, the final flood elevation determination inadvertently published at 72 FR 27746 on May 17, 2007 for the Unincorporated areas of Frederick County, Maryland, Case No. 06-03-B384P, Community No. 240027, is hereby removed. This matter is not a rulemaking governed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553. FEMA voluntarily publishes flood elevation determinations for notice and comment; however, they are governed by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* , and do not fall under the APA. If APA applicability is contested, however, FEMA asserts, for the reasons stated above, that it has good cause to issue this removal immediately, and without prior notice and opportunity to comment, because delaying implementation of this action to await public notice and comment is unnecessary, impracticable, and contrary to the public interest. *National Environmental Policy Act.* This rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. No environmental impact assessment has been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification.* This rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. *Executive Order 13132, Federalism.* This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform.* This rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is amended as follows: PART 65—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 65 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127 of Mar. 31, 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. § 65.4 [Amended] 2. The table published at 72 FR 27746 on May 17, 2007 under the authority of § 65.4 is amended to remove the following: The final flood elevation determination published at 72 FR 27746 on May 17, 2007 for the Unincorporated areas of Frederick County, Maryland, Case No. 06-03-B384P, Community No. 240027. Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-12700 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 67 Final Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: Base (1% annual chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs)and modified BFEs are made final for the communities listed below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that each community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). DATES: The date of issuance of the Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM)showing BFEs and modified BFEs for each community. This date may be obtained by contacting the office where the maps are available for inspection as indicated on the table below. ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)makes the final determinations listed below for the modified BFEs for each community listed. These modified elevations have been published in newspapers of local circulation and ninety
(90)days have elapsed since that publication. The Mitigation Division Director of FEMA has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification. This final rule is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60. Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM available at the address cited below for each community. The BFEs and modified BFEs are made final in the communities listed below. Elevations at selected locations in each community are shown. *National Environmental Policy Act.* This final rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification.* This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. *Executive Order 13132, Federalism.* This final rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform.* This final rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is amended as follows: PART 67—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. § 67.11 [Amended] 2. The tables published under the authority of § 67.11 are amended as follows: State City/town/county Source of flooding Location # Depth in feet above ground. * Elevation in feet
(NGVD)+ Elevation in feet
(NAVD)Modified Pinal County, Arizona and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: FEMA-B-7454 Arizona Pinal County (Unincorporated Areas) McClellan Wash Approximately 0.61 mile west of Battagila Drive +1,566 Approximately 6.8 miles upstream of confluence with McClellan Wash Split +1,824 City of Eloy Santa Cruz Wash Approximately 0.72 mile west of Ethington Road +1,382 Approximately 1,000 feet south of Shedd Road +1,440 City of Eloy Santa Rosa Canal Approximately 400 feet west of Henness Road +1,481 Approximately 222 feet east of Toltec Highway +1,528 City of Casa Grande North Branch Santa Cruz Wash Approximately 0.86 mile west of Thornton Road +1,363 Approximately 1.85 miles east of Peart Road +1,409 City of Casa Grande Arizola Drain Approximately 0.64 mile west of Cox Road +1,407 Approximately 5.02 miles above confluence with North Branch Santa Cruz Wash +1,453 #Depth in feet above ground. *National Geodetic Vertical Datum. +North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES Pinal County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at: 140 N. Florence Street, Florence, AZ 85232. City of Casa Grande Maps are available for inspection at: The City Hall 510 E. Florence Blvd., Casa Grande, AZ 85222. City of Eloy Maps are available for inspection at: City Hall 628 N. Main St., Eloy, AZ 85231 or the City Library at: 100 E. 7th St., Eloy, AZ 85231. Pinal County, Arizona and Incorporated Areas Docket No. FEMA B-7456 Arizona Pinal County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Casa Grande Arizola Drain Shallow Flooding Area—Between I-10/SR-84 Interchange to confluence with North Santa Cruz Wash #1 #Depth in feet above ground. *National Geodetic Vertical Datum. +North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Casa Grande Maps are available for inspection at: The City Hall 510 E. Florence Blvd., Casa Grande, AZ 85222. State City/town/county Source of flooding Location # Depth in feet above ground. * Elevation in feet
(NGVD)+ Elevation in feet
(NAVD)City of Eureka, Utah Docket No.: FEMA-B-7454 Utah City of Eureka Eureka Gulch Approximately 0.52 mile downstream of Church Street +6,303 Approximately 550 feet upstream of Bulk Plant Road +6,571 #Depth in feet above ground. *National Geodetic Vertical Datum. +North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Eureka Maps are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer at City Hall, 15 North Church Street, Eureka, UT 84628. City of Eureka, Utah Docket No.: FEMA-B-7473 Utah City of Eureka Eureka Gulch Approximately 0.30 miles downstream of Church Street +6,306 Approximately 830 feet upstream of Church Street +6,396 City of Eureka Eureka Gulch Approximately 490 feet upstream of Spring Street +6,528 Approximately 425 feet upstream of Bulk Plant Road +6,569 # Depth in feet above ground. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Eureka Maps are available for inspection at: City Hall, 15 North Church Street, Eureka, Utah. Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation * Elevation in feet
(NGVD)+ Elevation in feet
(NAVD)# Depth in feet above ground Modified Communities affected Gila County, Arizona and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: FEMA-B-7456 Bar X Wash Shallow Flooding—North side of Bar X Wash approximately 1059 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 634 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Shallow Flooding—North side of Bar X Wash approximately 1059 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 634 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Shallow Flooding—Approximately 1.02 miles above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 1.01 miles above confluence with Roosevelt Lake #2 Butcher Hook Shallow Flooding—North side of Butcher Hook approximately 1772 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 922 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Shallow Flooding—North side of Butcher Hook approximately 0.39 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 1772 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Shallow Flooding—South side of Butcher Hook approximately 0.45 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 0.39 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Shallow Flooding—North side of Butcher Hook approximately 1772 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 1247 feet above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #2 Chalk Springs Creek Shallow Flooding—Approximately 1.25 miles above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 1.02 miles above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Shallow Flooding—Approximately 1.01 miles above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to 0.96 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 South Oak Creek Shallow Flooding—Approximately 0.84 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 0.99 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Walnut Creek Shallow Flooding—Approximately 0.52 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake to approximately 0.44 mile above confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake #1 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Bar X Wash Approximately 645 feet upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2237 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 182 feet west of State Route 188 +2282 Butcher Hook Approximately 920 feet upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2242 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 517 feet west of State Route 188 +2294 Chalk Springs Creek Approximately 0.50 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2277 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 894 feet west of Earl Road +2389 Haystack Butte Approximately 0.54 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2308 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 675 feet west of Rio Salada Lane +2416 Lambing Creek Approximately 0.44 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2322 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.89 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2377 Landing Creek Approximately 222 feet east of Shereeve Lane +2284 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 846 feet west of State Route 188 +2362 Park Creek Approximately 526 feet upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2312 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 289 feet west of State Route 188 +2361 Reno Creek Approximately 1455 feet upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2319 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 757 feet west of State Route 188 +2356 South Oak Creek Approximately 0.44 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2221 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1.00 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2288 Sycamore Creek Approximately 0.84 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2224 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 490 feet west of State Route 188 +2286 Sycamore Creek Split Flow Approximately 0.48 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2213 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.65 mile upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2222 Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake Approximately 11.12 miles above Roosevelt Dam +2171 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2.2 miles upstream of Reno Creek +2373 Walnut Creek Approximately 1364 feet upstream of confluence with Tonto Creek at Roosevelt Lake +2270 Gila County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 505 feet west of Walnut Springs Road +2346 # Depth in feet above ground. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES Gila County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps available for inspection at: 1400 E. Ash Street, Globe, AZ 85501 or 714 S. Beeline Highway, Suite 200, Payson, AZ 85541. Eagle County, Colorado and Incorporated Areas Docket Nos.: FEMA-B-7439 and FEMA-B-7464 Bighorn Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,431 Town of Vail. Approximately 350 feet upstream of Columbine Drive +8,639 Black Gore Creek At confluence with Lower Gore Creek +8,575 Town of Vail. Approximately 1,280 feet upstream of confluence with Lower Gore Creek +8,628 Booth Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,296 Town of Vail. Approximately 1,300 feet upstream of interstate Highway 70 +8,392 Buffehr Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +7,956 Town of Vail, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,700 feet upstream of Circle Drive +8,180 Colorado River At Garfield County and Eagle County corporate limit +6131 Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 200 feet downstream of Interstate 70 +6145 Eagle River Approximately 500 feet downstream of U.S. Highway 6 +6,277 Town of Gypsum Eagle County Unincorporated Areas). Just downstream of confluence with Brush Creek +6,502 East Mill Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,175 Town of Vail, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Just upstream of Vail Road +8,292 Gore Creek Just upstream of confluence with Eagle River +7,728 Town of Vail, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). At confluence with Upper and Lower Gore Creeks +8,561 Lower Gore Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,561 Town of Vail, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). At Divergence from Upper Gore Creek +8,610 Middle Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,118 Town of Vail. Approximately 850 feet upstream of Interstate Highway 70 +8,335 Pitkin Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,366 Town of Vail. Approximately 200 feet upstream of Fall Line Drive +8,454 Red Sandstone Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,078 Town of Vail. Just upstream of Potato Patch Drive +8,254 Roaring Fork River At Eagle County/Garfield County boundary +6,380 Town of Basalt, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Just downstream of Emma Road +6,600 South Side Split Flow At confluence with Roaring Fork River +6,553 Town of Basalt, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,200 feet downstream of State Highway 82 Bypass +6,563 Spraddle Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,138 Town of Vail. Approximately 1,150 feet upstream of Interstate Highway 70 +8,274 Upper Gore Creek At confluence with Gore Creek +8,562 Town of Vail, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,000 feet upstream of Interstate Highway 70 westbound +8,682 West Mill Creek Just downstream of Gore Drive +8,165 Town of Vail, Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas). Just upstream of Vail Road +8,292 # Depth in feet above ground. * National Geodetic Datum. + National American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES Town of Basalt Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 101 Midland Avenue, Basalt, Colorado 81621. Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at 500 Broadway Street, Eagle, Colorado 81631. Town of Gypsum: Maps are available for inspection at 50 Lundgren Boulevard, Gypsum, Colorado 81637. Town of Vail Maps are available for inspection at the Community Development Office, 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657. Eagle County, Colorado, and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: B-7704 Eagle River Just upstream of the confluence with the Colorado River +6,144 Eagle County, (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Avon, Town of Eagle, Town of Gypsum, Town of Minturn. Approximately 1,040 feet downstream of the confluence with Two Elk Creek +7,989 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES Eagle County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at the Eagle County Building, 500 Broadway Street, Eagle, Colorado 81631. Town of Avon Maps are available for inspection at Avon Municipal Complex, 400 Benchmack Road, Avon, CO 81620. Town of Eagle Q02 Maps are available for inspection at Town Hall, Town of Eagle, 200 Broadway, Eagle, CO 81631. Town of Gypsum Maps are available for inspection at Town Hall, Town of Gypsum, 50 Lundgren Boulevard, Gypsum, CO 81637. Town of Minturn Map are available for inspection at Town Office, Town of Minturn, 302 Pine Street, Minturn, CO 81645. Hancock County, Indiana and Incorporated Areas Docket No: FEMA-B-7704 Bills Branch At East 96th Street +790 Town of McCordsville. Approximately 400 feet upstream of North Wind River Run +838 Brandywine Creek Approximately 6,000 feet downstream of County Road 500 South +831 City of Greenfield, Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 790 feet upstream of County Road 400 North +887 Briney Ditch At the confluence with Little Brandywine Creek +859 Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2,170 feet upstream of Interstate Highway 40 +895 Dry Branch At County Road 700 West +831 Town of McCordsville, Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,580 feet upstream of County Road 500 West +858 Jackson Ditch Approximately 1,190 feet downstream of West Staat Street +845 Town of Fortville, Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 600 feet upstream of County Road 200 West +857 Jackson Arm Ditch At the confluence with Jackson Ditch +856 Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2,010 feet upstream of West 850 North +865 Little Brandywine Creek At Steel Ford Road +856 City of Greenfield, Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 230 feet upstream of County Road 300 North +911 North Fork At County Road 700 West +820 Town of McCordsville, Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,170 feet upstream of County Road 900 North +853 Putter Ditch At the confluence with Brandywine Creek +861 City of Greenfield. Approximately 695 feet upstream of the confluence with Brandywine Creek +861 Rash Ditch At the confluence with Jackson Ditch +855 Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Just upstream of Meridian Road +866 Stansbury Ditch At the confluence with Dry Branch +843 Town of McCordsville, Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 4,610 feet upstream of County Road 700 North +861 West Fork Bills Branch At the confluence with Bills Branch +796 Town of McCordsville. Approximately 2,005 feet upstream of Cardinal Drive +821 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES Town of Fortville Maps are available for inspection at Courthouse Annex, 111 South American Legion Place, Greenfield, Indiana 46140. Town of Greenfield Maps are available for inspection at 10 South State Street, Greenfield, Indiana 46140. Hancock County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at Courthouse Annex, 111 South American Legion Place, Greenfield, Indiana 46140. Town of McCordsville Maps are available for inspection at 9175 Stormy Port, McCordsville, Indiana 46055. Clark County, Nevada, and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: FEMA-B-7708 Virgin River 5.0 miles downstream of the confluence of Pulsipher Wash +1473 Clark County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Mesquite. 0.5 miles upstream of the confluence of the Virgin River Avulsion +1597 Virgin River Avulsion 0.3 miles upstream of the confluence with the Virgin River +1591 City of Mesquite. 0.8 miles upstream of the confluence with the Virgin River +1598 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Mesquite Maps are available for inspection at Office of the City Engineer, 10 E. Mesquite Boulevard, Mesquite, NV 89027. Clark County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at Office of the Director of Public Works, 500 Grand Central Pky, Las Vegas, NV 89155. Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: FEMA-B-747 Canyon Creek At mouth of Lake Michigan *5901 City of Port Washington, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). At intersection of Interstate 43 *701 Cedar Creek At mouth at Milwaukee River *679 City of Cedarburg, Village of Grafton, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). 6450 feet upstream of County Highway Y *836 Fredonia Creek At mouth at Milwaukee River 1 *781 Village of Fredonia, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). 2500 feet upstream from County Highway D *831 Milwaukee River At County Line Road *653 Village of Thiensville, City of Mequon, Village of Grafton, Village of Saukville, Village of Fredonia, Village of Newburg, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). Downstream of northern crossing of Riverside Road *798 Upstream of south crossing of Riverside Road *805 Downstream of Hickory Road *835 Mineral Springs At mouth at Sauk Creek 1 *590 City of Port Washington. 300 feet upstream from State Highway 32 *719 Mole Creek At mouth at Milwaukee River 1 *746 Village of Grafton, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). 600 feet upstream of Center Road *818 North Branch of Milwaukee River At mouth at Milwaukee River *798 Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). Downstream of northern crossing of Riverside Road *799 Pigeon Creek At mouth at Milwaukee River approximately 100 feet downstream from Green Bay Road 1 *660 Village of Thiensville, City of Mequon 1900 feet upstream of Highland Road *732 Sauk Creek At mouth of Lake Michigan *590 City of Port Washington, Village of Belgium, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). 2000 feet upstream of County Highway KK *796 Ulao Creek At mouth at Milwaukee River 1 *664 City of Mequon,Village of Grafton, Ozaukee County, (Unincorporated Areas). 2300 feet upstream of State Highway 32 *744 Un-named Tributary #1 to Belgium Holland Drainage Ditch At intersection with County Highway K *720 Village of Belgium, Ozaukee County, (Unincorporated Areas). 100 feet downstream of Park Street *731 Overflow #1 At the downstream confluence of Un-named Tributary #1 to Belgium Holland Drainage Ditch *723 Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). At the upstream overflow from Un-named Tributary #1 to Belgium Holland Drainage Ditch (750 feet downstream of Park St) *724 Overflow #2 At the confluence of Un-Named Tributary #1 to Belgium Holland Drainage Ditch *730 Village of Belgium, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). At the upstream overflow from Un-named Tributary #1 to Belgium Holland Drainage Ditch (2750 feet downstream of Jay Rd) *730 Un-named Tributary #1 to Milwaukee River At mouth of the Milwaukee River 1 *758 Village of Saukville. 1690 feet upstream of Dekora Woods Boulevard *775 Un-named Tributary #1 to Ulao Creek At mouth of Ulao Creek *664 City of Mequon. 1700 feet upstream of County Highway W *673 Un-named Tributary to Un-named Tributary #1 to Ulao Creek At mouth of Un-named Tributary #1 to Ulao Creek *664 City of Mequon. 6750 feet upstream of Interstate 43 *673 Un-named Tributary #2 to Pigeon Creek At mouth of Pigeon Creek *623 City of Mequon, City of Cedarburg, Ozaukee County (Unincorporated Areas). 2300 feet upstream of State Highway 181 *806 Un-named Tributary #3 to Milwaukee River 200 feet downstream of Wheeler Avenue *791 Village of Fredonia. 500 feet upstream of Meadowbrook Drive *798 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. + North American Vertical Datum. 1 Flood Elevation based on Backwater. ADDRESSES Village of Belgium Maps are available for inspection at 195 Commerce St, Belgium, WI 53004-0224. City of Cedarburg Maps are available for inspection at W63 N645 Washington Avenue, Cedarburg, WI 53012-0049. Village of Fredonia Maps are available for inspection at Village Hall, 416 Fredonia Ave, Fredonia, WI 53021. Village of Grafton Maps are available for inspection at Village Hall—Thomas Johnson, 1971 Washington St., Grafton, WI 53024. City of Mequon Maps are available for inspection at 11333 N. Cedarburg Road, Mequon, WI 53092. Village of Newburg Maps are available for inspection at Village Hall, 614 Main St., Newburg, WI 53060. Unincorporated Areas of Ozaukee County Maps are available for inspection at Planning, Resources, and Land Management Department 121 West Main Street, P.O. Box 994, Port Washington, WI 53704-0994. City of Port Washington Maps are available for inspection at Office of Planning and Development, 100 W. Grand Avenue Port Washington, WI 53074. Village of Saukville Maps are available for inspection at Planning Department, 639 East Green Bay Ave., Saukville, WI 53080. Village of Thiensville Maps are available for inspection at 250 Elm Street, Thiensville, WI 53092. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-12698 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P 72 126 Monday, July 2, 2007 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 67 [Docket No. FEMA-B-7721] Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: Technical information or comments are requested on the proposed Base (1% annual chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs)and proposed BFEs modifications for the communities listed below. The BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). DATES: The comment period is ninety
(90)days following the second publication of this proposed rule in a newspaper of local circulation in each community. ADDRESSES: The proposed BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)proposes to make determinations of BFEs and modified BFEs for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a). These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State or regional entities. These proposed elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for the contents in these buildings. *National Environmental Policy Act.* This proposed rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification.* This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. *Executive Order 13132, Federalism.* This proposed rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform.* This proposed rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 67—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. § 67.4 [Amended] 2. The tables published under the authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be amended as follows: Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation * Elevation in feet
(NGVD)+ Elevation in feet
(NAVD)# Depth in feet above ground. Effective Modified Communities affected Warren County, Mississippi, and Incorporated Areas Clear Creek At Tiffintown Road None +144 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 6490 feet upstream of Tiffintown Road None +150 Tributary 1 At Tiffintown Road None +144 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1825 feet upstream of Tiffintown Road None +145 Crouches Creek Approximately 840 feet downstream of confluence with Crouches Creek Tributary 2 None +155 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2730 feet upstream of confluence with Crouches Creek Tributary 2 None +164 Tributary 2 At confluence with Crouches Creek None +159 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). At Freetown Road None +165 Tributary 3 At confluence with Crouches Creek None +159 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2970 feet upstream of confluence with Crouches Creek None +166 Glass Bayou At Fort Hill Drive None +123 City of Vicksburg. At Evergreen Drive None +208 Muddy Creek At Tucker Road None +148 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 4565 feet upstream of Tucker Road None +150 Tributary 1 At confluence with Muddy Creek None +148 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2970 feet upstream of confluence with Muddy Creek None +176 Paces Bayou At U.S. Highway 61 None +96 City of Vicksburg. Approximately 3530 feet upstream of U.S. Highway 61 None +108 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Tributary 1 At Redbone Road None +121 City of Vicksburg. Approximately 1390 feet upstream of Redbone Road None +123 Tributary 3 At Redbone Road None +115 City of Vicksburg. Approximately 2040 feet upstream of Redbone Road None +118 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Silver Creek Approximately 1500 feet downstream of confluence with Silver Creek Tributary 2 None +162 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 8615 feet upstream of confluence with Silver Creek Tributary 3 None +259 Tributary 2 Approximately 745 feet upstream of confluence with Silver Creek None +181 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 4890 feet upstream of confluence with Silver Creek None +217 Tributary 3 Approximately 1070 feet upstream of confluence with Silver Creek None +191 (Warren County Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 4975 feet upstream of confluence with Silver Creek None +228 Stouts Bayou At Interstate 20 None +122 City of Vicksburg. At Spring Street None +197 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES City of Vicksburg Maps are available for inspection at 1401 Walnut Street, Vicksburg, MS 39180. Send comments to The Honorable Laurence E. Leyens, Mayor, City of Vicksburg, 1401 Walnut Street, Vicksburg, MS 39180. Warren County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at 913 Jackson Street, Vicksburg, MS 39183. Send comments to Mr. Carl Flanders, Chairman, Warren County Board of Supervisors, 913 Jackson Street, Vicksburg, MS 39183. Grand County, Utah, and Incorporated Areas Pack Creek At the confluence with Mill Creek *4022 +4030 Grand County (Unincorporated Areas) 160 feet upstream of Mill Creek Drive None +4199 City of Moab * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES City of Moab Maps are available for inspection at 217 East Center Street, Moab, UT 84532. Send comments to The Honorable Dave Sakirson, Moab City Mayor, 217 East Center Street, Moab, UT 84532. Grand County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at Grand County Courthouse, Moab, UT 84532. Send comments to Joette Langianese, Chair, Grand County Council, 125 East Center Street, Moab, UT 84532. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-12697 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 67 [Docket No. FEMA-B-7718] Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: Technical information or comments are requested on the proposed Base (1% annual chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs)and proposed BFEs modifications for the communities listed below. The BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). DATES: The comment period is ninety
(90)days following the second publication of this proposed rule in a newspaper of local circulation in each community. ADDRESSES: The proposed BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)proposes to make determinations of BFEs and modified BFEs for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a). These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State or regional entities. These proposed elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for the contents in these buildings. *National Environmental Policy Act.* This proposed rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification.* This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. E *xecutive Order 13132, Federalism.* This proposed rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform.* This proposed rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 67—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. § 67.4 [Amended] 2. The tables published under the authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be amended as follows: Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation * Elevation in feet
(NGVD)+ Elevation in feet
(NAVD)# Depth in feet above ground Effective Modified Communities affected Cabarrus County, North Carolina and Incorporated Areas Adams Creek Approximately 150 feet upstream of NC 73 None +630 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,460 feet upstream of NC 73 Highway E None +630 Afton Run Approximately 50 feet upstream of Dogwood Boulevard None +665 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 1.5 miles upstream of Dogwood Boulevard None +710 Anderson Creek Approximately 50 feet upstream of Bethel Church Road (State Road 1125) None +566 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 900 feet upstream of Sam Black Road (State Road 1127) None +613 Tributary 1 At the confluence with Anderson Creek None +575 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). At Sam Black Road (State Road 1127) None +611 Caldwell Creek Tributary Approximately 1,125 feet upstream of the confluence with Caldwell Creek +592 +593 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,700 feet upstream of Pioneer Mill Road (State Road 1134) None +669 Chambers Branch Approximately 110 feet upstream of U.S. Highway 29 None +702 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 1,180 feet upstream of East 1st Street None +718 Clear Creek At the confluence with Rocky River +474 +469 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Midland. Approximately 1.6 miles upstream of Ben Black Road (State Road 1118) None +535 Coddle Creek Approximately 150 feet downstream of Coddle Creek Dam +621 +620 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). At the Rowan/Cabarrus/Iredell County boundary +676 +674 Tributary 1 Approximately 500 feet upstream of the confluence with Coddle Creek None +543 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Concord. Approximately 1,800 feet upstream of Rocky River Road (State Road 1139) None +555 Tributary 2 Approximately 950 feet upstream of the confluence with Coddle Creek None +543 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,300 feet upstream of Chapel Creek Road Southwest None +551 City of Concord. Tributary 3 Approximately 200 feet upstream of the confluence with Coddle Creek None +569 City of Concord. Approximately 1.0 mile upstream of Roberta Church Road None +598 Cold Water Creek At the confluence of Little Cold Water Creek None +550 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Moose Road None +653 City of Concord, City of Kannapolis. Common Ford Branch Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Penninger Road (State Road 2113) None +618 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1.5 miles upstream of Penninger Road (State Road 2113) None +682 Dutch Buffalo Creek Approximately 150 feet upstream of NC 73 None +524 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,120 feet upstream of Sapp Road (State Road 2402) None +684 Tributary 1 At the confluence with Dutch Buffalo Creek None +674 Unincorporated Areas of Cabarrus County. Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of Pless Road (State Road 2432) None +688 Horton Branch Approximately 80 feet upstream of Bethel Church Road (State Road 1125) None +575 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of Sam Black Road (State Road 1127) None +632 Irish Buffalo Creek Approximately 600 feet upstream of Cannon Farm Road +732 +733 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of Cannon Farm Road +740 +743 Tributary 1 Approximately 350 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +611 City of Concord. Approximately 910 feet upstream of Hanover Drive Northwest None +639 Tributary 2 Approximately 1,200 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +624 City of Concord, City of Kannapolis. Approximately 1,950 feet upstream of Orphanage Road None +645 Tributary 3 Approximately 750 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +671 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 500 feet upstream of Mooresville Road None +704 Tributary 4 Approximately 1,250 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +735 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +745 Tributary 5 Approximately 1,350 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek +732 +735 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +750 Jones Branch Approximately 500 feet upstream of the confluence with Rocky River None +530 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,690 feet upstream of Falcon Drive (State Road 1269) None +595 Lick Branch At the confluence with Dutch Buffalo Creek None +666 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,160 feet upstream of Sapp Road (State Road 2402) None +740 Little Buffalo Creek At the confluence with Dutch Buffalo Creek None +531 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1.9 miles upstream of Drye Road (State Road 2443) None +593 Little Meadow Creek Approximately 100 feet upstream of Reed Mine Road (State Road 1100) None +501 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 330 feet upstream of County Line Road (State Road 2623) None +607 Mallard Creek Approximately 2,250 feet upstream of Morehead Road +569 +570 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). At the Cabarrus/Mecklenberg County boundary +573 +576 Town of Harrisburg. Tributary 1 Approximately 850 feet upstream of the confluence with Mallard Creek None +571 Town of Harrisburg. At the Cabarrus/Mecklenberg County boundary None +590 Tributary 1A Approximately 350 feet upstream of the confluence with Mallard Creek Tributary 1 None +571 Town of Harrisburg. Approximately 1.0 mile upstream of the confluence with Mallard Creek Tributary 1 None +643 Tributary 1B At the confluence with Mallard Creek Tributary 1 None +586 Town of Harrisburg. Approximately 1,650 feet upstream of the confluence with Mallard Creek Tributary 1 None +623 Tributary 2 At the confluence with Mallard Creek Tributary 1 +570 +573 City of Concord, Town of Harrisburg. Approximately 1,290 feet upstream of Hudspeth Road (State Road 1302) None +634 Meadow Creek Approximately 1,500 feet downstream of Reed Mine Road (State Road 1100) None +495 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of Reed Mine Road (State Road 1100) None +500 Mill Creek At the confluence with Coddle Creek +622 +650 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Kannapolis. Approximately 100 feet upstream of the Cabarrus/Rowan County boundary None +715 Miller Branch Approximately 250 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +656 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Kannapolis. Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of Mooresville Road None +767 Morris Branch Approximately 660 feet upstream of the confluence with Rocky River +567 +566 Town of Harrisburg. Approximately 1,280 feet upstream of Rocky River Crossing Road +598 +602 Muddy Creek At the confluence with Rocky River +479 +478 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Midland. At the confluence of Muddy Creek Tributary 1 None +492 Tributary 1 At the confluence with Muddy Creek None +492 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas) Town of Midland. Approximately 150 feet upstream of NC 24-27 Highway E None +525 Overcash Branch Approximately 1,000 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +664 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 740 feet upstream of Quail Woods Court None +697 Park Creek At the confluence with Coddle Creek +648 +652 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). At the Cabarrus/Rowan County boundary None +679 Patterson Branch Tributary Approximately 75 feet upstream of the confluence with Patterson Branch +702 +703 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 1,800 feet upstream of Beaumont Avenue None +747 Ridenhour Branch At the downstream side of Colfax Drive Southeast (State Road 2513) None +552 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Concord. Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence with Ridenhour Branch Tributary None +628 Ridenhour Branch Tributary At the confluence with Ridenhour Branch None +599 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Concord. Approximately 1.2 miles upstream of Lake Lynn Road (State Road 2640) None +671 Rocky River At the Union/Stanly/Cabarrus County boundary +474 +469 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). At the Cabarrus/Mecklenberg/Iredell County boundary None +687 City of Concord, City of Kannapolis, Town of Harrisburg, Town of Midland. Tributary 11 Approximately 200 feet downstream of NC 200 None +508 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of NC 200 None +555 Rogers Lake Branch Approximately 100 feet upstream of Rogers Lake Road None +715 City of Kannapolis. Approximately 190 feet upstream of Richard Avenue None +742 Royal Oaks Branch Approximately 350 feet upstream of the confluence with Cold Water Creek None +582 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Concord. Approximately 650 feet upstream of Lake Concord Road None +660 City of Kannapolis. Shamrock Branch Approximately 75 feet downstream of Wilson Street None +595 City of Concord. Approximately 1,050 feet upstream of Shamrock Street Northeast None +644 Stricker Branch Approximately 750 feet upstream of the confluence with Irish Buffalo Creek None +597 City of Concord. Approximately 180 feet upstream of NC 73 None +636 Threemile Branch At the confluence with Cold Water Creek None +558 City of Concord, City of Kannapolis. Approximately 370 feet upstream of Plymouth Street None +751 Water Creek Approximately 500 feet upstream of the confluence with Little Cold Water Creek None +586 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of Gold Hill Road (State Road 2408) None +625 Yow Branch Approximately 80 feet upstream of NC 200 None +507 Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Mount Pleasant. Approximately 1,130 feet upstream of NC 200 Highway None +507 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. + North American Vertical Datum. ADDRESSES City of Concord Maps are available for inspection at City of Concord GIS Division, 66 Union Street South, Concord, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable J. Scott Padgett, Mayor of the City of Concord, P.O. Box 308, Concord, North Carolina 28026. City of Kannapolis Maps are available for inspection at Kannapolis City Hall, 246 Oak Avenue, Kannapolis, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Bob Misenheimer, Mayor of the City of Kannapolis, 246 Oak Avenue, Kannapolis, North Carolina 28081. Town of Harrisburg Maps are available for inspection at Harrisburg Town Hall, 4100 Main Street, Suite 101, Harrisburg, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Tim Hagler, Mayor of the Town of Harrisburg, P.O. Box 100, Harrisburg, North Carolina 28075. Town of Midland Maps are available for inspection at Midland Town Hall, 4293B Highway 24-27 East, Midland, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable John Crump, Mayor of the Town of Midland, 4293B Highway 24-27 East, Midland, North Carolina 28107. Town of Mount Pleasant Maps are available for inspection at Mount Pleasant Town Hall, 8590 Park Drive, Mount Pleasant, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Troy Barnhardt, Mayor of the Town of Mount Pleasant, P.O. Box 787, Mount Pleasant, North Carolina 28124. Cabarrus County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at Cabarrus County Planning Services Department, 65 Church Street Southeast, Concord, North Carolina. Send comments to Mr. John D. Day, Cabarrus County Manager, 65 Church Street Southeast, Concord, North Carolina 28025. Henderson County, North Carolina and Incorporated Areas Allen Branch At the confluence with Clear Creek None +2,081 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. Approximately 200 feet upstream of Luther Capell Lane None +2,183 Bat Fork Creek At the confluence with Mud Creek +2,084 +2,082 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. Approximately 200 feet upstream of U.S. 176 None +2,159 Battle Creek At the downstream side of U.S. 64 None +2,069 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Battle Creek Road (State Road 1211) None +2,082 Big Willow Creek Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of the confluence with French Broad River None +2,081 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). At the confluence of South Fork Big Willow Creek and North Fork Big Willow Creek None +2,081 Tributary 1 Approximately 1,200 feet upstream of the confluence with Big Willow Creek +2,081 +2,104 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 40 feet upstream of Lakeshore Drive +2,081 +2,109 Boylston Creek Approximately 50 feet downstream of Banner Farm Road +2,173 +2,172 Town of Mills River. Approximately 230 feet upstream of Turkey Pen Gap Road None +2,190 Tributary 7 At the confluence with Boylston Creek None +2,103 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Mills River. Approximately 1,090 feet upstream of Cross Creek Court None +2,128 Britton Creek At the confluence with Mud Creek +2,082 +2,081 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. Approximately 90 feet upstream of Mistletoe Trail None +2,284 Tributary 2 At the confluence with Britton Creek +2,083 +2,082 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. Approximately 150 feet upstream of Stonebrook Drive (State Road 2050) None +2,154 Broad River At the Henderson/Rutherford County boundary None +1,411 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). At the Buncombe/Henderson County boundary None +1,719 Cane Creek Approximately 100 feet upstream of I-26 +2,061 +2,062 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 350 feet downstream of the confluence with Robinson Creek +2,095 +2,094 Town of Fletcher. Clear Creek At the confluence with Mud Creek +2,079 +2,078 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1.0 mile upstream of Apple Valley Road (State Road 1572) None +2,171 Devils Fork At the confluence with Bat Fork Creek +2,086 +2,083 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. At Old Dana Road (State Road 1738) +2,136 +2,135 Dunn Creek At the confluence with Bat Fork Creek None +2,099 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. Approximately 570 feet upstream of Howard Gap Road (State Road 1006) None +2,144 Featherstone Creek At the confluence with Mud Creek +2,071 +2,069 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 240 feet upstream of Locust Grove Road (State Road 1528) None +2,253 Finley Creek At the confluence with Perry Creek and Shepherd Creek None +2,131 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,980 feet upstream of Old Kanuga Road (State Road 1138) None +2,146 Gash Creek Approximately 400 feet downstream of Etowah School Road (State Road 1205) None +2,081 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,250 feet upstream of U.S. 64 None +2,101 Green River At the Henderson/Polk County boundary None +1,442 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 300 feet upstream of Bear Paw Ridge Road None +2,166 Henderson Creek At the confluence with Clear Creek None +2,118 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,240 feet upstream of Pace Road (State Road 1762) None +2,146 Hickory Creek (near Gerton) At the confluence with Broad River None +1,483 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 320 feet upstream of Boulder Lane None +3,652 Higgins Branch At the confluence with Kimsey Creek None +2,062 Town of Fletcher. Approximately 1,820 feet upstream of Birkshire Way None +2,178 Hoopers Creek At the confluence with Cane Creek +2,075 +2,074 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Fletcher. Approximately 30 feet downstream of Lindsey Loop Road (State Road 1571) None +2,181 Kimsey Creek Approximately 50 feet upstream of U.S. 74 +2,061 +2,062 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Fletcher. Approximately 1,880 feet upstream of Kimzey Creek Drive None +2,155 King Creek At the confluence with Bat Fork Creek None +2,084 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville, Village of Flat Rock. Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of West Blue Ridge Road (State Road 1812) None +2,178 Tributary 3 At the confluence with King Creek None +2,099 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville, Village of Flat Rock. Approximately 210 feet upstream of Rutledge Drive (State Road 1166) None +2,171 Kyles Creek At the confluence with Clear Creek None +2,118 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 140 feet downstream of Terrys Gap Road (State Road 1565) None +2,187 Lanning Mill Creek At the confluence with Kyles Creek None +2,176 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 800 feet upstream of the confluence with Kyles Creek None +2,187 Lewis Creek At the confluence with Clear Creek None +2,126 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 80 feet downstream of Pilot Mountain Road (State Road 1783) None +2,169 Little Willow Creek At Pleasant Grove Road (State Road 1191) None +2,083 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1.6 miles upstream of the confluence with French Broad River None +2,113 Mill Pond Creek Approximately 175 feet upstream of Hysong Lane +2,076 +2,075 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Mountain Road (State Road 1381) None +2,202 Mills River Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of Hooper Lane (State Road 1353) None +2,063 Town of Mills River. At the confluence of North Fork Mills River and South Fork Mills River None +2,119 Mud Creek Approximately 1.4 miles upstream of the confluence with French Broad River +2,063 +2,062 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Hendersonville. Approximately 300 feet upstream of Walnut Cove Road (State Road 1125) None +2,161 Town of Fletcher, Village of Flat Rock. North Fork Big Willow Creek At the confluence with Big Willow Creek None +2,081 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence with Big Willow Creek None +2,099 North Fork Mills River At the confluence with Mills River None +2,119 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1.3 miles upstream of Rush Branch Road None +2,259 Perry Creek At the confluence with Shepherd Creek None +2,131 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,530 feet upstream of Price Road (State Road 1137) None +2,147 Piney Branch At the confluence with South Fork Big Willow Creek None +2,082 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of Big Willow Road (State Road 1191) None +2,218 Reedypatch Creek At the confluence with Broad River None +1,461 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 540 feet upstream of Bald Rock Road (State Road 1710) None +2,176 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Rock Creek (into Green River) At the confluence with Green River None +2,067 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Green River Road (State Road 1106) None +2,103 Shaw Creek At the downstream side of U.S. 64 None +2,069 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,400 feet upstream of Turley Falls Road (State Road 1215) None +2,122 Shephard Creek At South Lakeside Drive (State Road 1148) None +2,126 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). At the confluence of Perry Creek and Finley Creek None +2,131 South Fork Big Willow Creek At the confluence with Big Willow Creek None +2,081 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,810 feet upstream of Patterson Road (State Road 1194) None +2,103 South Fork Mills River At the confluence with Mills River None +2,119 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 3.2 miles upstream of Dalton Road (State Road 1340) None +2,258 Town of Mills River. South Wash Creek At the confluence with Wash Creek None +2,153 Town of Laurel Park. Approximately 50 feet downstream of Lake Drive None +2,217 Tonys Creek At the confluence with Shepherd Creek None +2,126 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas), Town of Laurel Park. Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Willow Road (State Road 1171) None +2,201 Wash Creek Approximately 400 feet upstream of the confluence with Mud Creek +2,090 +2,091 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 330 feet upstream of Railroad None +2,202 City of Hendersonville, Town of Laurel Park. Wolfpen Creek Approximately 500 feet upstream of the confluence with Clear Creek +2,092 +2,091 Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 90 feet upstream of Chestnut Gap Road (State Road 1742) None +2,130 City of Hendersonville. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES City of Hendersonville Maps are available for inspection at Hendersonville City Hall, 145 Fifth Avenue East, Hendersonville, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Greg Newman, Mayor of the City of Hendersonville, P.O. Box 1670, Hendersonville, North Carolina 28793. Town of Fletcher Maps are available for inspection at Fletcher Town Hall, 4005 Hendersonville Road, Fletcher, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Mark Biberdors, Mayor of the Town of Fletcher, 4005 Hendersonville Road, Fletcher, North Carolina 28732. Town of Laurel Park Maps are available for inspection at Laurel Park Town Hall, 441 White Pine Drive, Laurel Park, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Henry T. Johnson, Mayor of the Town of Laurel Park, 441 White Pine Drive, Laurel Park, North Carolina 28739. Town of Mills River Maps are available for inspection at Mills River Town Hall, 5046 Boylston Highway, Suite 3, Mills River, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Roger Snyder, Mayor of the Town of Mills River, 5046 Boylston Highway, Suite 3, Mills River, North Carolina 28759. Henderson County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at Henderson County Administration Building, 100 North King Street, Hendersonville, North Carolina. Send comments to Mr. Steve Wyatt, Henderson County Manager, 100 North King Street, Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792. Village of Flat Rock Maps are available for inspection at Flat Rock Village Hall, 110 Village Center Drive, Flat Rock, North Carolina. Send comments to The Honorable Ray E. Shaw, Jr., Mayor of the Village of Flat Rock, P.O. Box 1288, Flat Rock, North Carolina 28731. Clinton County, Pennsylvania, and Incorporated Areas Fishing Creek Approximately 550 feet downstream of Peale Avenue +567 +569 Borough of Mill Hall, Township of Bald Eagle. Approximately 4420 feet upstream of Furnace Road (Township Route 323) +860 +862 Township of Lamar, Township of Porter. * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES Borough of Mill Hall Maps are available for inspection at Beach Creek Avenue, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Send comments to The Honorable Thomas E. Bettner, Mayor, Mill Hall Borough, 117 North Chestnut Street, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Township of Bald Eagle Maps are available for inspection at 604 Lusk Run Road, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Send comments to Mr. Cristopher Dwyer, Chairman Supervisor, Bald Eagle Township, 604 Lusk Run Road, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Township of Lamar Maps are available for inspection at 148 Beagle Road, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Send comments to Mr. Michael L. Geyer, Chairman, Lamar Township, 148 Beagle Road, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Township of Porter Maps are available for inspection at 153 Clintondale Hill Road, Mill Hall, PA 17751. Send comments to Mr. Larry Dotterer, Chairman, Porter Township, P.O. Box 95, Lamar, PA 16848. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-12691 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 67 [Docket No. FEMA-B-7720] Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: Technical information or comments are requested on the proposed Base (1% annual chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs)and proposed BFEs modifications for the communities listed below. The BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). DATES: The comment period is ninety
(90)days following the second publication of this proposed rule in a newspaper of local circulation in each community. ADDRESSES: The proposed BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering Management Section, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202)646-3151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)proposes to make determinations of BFEs and modified BFEs for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a). These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State or regional entities. These proposed elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for the contents in these buildings. *National Environmental Policy Act* . This proposed rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared. *Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. *Regulatory Classification.* This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. *Executive Order 13132, Federalism.* This proposed rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. *Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform.* This proposed rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 67—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 *et seq.* ; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. § 67.4 [Amended] 2. The tables published under the authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be amended as follows: Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation * Elevation in feet
(NGVD)+ Elevation in feet
(NAVD)# Depth in feet above ground Effective Modified Communities affected Allen County, Indiana, and Incorporated Areas Aboite Creek Approximately 350 feet downstream of Powell Road +756 +755 Allen County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2,000 feet upstream of Powell Road +756 +755 Brown Ditch At the confluence with Adam Schlemmer-Baker Ditch +793 +792 Allen County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 650 feet upstream of the confluence with Adam Schlemmer-Baker Ditch +793 +792 Bullerman Branch Approximately 775 feet upstream of the confluence with Bullerman Ditch +777 +778 Allen County (Unincorporated Areas), City of Fort Wayne. Approximately 600 feet downstream of Stellhorn Road +777 +778 Durnell Ditch Approximately 1,056 feet upstream of Interstate Highway 69 +787 +786 City of Fort Wayne. Approximately 615 feet downstream of State Highway 14/Illinois Road +808 +807 Junk Ditch At the confluence with St. Mary's River +758 +759 City of Fort Wayne. Approximately 150 feet upstream of Taylor Street +758 +759 Lawrence Branch At the confluence with Flaugh Ditch +775 +776 City of Fort Wayne. Approximately 150 feet upstream of the confluence with Flaugh Ditch +775 +776 Martin Ditch At the confluence with MaumeeRiver +749 +748 City of New Haven. Approximately 2,900 feet upstream of confluence with Maumee River +749 +748 St. Mary's River Just downstream of Bostick Road +771 +772 Allen County (Unincorporated Areas). At South County Line Road East +776 +778 Willow Creek Branch No. 7 At the confluence with WillowCreek +825 +824 Allen County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,500 feet downstream of Woods Road +825 +824 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES City of Fort Wayne Maps are available for inspection at 1 Main Street, Room 630, Fort Wayne, IN 46802. Send comments to The Honorable Graham Richard, Mayor, City of Fort Wayne, 1 Main Street, Fort Wayne, IN 46802. City of New Haven Maps are available for inspection at 815 Lincoln Highway East, New Haven, IN 46774. Send comments to The Honorable Terry E. McDonald, Mayor, City of New Haven, 815 Lincoln Highway East, New Haven, IN 46774. Allen County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at 1 East Main Street, Room 630, Fort Wayne, IN 46802. Send comments to Linda K. Bloom, President, County Commissioners, 1 East Main Street, Room 200, Fort Wayne, IN 46802. Pearl River County, Mississippi, and Incorporated Areas East Hobolochitto Creek Just upstream of West Union Road None +86 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 420 feet upstream of Savannah Millard Road None +147 Jumpoff Creek At the confluence with East Hobolochitto Creek None +162 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Just upstream of Norfolk Southern Railroad None +238 Juniper Creek At the confluence with East Hobolochitto Creek None +166 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 1,900 feet upstream of Dupont-Harris Road None +252 Long Branch At the confluence with West Hobolochitto Creek None +72 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 6,900 feet upstream of Nelle Burkes Road None +161 Mill Creek No. 1 At the Pearl River-Hanconk County Boundary None +79 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 4,800 feet upstream of Mill Creek 2 Tributary 4 None +175 No. 3 Approximately 170 feet upstream of Boley Bypass Road None +54 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 14,600 feet upstream of Highway 11 None +180 No. 4 Just upstream of the dam None +91 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 6,200 feet upstream of Rock Ranch Road None +143 West Hobolochitto Creek Approximately 600 feet downstream of Henleyfield-McNeill Road None +98 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 200 feet upstream of Highway 26 +133 +130 White Sand Creek At the confluence with West Hobolochitto Creek None +129 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 4,050 feet upstream of White Sand Creek Tributary 7 None +247 Wolf River Approximately 16,100 feet downstream of McNeill-McHenryRoad None +120 Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas). Approximately 2,500 feet upstream of Highway 11 None +241 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES Pearl River County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at Department of Planning and Development, 167 Savannah-Millard Road, Poplarville, MS 39470. Send comments to Ms. Bettye Stockstill, President, Board of Supervisors, Pearl River County Courthouse, 207 West Pearl Street, Poplarville, MS 39470. Smith County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas Blackhawk Creek Approximately 2000 feet downstream of intersection with Blackjack Rd None +332 City of Whitehouse (Smith County), Unincorporated Areas. Approximately 1750 feet upstream of intersection with FM 346 E None +483 Tributary 1 Confluence with Blackhawk Creek None +383 City of Whitehouse. Approximately 250 feet upstream of Hagan Rd intersection None +419 Tributary 2 Confluence with Blackhawk Creek None +418 City of Whitehouse. Approximately 2000 feet upstream of interstection with CR 2319 None +460 Hill Creek Approximately 3500 feet from intersection with Troup Highway None +379 City of Whitehouse (Smith County), Unincorporated Areas. Approximately 2500 feet downstream of intersection with Bascom Rd None +465 Horsepen Branch Approximately 8000 feet downstream of confluence with Kickapoo Creek None +392 City of Troup. Approximately 1100 feet downstream of confluence with Kickapoo Creek None +411 Mud Creek Approximately 7000 feet downstream from intersection with Old Tyler Rd. (County Line) None +315 (Smith County) Unincorporated Areas. Approximately 140 feet upstream from intersection with TroupHighway None +333 Prairie Creek South Approximately 1750 feet downstream of intersection with Old Omen Rd None +382 (Smith County) Unincorporated Areas, New Chapel Hill. 1750 feet upstream of intersection with Henderson Hwy None +422 Prairie Creek Tributary 1 Confluence with Prairie Creek South None +391 (Smith County) Unincorporated Areas. 1500 feet upstream from Dam None +451 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ADDRESSES City of Troup Maps are available for inspection at 100 N. Broadway, Tyler, TX 75702. Send comments to The Honorable John Whitsell, Mayor, City of Troup, PO Box 637, Troup, TX 75789. City of Whitehouse Maps are available for inspection at 100 N. Broadway, Tyler, TX 75702. Send comments to The Honorable Jake Jacobson, Mayor, City of Whitehouse, PO Box 776, Whitehouse, TX 75791. New Chapel Hill Maps are available for inspection at 100 N. Broadway, Tyler, TX 75702. Send comments to The Honorable Robert Whitaker, Mayor, 14475 State Hwy 64 E, Tyler, TX 75707. Unincorporated Areas of Smith County Maps are available for inspection at 100 N. Broadway, Tyler, TX 75702. Send comments to The Honorable Joel P. Baker, County Judge, Smith County, 200 E. Ferguson, Ste. 100, Tyler, TX 75702. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: June 18, 2007. David I. Maurstad, Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-12692 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 212 and 225 RIN 0750-AF74 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Waiver of Specialty Metals Restriction for Acquisition of Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf Items (DFARS Case 2007-D013) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comments. SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to waive application of 10 U.S.C. 2533b for acquisitions of commercially available off-the-shelf
(COTS)items. 10 U.S.C. 2533b, established by section 842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, places restrictions on the acquisition of specialty metals not melted or produced in the United States. DATES: Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before August 1, 2007, to be considered in the formation of the final rule. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DFARS Case 2007-D013, using any of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. E-mail: *dfars@osd.mil.* Include DFARS Case 2007-D013 in the subject line of the message. Fax:
(703)602-7887. Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy Williams, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3C132, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Hand Delivery/Courier: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-3402. Comments received generally will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy Williams,
(703)602-0328. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background Section 842(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364) establishes a new specialty metals domestic source restriction, which is codified at 10 U.S.C. 2533b. A proposed rule is being developed to comprehensively implement 10 U.S.C. 2533b in the DFARS. However, this proposed rule is being published separately in order to expedite the exercise of a statutory exception to the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 2533b for COTS items. As defined in subsection
(c)of 41 U.S.C. 431 (Section 35 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act), “COTS item”—
(i)Means any item of supply that is—
(A)A commercial item;
(B)Sold in substantial quantities in the commercial marketplace; and
(C)Offered to the Government, without modification, in the same form in which it is sold in the commercial marketplace; and
(ii)Does not include bulk cargo, as defined in section 3 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. App. 1702), such as agricultural products and petroleum products. 41 U.S.C. 431(a) requires that the acquisition regulations list the provisions of law that are inapplicable to contracts and subcontracts for COTS items. Covered provisions of law must be included on that list unless the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
(OFPP)makes a written determination that it would not be in the best interest of the United States to exempt such contracts from the applicability of that provision of law. Covered provisions of law are those that, as determined by OFPP, impose on contractors Government-unique policies, procedures, requirements, or restrictions, except for— ○ A provision of law that provides for criminal or civil penalties; or ○ A provision of law that specifically refers to 41 U.S.C. 431, and states that the law is nevertheless applicable to COTS items. 10 U.S.C. 2533b does not provide for criminal or civil penalties; nor does it refer to 41 U.S.C. 431 and state that the law is nevertheless applicable to COTS items. Accordingly, this proposed rule— ○ Creates a new DFARS section 212.570 to list 10 U.S.C. 2533b as inapplicable to contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of COTS items; and ○ Includes acquisitions of COTS items containing specialty metals as an exception at DFARS 225.7002-2. Exercise of this statutory COTS waiver is critical to DoD's access to the commercial marketplace. Manufacturers make component purchasing decisions based on factors such as cost, quality, availability, and maintaining the state of the art—not the country in which specialty metals in the components were melted. In addition, many commercial items commonly acquired in large quantities by DoD, such as computers, commercial-off-the shelf engines, and semi-conductors, may contain a small percentage of components made of specialty metals, subjecting the manufacturers to costly and burdensome, if not impossible, tracking requirements. Many manufacturers of COTS items are unwilling to change their existing processes, inventory systems, or facilities and incur the significant expense associated with tracking the sourcing of specialty metals in the components of a COTS item in order to generate sales to DoD, which typically represent a very small percentage of overall revenue for COTS items. Section 2533b permits DoD to process a domestic non-availability determination, but such process poses difficulties for DoD in meeting mission-sensitive requirements in a timely manner. In order for DoD to be able to support a determination, a contractor must—
(1)Work with its suppliers at every tier to identify non-compliant parts from among potentially hundreds of thousands of parts;
(2)Determine that it cannot find a compliant source, either because lead times are longer than the contract permits, or because sufficient quantity is not available; and
(3)Research whether and by when it can become compliant. Once the information on noncompliant parts and their nonavailability is provided to DoD, the Department must conduct a validation review and develop a report to document the determination. All of these efforts taken together may entail thousands of hours of work, at considerable cost to the taxpayer, and a significant addition in lead time to the acquisition cycle. For all of these reasons, an exemption from 10 U.S.C. 2533b for COTS items is in the best interest of the Government. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act This rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* , because manufacturers of COTS items have not generally changed their manufacturing and purchasing practices based on DoD regulations. The burden generally falls on the Government to forego purchase of the item or to process a domestic nonavailability determination requested by the prime contractor. So far, only large contractors have had the resources to request a domestic nonavailability determination. If there is any impact of this proposed rule, it should be beneficial, because small businesses providing COTS items, many of whom are subcontractors, will not have to— ○ Rely on the prime contractor to request a domestic nonavailability determination from the Government; or ○ Face the decision whether to cease doing business with the Government or set up systems to track and segregate all DoD parts that contain specialty metals. Therefore, DoD has not performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. DoD invites comments from small businesses and other interested parties. DoD also will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subparts in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be submitted separately and should cite DFARS Case 2007-D013. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ) does not apply, because the proposed rule contains no information collection requirements. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 212 and 225 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 CFR parts 212 and 225 as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 212 and 225 continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 212—ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2. Section 212.570 is added to read as follows: 212.570 Applicability of certain laws to contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of commercially available off-the-shelf items. 10 U.S.C. 2533b, Requirement to buy strategic materials critical to national security from American sources, is not applicable to contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of commercially available off-the-shelf items as defined in 41 U.S.C. 431(c). PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 3. Section 225.7002-2 is amended by adding paragraph
(q)to read as follows: 225.7002-2 Exceptions.
(q)Acquisitions of commercially available off-the-shelf items containing specialty metals. [FR Doc. E7-12763 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 172 [RSPA Docket No. 2006-26322 (HM-206F)] RIN 2137-AE21 Hazardous Materials: Revision of Requirements for Emergency Response Telephone Numbers AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: In this NPRM, PHMSA proposes to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations
(HMR)to clarify requirements governing emergency response information services provided by arrangement with hazardous materials offerors. In order to preserve the effectiveness of these arrangements for providing accurate and timely emergency response information, PHMSA proposes to require that basic identifying information (offeror name or contract number) be included in shipping papers. This information will enable the service provider to identify the shipper on whose behalf it is accepting responsibility for providing emergency response information in the event of a hazardous materials incident. DATES: Comments must be received by August 31, 2007. To the extent possible, we will consider late filed comments as we determine what further action will be taken. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *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 System; U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Operations, M-30, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *Hand Delivery:* To U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Operations, M-30, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. *Instructions:* Include the agency name and docket number PHMSA-06-26322 (HM-206F) or the Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN)for this rulemaking at the beginning of your comment. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov* including any personal information provided. If sent by mail, comments must be submitted in duplicate. Persons wishing to receive confirmation of receipt of their comments must include a self-addressed stamped postcard or access our Web site at *http://dms.dot.gov.* *Docket:* You may view the public docket through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the Docket Operations office at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan McIntyre, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, telephone
(202)366-8553, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan McIntyre, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards,
(202)366-8553, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The proposed rule would make a narrow, clarifying change to the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180) applicable to shipping papers for certain hazardous materials shipments. With limited exceptions not applicable here, the HMR require that shipments of hazardous materials be accompanied by shipping papers and other documentation designed to communicate to transport workers and emergency responders the hazards associated with a specific shipment. This information must include the immediate hazard to health; risks of fire or explosion; immediate precautions to be taken in the event of an accident; immediate methods for handling fires; initial methods for handling spills in the absence of fire; and preliminary first aid measures. The information must be in writing, in English, and presented on a shipping paper or related shipping document (see § 172.602). In addition to written emergency response information, § 172.604 of the HMR requires a person who offers a hazardous material for transportation in commerce to provide an emergency response telephone number on the shipping paper. The emergency response telephone number must connect a caller to the offeror or to a party capable of, and accepting responsibility for, providing detailed information about the hazardous materials shipment. The emergency response telephone number is used by emergency responders and transport workers to obtain detailed, product-specific information, including directions for remedial measures to be taken in the event of an incident during transportation. The telephone number must be answered by a person who is knowledgeable about the material being shipped and possesses comprehensive emergency response and incident mitigation information for that material, or has immediate access to a person who possesses such knowledge. Under this standard, “immediate access” requires that the emergency response information be provided to the emergency responder or transportation worker promptly and with no undue delay. Additionally, the emergency response telephone number must be active, with no limitations, during the entire time a shipment is in transportation, including storage incidental to movement and intermodal shipments that are transferred from one carrier to another for continued transportation. The term “storage incidental to movement” means storage occurring between the time a hazardous material is offered for transportation and the time it is delivered to the consignee (see definition for “storage incidental to movement” in § 171.8). As set forth in § 172.604(a), it is the responsibility of the person who offers a hazardous material for transportation to provide an emergency response telephone number meeting the requirements in the HMR. As currently required in § 172.604(b), a person offering a hazardous material must ensure that the emergency response service provider has up-to-date information on the hazardous material and that the emergency response service provider is capable of and has accepted responsibility for providing detailed emergency response information. As revised under a final rule, HM-223A, published on July 28, 2005 (70 FR 43638), the definition of a “person who offers or offeror” (49 CFR 171.8) includes “any person who performs, or is responsible for performing, any pre-transportation function required under this subchapter for transportation of the hazardous material in commerce.” The definition goes on to provide that a carrier is not an offeror when it performs a function as a condition of accepting a hazardous material shipment for continued transportation without performing a pre-transportation function (see definition for “pre-transportation function” in § 171.8). Offerors and carriers may rely on information provided by a previous offeror or carrier unless they know, or a reasonable person acting in the circumstances and exercising reasonable care would know, that the information provided to them is incorrect. Any person subject to the HMR, who by action or inaction and with knowledge of incorrect information, prevents immediate access to emergency response information creates a potential safety hazard and is in violation of the HMR. Additionally, an offeror or an interconnecting carrier who knowingly or willfully provides incorrect information to a subsequent carrier, or a subsequent carrier who knowingly accepts and continues to use inaccurate information, is in violation of the HMR. A civil or criminal penalty (see §§ 107.329 and 107.333) may be assessed against any person subject to the HMR who knowingly or willfully offers for transportation or transports a hazardous material in a manner not complying with the HMR. II. Purpose of This NPRM We have become aware of a number of problems associated with emergency response telephone numbers on shipping papers, specifically related to the increasing use by shippers of emergency response service providers to comply with the requirements of § 172.604. In such situations, the original shipper (offeror) enters into a contract or agreement with an agency or organization (industry associations may offer this service to their members) accepting responsibility for providing detailed emergency response information in accordance with § 172.604(b). The telephone number on the shipping paper is the telephone number of the emergency response service provider, but the original shipper is not required to include a notation to this effect on the shipping paper, nor is the name of the original shipper required to appear on the shipping paper. Thus, the identity of the person who arranged with the emergency response service provider is not readily available through shipping documentation. The International Vessel Operators Hazardous Materials Association (VOHMA) has requested that we revise the emergency response telephone number requirement to link the emergency response service provider to the original shipper who arranged for the emergency response service. VOHMA states that valuable time is lost when shipments are delayed while emergency responders or enforcement officers are attempting to obtain or verify emergency response information and their efforts are obstructed because the party who arranged with the emergency response service is not noted on the shipping papers. This problem is exacerbated because, under the HMR, a carrier or freight forwarder preparing a shipping paper for the continued movement of a hazardous material in commerce may rely on information provided by the original shipper for the preparation of the new shipping paper (for example, the classification of the material, the compatibility of the material with the packaging being used, or the emergency response telephone number), so long as the carrier or freight forwarder exercises due care. For example, a carrier or freight forwarder may rely on an emergency response telephone number provided by a preceding offeror unless it is aware (or should be aware) of facts indicating the emergency response telephone number is not operative and does not meet the requirements of § 172.604(b). The initial shipment of hazardous materials may be handled by several entities before reaching its final destination. For example, a motor carrier may accept a shipment from the originating shipper for transportation and deliver the material to a freight forwarder to arrange continued transportation. The freight forwarder may prepare shipping papers using the emergency response telephone number provided by the originating shipper. The freight forwarder may then arrange for continued shipment of the hazardous material by rail; a rail carrier may prepare shipping documentation using the information, including the emergency response telephone number, provided by the freight forwarder. The shipping documentation accompanying the shipment may or may not include the name of the originating shipper. In cases where the originating shipper arranges with an emergency response service to provide telephone service, the nexus between the shipper and emergency response service provider may be lost as new shipping papers are prepared at each stage of transportation. Without the name of the person who arranged for an emergency response service, an emergency response service provider may not be able to communicate the product-specific information that was provided by the shipper. This could result in a serious problem if transportation workers or emergency response personnel must use the telephone number to request assistance in handling an accident or emergency. Most emergency response services will attempt to provide assistance whether or not they can verify that the original shipper arranged for emergency response service. However, without the identification of the party who has made arrangements with the service, it may not be possible for the emergency response service to quickly access information specific to the material involved in the accident, thereby defeating the purpose of the requirement in § 172.604 to enable transport workers and emergency response personnel to expeditiously obtain detailed information about a hazardous materials shipment. A delay or improper response due to lack of accurate and timely emergency response information may place emergency response personnel, transportation workers and the general public and environment at increased risk. Expeditious identification of the hazards and direction for appropriate clean up associated with specific hazardous materials is critical in mitigating the consequences of hazardous materials incidents. III. Proposals in this NPRM To remedy the problem discussed above, in this NRPM, we propose to require the person who offers a hazardous material for transportation and who uses an emergency response service provider to comply with the requirements of § 172.604 to be identified on the originating shipping paper and any subsequent shipping papers that use the service provider's emergency response number. Specifically, we propose to: • Require that the shipper (offeror) who has made the arrangement with the emergency response service provider be identified on the shipping paper. Any party preparing a shipping paper would be required to identify the original shipper, by name or contract number, with the emergency response telephone number indicated on the shipping paper, and clearly note the identification in association with the emergency response telephone number, or insert and identify its own emergency response telephone number conforming to the requirements in Subpart G of Part 172. • Clarify that any person preparing a subsequent shipping paper for continued transport of hazardous materials may not omit the original shipper's (offeror's) name if the shipper is the registrant for the emergency response telephone service. Again, the name of the original shipper or its contract number with the emergency response service provider would be required to be included on the shipping paper, or the person preparing subsequent shipping papers must insert and identify by name its own valid emergency response number conforming to the requirements in Subpart G of Part 172. In addition to the amendments described above, we are also proposing the following clarifications: —To clarify that international telephone numbers used to comply with the emergency response telephone number requirement must include the country code and city code. VOHMA requested this clarification to ensure that emergency responders and transportation workers have a complete emergency response telephone number for international shipments. —To clarify that the emergency response telephone number requirements do not apply to transport vehicles or freight containers containing lading that has been fumigated and displays the FUMIGANT marking, as required by § 173.9 of the HMR, unless other hazardous materials are present in the cargo transport unit. The proposals in this NPRM are intended to fill a gap that was unforeseen when we initially adopted these requirements in 1989 under Docket HM-126C (54 FR 27138, 06/27/89). If adopted, the proposed rule should serve to eliminate delays in transportation due to lack of information, and eliminate enforcement problems created when enforcement personnel are not able to verify emergency response telephone numbers. Most importantly, the proposals in this NPRM will help to ensure that transportation workers and emergency response personnel are provided with accurate, timely information about the hazardous materials involved in a transportation accident or other emergency. IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This proposed rule is a non-significant rule under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation [44 FR 11034]. If adopted, the proposals in this NPRM should result in minimal costs to shippers to add the required information to shipping papers. The emergency response telephone number is currently required on the shipping paper. Adding a notation to identify the person who arranged with an emergency response services provider should not add any significant time to the process of completing a shipping paper or to the cost of providing it. Moreover, the proposed notation on a shipping paper of the identity of the person who made arrangements with an emergency response telephone service is currently common industry practice for the initial shipper. The small costs that may be incurred are more than offset by the safety benefits resulting from faster and more efficient response to hazardous materials transportation accidents and other emergencies. The provisions of this NPRM clarify and support the intent of the current emergency response telephone number requirement by ensuring emergency response personnel have immediate access to crucial emergency information specific to the hazardous material involved. B. Executive Order 13132 This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132 (“Federalism”). Any rule resulting from this rulemaking will preempt State, local and Indian tribe requirements but will not have substantial direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply. The Federal hazmat law contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)), preempting State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on covered subjects, as follows:
(1)The designation, description, and classification of hazardous materials;
(2)The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and placarding of hazardous materials;
(3)The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents related to hazardous materials and requirements related to the number, contents, and placement of those documents;
(4)The written notification, recording, and reporting of the unintentional release in transportation of hazardous materials; or
(5)The design, manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in transporting hazardous material. This proposed rule addresses covered subject item
(3)above and would preempt State, local, and Indian tribe requirements not meeting the “substantively the same” standard. Federal hazmat law provides at section 5125(b)(2) that, if DOT issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects, DOT must determine and publish in the **Federal Register** the effective date of Federal preemption. The effective date may not be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of a final rule and not later than two years after the date of issuance. The proposed effective date of Federal preemption for this rule is (90 days after publication of a final rule). C. Executive Order 13175 This proposed rule was analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13175 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). Because this proposed rule does not have tribal implications, and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) requires an agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency determines the rule is not expected to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. In this case, although the requirements of the proposed rule would apply to a substantial number of small entities, none would sustain significant economic impact as a result of the rule. *Identification of potentially affected small entities.* Businesses likely to be affected by the rule are persons who offer for transportation or transport hazardous materials in commerce, including hazardous materials manufacturers and distributors; freight forwarders, transportation companies, including air, highway, rail, and vessel carriers and hazardous waste generators. Unless alternative definitions have been established by the agency in consultation with the Small Business Administration (SBA), the definition of “small business” has the same meaning as under the Small Business Act. Since no such special definition has been established, we employ the thresholds published by SBA for establishments that will be subject to the proposed amendments if adopted. Based on data for 1997 compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 95 percent of persons that would be affected by this rule are small businesses. *Related Federal rules and regulations.* There are no related Federal rules or regulations governing the transportation of hazardous materials in domestic or international commerce. *Alternate proposals for small businesses.* The Regulatory Flexibility Act directs agencies to establish exceptions and differing compliance standards for small businesses, where it is possible to do so and still meet the objectives of applicable regulatory statutes. In the case of hazardous materials transportation, it is not possible to establish exceptions or differing standards and still accomplish our safety objectives. *Conclusion.* While the proposed rule would apply to a substantial number of small entities, there would not be a significant impact on those entities. This proposed rule revises the HMR's emergency response telephone requirements to enable emergency response services and others providing such service to supply the required HMR emergency response information to first responders. The impact of this new requirement is expected to be minimal; the indication of the emergency response telephone number on shipping papers is a current requirement and the proposed notation of the identity of the emergency response telephone services' registrant is currently common industry practice for the initial shipper. The problem, as discussed in the preamble of this rulemaking, primarily arises from subsequent carriers omitting the registrant's name when preparing new shipping papers for a shipment continuing on to its final destination. Our proposal to add the identification of the telephone number's registrant to shipping papers will eliminate an obstruction that could interfere with the transmission of crucial emergency response information to first responders on the scene of an incident. Additionally, the proposal would serve to eliminate delays in transportation due to lack of information, and eliminate enforcement problems stemming from possible invalid emergency response telephone number violations. This proposed rule has been developed in accordance with Executive Order 13272 (“Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking”) and DOT's procedures and policies to promote compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act to ensure that potential impacts of draft rules on small entities are properly considered. E. Paperwork Reduction Act By requiring that additional information be included in certain shipping papers, this NPRM may result in a minimal increase in annual paperwork burden and costs attributable to the HMR. PHMSA currently has an approved information collection under OMB Control Number 2137-0034, “Hazardous Materials Shipping Papers & Emergency Response Information,” reflecting 6,536,111 burden hours and expiring on May 31, 2008. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no person is required to respond to an information collection unless it has been approved by OMB and displays a valid OMB control number. Section 1320.8(d), Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations requires that PHMSA provide interested members of the public and affected agencies an opportunity to comment on information and recordkeeping requests. This notice identifies a revised information collection request that PHMSA will submit to OMB for approval based on the requirements in this proposed rule. PHMSA has developed burden estimates to reflect changes in this proposed rule. PHMSA estimates that the additional information collection and recordkeeping burden as proposed in this rule would be as follows: OMB Control No. 2137-0034: Annual Number of Respondents: 250,000. Annual Responses: 260,000,000. Annual Burden Hours: 1,805. Annual Costs: $1,805.00. PHMSA specifically requests comments on the information collection and recordkeeping burdens associated with developing, implementing, and maintaining these requirements for approval under this proposed rule. Requests for a copy of this information collection should be directed to Deborah Boothe or T. Glenn Foster, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards (PHH-11), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., East Building, 2nd Floor, PHH-10, Washington, DC 20590-0001, Telephone
(202)366-8553. Address written comments to the Dockets Unit as identified in the ADDRESSES section of this rulemaking. We will consider all comments regarding information collection burdens received prior to the close of the comment period identified in the DATES section of this rulemaking. In addition, you may submit comments specifically related to the information collection burden to the PHMSA Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget at fax number 202-395-6974. If these proposed requirements are adopted in a final rule, PHMSA will submit the revised information collection and recordkeeping requirements to the OMB for approval. F. Regulation Identifier Number
(RIN)A regulation identifier number
(RIN)is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda. G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This proposed rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of $120.7 million or more to either State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, and is the least burdensome alternative that achieves the objective of the rule. H. Environmental Assessment The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)requires Federal agencies to consider the consequences of major Federal actions and prepare a detailed statement on actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. We regulate hazardous materials transported by aircraft, vessel, rail, and highway. The potential for environmental damage or contamination exists when packages of hazardous materials are involved in accidents or en route incidents resulting from cargo shifts, valve failures, package failures, or loading, unloading, or handling problems. The ecosystems that could be affected by a release include air, water, soil, and ecological resources (for example, wildlife habitats). The adverse environmental impacts associated with releases of most hazardous materials are short-term impacts that can be greatly reduced or eliminated through proper emergency response action and prompt clean up of the accident scene. The proposals in this NPRM would improve the effectiveness of the HMR by enabling emergency responders on the scene of a hazardous materials incident to quickly and efficiently identify hazards and mitigate potential risks to the environment. There are no significant environmental impacts associated with proposals in this NPRM. I. Privacy Act Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the document, 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78), which may also be found at *http://dms.dot.gov.* List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 172 Education, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Labeling, Markings, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. In consideration of the foregoing, we propose to amend 49 CFR Chapter I as follows: PART 172—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS 1. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.45 and 1.53. 2. In § 172.201, revise paragraph
(d)to read as follows: § 172.201 Preparation and retention of shipping papers.
(d)*Emergency response telephone number.* Except as provided in § 172.604(c), a shipping paper must contain an emergency response telephone number and, if utilizing an emergency response telephone number service provider, identify the person who has a contractual agreement with the service provider, as prescribed in subpart G of this part. 3. In § 172.604, make the following changes: a. Revise paragraph
(a)introductory text; b. At the end of paragraph (a)(3)(i), remove the word “or”; c. Revise paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (b); and d. Add new paragraph (c)(3). The addition and revisions read as follows: § 172.604 Emergency response telephone number.
(a)A person who offers a hazardous material for transportation must provide an emergency response telephone number, including the area code or country code and city code. This information is for use in the event of an emergency involving the hazardous material. The telephone number must be—
(1)* * *
(2)* * *
(3)* * *
(ii)Entered once on the shipping paper in a clearly visible location. This provision may be used only if the telephone number applies to each hazardous material entered on the shipping paper, and if it is indicated that the telephone number is for emergency response information (for example: “EMERGENCY CONTACT: * * *).
(b)The telephone number required by paragraph
(a)of this section must include the number of the person offering the hazardous material for transportation or of an emergency response service provider capable of, and accepting responsibility for, providing the information required by paragraph (a)(2). Where an emergency response service provider is used, the offeror must be identified by name or contract number on the shipping paper and must ensure the service provider has received current information on the material. A person preparing subsequent shipping papers for continued transportation in commerce must include the information required by this section.
(c)* * *
(3)Transport vehicles or freight containers containing lading that has been fumigated and displays the FUMIGANT marking (see § 172.302(g)) as required by § 173.9 of this subchapter), unless other hazardous materials are present in the cargo transport unit. Issued in Washington, DC on June 21, 2007 under authority delegated in 49 CFR Part 106. Theodore L. Willke, Acting Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety. [FR Doc. E7-12665 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-60-P 72 126 Monday, July 2, 2007 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request June 27, 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)720-8958. 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. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service *Title:* National Animal Identification System; Information Requirements for Species Data by State. *OMB Control Number:* 0579-NEW. *Summary of Collection:* The U.S. Department of Agriculture initiated implementation of the National Animal Identification System
(NAIS)in 2004. The NAIS is a cooperative State-Federal-industry program administered by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The purpose of the NAIS is to provide a streamlined information system that will help producers and animal health officials respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events in the United States. Premises registration continues to advance, as does the interest in the NAIS from industry, legislators, etc. Veterinary Service
(VS)needs assistance from each State to provide “species at the premises” statistics, since this information is stored at the State-level only, rather than in the National Information Records Repository. For States who wish to gather this information themselves, VS is asking that those States include this information in the quarterly cooperative agreement progress reports submitted to the Eastern and Western Regions. VS is providing a spreadsheet that the Regions can use to keep track of premises registered by species and use as a tool for submission of data. *Need and Use of the Information:* VS will use the information provided on the report form to track progress being made as participation in the program increases. The information will also be used on a quarterly basis to help ascertain progress being made by species and the species organizations working with APHIS to increase participation. This information will help staff determine if additional efforts need to be made with particular species groups that are not participating at desired levels. Without this premises registration component, an effective NAIS would be impossible, and without this national system, animal disease outbreaks will be more difficult to trace and contain. *Description of Respondents:* State, Local or Tribal Government. *Number of Respondents:* 15. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: Quarterly. *Total Burden Hours:* 64. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service *Title:* National Animal Identification System; Information Requirements for Tribal Participants in Premises Registration. *OMB Control Number:* 0579-NEW. *Summary of Collection:* The U.S. Department of Agriculture initiated implementation of the National Animal Identification System
(NAIS)in 2004. The NAIS is a cooperative State-Federal-industry program administered by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The purpose of the NAIS is to provide a streamlined information system that will help producers and animal health officials respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events in the United States. Meeting the needs of Native Americans has been a priority for USDA since the inception of the NAIS, and APHIS has sought to have Tribal representatives involved in the development of the system. APHIS is now providing the opportunity for participating Tribes to designate which premises registration system they prefer to use. APHIS will make a form available to interested Tribes. *Need and Use of the Information:* APHIS will use the information provided on VS Form 1-63 to initiate the process for getting the interested Tribal entity or organization set up to use the premises registration system of their choice. Without this premises registration component, an effective NAIS would be impossible, and without this national system, animal disease outbreaks will be more difficult to trace and contain. *Description of Respondents:* State, Local or Tribal Government. *Number of Respondents:* 60. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 90. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-12737 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Order No. 1515] Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 70, Detroit, Michigan Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: *Whereas* , the Greater Detroit Foreign Trade Zone, Inc., grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 70, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand the zone to include a site at the Willow Run Airport (Site 19) in Ypsilanti, Michigan, within the Detroit Customs and Border Protection port of entry (FTZ Docket 41-2006; filed 10/16/06); *Whereas* , notice inviting public comment was given in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 62080, 10/23/06) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and, Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest; Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders: The application to expand FTZ 70 is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28, and subject to the Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for the overall zone project. Signed at Washington, DC, this 22nd day of June 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board. Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-12758 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Order No. 1514] Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 230, Piedmont Triad Area, North Carolina Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: *Whereas* , the Piedmont Triad Partnership, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 230, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand the zone to include seven sites in the Piedmont Triad area and to formally delete 110 acres (Parcel 2) within Site 3 from the zone plan, adjacent to the Winston-Salem Customs and Border Protection port of entry (FTZ Docket 13-2006; filed 4/7/06; amended 4/13/07); *Whereas* , notice inviting public comment was given in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 19871, 4/18/06) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and, *Whereas* , the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal, as amended, is in the public interest; *Now, therefore* , the Board hereby orders: The application, as amended, to expand FTZ 230 is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28, subject to the Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for the overall zone project, and further subject to a sunset provision that would terminate authority on June 30, 2012, for any of the proposed sites (Sites 7-13) where no activity has occurred under FTZ procedures before that date. Signed at Washington, DC, this 21st day of June 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board. Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-12757 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is automatically initiating a five-year review (“Sunset Review”) of the antidumping duty order listed below. The International Trade Commission (“the Commission”) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of *Institution of Five-Year Review* which covers the same order. DATES: *Effective Date:* July 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita Chen, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202)482-1904. For information from the Commission, contact Mary Messer, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission at
(202)205-3193. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its *Procedures for Conducting Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders,* 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3— *Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin,* 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (“ *Sunset Policy Bulletin* ”). Initiation of Reviews In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Review of the following antidumping duty order: DOC case no. ITC case no. Country Product A-570-846 731-TA-744. PRC Brake Rotors (2nd Review). Countervailing Duty Proceedings No Sunset Reviews of countervailing duty orders are scheduled for initiation in July 2007. Suspended Investigations No Sunset Reviews of suspended investigations are scheduled for initiation in July 2007. Filing Information As a courtesy, we are making information related to Sunset proceedings, including copies of the Department's regulations regarding Sunset Reviews (19 CFR 351.218) and *Sunset Policy Bulletin,* the Department's schedule of Sunset Reviews, case history information ( *i.e.* , previous margins, duty absorption determinations, scope language, import volumes), and service lists available to the public on the Department's sunset Internet Web site at the following address: *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/sunset* . All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with the Department's regulations regarding format, translation, service, and certification of documents. These rules can be found at 19 CFR 351.303. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of this notice of initiation. Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties to apply for access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (“APO”) immediately following publication in the **Federal Register** of the notice of initiation of the sunset review. The Department's regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304-306. Information Required From Interested Parties Domestic interested parties (defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and
(G)of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b)) wishing to participate in these Sunset Reviews must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the Department's regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, the Department will automatically revoke the orders without further review. *See* 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii). If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, the Department's regulations provide that *all parties* wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that the Department's information requirements are distinct from the Commission's information requirements. Please consult the Department's regulations for information regarding the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews. 1 Please consult the Department's regulations at 19 CFR part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at the Department. 1 In comments made on the interim final sunset regulations, a number of parties stated that the proposed five-day period for rebuttals to substantive responses to a notice of initiation was insufficient. This requirement was retained in the final sunset regulations at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As provided in 19 CFR 351.302(b), however, the Department will consider individual requests for extension of that five-day deadline based upon a showing of good cause. This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c). Dated: June 21, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-12744 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of Upcoming Sunset Reviews. Background Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita Chen, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. 14th Street & Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone
(202)482-1904. Upcoming Sunset Reviews for August 2007 There are no Sunset Reviews scheduled for initiation in August 2007. For information on the Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews, *See* 19 CFR 351.218. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3, “Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders;” Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (“Sunset Policy Bulletin”). The Notice of Initiation of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Reviews. Dated: June 21 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-12760 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-583-816] Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: In response to requests from respondent Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd. (Ta Chen) and from Flowline Division of Markovitz Enterprises, Inc. (Flowline Division), Gerlin, Inc., Shaw Alloy Piping Products, Inc., and Taylor Forge Stainless, Inc., (collectively, petitioners), the Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings (pipe fittings) from Taiwan. Petitioners requested that the Department conduct the administrative review for Ta Chen, Liang Feng Stainless Steel Fitting Co., Ltd. (Liang Feng), Tru-Flow Industrial Co., Ltd. (Tru-Flow), Censor International Corporation (Censor), and PFP Taiwan Co., Ltd. (PFP). With regard to Ta Chen, we preliminarily determine that sales have been made below normal value (NV). On September 28, 2006, Tru-Flow, Liang Feng, Censor, and PFP certified that they had no sales or shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the period of review (POR). Based on Tru-Flow's, Liang Feng's, Censor's, and PFP's certified statements and on information from U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)indicating that these companies had no shipments to the United States of the subject merchandise during the POR, we hereby give notice that we intend to rescind the review regarding these four companies. For a full discussion of the intent to rescind with respect to Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, Censor and PFP, see the “Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part” section of this notice. If these preliminary results of review of Ta Chen's sales are adopted in the final results, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on appropriate entries based on the difference between the constructed export price
(CEP)and the NV. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. Parties who submit comments in this proceeding are requested to submit with the argument: 1) a statement of the issues, 2) a brief summary of the argument, and 3) a table of authorities. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Lao or Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202)482-7924 or
(202)482-3019, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Period of Review The POR for this administrative review is June 1, 2005, through May 31, 2006. Background On June 16, 1993, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the antidumping duty order on pipe fittings from Taiwan. *See Amended Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings from Taiwan* , 58 FR 33250 (June 16, 1993). On June 2, 2006, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request administrative review for the period June 1, 2005, through May 31, 2006. *See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review* , 70 FR 32032 (June 2, 2006). In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1) and (2), on June 22, 2006, petitioners requested an antidumping duty administrative review for Ta Chen, Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, Censor International, and PFP (collectively, respondents), and on June 29, 2006, Ta Chen requested an administrative review. On July 27, 2006, and August 30, 2006, the Department published notices initiating this administrative review. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation In Part* , 71 FR 42626 (July 27, 2006), and *Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 71 FR 51573 (August 30, 2006). On August 4, 2006, the Department issued its antidumping duty questionnaire to Ta Chen, and on August 31, 2006, the Department issued its antidumping duty questionnaire to Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, Censor International, and PFP. On September 11, 2006, Ta Chen submitted its response to section A of the Department's questionnaire. In addition, on September 28, 2006, the Department received statements from four of the respondents, Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, Censor, and PFP, certifying that they had neither sales nor exports of subject pipe fittings to the United States during the POR. On September 26, 2006, Ta Chen submitted its responses to sections B, C, and D of the Department's questionnaire. On September 27, 2006, petitioners submitted comments regarding Ta Chen's section A response, primarily regarding alleged affiliation issues. On October 30, 2006, petitioners submitted comments on Ta Chen's section B, C, and D responses. On December 11, 2006, as a supplement to its September 27, 2006 comments, petitioners submitted additional comments regarding the disclosure requirements of related parties under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). On December 20, 2006, the Department issued a supplemental section D questionnaire to Ta Chen. On January 16, 2007, the Department issued a supplemental section A through C questionnaire to Ta Chen. Ta Chen responded to the Department's section D supplemental questionnaire on January 17, 2007. On February 15, 2007, Ta Chen responded to the Department's supplemental section A through C questionnaire. On February 22, 2007, the Department extended the time limit for the preliminary results of this administrative review by 120 days, to not later than July 2, 2007. *See Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Taiwan: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results in Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 7953 (February 22, 2007). On March 15, 2007, the Department issued a second section A through C supplemental questionnaire to Ta Chen. Ta Chen submitted its response to the Department's section A through C second supplemental response, and response regarding petitioners' comments on April 6, 2007. On April 16, 2007, the Department issued a third section A through C supplemental questionnaire response. Ta Chen submitted its response to the Department's third section A through C supplemental questionnaire on April 25, 2007, which included a response to petitioner's March 23, 2007, comments. On May 7, 2007, petitioners submitted comments on Ta Chen's April 25, 2007, questionnaire response. On May 17, 2007, Ta Chen submitted a response on petitioners' May 7, 2007, comments. On May 22, 2007, petitioners submitted comments to Ta Chen's May 17, 2007 submission. On May 24, 2007, the Department issued a fourth section A through D supplemental questionnaire to Ta Chen. Ta Chen submitted its response to the Department's third section A through D supplemental questionnaire on June 14, 2007. On June 18, 2007, petitioners submitted a request to the Department that it take additional steps to confirm that there were no shipments or entries from Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, Censor, and PFP of pipe fittings to the United States. Notice of Intent to Rescind Review in Part Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), the Department may rescind an administrative review, in whole or with respect to a particular exporter or producer, if the Secretary concludes that there were no entries, exports, or sales of the subject merchandise during the POR. *See* , *e.g.* , *Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission* , 71 FR 27676-78 (May 12, 2006); *Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Japan: Final Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 26041 (May 3, 2006). On September 28, 2006, Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, PFP, and Censor each submitted letters on the record certifying that their firms had no sales, entries, or exports of pipe fittings to the United States during the POR. To confirm their statements, the Department conducted a CBP data inquiry and determined that there were no identifiable entries of pipe fittings during the POR manufactured or exported by Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, PFP or Censor. *See Memo to the File, through Angelica Mendoza, Program Manager from Judy Lao: Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd. No Shipments Inquiry dated June 13, 2007* . Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), the Department preliminarily intends to rescind this review as to Liang Feng, Tru-Flow, PFP and Censor. Scope of the Order The products covered by this review are certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings, whether finished or unfinished, under 14 inches inside diameter. Certain welded stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings are used to connect pipe sections in piping systems where conditions require welded connections. The subject merchandise is used where one or more of the following conditions is a factor in designing the piping system:
(1)corrosion of the piping system will occur if material other than stainless steel is used;
(2)contamination of the material in the system by the system itself must be prevented;
(3)high temperatures are present;
(4)extreme low temperatures are present; and
(5)high pressures are contained within the system. Pipe fittings come in a variety of shapes, with the following five shapes the most basic: elbows, tees, reducers, stub ends, and caps. The edges of finished pipe fittings are beveled. Threaded, grooved, and bolted fittings are excluded from the order. The pipe fittings subject to the order are currently classifiable under subheading 7307.23.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the review is dispositive. Pipe fittings manufactured to American Society of Testing and Materials specification A774 are included in the scope of this order. Affiliation We note that in this proceeding there is an ongoing claim by the petitioners that Ta Chen and its U.S. subsidiary, Ta Chen International Corporation (TCI), have several related parties that were not disclosed in its financial statements, and therefore, Ta Chen's and TCI's financial statements (and thus its underlying accounting records) should not be relied upon for the purposes of this determination. For the preliminary results, we have determined that the evidence on the record does not warrant a finding that the Department should disregard Ta Chen's or TCI's financial statements. However, we intend to solicit additional information from Ta Chen regarding its current affiliation with certain entities alleged by petitioners for our final results. Product Comparisons For the purpose of determining appropriate product comparisons to pipe fittings sold in the United States, we considered all pipe fittings covered by the scope that were sold by Ta Chen in the home market during the POR to be “foreign like products,” in accordance with section 771(16) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Where there were no contemporaneous sales of identical merchandise in the home market to compare to U.S. sales, we compared U.S. sales to the next most similar foreign like product on the basis of the physical characteristics reported by Ta Chen, as follows: specification, seam, grade, size and schedule. The record shows that Ta Chen both purchased from and entered into tolling arrangements with unaffiliated Taiwanese manufacturers of pipe fittings. We have preliminarily determined that Ta Chen is the sole exporter of the pipe fittings under review, because record evidence, such as purchase orders, does not indicate that these manufacturers had knowledge that the pipe fittings would be exported to the United States. Therefore, knowledge that the pipe fittings would also be sold to the United States cannot be imputed to those unaffiliated manufacturers. *See* 19 CFR 351.401(h). Section 771(16)(A) of the Act defines “foreign like product” to be “{t}he subject merchandise and other merchandise which is identical in physical characteristics with, and was produced in the same country by the same person as, that merchandise.” Thus, consistent with the Department's past practice in reviews under this order, for products that Ta Chen has identified with certainty that it purchased from a particular unaffiliated producer and resold in the U.S. market, we have restricted the matching of products to products purchased by Ta Chen from the same unaffiliated producer and resold in the home market. *See, e.g.* , *Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part* , 71 FR 39663 (July 13, 2006), and *Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part* , 70 FR 39735 (July 11, 2005). Date of Sale The Department's regulations state that it will normally use the date of invoice, as recorded in the exporter's or producer's records kept in the ordinary course of business, as the date of sale. *See* 19 CFR 351.401(i). If the Department can establish “a different date {that} better reflects the date on which the exporter or producer establishes the material terms of sale,” the Department may choose a different date. *Id* . In the present review, Ta Chen claimed that invoice date should be used as the date of sale in both the home market and the U.S. market. *See* Ta Chen's Section A Resp., at 14-16 (Sept. 11, 2006). For home market
(HM)sales, the Department examined whether the date Ta Chen issued its *pro forma* invoice or its actual invoice best reflects the date of sale and determined that actual invoice date should be the sale date, consistent with the practice in all the previous reviews of this proceeding. *See* Ta Chen's Section B Resp., at 8 (September 26, 2006), Ta Chen's Supplemental Section A through C Resp., at 16 (February 15, 2007), and Ta Chen's Supplemental Section A through C Resp., at 16-18 (April 6, 2007). For U.S. sales, Ta Chen only had constructed export price
(CEP)sales, and we used the invoice date for sales to the first unaffiliated U.S. customer. Fair Value Comparisons To determine whether sales of pipe fittings by Ta Chen to the United States were made at prices below NV, we compared CEP to NV, as described below. Pursuant to section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we compared the CEPs of individual U.S. transactions to the monthly weighted-average NV of the foreign like product. Constructed Export Price Section 772(b) of the Act defines CEP as “the price at which the subject merchandise is first sold (or agreed to be sold) in the United States before or after the date of importation by or for the account of the producer or exporter of such merchandise or by a seller affiliated with the producer or exporter, to a purchaser not affiliated with the producer or exporter “ Consistent with recent past reviews, pursuant to section 772(b) of the Act, we calculated the price of Ta Chen's sales based on CEP because the sale to the first unaffiliated U.S. customer was made by Ta Chen's U.S. affiliate, TCI. *See Analysis Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of Administrative Review of Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Taiwan: Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd.* (June 25, 2007) (Analysis Memo). Ta Chen has two channels of distribution for U.S. sales: 1) Ta Chen ships the merchandise to TCI for inventory in warehouses and subsequent resale to unaffiliated buyers (stock sales), and 2) Ta Chen ships the merchandise directly to TCI's U.S. customer (indent sales). The Department finds that both stock and indent sales qualify as CEP sales because the original sales contract is between TCI and the U.S. customer. In addition, TCI handles all communication with the U.S. customer, from customer order to receipt of payment, and incurs the risk of non-payment. In addition, TCI handles customer complaints concerning issues such as product quality, specifications, delivery, and product returns. TCI is also responsible for the ocean freight for all U.S. sales and all selling efforts to the U.S. customer. *See* Ta Chen's Section A Resp., at A10- A13 (Sept. 11, 2006), and Ta Chen's Section A-C Resp. at 1-4, and 13-16 (April 6, 2007). We calculated CEP based on ex-warehouse or delivered prices to unaffiliated purchasers in the United States and, where appropriate, we added billing adjustments and deducted discounts. In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of the Act, the Department deducted direct and indirect selling expenses, including inventory carrying costs incurred by TCI for stock sales, related to commercial activity in the United States. We also made deductions for movement expenses, which include foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean freight, containerization expense, Taiwan harbor construction tax, marine insurance, U.S. inland freight, U.S. brokerage and handling, and U.S. customs duties. Finally, in accordance with sections 772(d)(3) and 772(f) of the Act, we deducted CEP profit. Normal Value 1. Home Market Viability To determine whether there is a sufficient volume of sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV, we compared Ta Chen's volume of home market sales of the foreign like product to the volume of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Because Ta Chen's aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign like product was greater than five percent of its aggregate volume of U.S. sales for the subject merchandise, we determined that the home market was viable. *See* Ta Chen's Section A Resp., at 2 (Sept. 11, 2006). 2. Cost of Production Analysis Because we disregarded sales below the cost of production
(COP)in the prior administrative review, we have reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales by Ta Chen in its home market were made at prices below the COP, pursuant to sections 773(b)(1) and 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act. *See Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part* , 71 FR 39663, 39665-66 (July 13, 2006), and *Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Taiwan: Final Results and Final Rescission in Part of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part* , 71 FR 67098 (Nov. 20, 2006). Therefore, pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act, we conducted a COP analysis of home market sales by Ta Chen. A. Calculation of COP In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated a weighted-average COP based on the sum of Ta Chen's cost of materials and fabrication for the foreign like product, plus indirect selling expenses and packing costs. We relied on the COP data submitted by Ta Chen in its original and supplemental cost questionnaire responses. For these preliminary results, the Department did not make any adjustments to the COP calculation. *See Memo to Neal M. Halper, through Michael P. Martin, from Trinette Boyd: Cost of Production and Constructed Value Programming Instructions for the Preliminary Determination - Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd* ., dated July 2, 2007. B. Test of Home Market Prices We compared the weighted-average COP to home market sales of the foreign like product, as required under section 773(b) of the Act, in order to determine whether these sales had been made at prices below the COP. In determining whether to disregard home market sales made at prices below the COP, we examined whether such sales were made within an extended period of time in substantial quantities, and were not at prices that permitted the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with sections 773(b)(1)(A) and 773(b)(1)(B) of the Act. Where appropriate, we compared the COP to home market prices on a product-specific basis. We deducted imputed credit expenses, indirect selling expenses and packing from home market prices, and, where appropriate, added interest revenue received for late payments by customers. C. Results of COP Test In accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Act, when less than 20 percent of Ta Chen's sales of a given product were at prices less than the COP, we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that product because we determined that the below-cost sales were not made in substantial quantities, as defined by section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act. When 20 percent or more of Ta Chen's sales of a given product during the POR were at prices less than the COP, we determined that such sales have been made in “substantial quantities” within an extended period of time, in accordance with sections 773(b)(2)(B) and 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act. In such cases, because we use POR average costs, we also determined that such sales were not made at prices that would permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act. Therefore, for purposes of this administrative review, we appropriately disregarded below-cost sales and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining NV, in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Act. 3. Price-to-Price Comparisons As there were sales at prices above the COP for all product comparisons, we based NV on prices to home market customers. We deducted credit expenses and added interest revenue. In addition, we made adjustments, where appropriate, for physical differences in the merchandise in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act. Finally, in accordance with section 773(a)(6) of the Act, we also deducted home market packing costs and added U.S. packing costs. Level of Trade In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent practicable, we determined NV based on sales in the comparison market at the same level of trade
(LOT)as the CEP transaction. The NV LOT is that of the starting-price sales in the comparison market. For CEP, it is the level of the constructed sale from the exporter to the importer. To determine whether NV sales are at a different LOT than CEP sales, we examine different selling functions along the chain of distribution between the producer and the unaffiliated customer. If the comparison market sales are at a different LOT, and the difference affects price comparability as manifested in a pattern of consistent price differences between the sales on which NV is based and comparison market sales at the LOT of the export transaction, where possible, we make an LOT adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. Finally, for CEP sales for which we are unable to quantify an LOT adjustment, if the NV level is more remote from the factory than the CEP level and there is no basis for determining whether the difference in levels between NV and CEP sales affects price comparability, we adjust NV under section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act (the CEP offset provision). Ta Chen reported two channels of distribution in the home market: unaffiliated distributors and end-users. We examined the selling activities reported for each channel of distribution and organized the reported selling activities into the following four selling functions: sales process and marketing support, freight and delivery, inventory maintenance and warehousing, and warranty and technical services. We found that Ta Chen's level of selling functions to its home market customers for each of the four selling functions did not vary significantly by channel of distribution. *See* Ta Chen's Section A Resp., at A10-14 (Sept. 11, 2006); *see also* Ta Chen's Sections A-D Supp. Resp., at 9-14 (Feb. 15, 2007); Ta Chen's Sections A-C Suppl. Resp., at 13-16. Therefore, we preliminarily conclude that the selling functions for the reported channels of distribution constitute one LOT in the comparison market. For CEP sales, we examined the selling activities related to each of the selling functions between Ta Chen and its U.S. affiliate, TCI. Ta Chen reported that all of its sales to the United States are CEP sales made through TCI, *i.e.* , through one channel of distribution, and claimed that there is only one LOT. We examined the four selling functions and found that Ta Chen's selling functions for sales to TCI are performed regardless of whether shipments are going to TCI or directly to the unaffiliated customer. Therefore, we preliminary determine that Ta Chen's U.S. sales constitute a single LOT. We then compared the selling functions Ta Chen provided in the home market LOT with the selling functions provided to the U.S. LOT. In the home market, Ta Chen provides significant selling functions related to the sales process and marketing support, warranty and technical service, inventory maintenance, and some technical services in the comparison market, which it does not for the U.S. LOT. On this basis, we determined that the HM LOT is not similar Ta Chen's U.S. LOT. However, since we have preliminarily determined that there is only one LOT in the home market, we are unable to calculate a LOT adjustment. Because we have preliminarily determined that NV is established at a LOT that is at a more advanced stage of distribution than the LOT of the CEP transactions, and we are unable to quantify a LOT adjustment pursuant to section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act, for these preliminary results we have applied a CEP offset to the NV-CEP comparisons, in accordance with section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act. Currency Conversion For purposes of the preliminary results, we made currency conversions into U.S. dollars based on the exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales, as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank, in accordance with section 773A(a) of the Act. Preliminary Results of the Review As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine the weighted-average dumping margin for the period June 1, 2005, through May 31, 2006, to be as follows: Weighted-Average Margin Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd 0.52%% The Department will disclose calculations performed for these preliminary results of review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written comments no later than 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review. *See* 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii). Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written comments are limited to issues raised in such briefs or comments and may be filed no later than five days after the time limit for filing the case briefs or comments. *See* 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit argument in these proceedings are requested to submit with the argument:
(1)a statement of the issue,
(2)a brief summary of the argument, and
(3)a table of authorities. *See* 19 CFR 351.309(c). An interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of these preliminary results. *See* 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested, will be held two days after the scheduled date for submission of rebuttal briefs. *See* 19 CFR 351.310(d). The Department will issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised in any such written comments or at a hearing, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Assessment Rates Upon completion of this review the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an importer-specific *ad valorem* rate for merchandise exported by Ta Chen which is subject to this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of final results of this review. The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). *See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties* , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by Ta Chen or by any of the companies for which we are rescinding this review and for which Ta Chen or each no-shipment respondent did not know its merchandise would be exported by another company to the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. Cash Deposit The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act:
(1)the cash deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the rate listed in the final results of review;
(2)for previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period;
(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value
(LTFV)investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and
(4)the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the “all others” rate of 51.01 percent, which is the “all others” rate established in the LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Interested Parties This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: June 25, 2007. Joseph A. Spetrini, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-12750 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Export Trade Certificate of Review ACTION: Notice of Application to Amend an Export Trade Certificate of Review Issued to Northwest Fruit Exporters. SUMMARY: Export Trading Company Affairs (“ETCA”), International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, has received an application to amend an Export Trade Certificate of Review (“Certificate”). This notice summarizes the proposed amendment and requests comments relevant to whether the Certificate should be issued. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Anspacher, Director, Export Trading Company Affairs, International Trade Administration,
(202)482-5131 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail at *oetca@ita.doc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001-21) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. An Export Trade Certificate of Review protects the holder and the members identified in the Certificate from state and federal government antitrust actions and from private treble damage antitrust actions for the export conduct specified in the Certificate and carried out in compliance with its terms and conditions. Section 302(b)(1) of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 and 15 CFR 325.6(a) require the Secretary to publish a notice in the **Federal Register** identifying the applicant and summarizing its proposed export conduct. Request for Public Comments Interested parties may submit written comments relevant to the determination whether an amended Certificate should be issued. If the comments include any privileged or confidential business information, it must be clearly marked and a non-confidential version of the comments (identified as such) should be included. Any comments not marked privileged or confidential business information will be deemed to be non-confidential. An original and five
(5)copies, plus two
(2)copies of the non-confidential version, should be submitted no later than 20 days after the date of this notice to: Export Trading Company Affairs, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 7021-B H, Washington, DC 20230. Information submitted by any person is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). However, non-confidential versions of the comments will be made available to the applicant if necessary for determining whether or not to issue the Certificate. Comments should refer to this application as “Export Trade Certificate of Review, application number 84-18A12.” A summary of the application for an amendment follows. *Summary of the Application:* *Applicant:* Northwest Fruit Exporters (“NFE”), 105 South 18th Street, Suite 227, Yakima, Washington 98901. *Contact:* James R. Archer, Manager to NFE, Telephone:
(509)576-8004. *Application No.:* 84-18A12. *Date Deemed Submitted:* June 19, 2007. The original NFE Certificate was issued on June 11, 1984 (49 FR 24581, June 14, 1984) and last amended on September 28, 2006 (71 FR 58785, October 5, 2006). *Proposed Amendment:* NFE seeks to amend its Certificate to: 1. Add each of the following companies as a new “Member” of the Certificate within the meaning of section 325.2(1) of the Regulations (15 CFR 325.2(1)): K-K Packing & Storage, LLC, Zillah, Washington; Manzaneros Mexicanos De Washington, Yakima, Washington; and Valicoff Fruit Co., Inc., Wapato, Washington; 2. Delete the following companies as “Members” of the Certificate: Cascade Fresh Fruits, LLC, Manson, Washington; John's Farm LLC, Brewster, Washington; Lloyd Garretson Co., Yakima, Washington; Obert Cold Storage, Inc., Zillah, Washington; PAC Marketing International, LLC, Yakima, Washington; Rowe Farms, Inc., Naches, Washington; and Voelker Fruit and Cold Storage, Yakima, Washington; and 3. Change the listing of the following “Member”: Sage Processing LLC, Wapato and Zillah, Washington to the new listing Pacific Coast Cherry Packers, LLC, Yakima, Washington. Dated: June 26, 2007. Jeffrey Anspacher, Director, Export Trading Company Affairs. [FR Doc. E7-12756 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary of Defense Meeting of the DOD Advisory Group on Electron Devices AGENCY: Department of Defense, Advisory Group on Electron Devices. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The DoD Advisory Group on Electron Devices
(AGED)announces a closed session meeting. DATES: The meeting will be held at 0900, Friday, July 27, 2007. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Naval Post Graduate School, Monterey, CA. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Vicki Schneider, ITS Noesis Business Unit, 4100 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 800, Arlington, VA 22203, 703-741-0300. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The mission of the Advisory Group is to provide advice to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, to the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E), and through the DDR&E to the Director, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Military Department in planning and managing an effective and economical research and development program in the area of electron devices. The AGED meeting will be limited to review of research and development efforts in electronics and photonics with a focus on benefits to national defense. These reviews may form the basis for research and development programs initiated by the Military Departments and Defense Agencies to be conducted by industry, universities, or in government laboratories. The agenda for this meeting will include programs on molecular electronics, microelectronics, electro-optics, and electronic materials. In accordance with section 10(d) of Pub. L. No. 92-463, as amended, (5 U.S.C. App. 2), it has been determined that this Advisory Group meeting concerns matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), and that accordingly, this meeting will be closed to the public. Dated: June 26, 2007. C. R. Choate, Alternate, OSD Federal Register Liaison OFficer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 07-3210 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 71
Traces to 71 documents
U.S. Code
CFR
45 references not yet in our index
  • 7 CFR 301
  • 7 CFR 301.51-1
  • 7 CFR 305
  • 7 CFR 3015
  • 7 USC 7701-7772
  • 7 CFR 2.22
  • 7 CFR 353
  • 14 CFR 73
  • 17 CFR 3
  • 5 USC 522
  • Pub. L. 100-690
  • Pub. L. 101-647
  • Pub. L. 103-200
  • Pub. L. 104-237
  • 21 CFR 1309
  • 21 CFR 1310
  • 21 CFR 1313
  • 21 CFR 1316
  • 5 USC 600-612
  • 32 CFR 841
  • 37 CFR 404
  • 44 CFR 65
  • 44 CFR 60.3
  • 44 CFR 65.4
  • 44 CFR 10
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • 44 CFR 67
  • 44 CFR 60
  • 44 CFR 67.4(a)
  • Pub. L. 109-364
  • 41 USC 431
  • 41 USC 431(a)
  • 41 USC 421
  • 41 USC 431(c)
  • 49 CFR 172
  • 49 CFR 171.8
  • 49 USC 5101-5128
  • 49 CFR 1.45
  • 49 CFR 106
  • Pub. L. 104-13
+ 5 more
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Affirmation of interim rule as final rule
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 553
U.S.C.§ 603
U.S.C.§ 7701
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 136
U.S.C.§ 106
Cite7 CFR 301
Cite7 CFR 301.51-1
Cite7 CFR 305
Cites 116 · 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.