Unknown. Final rule

51,203 words·~233 min read·/register/2007/07/24/07-3630

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-2007-07-24.xml --- 72 141 Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service See Foreign Agricultural Service See Forest Service See Natural Resources Conservation Service Alcohol Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40325-40331 E7-14235 E7-14236 E7-14237 E7-14238 E7-14239 E7-14240 E7-14241 E7-14242 E7-14244 Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:

Web site listing significant guidance documents, 40270 E7-14254 Antitrust Antitrust Division NOTICES National cooperative research notifications: IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc., 40331 07-3592 Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40296-40299 E7-14273 E7-14282 E7-14283 Meetings: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Initial Review Group, 40299 E7-14319 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40299-40301 07-3641 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 07-3568 40301-40309 07-3570 07-3571 07-3572 07-3573 07-3574 07-3575 07-3576 07-3577 07-3578 07-3579 07-3581 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge operations:

California, 40239 E7-14203 Maryland and Virginia, 40239-40240 E7-14261 Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.: Biscayne Bay, Miami, FL, 40243-40245 E7-14265 Jacksonville Captain of Port Zone, FL, 40240-40242 E7-14207 NOTICES Meetings: Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee, 40321-40322 E7-14297 Commerce Commerce Department See Foreign-Trade Zones Board See International Trade Administration See National Institute of Standards and Technology See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Patent and Trademark Office CITA Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements NOTICES Textile and apparel categories:

Central America-Dominican Republic-United States Free Trade Agreement; commercial availability— Nicaragua; cotton and man-made fiber woven trousers, 40287-40288 E7-14320 Commodity Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 07-3623 07-3624 07-3625 07-3626 07-3627 Consumer Consumer Product Safety Commission PROPOSED RULES Unstable refuse bins, ban; and pacifier requirements; safety standards; systematic regulatory review, 40265-40266 E7-14248 Defense Defense Department NOTICES Meetings;

Sunshine Act, 40288-40289 07-3622 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 Correction, 40238-40239 E7-14317 NOTICES *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* American Radiolabeled Chemical, Inc., 40331 E7-14267 Applied Science Labs, 40331-40332 E7-14266 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40289 E7-14274 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

Safe and drug-free schools programs— Improvement of Public Knowledge of and Support for Democracy Program; correction, 40289-40290 E7-14328 Special education and rehabilitative services— Technical Assistance on State Data Collection Program; correction, 40371 Z7-13142 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Adjustment assistance; applications, determinations, etc.: Arrow International et al., 40332-40333 E7-14219 Bell Sponging Co., Inc., 40333 E7-14232 Cochrane Furniture Co., 40333-40334 E7-14221 Convergys Information Management Group, 40334 E7-14226 C-Tech Industries, 40333 E7-14224 Entronix, Inc., 40334 E7-14230 Johnson Controls Battery Group, Inc., 40334 E7-14229 Jones Apparel Group Inc., 40334-40335 E7-14222 Lexington Furniture Industries, 40335 E7-14228 MacDonald's Industrial Products, 40335 E7-14220 MRC Industrial Group, 40335-40336 E7-14233 Prelude Foam Products, Inc., 40336 E7-14218 Reitter & Schefenacker USA LP, 40336 E7-14223 Victor Forstmann, Inc., 40336 E7-14225 Webb Furniture, 40336-40337 E7-14231 Energy Energy Department See Energy Information Administration Energy Energy Information Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40290-40292 E7-14252 EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Water pollution control:

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System— Concentrated animal feeding operations; permitting requirements and effluent limitations guidelines and standards; compliance dates extension, 40245-40250 E7-14258 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40292-40295 E7-14260 E7-14262 E7-14263 Air programs: State implementation plans; adequacy status for transportation conformity purposes— Kentucky, 40295-40296 E7-14316 Executive Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness directives:

Airbus, 40222-40224 E7-14044 BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd., 40230-40233 E7-14134 Boeing, 40226-40230 E7-13979 Bombardier, 40224-40226 E7-13983 McDonnell Douglas, 40216-40222 E7-14043 Stemme GmbH & Co. KG, 40233-40235 E7-13981 Airworthiness standards: Special conditions— Boeing Model 787-8 airplane, 40215-40216 E7-14333 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness directives: Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER); withdrawn, 40265 E7-14145 NOTICES Airport noise compatibility program:

Flagstaff Pulliam Airport, AZ, 40355-40356 07-3609 Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, GA, 40356 07-3607 Noise exposure maps— McCarran International Airport, CA, 40357 07-3605 Meetings: RTCA, Inc., 40357-40358 07-3610 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Federal agency actions on proposed highways; judicial review claims: Brunswick County, NC; Bridge No. 198 replacement, 40358-40359 E7-14324 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration RULES Motor carrier safety standards:

Commercial motor vehicle accidents involving fires; recording; regulatory guidance, 40250-40252 E7-14092 NOTICES Motor carrier safety standards: Driver qualifications; vision requirement exemptions, 40359-40365 E7-14278 E7-14281 E7-14286 E7-14289 E7-14296 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Banks and bank holding companies: Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 40296 E7-14253 Food Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40309-40311 E7-14200 E7-14201 Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.:

National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee et al., 40311-40313 E7-14206 Foreign Foreign Agricultural Service NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 40270-40272 07-3594 07-3596 Foreign Foreign Assets Control Office RULES Sanctions; blocked persons, specially designated nationals, terrorists, global terrorists, foreign terrorist organizations, and narcotics traffickers: Individuals and entities subject to various economic sanctions programs, 40374-40704 E7-13199 MISSING FOR:

Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Georgia Perkins Shibaura Engines LLC; diesel engine manufacturing facilities, 40273 E7-14323 Virginia, 40273-40274 E7-14322 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Resource Advisory Committees— Custer County, 40272 07-3601 Fremont and Winema, 40272-40273 07-3611 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Children and Families Administration See Food and Drug Administration See National Institutes of Health Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See Transportation Security Administration Interior Interior Department See Land Management Bureau See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office International International Trade Administration RULES Tariff rate quotas:

Cotton shirting fabric, 40235-40238 E7-14321 NOTICES Antidumping: Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— Thailand, 40274 E7-14288 Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from— Various countries, 40274-40280 E7-14284 Stainless steel bar from— United Kingdom, 40280-40281 E7-14287 Countervailing duties: Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from— China, 40281-40284 E7-14277 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Import investigations: Hot-rolled steel products from— Netherlands, 40322-40323 E7-14187 Lighters, 40323 E7-14186 Justice Justice Department See Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau See Antitrust Division See Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40323-40325 E7-14243 E7-14245 E7-14246 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration See Occupational Safety and Health Administration Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Alaska Native claims selection:

Calista Corp., 40322 E7-14270 Merit Merit Systems Protection Board RULES Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Western Regional Office; relocation, 40215 E7-14293 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Maximum probable loss insurance requirements: Wallops Flight Facility, VA; Alliant Techsystems Inc. ALV-X1 suborbital launch vehicle, 40338 E7-14294 Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially exclusive: Regenetech, Inc., 40338-40339 E7-14291 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Agency records schedules; availability, 40339-40340 E7-14264 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration RULES Motor vehicle safety standards:

Occupant crash protection— Child restraint anchorage system (“LATCH” system); installation in front passenger seating of vehicles certified to meet advanced air bag requirements, 40252-40262 E7-13565 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Meetings: Advanced Technology Visiting Committee, 40284-40285 E7-14334 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40313 E7-14214 Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, 40313-40316 E7-14204 E7-14205 Meetings:

Fecal and Urinary Incontinence Prevention in Adults; State-of-the-Science Conference, 40316-40317 E7-14208 National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 40317 07-3587 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 40317 07-3586 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 40318 07-3588 National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, 40318 07-3585 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 40319 07-3590 National Institute of Mental Health, 40318-40319 07-3589 National Institute on Drug Abuse, 40317-40318 07-3584 Scientific Review Center, 40319 07-3582 07-3583 Vitamin D and Health in 21st Century—Update; conference, 40319-40320 E7-14209 Recombinant DNA molecules research:

Actions under guidelines Proposed, 40320-40321 E7-14215 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fishery conservation and management: Alaska; fisheries of Exclusive Economic Zone— Pelagic shelf rockfish, 40264 07-3606 Northeastern United States fisheries— Summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass, 40263-40264 E7-14325 NOTICES Marine mammal permit applications, determinations, etc., 40285 E7-14330 Meetings: Caribbean Fishery Management Council, 40285-40286 E7-14280 NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Environmental statements; record of decision:

North Fork Powell River Watershed, Lee County, VA, 40273 E7-14210 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent: Uranium milling facilities; meetings, 40344-40346 E7-14362 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 40346-40347 07-3620 Regulatory guides; issuance, availability, and withdrawal, 40347-40348 E7-14251 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, et al., 40341-40342 07-3604 Exelon Generation Co., LLC, et al., 40342-40344 E7-14250 Shaw Areva Mox Services, 40344 E7-14255 Occupational Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40337-40338 E7-14256 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40286-40287 E7-14271 Presidential Presidential Documents EXECUTIVE ORDERS Defense and national security:

Unlawful enemy combatants; Central Intelligence Agency detention and interrogation program, interpretation of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention (EO 13340), 40705-40709 07-3656 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Securities: Suspension of trading— American Pad & Paper Co. et al, 40348 07-3629 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: New York Stock Exchange LLC, 40348-40353 E7-14217 E7-14249 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40353-40355 E7-14147 Surface Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office PROPOSED RULES Permanent program and abandoned mine land reclamation plan submissions:

Mississippi, 40266-40269 E7-14117 Textile Textile Agreements Implementation Committee See Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Transportation Transportation Security Administration RULES Civil aviation security: Prohibited items— Lighters, 40262-40263 07-3630 Treasury Treasury Department See Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40365-40366 E7-14275 Veterans Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 40366-40370 E7-14190 E7-14191 E7-14192 E7-14193 E7-14194 E7-14195 E7-14196 E7-14198 E7-14199 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Treasury Department, Foreign Assets Control Office, 40374-40704 E7-13199 Part III Executive Office of the President, Presidential Documents, 40705-40709 07-3656 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. 72 141 Tuesday, July 24, 2007 Rules and Regulations MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 5 CFR Part 1201 Practices and Procedures AGENCY: Merit Systems Protection Board. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB or the Board) is amending its rules of practice and procedure in this part to reflect the relocation of its Western Regional Office.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 27, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Shannon, Acting Clerk of the Board,

(202)653-7200. The Board is publishing this rule as a final rule pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1204(h). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 27, 2007, the Board relocates its Western Regional Office from 250 Montgomery Street, Suite 400, 4th Floor, San Francisco, California 94105-3401, to 201 Mission Street, Suite 2310, San Francisco, California 94105-1831. Appendix II of this part is amended to show the new address. The Western Regional Office telephone number changes to

(415)904-6772 and the facsimile number is changes to

(415)904-0580. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 1201 Administrative practice and procedure, Civil rights, Government employees. Accordingly, the Board amends 5 CFR part 1201 as follows: PART 1201—PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 1201 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1204 and 7701, unless otherwise noted. Appendix II to Part 1201 [Amended] 2. Amend Appendix II to Part 1201 in item 5. by removing “250 Montgomery Street, Suite 400, 4th Floor, San Francisco, California 941-3401, Facsmile No.:

(415)705-2945,” and adding, in its place “201 Mission Street, Suite 2310, San Francisco, California 94105-1831 Facsmile No.:

(415)904-0580,”. Dated: July 18, 2007. Arlin Winefordner, Acting Clerk of the Board. [FR Doc. E7-14293 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7400-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. NM372 Special Conditions No. 25-355-SC] Special Conditions: Boeing Model 787-8 Airplane; Reinforced Flightdeck Bulkhead AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final special conditions. SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Boeing Model 787-8 airplane. This airplane will have novel or unusual design features when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. The Boeing Model 787-8 airplanes will have a flightdeck bulkhead incorporating ballistic-and intrusion-resistant features. While the regulations include standards for ballistic-and intrusion-resistant flightdeck doors, they do not yet incorporate the same standards for these features in the bulkhead. Therefore, special conditions are needed to address these design features. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing standards. Additional special conditions will be issued for other novel or unusual design features of the Boeing Model 787-8 airplanes. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 23, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Gardlin, FAA, Airframe/Cabin Safety, ANM-115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-2136; facsimile

(425)227-1320. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 28, 2003, Boeing applied for an FAA type certificate for its new Boeing Model 787-8 passenger airplane. The Boeing Model 787-8 airplane will be an all-new, two-engine jet transport airplane with a two-aisle cabin. The maximum takeoff weight will be 476,000 pounds, with a maximum passenger count of 381 passengers. Type Certification Basis Under provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)21.17, Boeing must show that Boeing Model 787-8 airplanes (hereafter referred to as “the 787”) meet the applicable provisions of 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-117, except §§ 25.809(a) and 25.812, which will remain at Amendment 25-115. If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the 787 because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under provisions of 14 CFR 21.16. In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the 787 must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of part 36. In addition, the FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy pursuant to section 611 of Public Law 92-574, the “Noise Control Act of 1972.” The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in § 11.19, under § 11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis under § 21.17(a)(2). Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model under § 21.101. Novel or Unusual Design Features The 787 will incorporate a number of novel or unusual design features. Because of rapid improvements in airplane technology, the applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for these design features. These special conditions for the 787 contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards. On January 15, 2002, the FAA issued 14 CFR 25.795(a) (Amendment 25-106), which specifies that the flightdeck door of a transport airplane be designed to resist forcible intrusion by unauthorized persons and penetration by small arms fire and fragmentation devices. At the time it was written, the regulation was limited to the flightdeck door to expedite a rapid retrofit of the existing airplanes required by operating rules to have a flightdeck door. In addition to a reinforced flightdeck door, the 787 will have a flightdeck bulkhead which is reinforced to resist intrusion and ballistic penetration. The regulations do not adequately address the certification requirements for such a bulkhead, and appropriate certification standards are necessary. These special conditions require that the reinforced flightdeck bulkhead meet the same standards as those specified in § 25.795(a) for flightdeck doors. These special conditions contain the minimum standards that the Administrator considers necessary to ensure that safety standards are maintained after the aircraft enters into service. On December 21, 2006, the FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that proposes amending § 25.795(a) to require that a flightdeck bulkhead—and any other accessible barrier separating the flightcrew compartment from occupied areas—also be designed to resist intrusion or penetration. The methods of compliance described in the preamble of that notice and associated draft advisory material could be used to show compliance with these special conditions. For the 787, the reinforced bulkhead may be comprised of components such as the walls of adjacent lavatories, galleys, or crew rest areas. Those components are covered by these special conditions. Discussion of Comments Notice of Proposed Special Conditions No. 25-07-08-SC for the 787 was published in the **Federal Register** on April 12, 2007 (72 FR 18412). One comment was received, from Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA). *ALPA Comment:* ALPA recommended that the requirements of these special conditions apply to future versions of the 787, including possible freighter configurations. *FAA Response:* These special conditions apply to airplanes that incorporate a reinforced bulkhead. They are not limited to any particular type of operation, nor do they impose operational requirements. Thus, if a future freighter version did incorporate a reinforced bulkhead, these special conditions would apply. These special conditions are adopted as proposed. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the 787. Should Boeing apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model on the same type certificate incorporating the same novel or unusual design features, these special conditions would apply to that model as well. Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features of the 787. It is not a rule of general applicability. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704. The Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for the Boeing Model 787-8 airplane. In addition to the requirements of 14 CFR 25.795(a) governing protection of the flightdeck door, the following special conditions apply. The reinforced bulkhead, including components that comprise the bulkhead, separating the flightcrew compartment from occupied areas must be designed to meet the following standards: It must resist forcible intrusion by unauthorized persons and be capable of withstanding impacts of 300 Joules (221.3 foot-pounds) at critical locations on the bulkhead as well as a 1113 Newton (250 pound) constant tensile load on accessible handholds. It must resist penetration by small arms fire and fragmentation devices to a level equivalent to level IIIa of the National Institute of Justice Standard

(NIJ)0101.04. Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 12, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-14333 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28749; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-079-AD; Amendment 39-15134; AD 2007-15-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F Airplanes, Model DC-10-15 Airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) Airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F Airplanes, Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F Airplanes, and Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for all transport category airplanes identified above. This AD requires an inspection to determine if a certain fuel pump housing electrical connector is installed. This AD also requires a revision to the FAA-approved airplane flight manual

(AFM)to advise the flightcrew of the appropriate procedures for disabling certain fuel pump electrical circuits following failure of a fuel pump housing electrical connector if applicable. This AD also requires the deactivation of certain fuel tanks or fuel pumps and the installation of placards if applicable. This AD allows the optional replacement of the fuel pump housing electrical connectors with new, improved parts, which would terminate the AFM revisions, deactivation of certain fuel tanks and fuel pumps, and placard installation. This AD results from a report of two failures of the fuel pump housing electrical connector. We are issuing this AD to prevent continued arcing following a short circuit of the fuel pump housing electrical connector, which could damage the conduit that protects the power lead inside the fuel tank; this condition could create an ignition source inside the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective August 8, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of August 8, 2007. On December 5, 2000 (65 FR 69658, November 20, 2000), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain other publication listed in the AD. We must receive comments on this AD by September 24, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this AD. • *DOT Docket Web site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Government-wide rulemaking Web site:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Fax:*

(202)493-2251. • *Hand Delivery:* Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip C. Kush, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone

(562)627-5263; fax

(562)627-5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We have received a report indicating that the fuel pump housing electrical connector, part number (P/N) 60-84355, failed on two McDonnell Douglas MD-11 airplanes. The airplanes had accumulated 3,000 and 3,600 flight hours since installation of the electrical connector in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A113. The failures were attributed to arcing between the contacts in the potted backside of the electrical connector. Subsequent x-ray inspections of the electrical connectors revealed soldering problems with the connector contacts. Continued arcing following a short circuit of the fuel pump housing electrical connector could damage the conduit that protects the power lead inside the fuel tank. This condition, if not corrected, could create an ignition source inside the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. Fuel pump housing electrical connector, P/N 60-84355, has also been installed on McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A229. Therefore, all of these models may be subject to the same unsafe condition. Other Relevant Rulemaking On November 1, 2000, we issued AD 2000-22-21, amendment 39-11969 (65 FR 69658, November 20, 2000), for all McDonnell Douglas DC-10, MD-10, and MD-11 series airplanes. That AD requires revising the airplane flight manual

(AFM)to ensure that the flightcrew is advised of appropriate procedures for disabling certain fuel pump electrical circuits following failure of a fuel pump electrical connector. For certain airplanes, that AD also requires revising the AFM to prohibit resetting of tripped fuel pump circuit breakers. We approved installation of fuel pump housing electrical connector, P/N 60-84355, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A229 or MD11-28A113, as applicable, as an alternative method of compliance

(AMOC)for AD 2000-22-21. That AMOC allowed removal of certain interim operating procedures from the Procedures section of the FAA-approved AFM, which is required by paragraph

(a)of AD 2000-22-21. This AD reintroduces that requirement, since we have determined that an unsafe condition exists on airplanes equipped with electrical connector P/N 60-84355. On June 25, 2002, we issued AD 2002-13-10, amendment 39-12798 (67 FR 45053, July 8, 2002), for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, -10F, -15, -30, -30F, -30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), -40, and -40F airplanes; Model MD-10-10F and -30F airplanes; and Model MD-11 and -11F airplanes. That AD requires repetitive tests for electrical continuity and resistance and repetitive inspections to detect discrepancies of the fuel boost/transfer pump connectors; and corrective actions, if necessary. Accomplishing the optional replacement of all electrical connectors in accordance with paragraph

(k)or

(l)of this AD, as applicable, terminates the requirements of AD 2002-13-10. On April 4, 2003, we issued AD 2003-07-14, amendment 39-13110 (68 FR 17544, April 10, 2003), for a certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-30 airplane. That AD requires repetitive tests for electrical continuity and resistance and repetitive inspections to detect discrepancies of the fuel boost/transfer pump connectors; and corrective actions, if necessary. Accomplishing the optional replacement of all electrical connectors in accordance with paragraph

(k)of this AD terminates the requirements of AD 2003-07-14. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed the following service bulletins: • Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259, dated March 20, 2007, for Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes. • Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007, for Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes. Boeing Alert Service Bulletins DC10-28A259 and MD11-28A138 describe procedures for deactivating certain fuel tanks or fuel pumps, as applicable. The service bulletins also describe procedures for installing a placard on or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel or adjacent to display units 1 and 6, as applicable. The service bulletins also describe procedures for replacing fuel pump housing electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355, with new, improved electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355-1, and removing the placards after installing the new, improved electrical connectors. We have also reviewed Boeing Flight Operations Bulletin DC-10-00-01A, MD-11-00-03A, and MD-10-00-02A, dated September 20, 2000, for Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, and Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes, and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes. Boeing Flight Operations Bulletin DC-10-00-01A, MD-11-00-03A, and MD-10-00-02A provides instructions for revising the Procedures section of the FAA-approved AFM by inserting certain Interim Operating Procedures (IOPs). The IOPs advise the flightcrew of proper procedures for disabling certain fuel pump electrical circuits following failure of a fuel pump housing electrical connector. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we are issuing this AD to prevent continued arcing following a short circuit of the fuel pump housing electrical connector, which could damage the conduit that protects the power lead inside the fuel tank; this condition could create an ignition source inside the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. This AD requires an inspection to determine if fuel pump housing electrical connector, P/N 60-84355, is installed. If that electrical connector is installed, this AD requires the following additional actions: • Revising the Procedures section of the FAA-approved AFM to advise the flightcrew of the appropriate procedures for disabling certain fuel pump electrical circuits following failure of a fuel pump housing electrical connector. • Deactivating certain fuel tanks or fuel pumps, as applicable. • Installing placards on or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel or adjacent to display units 1 and 6, as applicable. This AD also allows the optional replacement of the fuel pump housing electrical connectors with new, improved parts, which would terminate the AFM revisions, deactivation of certain fuel tanks and fuel pumps, and placard installation. Differences Between the AD and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259 The Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259 is divided into work packages for airplanes identified as Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. This AD does not require any action for Group 5 airplanes. Also, this AD does not require accomplishing Work Package 2 for Groups 1, 2, and 3 airplanes and does not require accomplishing Work Package 5 for Group 4 airplanes; these work packages describe procedures for replacing the affected electrical connectors on tanks 1, 2, and 3. Differences Between the AD and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138 The Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138 is divided into work packages for airplanes identified as Groups 1 and 2. This AD does not require accomplishing Work Package 5 for Group 1 airplanes and does not require accomplishing Work Package 6 for Group 2 airplanes; these work packages describe procedures for replacing the affected electrical connectors on main tanks 1 and 3. The compliance tables in paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138 recommend a compliance time of 10 days for accomplishing the following actions:

(1)Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Tank 2 (Placards Installation) for Group 1 airplanes,

(2)Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Forward Auxiliary Tank (Deactivation) for Group 2 airplanes, and

(3)Work Package 2—Option 1—Part 1—Tank 2 (Placards Installation) for Group 2 airplanes. This AD, however, would require accomplishing those actions within 14 days after the effective date of this AD. We have coordinated this difference with Boeing. Clarification of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259 The compliance table for Group 4 airplanes in paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259 identifies 5 work packages, one of which is “Work Package 3—Upper and Lower Center Wing Tanks.” However, the procedures for Work Package 3 are described under the headings, “Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Upper and Lower Center Wing Fuel Tanks (Deactivation)” and “Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper and Lower Center Wing Fuel Tank (Connector Replacement)” in the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. In this AD, we have referenced the headings for Work Package 3 exactly as they appear in the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Interim Action We consider this AD interim action. We are currently considering requiring replacement of all affected electrical connectors, which will constitute terminating action for the AFM revisions, deactivation of certain fuel tanks and fuel pumps, and placard installation required by this AD action. However, the planned compliance time for the replacement of all affected connectors would allow enough time to provide notice and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of the modification. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD, we have found that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable, and that good cause exists to make this AD effective in less than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements that affect flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment; however, we invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-28749; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-079-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the AD that might suggest a need to modify it. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is located on ground floor of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-15-05 McDonnell Douglas:** Amendment 39-15134. Docket No. FAA-2007-28749; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-079-AD. Effective Date

(a)This AD becomes effective August 8, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)Accomplishing paragraph

(k)or

(l)of this AD, as applicable, terminates the requirements of AD 2002-13-10, amendment 39-12798, the requirements of AD 2003-07-14, amendment 39-13110, and the requirements of paragraph

(a)of AD 2000-22-21, amendment 39-11969. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes, and Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes, certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report of two failures of the fuel pump housing electrical connectors. We are issuing this AD to prevent continued arcing following a short circuit of the fuel pump housing electrical connector, which could damage the conduit that protects the power lead inside the fuel tank; this condition could create an ignition source inside the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. Compliance

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

(f)The term “service bulletin,” as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions of the following service bulletins, as applicable:

(1)For Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes: Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259, dated March 20, 2007; and

(2)For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes: Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007. Inspection To Determine Part Number (P/N)

(g)For all airplanes: Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect the fuel pump housing electrical connector to determine if P/N 60-84355 is installed. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number of the fuel pump housing electrical connector can be conclusively determined from that review. If P/N 60-84355 is installed, accomplish the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (h), (i), and

(j)of this AD. Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM)Revision of Procedures Section

(h)For all airplanes equipped with fuel pump housing electrical connector P/N 60-84355: Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD, insert the applicable Interim Operating Procedures regarding abnormal operations for failure of the fuel pump housing electrical connector into the Procedures section of the FAA-approved AFM, in accordance with Boeing Flight Operations Bulletin DC-10-00-01A, MD-11-00-03A, and MD-10-00-02A, dated September 20, 2000. Accomplishing the applicable actions specified in paragraph

(k)or

(l)of this AD, as applicable, terminates the requirements of this paragraph and the corresponding requirements specified in paragraph

(i)or

(j)of this AD, as applicable. Deactivation of Fuel Tanks and Placard Installation for DC-10/MD-10 Airplanes

(i)For Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes identified in the applicable service bulletin as Group 1, 2, 3, or 4 airplanes and equipped with fuel pump housing electrical connector P/N 60-84355: At the applicable time specified in Table 1 of this AD, deactivate the applicable fuel tank(s) and applicable fuel pumps and install a placard at the applicable location specified in Table 1 of this AD, in accordance with the applicable work package of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin. For the placard installation required by this paragraph, alternative placard location and wording may be used if approved by an appropriate FAA Principal Operations Inspector. Accomplishing the applicable actions specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD terminates the corresponding requirements of this paragraph and the AFM revision required by paragraph

(h)of this AD. Table 1.—Requirements for Model DC-10 and Model MD-10 Airplanes Airplanes Compliance time Deactivated fuel tank(s) or fuel pump Placard location Work package Group 1 Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Auxiliary fuel tank On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 1—Part 1—Option 1—Aux Fuel Tank (Deactivation). Group 2: Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, and Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Upper and lower auxiliary fuel tanks On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Upper and Lower Aux Fuel Tanks (Deactivation) (DC-10/KDC-10). Group 2: Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Upper and lower auxiliary fuel tanks Adjacent to display units 1 and 6 Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Upper and Lower Aux Fuel Tanks (Deactivation) (MD-10). Group 3 Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Upper, lower, and aft fuel tanks On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Upper, Lower and Aft Aux Fuel Tanks (Deactivation). Group 4 Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD Fuel pump for aft fuselage tank On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Aft Fuselage Fuel Pump (Deactivation). Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD Fuel pumps for wing tip tanks 1 and 3 On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 2—Option 1—Part 1—Wing Tip Tank 1 and 3 Pumps (Deactivation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Upper and lower center wing tanks On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Upper and Lower Center Wing Fuel Tanks (Deactivation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Fuel pump for forward fuselage tank On or adjacent to the flight engineer's fuel control panel Work Package 4—Option 1—Part 1—Fwd Fuselage Fuel Pump (Deactivation). Deactivation of Fuel Tanks and Placard Installation for MD-11/-11F Airplanes

(j)For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes identified in the applicable service bulletin as Group 1 and 2 airplanes and equipped with fuel pump housing electrical connector P/N 60-84355: At the applicable time specified in Table 2 of this AD, deactivate the applicable fuel tanks specified in Table 2 of this AD and install a placard adjacent to display units 1 and 6, in accordance with the applicable work package of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin. For the placard installation required by this paragraph, alternative placard location and wording may be used if approved by an appropriate FAA Principal Operations Inspector. Accomplishing the applicable actions specified in paragraph

(l)of this AD terminates the corresponding requirements of this paragraph and the AFM revision required by paragraph

(h)of this AD. Table 2.—Requirements for Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes Airplanes Compliance time Deactivated fuel tanks Work package Group 1 Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD Not applicable Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Tank 2 (Placards Installation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Tail tank Work Package 2—Option 1—Part 1—Tail Tank (Deactivation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Not applicable Work Package 3—Option 1—Part 1—Upper Auxiliary Tank (Placards Installation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Lower auxiliary tank Work Package 4—Option 1—Part 1—Lower Auxiliary Tank (Deactivation). Group 2 Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD Forward auxiliary tank Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 1—Forward Auxiliary Tank (Deactivation). Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD Not applicable Work Package 2—Option 1—Part 1—Tank 2 (Placards Installation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Tail tank Work Package 3—Option 1—Part 1—Tail Tank (Deactivation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Not applicable Work Package 4—Option 1—Part 1—Upper Auxiliary Tank (Placards Installation). Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD Lower auxiliary tank Work Package 5—Option 1—Part 1—Lower Auxiliary Tank (Deactivation). Optional Terminating Action for DC-10/MD-10 Airplanes

(k)For Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes, and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes identified in the applicable service bulletin as Group 1, 2, 3, or 4 airplanes and equipped with fuel pump housing electrical connector P/N 60-84355: As an option, replace all fuel pump housing electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355, with new, improved electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355-1, and remove the applicable placards, in accordance with the applicable work package(s) of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin as specified in Table 3 of this AD. Accomplishing the applicable actions specified in this paragraph terminates the corresponding requirements of paragraph

(i)of this AD and the AFM revision required by paragraph

(h)of this AD. Table 3.—Optional Work Packages for Model DC-10 and Model MD-10 Airplanes Airplanes Work package Group 1 Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Aux Fuel Tank (Connector Replacement). Group 2: Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes, Model DC-10-15 airplanes, Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes, and Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper and Lower Aux Fuel Tanks (DC-10/KDC-10) (Connector Replacement). Group 2: Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper and Lower Aux Fuel Tanks (MD-10) (Connector Replacement). Group 3 Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper, Lower and Aft Aux Fuel Tanks (Connector Replacement). Group 4 Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Aft Fuselage Fuel Pump (Connector Replacement). Work Package 2—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Wing Tip Tanks 1 and 3 (Connector Replacement). Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper and Lower Center Wing Fuel Tanks (Connector Replacement). Work Package 4—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Fwd Fuselage Fuel Pump (Connector Replacement). Optional Terminating Action for MD-11/-11F Airplanes

(l)For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes identified in the applicable service bulletin as Group 1 and 2 airplanes and equipped with fuel pump housing electrical connector P/N 60-84355: As an option, replace all fuel pump housing electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355, with new, improved electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355-1, and remove the applicable placards, in accordance with the applicable work packages of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin as specified in Table 4 of this AD. Accomplishing the applicable actions specified in this paragraph terminates the corresponding requirements of paragraph

(j)of this AD and the AFM revision required by paragraph

(h)of this AD. Table 4.—Optional Work Packages for Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes Airplanes Work package Group 1 Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Tank 2 (Connector Replacement). Work Package 2—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Tail Tank (Connector Replacement). Work Package 3—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper Auxiliary Tank (Connector Replacement). Work Package 4—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Lower Auxiliary Tank (Connector Replacement). Group 2 Work Package 1—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Forward Auxiliary Tank (Connector Replacement). Work Package 2—Option 1 Part 2 or Option 2—Tank 2 (Connector Replacement). Work Package 3—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Tail Tank (Connector Replacement). Work Package 4—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Upper Auxiliary Tank (Connector Replacement). Work Package 5—Option 1—Part 2 or Option 2—Lower Auxiliary Tank (Connector Replacement). Parts Installation

(m)For all airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a fuel pump housing electrical connector, P/N 60-84355, on any airplane. Terminating Action for AD 2002-13-10

(n)Replacing all fuel pump housing electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355, with new, improved parts in accordance with paragraph

(k)or

(l)of this AD, as applicable, terminates the requirements of AD 2002-13-10. Terminating Action for AD 2003-07-14

(o)Replacing all fuel pump housing electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355, with new, improved parts in accordance with paragraph

(k)of this AD terminates the requirements of AD 2003-07-14. Terminating Action for Paragraph

(a)of AD 2000-22-21

(p)Replacing all fuel pump housing electrical connectors, P/N 60-84355, with new, improved parts in accordance with paragraph

(k)or

(l)of this AD, as applicable, terminates the requirements of paragraph

(a)of AD 2000-22-21. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (q)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(2)To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Material Incorporated by Reference

(r)You must use the service information identified in Table 5 of this AD to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. Table 5.—Material Incorporated by Reference Service information Revision level Date Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259 Original March 20, 2007. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138 1 March 26, 2007. Boeing Flight Operations Bulletin DC-10-00-01A, MD-11-00-03A, and MD-10-00-02A Original September 20, 2000.

(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-28A259, dated March 20, 2007; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-28A138, Revision 1, dated March 26, 2007; in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2)On December 5, 2000 (65 FR 69658, November 20, 2000), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Boeing Flight Operations Bulletin DC-10-00-01A, MD-11-00-03A, and MD-10-00-02A, dated September 20, 2000.

(3)Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 13, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-14043 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-27268; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-190-AD; Amendment 39-15135; AD 2007-15-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes. This AD requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new limitations for fuel tank systems. This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective August 28, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of August 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-2141; fax

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Examining the Docket You may examine the airworthiness directive

(AD)docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is located on the ground floor of the West Building at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on February 22, 2007 (72 FR 7936). That NPRM proposed to require revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new limitations for fuel tank systems. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the single comment received. The commenter, Airbus, supports the NPRM. Explanation of Change to Applicability We have removed the Model A318-121 and A318-122 airplanes from the applicability because Models A318-121 and A318-122 have not yet been certificated by the FAA. When the Model A318-121 and A318-122 are certificated, the airworthiness limitations applicable to these models will include the limitations required by this AD in the FAA-approved type design for these models. Changes to Language for Repetitive Intervals In paragraph

(f)of the NPRM, we stated that all tasks identified in Section 1 of Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1931/05, Issue 1, dated December 19, 2005, “ * * * must be accomplished within the repetitive interval specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1931/05. * * *” We have revised paragraph

(f)of this AD to more clearly state that “* * * the repetitive inspections must be accomplished thereafter at the intervals specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1931/05. * * *” Airbus issued Operator Information Telex

(OIT)SE 999.0076/06, dated June 20, 2006, to identify the applicable sections of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airplane Maintenance Manual necessary for accomplishing the tasks specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1931/05. We have added a note to paragraph

(f)of this AD to refer to that OIT. Clarification of Alternative Method of Compliance

(AMOC)Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance This AD affects about 720 airplanes of U.S. registry. The required actions take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of this AD for U.S. operators is $115,200, or $160 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-15-06 Airbus:** Amendment 39-15135. Docket No. FAA-2007-27268; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-190-AD. Effective Date

(a)This AD becomes effective August 28, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all Airbus Model A318-111 and -112 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-111, -211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes; certificated in any category. Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new inspections and critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs). Compliance with the operator maintenance documents is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these inspections and CDCCLs, the operator may not be able to accomplish inspections and CDCCLs described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph

(i)of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required inspections and CDCCLs that will preserve the critical ignition source prevention feature of the affected fuel system. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. Compliance

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

(ALS)To Incorporate Fuel Maintenance and Inspection Tasks

(f)Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, dated February 28, 2006, as defined in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1931/05, Issue 1, dated December 19, 2005 (approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency

(EASA)on March 14, 2006), Section 1, “Maintenance/Inspection Tasks.” For all tasks identified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1931/05, the initial compliance times start from the effective date of this AD and the repetitive inspections must be accomplished thereafter at the intervals specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1931/05. Note 2: Airbus Operator Information Telex

(OIT)SE 999.0076/06, dated June 20, 2006, identifies the applicable sections of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airplane Maintenance Manual necessary for accomplishing the tasks specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1931/05. Revise ALS To Incorporate CDCCLs

(g)Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, dated February 28, 2006, as defined in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1931/05, Issue 1, dated December 19, 2005 (approved by the EASA on March 14, 2006), Section 2, “Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations.” No Alternative Inspections, Inspection Intervals, or CDCCLs

(h)Except as provided by paragraph

(i)of this AD: After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs

(f)and

(g)of this AD, no alternative inspections, inspection intervals, or CDCCLs may be used. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (i)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Related Information

(j)EASA airworthiness directive 2006-0203, dated July 11, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference

(k)You must use Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1931/05, Issue 1, dated December 19, 2005; and Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, dated February 28, 2006; to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register approves the incorporation by reference of these documents in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 13, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-14044 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-25779; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-088-AD; Amendment 39-15131; AD 2007-15-02] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for all Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. This AD requires revising the Certification Maintenance Requirements and the Maintenance Review Board Report sections of the Canadair Regional Jet Maintenance Requirements Manual to include changes and additions to checks of the aileron power control units

(PCUs)and a change to the interval of the backlash check of the aileron control system. This AD results from a report that data collected from in-service airplanes show that approximately 19 percent of aileron backlash checks conducted at 4,000-flight-hour intervals reveal that aileron backlash wear limits are being exceeded. We are issuing this AD to prevent exceeded backlashes in both aileron PCUs, which, if accompanied by the failure of the flutter damper, could result in aileron vibration/flutter and reduced controllability of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective August 28, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of August 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. Contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centreville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada, for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Parrillo, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone

(516)228-7305; fax

(516)794-5531. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Examining the Docket You may examine the airworthiness directive

(800)647-5527) is located on the ground floor of the West Building at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to all Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on September 11, 2006 (71 FR 53345). That NPRM proposed to require revising the Certification Maintenance Requirements and the Maintenance Review Board

(MRB)Report sections of the Canadair Regional Jet Maintenance Requirements Manual

(MRM)to include changes and additions to checks of the aileron power control units

(PCUs)and a change to the interval of the backlash check of the aileron control system. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments received. Request To Provide Additional Information on Selection of Check Interval The National Transportation Safety Board

(NTSB)requests that we provide additional information in the final rule indicating how the repeat interval for the aileron backlash check was selected and why the interval will prevent flight with aileron freeplay greater than the maximum limit. The NTSB notes that the Discussion section of the proposed AD does not explain how the 2,000-flight-hour interval was selected or why it would prevent flight with aileron freeplay greater than the maximum limit. We agree to provide additional information. The repeat interval was selected after consideration of several factors related to known service experience, guidance from flutter analysis reference materials, and detailed flutter analysis. With respect to service experience, the absence of reports of buzzing or flutter events, known values of backlash freeplay, and the existing inspection interval were evaluated. Known backlash freeplay values were assessed against those recommended in flutter reference materials. A review of a recent flutter analysis conducted by Bombardier was also included in our consideration of an appropriate interval. Also, Bombardier, with the agreement of the airworthiness authorities (Transport Canada Civil Aviation

(TCCA)and the FAA), has started monthly monitoring of the Model CRJ200 fleet since the inspection interval was lowered from 4,000 to 2,000 flight hours. After collecting sufficient data on the backlash freeplay that develops during the 2,000-flight-hour interval, further evaluation of the interval may be conducted. Therefore, we consider the proposed interval to be appropriate at this time. No change to the AD is necessary in this regard. Request To Collect Aileron Freeplay Data The NTSB also requests that the FAA revise the AD to include a method for operators to record, retain, and report aileron freeplay check data. The NTSB is concerned that the FAA, TCCA, and Bombardier might fail to monitor the effects of the reduced interval appropriately by not collecting and analyzing aileron freeplay check data. We do not agree to revise the AD to add a requirement to collect and report data. While we have not mandated reporting of the aileron freeplay check measurements to the manufacturer, Task Card 000-27-900-015 specifies recording and retaining this measurement. Bombardier is soliciting the measurement results from operators during the bi-monthly Technical Steering Committee meetings. As of January 2007, Bombardier has received feedback on over 70 airplanes and is confident that sufficient data will be available at the end of the 2-year term to provide validation of the check interval. TCCA requires Bombardier to provide the data results within 2 years after issuing Temporary Revision 1-2-33 to the MRM. Bombardier will tabulate the results based on the current methods and provide a matrix along with a recommendation to TCCA in mid-2008. There is no need to mandate a method for collecting the data, as there is a process in place. No change to the AD is necessary in this regard. Request To Use Data in Monitoring Reclassification of Aileron Freeplay Check The NTSB suggests that aileron freeplay data provided by the operators also be used to assist the FAA, TCCA, and Bombardier in monitoring the reclassification of the bearing backlash test portion of the aileron freeplay check. The NTSB states that the NPRM proposes to reclassify the bearing backlash test portion of the aileron freeplay check from a certification maintenance requirement

(CMR)task to an MRB task. The aileron freeplay backlash check would be replaced with an aileron PCU internal leakage test and would remain a CMR task. We agree that the aileron free play data could be useful. We will consider the NTSB's suggestion to use aileron freeplay data to monitor reclassification of the bearing backlash test once the service data are collected and we have reviewed the data. No change to the AD is necessary in this regard. Clarification of Alternative Method of Compliance

(AMOC)Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. We have determined that this change will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance This AD affects about 742 airplanes of U.S. registry. The required actions take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the AD for U.S. operators is $59,360, or $80 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-15-02 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair):** Amendment 39-15131. Docket No. FAA-2006-25779; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-088-AD. Effective Date

(a)This AD becomes effective August 28, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report that data collected from in-service airplanes show that approximately 19 percent of aileron backlash checks conducted at 4,000-flight-hour intervals reveal that aileron backlash wear limits are being exceeded. We are issuing this AD to prevent exceeded backlashes in both aileron power control units (PCUs), which, if accompanied by the failure of the flutter damper, could result in aileron vibration/flutter and reduced controllability of the airplane. Compliance

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

(f)Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the Canadair Regional Jet MRM CSP A-053 by doing the actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD. When the tasks specified in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revisions 2A-20, dated March 13, 2006; and 1-2-33, dated October 27, 2005; are included in the general revisions of the MRM, the general revisions may be inserted in the MRM, and these temporary revisions may be removed.

(1)Revise the Certification Maintenance Requirements section of the Canadair Regional Jet MRM to include Tasks C27-10-105-06 and C27-10-105-05, as specified in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 2A-20, dated March 13, 2006, to Part 2, Appendix A—Certification Maintenance Requirements, of the Canadair Regional Jet MRM CSP A-053.

(2)Revise the Maintenance Review Board Report for Section 2—Systems and Powerplant Program, of Part 1 of the Canadair Regional Jet MRM CSP A-053, to include the task interval for Task 27-11-00-09, as specified in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 1-2-33, dated October 27, 2005. Incorporating Revision 10, dated May 27, 2005, of the Canadair Regional Jet Maintenance Review Board Report for Section 2—Systems and Powerplant Program of the Canadair Regional Jet MRM CSP A-053 is one approved method for including the task interval specified in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 1-2-33. After the task interval has been incorporated into the MRM, no alternative aileron backlash check interval in excess of 2,000 flight hours may be approved, except as specified in paragraphs

(g)and

(h)of this AD. Phase-In Schedule for Initial Inspection Specified in MRM Revisions

(g)For airplanes with more than 1,000 flight hours but less than 3,000 flight hours since the last aileron backlash check specified in Task 27-11-00-09 was accomplished, as of the effective date of this AD: Within 1,000 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, do the next aileron backlash check in accordance with Task 27-11-00-09, as specified in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 1-2-33, dated October 27, 2005.

(h)For airplanes with 3,000 flight hours or more since the last aileron backlash check specified in Task 27-11-00-09 was accomplished, as of the effective date of this AD: Within 4,000 flight hours after the last aileron backlash check, do the next aileron backlash check in accordance with Task 27-11-00-09, as specified in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 1-2-33, dated October 27, 2005. One Approved Method for Task C27-10-105-06

(i)For airplanes without access to ground support equipment necessary to do the PCU internal leakage functional check, as specified in Task C27-10-105-06 specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD: Doing the aileron PCU internal leakage check in accordance with Task 27-11-00-220-803 of Chapter 27-11-00 of the Canadair Regional Jet Aircraft Maintenance Manual at intervals not to exceed 4,000 flight hours is one approved method for accomplishing Task C27-10-105-06, and is acceptable for up to 12 months after the effective date of this AD. Thereafter, the check must be done in accordance with Task C27-10-105-06 as specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD at a repetitive interval not to exceed that specified in the task. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (j)(1) The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Related Information

(k)Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2006-04, dated March 22, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference

(l)You must use Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 1-2-33, dated October 27, 2005, to the Canadair Regional Jet Maintenance Review Manual CSP A-053; and Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 2A-20, dated March 13, 2006, to the Canadair Regional Jet Maintenance Review Manual CSP A-053; to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of these documents in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 11, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-13983 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28750; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-124-AD; Amendment 39-15133; AD 2007-15-04] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-800 Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive

(AD)that applies to certain Boeing Model 737-800 series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires inspecting flight spoilers to determine spoiler position after every landing and after any rejected takeoff maneuver. For airplanes on which any flight spoiler is found in the up position with the speedbrake handle in the down position, the existing AD requires replacing the flight spoiler actuator with a flight spoiler actuator having a certain part number. The existing AD also requires an operational test of the speedbrake control system after any maintenance actions that operate the spoiler system, and replacement of the flight spoiler actuator if necessary. The existing AD also provides for optional terminating action for those requirements. This new AD requires the previously optional terminating action. This AD results from a report of seven flight spoiler actuator jams on Model 737-800 airplanes equipped for short field performance (SFP). The cause of the failure has been identified as interference within the actuator main control valve. We are issuing this AD to prevent operation with defective flight spoiler actuators, which could result in a flight spoiler actuator hardover, and could cause the flight spoiler surface to jam in the fully extended position. Two or more hardover failures of the flight spoiler surfaces in the up direction on the same wing, if undetected prior to takeoff, can cause significant roll and consequent loss of control of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective August 8, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of August 8, 2007. On May 7, 2007 (72 FR 21083, April 30, 2007), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD. We must receive any comments on this AD by September 24, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this AD. • *DOT Docket Web site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Government-wide rulemaking Web site:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Fax:*

(202)493-2251. • *Hand Delivery:* Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)917-6490; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion On April 18, 2007, we issued AD 2007-06-52, amendment 39-15036 (72 FR 21083, April 30, 2007). That AD applies to certain Boeing Model 737-800 series airplanes. That AD requires inspecting flight spoilers to determine spoiler position after every landing and after any rejected takeoff maneuver. For airplanes on which any flight spoiler is found in the up position with the speedbrake handle in the down position, that AD requires replacement of the flight spoiler actuator with a flight spoiler actuator having a certain part number. That AD also requires an operational test of the speedbrake control system after any maintenance actions that operate the spoiler system, and replacement of the flight spoiler actuator(s) if necessary. That AD also provides for optional terminating action for those requirements. In addition, that AD requires you to report to the manufacturer any spoiler panel that is found in the up position with the speedbrake handle in the down position. That AD resulted from a report of seven flight spoiler actuator jams on Model 737-800 short field performance

(SFP)airplanes. The actions specified in that AD are intended to detect and correct any spoiler panel that is found in the up position with the speedbrake handle in the down position, which could result in a spoiler actuator hardover, and could cause the spoiler surface to jam in the fully extended position. Two or more hardover failures of the spoiler surfaces in the up direction on the same wing, if undetected prior to takeoff, can cause significant roll and consequent loss of control of the airplane. The goal of the actions required by AD 2007-06-52 is to detect actuators that might have failed during the previous flight in order to prevent an attempted takeoff with extended flight spoiler(s). We determined that takeoff is the most critical portion of the flight profile for this particular failure, but it is not the only flight profile that could be affected. Therefore, we are issuing this new AD for the following reasons: • Replacing all flight spoiler actuators is the best method to eliminate the possibility of this failure. • The inspections and operational tests required by AD 2007-06-52 are an interim solution and cannot detect or prevent other possible scenarios involving a failed flight spoiler actuator. • Inspecting each flight spoiler after every landing and after any rejected takeoff maneuver does not guarantee that the flight spoiler will function properly during the next flight. Actions Since AD Was Issued The preamble to AD 2007-06-52 explains that we consider the requirements “interim action” and are considering requiring the replacement of all eight flight spoiler actuators. We now have determined that replacement of the flight spoiler actuators is necessary, and this AD follows from that determination. The replacement actuators correct the interference condition in the valve assembly, eliminate possible rate jam conditions, and ensure continued correct operation of the flight spoilers. Replacement of all flight spoiler actuators constitutes terminating action for the requirements of AD 2007-06-52. In addition, paragraph

(g)of AD 2007-06-52 also specifies that the Master Minimum Equipment List

(MMEL)Item 27-7, “Auto Speed Brake System,” is no longer applicable to Model 737-800 series airplanes equipped with an SFP package. Since we issued AD 2007-06-52, Boeing has revised MMEL Item 27-7 to accurately reflect the operational requirements to account for the degraded performance when operating a Model 737-800 series airplane equipped with the SFP package when it has the auto speed brake system disabled. Therefore, the requirement in paragraph

(g)of AD 2007-06-52 has not been restated in this AD. We have re-lettered the remaining paragraphs accordingly. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-27A1283, dated April 3, 2007. The service bulletin describes procedures for installing an improved SFP actuator for each of the eight flight spoilers. The installation includes replacing the SFP actuator, making sure there is no hydraulic leakage at the connections to each of the new, improved SFP actuators, and completing all adjustments and tests of each flight spoiler to make sure it operates correctly. The service bulletin specifies doing the adjustments and tests in accordance with the applicable aircraft maintenance manual. The service bulletin also specifies returning each removed flight spoiler SFP actuator to the vendor for modification. The service bulletin includes eight individual work packages for replacement of each of the eight flight spoiler actuators to allow flexibility in accomplishing the service bulletin. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we are issuing this AD to supersede AD 2007-06-52. This new AD retains certain requirements of the existing AD. This AD also requires accomplishing the actions specified in the service bulletin described previously, except as discussed under “Difference Between the AD and the Service Bulletin.” This AD allows 120 days from its effective date to accomplish the required actions. This amount of time is necessary to enable operators to obtain sufficient parts to modify all affected airplanes. Difference Between the AD and the Service Bulletin Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-27A1283, dated April 3, 2007, describe procedures for returning parts to the vendor, this AD does not require that action. Change to Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) Paragraph AD 2007-06-52 requires accomplishing certain actions in accordance with Boeing 737 Flight Crew Operations Manual Bulletin No. TBC-67, dated March 5, 2007. That document is specific to Boeing operations. Since we issued AD 2007-06-52, Boeing has released operator-specific versions of Bulletin No. TBC-67 for affected operators of Model 737-800 airplanes equipped with the SFP package. The operator-specific documents have been approved as AMOCs for AD 2007-06-52. For simplicity, paragraph (f)(1) of this new AD continues to require actions in accordance with Bulletin No. TBC-67. However, paragraph (l)(3) has been added to this AD to specify that the existing AMOCs that approve operator-specific documents continue to be acceptable. Clarification of Terminology We use the term “flight spoilers,” “flight spoiler actuators,” or “SFP actuators,” in this AD to refer to the affected spoilers and actuators. There are ground spoilers on the affected airplanes, but the ground spoilers have a different type of actuator and are not affected by this AD. We have added Note 1 to this AD to include this clarification. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD; therefore, providing notice and opportunity for public comment before the AD is issued is impracticable, and good cause exists to make this AD effective in less than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements that affect flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment; however, we invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-28750; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-124-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the AD that might suggest a need to modify it. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov* . Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is located on the ground floor of the West Building at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-15036 (72 FR 21083, April 30, 2007) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-15-04 Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2007-28750; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-124-AD; Amendment 39-15133. Effective Date

(a)This AD becomes effective August 8, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)This AD supersedes AD 2007-06-52. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-800 series airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 32685, 34277 through 34281 inclusive, 34474, 34475, 34654 through 34656 inclusive, 34690, 34948, 34949, 35091 through 35093 inclusive, 35103, 35134, 35176 through 35183 inclusive, 35330, 35331, 35558, 35559, and 36323 through 36328 inclusive. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report of seven flight spoiler actuator jams on Model 737-800 series airplanes equipped for short field performance (SFP). The cause of the failure has been identified as interference within the actuator main control valve. We are issuing this AD to prevent operation with defective flight spoiler actuators, which could result in a spoiler actuator hardover, and could cause the spoiler surface to jam in the fully extended position. Two or more hardover failures of the flight spoiler surfaces in the up direction on the same wing, if undetected prior to takeoff, can cause significant roll and consequent loss of control of the airplane. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Note 1: We use the term “flight spoilers,” “flight spoiler actuators,” or “SFP actuators,” in this AD to refer to the affected spoilers and actuators. There are ground spoilers on the affected airplanes, but the ground spoilers have a different type of actuator and are not affected by this AD. Restatement of the Requirements of AD 2007-06-52 Visual Check and Corrective Action

(f)Within 24 clock hours after May 7, 2007 (the effective date of AD 2007-06-52), do the actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD, as applicable, until the action required by paragraph

(h)of this AD is accomplished. The visual checks required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD may be performed by qualified personnel or flightcrew, and must be entered into the aircraft records showing compliance with this AD in accordance with 14 CFR 43.9(b) and 14 CFR 121.363 and 121.380.

(1)After every landing, visually check the spoilers to determine spoiler position, in accordance with Boeing 737 Flight Crew Operations Manual Bulletin No. TBC-67, dated March 5, 2007.

(i)If all spoilers are determined to be properly stowed, no further action is required by this paragraph.

(ii)If any spoiler is found to be improperly stowed (in the up position with the speedbrake handle in the down position), before further flight, replace the flight spoiler actuator with a flight spoiler actuator, having part number (P/N) P665A0001-01 or higher dash number, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. The “Flight Spoiler Actuator Removal” task and the “Flight Spoiler Actuator Installation” task in Chapter 27-61-51 of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Aircraft Maintenance Manual

(AMM)are approved methods for the replacement (removal and installation) of the flight spoiler actuator.

(2)After any rejected takeoff maneuver, do the visual check specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.

(3)After any maintenance action that operates the spoiler system, do an operational test of the speedbrake control system in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA. The “Speedbrake Control System Operational Test” specified in Chapter 27-62-00 of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 AMM is one approved method for the operational test of the speedbrake control system. If any spoiler panel is found to be fully extended with the speedbrake handle down, or if any spoiler panel is found fully retracted when the speedbrake handle is up, before further flight, replace the flight spoiler actuator in accordance with the actions specified in paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD. Reporting

(g)If any spoiler is found to be improperly stowed during any visual check required by this AD, at the applicable time specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, report the following information electronically to Boeing using the established Boeing Communications System (BCS): Airplane serial number, jam position, spoiler panel number or wing position of the spoiler that jammed, date of visual check, and flight hours accumulated on the airplane. Doing the action required by paragraph

(h)of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.

(1)For visual checks done before May 7, 2007: Within 7 days after May 7, 2007.

(2)For visual checks done after May 7, 2007: Within 7 days after doing the inspection. New Requirements of This AD Terminating Action

(h)Within 120 days after the effective date of this AD: Install flight spoiler actuator, P/N P665A0001-01 or higher dash number, in all eight flight spoiler positions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-27A1283, dated April 3, 2007. Doing this installation ends the requirements of paragraphs

(f)and

(g)of this AD. Any flight spoiler actuator with P/N P665A0001-01 (or higher dash number) that was previously installed in any flight spoiler position in accordance with the requirements of AD 2007-06-52 is acceptable for meeting the requirements of this AD for that flight spoiler position. Parts Installation

(i)As of May 7, 2007, no person may install a flight spoiler actuator, having P/N P665A0001-00, on any airplane. Parts Return

(j)Although the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-27A1283, dated April 3, 2007, describe procedures for returning parts to the vendor, this AD does not require that action. Special Flight Permit

(k)Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199), are subject to the requirements of paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD.

(1)Special flight permits are not allowed if any flight spoiler is found in the up position during any visual check required by paragraph

(f)of this AD.

(2)Special flight permits are allowed for ferry flights to a maintenance location to accomplish the flight spoiler actuator installation required by paragraph

(h)of this AD if no flight spoiler has failed any visual check required by paragraph

(f)of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (l)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

(3)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2007-06-52 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference

(m)You must use Boeing 737 Flight Crew Operations Manual Bulletin No. TBC-67, dated March 5, 2007; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-27A1283, dated April 3, 2007; as applicable, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.

(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-27A1283, dated April 3, 2007, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2)On May 7, 2007 (72 FR 21083, April 30, 2007), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Boeing 737 Flight Crew Operations Manual Bulletin No. TBC-67, dated March 5, 2007.

(3)Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 11, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-13979 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28747; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-275-AD; Amendment 39-15137; AD 2007-15-08] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model ATP Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD), which applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model ATP airplanes. The existing AD currently requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section

(ALS)of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness

(ICA)to incorporate life limits for certain items and inspections to detect fatigue cracking in certain structures; to incorporate new inspections to detect fatigue cracking of certain significant structural items (SSIs); and to revise life limits for certain equipment and various components. This new AD requires revising the ALS of the ICA to include revised requirements. This AD results from the determination that additional and revised inspections of the fuselage are needed. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain structural elements, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective August 8, 2007. On September 21, 2006 (71 FR 52418, September 6, 2006), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service Bulletin ATP-51-002, dated December 20, 2005. We must receive comments on this AD by September 24, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this AD. • *DOT Docket Web site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Government-wide rulemaking Web site:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Fax:*

(202)493-2251. • *Hand Delivery:* Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact British Aerospace Regional Aircraft American Support, 13850 Mclearen Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171, for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-1175; fax

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion On August 23, 2006, we issued AD 2006-18-09, amendment 39-14748 (71 FR 52418, September 6, 2006), for all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model ATP airplanes. That AD requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section

(ALS)of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness

(EASA)airworthiness directive 2006-0090, dated April 20, 2006. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued Since we issued AD 2006-18-09, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which is the airworthiness authority for the United Kingdom, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model ATP airplanes. The CAA advises that the certification requirements for damage tolerant and safe life structure are given in Chapter 5 of the BAE ATP aircraft maintenance manual (AMM). The CAA has identified the need to revise these requirements to add and change inspections of the fuselage. The revisions primarily recognize the introduction of Modification JDM60138N, which installs an energy-absorbing stop to aircraft fitted with the large freight door. Failure to adopt the latest revision of Chapter 5 of the AMM could result in fatigue cracking of certain structural elements remaining undetected, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. Relevant Service Information BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has issued revisions to Section 05-10-12, “Mandatory Life Limitations (Airframe—Structures),” dated January 15, 2007; Section 05-10-15, “Mandatory Life Limitations (Powerplant/Engine/APU—Structures),” dated January 15, 2007; and Section 05-10-17, “Structurally Significant Items (SSIs),” dated January 15, 2007; of the BAE Systems (Operations) Limited ATP AMM; which refer to additional chapters of the AMM. Those revised sections of the AMM include mandatory life limitations for the airframe and power plant/engine; and structural inspections of the fuselage, engine, horizontal stabilizer, and wing bottom surface. The revised sections also describe new inspections and compliance times for inspection and replacement actions. Accomplishment of those actions will prevent the onset of fatigue cracking of certain structural elements of the airplane. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The CAA mandated the service information and issued British airworthiness directive G-2005-0031, dated October 20, 2005 (which supersedes British airworthiness directive G-2004-0020, dated August 25, 2004), to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in the United Kingdom. Clarification of Alternative Method of Compliance

(AMOC)Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD This airplane model is manufactured in the United Kingdom and is type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the CAA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the CAA's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for products of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. This AD supersedes AD 2006-18-09 and retains the requirements of the existing AD. This AD also requires revising the ALS of the ICA to include new and revised inspections. Costs of Compliance None of the airplanes affected by this action are on the U.S. Register. All airplanes affected by this AD are currently operated by non-U.S. operators under foreign registry; therefore, they are not directly affected by this AD action. However, we consider this AD necessary to ensure that the unsafe condition is addressed if any affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the future. The following table provides the estimated costs to comply with this AD for any affected airplane that might be imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the future. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Cost per airplane ALS Revisions 1 $80 $80 FAA's Determination of the Effective Date No airplane affected by this AD is currently on the U.S. Register. Therefore, providing notice and opportunity for public comment is unnecessary before this AD is issued, and this AD may be made effective in less than 30 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements that affect flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment; however, we invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-28747; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-275-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the AD that might suggest a need to modify it. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov,* or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is located on the ground floor of the West Building at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-14748 (71 FR 52418, September 6, 2006) and by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-15-08 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited (Formerly British Aerospace Regional Aircraft):** Amendment 39-15137. Docket No. FAA-2007-28747; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-275-AD. Effective Date

(a)This AD becomes effective August 8, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)This AD supersedes AD 2006-18-09. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model ATP airplanes, certificated in any category. Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new and revised inspections. Compliance with these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph

(m)of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular

(AC)25-1529. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from the determination that additional and revised inspections of the fuselage are needed. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain structural elements, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Restatement of Requirements of AD 2006-18-09 Airworthiness Limitations Revision Specified in AD 2000-26-10

(f)Within 30 days after February 7, 2001 (the effective date of AD 2000-26-10, amendment 39-12060, which was superseded by AD 2005-19-03), revise the Airworthiness Limitations section

(ALS)of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness according to a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA. One approved method is by incorporating Section 05-00-00, dated August 15, 1997, of the British Aerospace ATP Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), dated October 15, 1999, into the ALS. This section references other chapters of the AMM. The applicable revision level of the referenced chapters is that in effect on February 7, 2001. Doing the revision specified in paragraph

(g)of this AD replaces Chapters 27, 32, 53, and 54 listed in Section 05-10-11 and Chapters 52, 53, 54, 55, and 57 listed in Section 05-10-17 that are in effect on February 7, 2001, with Chapters 27, 32, 53, and 54 listed in Section 05-10-11, “Mandatory Life Limitations (Airframe)”; and Chapters 52, 53, 54, 55, and 57 listed in Section 05-10-17, “Structurally Significant Items (SSIs)”; both dated July 15, 2004; of the British Aerospace ATP AMM. Doing the revision specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD replaces Sections 05-10-12, 05-10-15, and 05-10-17 with the corresponding sections specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD. Airworthiness Limitations Specified in AD 2005-19-03

(g)Within 30 days after September 28, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005-19-03, amendment 39-14268, which was superseded by AD 2006-18-09), revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness according to a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA. One approved method is by incorporating the tasks for Chapters 27, 32, 53, and 54 listed in Section 05-10-11, “Mandatory Life Limitations (Airframe)”; and the tasks for Chapters 52, 53, 54, 55, and 57 listed in Section 05-10-17, “Structurally Significant Items (SSIs)”; both dated July 15, 2004; of the British Aerospace ATP AMM; into the ALS. These chapters replace the corresponding chapters in Section 05-00-00, dated August 15, 1997, of the British Aerospace ATP AMM as specified in paragraph

(f)of this AD. Doing the revision specified in paragraph

(h)of this AD replaces certain Chapter 52 and 53 tasks listed in Section 05-10-17, “Structurally Significant Items (SSIs),” dated July 15, 2004, of the British Aerospace ATP AMM, with the corresponding Chapter 52 and 53 tasks listed in BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service Bulletin ATP-51-002, dated December 20, 2005. Doing the revision specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD replaces Chapters 52, 53, 54, 55, and 57 listed in Section 05-10-17 with the corresponding Section 05-10-17 specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD. New and Revised Airworthiness Limitations in AD 2006-18-09

(h)Within 30 days after September 21, 2006 (the effective date of AD 2006-18-09), revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness by incorporating the new and revised tasks for Chapters 52 and 53 as specified in BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service Bulletin ATP-51-002, dated December 20, 2005, into the ALS. The revised Chapter 52 and 53 tasks replace the corresponding Chapter 52 and 53 tasks in Section 05-10-17, “Structurally Significant Items (SSIs),” dated July 15, 2004, of the British Aerospace ATP AMM, as specified in paragraph

(g)of this AD.

(i)Except as provided by paragraph

(m)of this AD: After the actions specified in paragraphs (f), (g), and

(h)of this AD have been accomplished, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may be approved for the structural elements specified in the documents listed in paragraphs (f), (g), and

(h)of this AD. No Reporting Required

(j)Although BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service Bulletin ATP-51-002, dated December 20, 2005, specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement. New Requirements of This AD Revised Limitations

(k)Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness according to a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA. One approved method is by incorporating Section 05-10-12, “Mandatory Life Limitations (Airframe—Structures),” dated January 15, 2007; Section 05-10-15, “Mandatory Life Limitations (Powerplant/Engine/APU—Structures),” dated January 15, 2007; and Section 05-10-17, “Structurally Significant Items (SSIs),” dated January 15, 2007; of the BAE Systems (Operations) Limited ATP AMM; into the ALS. The revised sections replace the corresponding sections specified in paragraphs

(f)and

(g)of this AD.

(l)Except as provided by paragraph

(m)of this AD: After the action specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD has been accomplished, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may be approved for the structural elements specified in the documents listed in paragraph

(k)of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (m)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Related Information

(n)British airworthiness directive G-2005-0031, dated October 20, 2005, and European Aviation Safety Agency

(EASA)airworthiness directive 2006-0090, dated April 20, 2006, also address the subject of this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference

(o)You must use BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service Bulletin ATP-51-002, dated December 20, 2005, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. On September 21, 2006 (71 FR 52418, September 6, 2006), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this document. Contact British Aerospace Regional Aircraft American Support, 13850 Mclearen Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 15, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-14134 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-27431 Directorate Identifier 2007;-016-AD; Amendment 39-15132; AD 2007-15-03] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Stemme GmbH & Co. KG Model S10-V and S10-VT Powered Sailplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI)issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: Service experience showed that the connection screw of the propeller blade follower type 10AP-VM may break and the main part of the blade follower can be lost in flight. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to high vibration during powered flight and consequently result in decreased control of the aircraft. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective August 28, 2007. On August 28, 2007, the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Davison, Glider Program Manager, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:

(816)329-4130; fax:

(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on April 23, 2007 (72 FR 20072). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states that: Service experience showed that the connection screw of the propeller blade follower type 10AP-VM may break and the main part of the blade follower can be lost in flight. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to high vibration during powered flight and consequently result in decreased control of the aircraft. Stemme has developed a new blade follower, Model 10AP-VP, which is reinforced on the shaft and has an Allen head screw installed instead of a slotted screw. For the reason stated above, this Emergency Airworthiness Directive

(EAD)requires the replacement of the blade follower type 10AP-VM with the new type 10AP-VP. This EAD has been revised to correct the TCDS reference and the applicability statement. No separate TC was issued for the affected propellers. These propellers are part of the aircraft type design. Paragraph

(4)of the “Compliance” section of this EAD has been corrected. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public. Conclusion We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a **Note** within the AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect 53 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 3 work-hours per product to comply with basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $117 per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $18,921 or $357 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:

(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-15-03 Stemme GmbH & Co. KG:** Amendment 39-15132; Docket No. FAA-2007-27431; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-016-AD. Effective Date

(a)This airworthiness directive

(AD)becomes effective August 28, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Models STEMME S10-V and STEMME S10-VT powered sailplanes, all serial numbers, that:

(1)Are certificated in any category; and

(2)Have not incorporated the actions in their entirety of STEMME F & D SB A31-10-078, Am.-index: 01.a, dated November 6, 2006, which references STEMME F & D Installation Instruction A34-10-078-E, Am.-index: 01.a, dated February 20, 2007. Subject

(d)Air Transport Association of America

(ATA)Code 61: Propellers. Reason

(e)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI)states: Service experience showed that the connection screw of the propeller blade follower type 10AP-VM may break and the main part of the blade follower can be lost in flight. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to high vibration during powered flight and consequently result in decreased control of the aircraft. Stemme has developed a new blade follower, Model 10AP-VP, which is reinforced on the shaft and has an Allen head screw installed instead of a slotted screw. For the reason stated above, this Emergency Airworthiness Directive

(4)of the “Compliance” section of this EAD has been corrected. Actions and Compliance

(f)Unless already done, within the next 25 engine operating hours after August 28, 2007 (the effective date of this AD) or 90 days after August 28, 2007 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first, do the following actions:

(1)Replace the blade follower type 10AP-VM with the new type 10AP-VP following the instructions contained in STEMME F & D SB A31-10-078, Am.-index: 02.a, dated March 2, 2007, which references STEMME F & D Installation Instruction A34-10-078-E, Am.-index: 01.a, dated February 20, 2007.

(2)As of 25 engine operating hours after August 28, 2007 (the effective date of this AD) or 90 days after August 28, 2007 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first, do not install a propeller type 10AP-F, 10AP-V or 11AP-V on any aircraft, unless that propeller has the new type 10AP-VP blade follower installed following the instructions contained in STEMME F & D SB A31-10-078, Am.-index: 02.a, dated March 2, 2007, which references STEMME F & D Installation Instruction A34-10-078-E, Am.-index: 01.a, dated February 20, 2007. FAA AD Differences Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: The MCAI requires an amendment to the aircraft flight manual before further flight as an interim requirement to the replacement. We consider before flight as an urgent safety of flight compliance time, and we do not consider this unsafe condition to be an urgent safety of flight condition. We feel that 25 engine operating hours or 90 days, whichever occurs first, for the replacement is an adequate compliance for this AD action. We do encourage you to incorporate these flight manual amendments referenced in the MCAI and service information until you replace the propeller blade follower. Other FAA AD Provisions

(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, Standards Staff, FAA, ATTN: Gregory Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri, 64106; telephone:

(816)329-4130; fax:

(816)329-4090, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et. seq.* ), the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information

(h)Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency

(EASA)Emergency AD No.: 2006-0373R1-E, dated December 15, 2006, corrected January 5, 2007; STEMME F & D SB A31-10-078, Am.-index: 02.a, dated March 2, 2007; and STEMME F & D Installation Instruction A34-10-078-E, Am.-index: 01.a, dated February 20, 2007 for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference

(i)You must use STEMME F & D SB A31-10-078, Am.-index: 02.a, dated March 2, 2007, which references STEMME F & D Installation Instruction A34-10-078-E, Am.-index: 01.a, dated February 20, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.

(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Stemme GmbH & Co. KG, Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25, D-13355 Berlin, Germany; Telephone: 49.3341.3111.70; Facsimile: 49.3341.3111.73.

(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 12, 2007. Sandra J. Campbell, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-13981 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration 15 CFR Part 336 [Docket Number: 070712324-7325-01] RIN 0625-AA74 Imports of Certain Cotton Shirting Fabric: Implementation of Tariff Rate Quota Established Under the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 AGENCY: Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration. ACTION: Interim final rule, request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce is issuing interim regulations implementing Section 406 of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (“the Act”), which President Bush signed into law on December 20, 2006 (Pub. L. 109-432). Section 406(b)(1) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue licenses to eligible manufacturers under headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, specifying the restrictions under each such license on the quantity of cotton woven fabrics that may be entered each year by or on behalf of the manufacturer. DATES: This interim final rule is effective July 24, 2007. To be considered, written comments must be received by 5 p.m. on September 24, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to: R. Matthew Priest, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Textiles and Apparel, Room 3001, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sergio Botero, Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,

(202)482-4058. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department of Commerce is issuing interim regulations implementing Section 406 of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (“the Act”), which President Bush signed into law on December 20, 2006 (Pub. L. 109-432). Section 406(b)(1) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue licenses to eligible manufacturers under headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, specifying the restrictions under each such license on the quantity of cotton woven fabrics that may be entered each year by or on behalf of the manufacturer. The Act creates an annual tariff rate quota providing for temporary reductions through December 31, 2009 in the import duties of cotton woven fabrics suitable for making cotton shirts (new Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

(HTS)headings 9902.52.08, 9902.52.09, 9902.52.10, 9902.52.11, 9902.52.12, 9902.52.13, 9902.52.14, 9902.52.15, 9902.52.16, 9902.52.17, 9902.52.18, and 9902.52.19). The reduction in duty is limited to 85 percent of the total square meter equivalents of all imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton used by manufacturers in cutting and sewing men's and boy's cotton shirts in the United States and purchased by such manufacturers during calendar year 2000. The Act requires that the Secretary of Commerce must issue licenses and ensure that the tariff rate quotas are fairly allocated to eligible manufacturers under such headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19. The Department, promptly upon promulgation of these interim regulations, intends to begin the process of soliciting applications for a license allocation of the 2007 tariff rate quota. Licenses will be issued to eligible manufacturers within 60 days after the manufacturer files an application with the Department. In subsequent years the Department intends to make its determination regarding allocation of the tariff rate quota no later than December 31 of the year preceding the tariff rate quota year The tariff rate quota licenses will be issued to eligible manufacturers on the basis of the percentage of each manufacturer's quantity of imported woven fabrics described under HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 during calendar year 2000, compared to the imports of such fabric by all manufacturers that qualify for a tariff rate quota allocation. Pursuant to statutory requirements, allocation will be limited to persons (including firms, corporations, or other legal entities) who cut and sew men's and boys' cotton shirts in the United States and who, during calendar year 2000, were manufacturers cutting and sewing men's and boy's cotton shirts in the United States from imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton of the kind described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 purchased by such manufacturers during calendar year 2000. Any manufacturer who becomes a successor-of-interest to a manufacturer of the cotton woven shirts described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 during 2000 because of a reorganization or otherwise, shall be eligible to apply for a TRQ. In order to receive a license, eligible manufactures must submit ITA Form ITA-4156P entitled “Affidavit for Application for TRQ License Cotton Shirting Fabric Tariff Rate Quota” containing the following information:

(1)Company name, address, contact telephone number, e-mail address, federal tax identification number, name of person submitting the application, and title, or capacity in which the person is acting for the applicant.

(2)The name and address of each plant and/or contractor location in the United States where men's and boy's cotton shirts of imported woven fabric of the kind described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 was cut and sewn in calendar year 2000.

(3)The date of purchase shall be

(a)the invoice date if the manufacturer is not the importer of record; and

(b)the date of entry if the manufacturer is the importer of record.

(4)The quantity of imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton purchased during calendar year 2000 for use in the cutting and sewing of men's and boys' shirts in the United States. At the conclusion of the application the applicant must attest that “all information contained in the application is complete and correct and no false claims, statements or representations have been made.” Applicants should be aware that, generally, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3729 persons providing false or fraudulent claims, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 101, persons making materially false statement to representations, are subject to civil or criminal penalties, respectively. All applications must be notarized by a licensed public notary. Any business confidential information provided pursuant must be marked “business confidential.” Such information will be kept confidential and protected from disclosure to the full extent permitted by law. The applicant must retain records substantiating the information provided in the application for a period of 3 years. Such records must be made available upon request by an appropriate government official. Conditions of License Use The importer of record of fabric entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption under a license must be the Licensee or an importer authorized by the Licensee to act on its behalf. A Licensee may only authorize an importer to import fabric under the license on its behalf by making such authorization in writing or by electronic notice to the importer and providing a copy of such authorization to the Department. The authorization must include the unique number of the license, must specify the type of fabric imported by micron count, and must be in the possession of the importer at the time of filing the entry summary or warehouse withdrawal for consumption (Customs Form 7501) or its electronic equivalent. The authorization also must include the unique PIN assigned by the licensee to the importer. A copy of the authorization and PIN assigned to each importer must be provided to the Department by fax

(202)482-0667 or by mail to the Office of Textiles and Apparel, Room 3001, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230. This authorization may only be withdrawn by notifying the importer, in writing or by electronic notice, with a copy provided to the Department. The licensee also must advise the Department of each authorized importer's Importer of Record Identification Number. The licensee should inform its authorized importers that if they enter an amount less than the exact amount requested and authorized by the Import Approval, the importer must annotate the Import Approval form and send a copy to the Department and to the licensee. This annotation will be used to correct the record of use of the license. Failure to provide such information could disrupt the orderly use of the license. Imports in excess of amount of import approval are not authorized. Classification Executive Order 12866: This rule has been determined to be not significant under E.O. 12866. Administrative Procedure Act: The Department of Commerce finds good cause, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. The new HTS categories and allocation system must be implemented as soon as possible to allow TRQ recipients to import their products under the new HTS categories and allocation system. If the new HTS category and allocation system are not implemented immediately, TRQ recipients will be required to file amended entries with U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)in order to get the duty benefit. The Act entered into force in December 20, 2006, created an annual tariff rate quota providing for temporary reductions through December 31, 2009 in the import duties of cotton woven fabrics suitable for making cotton shirts (new Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

(HTS)headings 9902.52.08, 9902.52.09, 9902.52.10, 9902.52.11, 9902.52.12, 9902.52.13, 9902.52.14, 9902.52.15, 9902.52.16, 9902.52.17, 9902.52.18, and 9902.52.19). The reduction in duty is limited to 85 percent of the total square meter equivalents of all imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight cotton used by manufacturers in cutting and sewing men's and boy's cotton shirts in the United States and purchased by such manufacturer during calendar year 2000. The Act establishes that the TRQ is to be administered on a calendar year (January 1 to December 31) basis. While the Act does not specify a start date, Congress plainly intended the TRQ to be in effect in the first calendar year following the enactment, or January 1, 2007-December 31, 2007. During the calendar year of the date of application, an applicant must have cut and sewed men's and boys' cotton woven shirts in the United States. Furthermore, an applicant must have, during calendar year 2000, cut and sewed men's and boy's cotton shirts in the United States from imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton of the kind described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.5219 purchased by such manufacturer during calendar year 2000. The applicant may have cut or sewn these cotton shirts on its own behalf or had another person cut and sew the cotton shirts on the applicant's behalf, provided the applicant owned the fabric at the time it was cut and sewn. Amended entries are costly and time consuming. To obtain the duty benefits under a TRQ from a license issued after cotton fabric has cleared CBP, a Licensee would need to request its brokers and other suppliers to file amended entries on its behalf with CBP in order to obtain the duty rebates applicable to the TRQ license. This process is time consuming and costly as additional staff would need to be hired and extra hours devoted to research and file amended entries. Brokers would need to research thousand of shipments, imported into several different ports, in order to file amended entries. Brokers and other suppliers do not always have the resources and personnel in order to investigate individual shipments for individual companies to file entries retroactively. The average cost charged by brokers and suppliers for researching shipments range from $100 to $200 to file amended entries, which would in effect nullify the duty benefit for small shipments which may make up the bulk of the entries for licensees. For the same reasons above, there is good cause to find under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness. As stated above, the process of researching shipments to file amended entries is time consuming and costly. If this regulation is not implemented immediately, the costs incurred by TRQ recipients would in effect nullify any duty benefits, particularly for those TRQ recipients who have small shipments. While these regulations will be effective upon publication, the Department of Commerce hereby solicits comments on these interim regulations and will amend them in final regulations if appropriate. The Department is particularly interested in comments concerning any impact these regulations might have on small-or-medium sized businesses. Paperwork Reduction Act: This interim rule contains information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This information collection requirements have been approved by Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)under an emergency request under Control Number 0625-0260. A request for permanent approval is pending. When the approval is provided, notice will be published in the **Federal Register** . Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The information collected will be used by the Department to allocate the tariff rate quota among manufacturers. Responses to the collection of information are required for a manufacturer to receive allocation of the tariff rate quota. Records substantiating information provided in an application must be retained. It is estimated that the annual burden for the collection will average one hour per application. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 (Attention: ITA Desk Officer). Dated: July 18, 2007. Joseph A. Spetrini, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. List of Subjects 15 CFR Part 336 Imports, Quotas, Reporting and Recordkeeping, Tariffs, Textiles. For reasons stated in the preamble, Part 336 is added to title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows: PART 336—IMPORTS OF COTTON WOVEN FABRIC Sec. §336.1 Purpose. §336.2 Definitions. §336.3 Eligibility Criteria and Application Requirements to receive allocation. §336.4 Allocation. §336.5 Licenses. Authority: Section 406 Public Law 109-434. Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006. December 9, 2006. §336.1 Purpose. This part sets forth regulations regarding the issuance and effect of licenses for allocation of Cotton Woven Fabric under the Tariff Rate Quota established by Section 406 of the Act. §336.2 Definitions. **For purposes of these regulations:** *Act* means the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-434). *Cotton Shirts* means men's and boys' cotton shirts made from woven fabric containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton. *Cotton Woven Fabric* means woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton. *Department* means the United Sates Department of Commerce. *HTS* means the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. *Imports* subject to Tariff Rate Quota are defined by date of presentation as defined in 19 CFR 132.1(d) and 19 CFR 132.11(a). *Licensee* means applicant for an allocation of the Tariff Rate Quota that receives an allocation and a license. *Manufacturer* means a person or entity that cuts and sews men's and boys' cotton woven shirts in the United States. *Tariff Rate Quota or Quotas* means the temporary duty reduction provided under Section 406 of the Act for limited quantities of cotton woven fabrics entered under HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 suitable for use in making men's and boys' cotton woven shirts. *Tariff Rate Quota Year* means a calendar year for which the Tariff Rate Quotas are in effect. §336.3 Eligibility Criteria and Application Requirements to receive allocation.

(a)In each year prior to the Tariff Rate Quota Year, the Department will cause to be published a **Federal Register** notice soliciting applications to receive an allocation of the Tariff Rate Quotas.

(b)An application for a Tariff Rate Quota must be received, or postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service, within 30 calendar days after the date of publication of the **Federal Register** notice soliciting applications.

(c)Eligibility The TRQ is available to manufacturers that during the calendar year of the date of application, have cut and sewed men's and boys' cotton woven shirts in the United States. Furthermore, an applicant must have, during calendar year 2000, cut and sewed men's and boy's cotton shirts in the United States from imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton of the kind described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.5219 purchased by such manufacturer during calendar year 2000. The applicant may have cut or sewn these cotton shirts on its own behalf or had another person cut and sew the cotton shirts on the applicant's behalf, provided the applicant owned the fabric at the time it was cut and sewn. Any manufacturer who becomes a successor-of-interest to a manufacturer of the cotton shirts described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 during 2000 because of a reorganization or otherwise, shall be eligible to apply for a TRQ.

(d)Application Requirements: To receive consideration for a TRQ, an applicant must submit ITA Form ITA-4156P providing the following information:

(1)*Identification:* Company name, address, contact telephone number, e-mail address, federal tax identification number, name of person submitting the application, and title, or capacity in which the person is acting for the applicant.

(2)*Manufacturing Facilities:* The name and address of each plant or location in the United States where men's and boy's cotton shirts of imported woven fabric of the kind described in HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 was cut and sewn in calendar year 2000.

(3)*Date of purchase:* The date of purchase shall be

(a)the invoice date if the manufacturer is not the importer of record; and

(b)the date of entry if the manufacturer is the importer of record.

(4)*Quantity of fabric:* The quantity of imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton purchased during calendar year 2000 for use in the cutting and sewing of men's and boys' shirts in the United States.

(5)*Affidavit:* At the conclusion of the application an officer of the manufacturer must certify that the manufacturer is eligible to receive a license and stating the quantity of imported woven fabrics of cotton containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton purchased during calendar year 2000 for use in the cutting and sewing of men's and boys' shirts in the United States and attest that all information contained in the application is complete and correct and no false claims, statements or representations have been made. Applicants should be aware that, generally, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3729 persons providing false or fraudulent claims, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 101, persons making materially false statement to representations, are subject to civil or criminal penalties, respectively.

(6)*Notarization.* All application must be notarized by a licensed public notary.

(e)*Confidentiality.* Any business confidential information provided pursuant to this section that is marked “business confidential” will be kept confidential and protected from disclosure to the full extent permitted by law.

(f)*Record Retention:* The applicant shall retain records substantiating the information provided in §336.3(d)(2), and (3), and

(4)for a period of 3 years and the records must be made available upon request by an appropriate government official. §336.4 Allocation.

(a)The Tariff Rate Quota licenses will be issued to eligible manufacturers on the basis of the percentage of each manufacturer's quantity of imported woven fabrics described under HTS headings 9902.52.08 through 9902.52.19 during calendar year 2000, compared to the imports of such fabric by all manufacturers that qualify for a Tariff Rate Quota license.

(b)The Department will cause to be published in the **Federal Register** its determination to allocate Tariff Rate Quotas and issue licenses to manufacturers within 60 days after the manufacturers file an application with the Department. §336.5 Licenses.

(a)Each Licensee will receive a license, which will include a unique control number.

(b)A license may be exercised only for fabric entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, during the Tariff Rate Quota Year specified in the license. A licensee will be debited on the basis of date of entry for consumption or withdrawal from warehouse for consumption.

(c)A Licensee may import fabric certified by the importer as suitable for use in making men's and boys' cotton shirts under the Tariff Rate Quota as specified in the license up to the quantity specified in the license subject to the Tariff Rate Quota duty rate. Only a Licensee or an importer authorized by a Licensee will be permitted to import fabric under the Tariff Rate Quota and to receive the Tariff Rate Quota duty rate.

(d)The term of the license shall be the Tariff Rate Quota Year for which it is issued. Fabric may be entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption under a license only during the term of that license. The license cannot be used for fabric entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption after December 31 of the year of the term of the license.

(e)The importer of fabric entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption under a license must be the Licensee or an importer authorized by the licensee to act on its behalf. If the importer of record is the Licensee, the importer must possess the license at the time of filing the entry summary or warehouse withdrawal for consumption (Customs Form 7501).

(f)A Licensee may only authorize an importer to import fabric under the license on its behalf by making such an authorization in writing or by electronic notice to the importer and providing a copy of such authorization to the Department. A Licensee may only withdraw authorization from an importer by notifying the importer, in writing or by electronic notice, and providing a copy to the Department.

(g)The written authorization must include a unique number of the license, must specifically cover the type of fabric imported, and must be in possession of the importer at the time of filing the entry summary or warehouse withdrawal for consumption (Customs Form 7501), or its electronic equivalent, in order for the importer to obtain the applicable Tariff Rate Quota duty rate. The authorization also must include the unique PIN assigned by the licensee to the importer. A copy of the authorization and PIN assigned to each importer must be provided to the Department by fax

(202)482-0667 or by mail to the Office of Textiles and Apparel, Room 3001, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230 . The licensee also must advise the Department of each authorized importer's Importer of Record Identification Number.

(h)It is the responsibility of the Licensee to safeguard the use of the license issued. The Department and U.S. Customs and Border Protection will not be liable for any improper use of the license.

(i)The licensee should inform its authorized importers that if they enter an amount less than the exact amount requested and authorized by the Import Approval, the importer must annotate the Import Approval form and send a copy to the Department and to the licensee. This annotation will be used to correct the record of use of the license. Failure to provide such information could disrupt the orderly use of the license. Imports in excess of amount of import approval are not authorized. [FR Doc. E7-14321 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration 21 CFR Part 1310 [Docket No. DEA-257C] RIN 1117-AA93 Changes in the Regulation of Iodine Crystals and Chemical Mixtures Containing Over 2.2 Percent Iodine; Correction AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Justice ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: On July 2, 2007, the Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA)published a final rule in the **Federal Register** changing the regulation of iodine under the Controlled Substances Act. Several amendatory instructions amending the Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)to implement this rulemaking were published in error. This correction corrects those errors. EFFECTIVE DATES: This correction is effective July 24, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, PhD, Chief, Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537 at

(202)307-7183. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 2, 2007, the Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA)published a Final Rule in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 35920) changing the regulation of iodine under the Controlled Substances Act. As part of that rulemaking, several sections in Part 1310 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)were amended. However, DEA previously published several documents in the **Federal Register** adding similarly designated paragraphs. Thus, the final rule regarding the regulation of iodine published July 2, 2007 at 72 FR 35920 inadvertently removed those previous amendments. Therefore, this document corrects the amendments to the affected CFR sections to correctly designate paragraphs, thus reflecting all amendments to Part 1310 of Title 21 of the CFR. Accordingly, the final rule published July 2, 2007, at 72 FR 35920 (FR Doc. E7-12736) is corrected as follows: PART 1310—RECORDS AND REPORTS OF LISTED CHEMICALS AND CERTAIN MACHINES [AMENDED] 1. On page 35931, amendment 4 is corrected to read as follows: “4. Section 1310.02 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(29), removing paragraph (b)(11), and redesignating paragraph (b)(12) as paragraph (b)(11) to read as follows:” § 1310.02 Substances covered.

(a)* * *

(29)Iodine 6699 2. On page 35931, amendment 5 is corrected to read as follows: “5. Section 1310.04 is amended by removing paragraph (f)(2)(ii)(H); redesignating (f)(2)(ii)(I) and (f)(2)(ii)(J) as (f)(2)(ii)(H) and (f)(2)(ii)(I); and adding a new paragraph (g)(1)(vii) to read as follows:” § 1310.04 Maintenance of records.

(g)* * *

(1)* * *

(vii)Iodine 3. On page 35931, amendment 7 is corrected to read as follows: “7. Section 1310.09 is amended by adding new paragraph

(i)to read as follows:” § 1310.09 Temporary exemption from registration.

(i)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. Dated: July 17, 2007. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control. [FR Doc. E7-14317 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [CGD11-07-012] Drawbridge Operation Regulations; China Basin, San Francisco, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations. SUMMARY: The Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District, has issued a temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the Third Street Drawbridge across China Basin, mile 0.0, at San Francisco, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the public to cross the bridge to participate in the scheduled San Francisco Marathon, a community event. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the marathon. DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. through 12:30 p.m. on July 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for inspection or copying at Commander (dpw), Eleventh Coast Guard District, Building 50-2, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA 94501-5100, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is

(510)437-3516. The Eleventh Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this temporary deviation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District, telephone

(510)437-3516. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The City of San Francisco requested a temporary change to the operation of the Third Street Drawbridge, mile 0.0, over China Basin, at San Francisco, CA. The Third Street Drawbridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 7 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw opens on signal if at least one hour notice is given as required by 33 CFR 117.149. Navigation on the waterway is recreational. The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position 7 a.m. through 12:30 p.m. on July 29, 2007 to allow participants in the San Francisco Marathon to cross the bridge during the event. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised. Vessels that can transit the bridge, while in the closed-to-navigation position, may continue to do so at any time. In the event of an emergency the draw can be opened with 30 minutes advance notice. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. Dated: July 13, 2007. C.E. Bone, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-14203 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [CGD05-07-074] RIN 1625-AA-09 Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Potomac River, Between Maryland and Virginia AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations. SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District, has approved a temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the new Woodrow Wilson Memorial (I-95) Bridge, mile 103.8, across Potomac River between Alexandria, Virginia and Oxon Hill, Maryland. This deviation allows the new drawbridge to remain closed-to-navigation each day from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. beginning on July 23, 2007 until and including January 25, 2008, to facilitate testing and commissioning for the new Woodrow Wilson Bridge construction project. DATES: This deviation is effective from 10 a.m. on July 23, 2007, until 2 p.m. on January 25, 2008. ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for inspection or copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-5004 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is

(757)398-6222. Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this temporary deviation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District, at

(757)398-6222. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In June 2006, the southernmost portion of the bascule spans for the new Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge, at mile 103.8, across Potomac River between Alexandria, Virginia and Oxon Hill, Maryland was publicly placed into service, switching I-95 Northbound traffic onto the new Outer Loop portion of the bridge. The newly-constructed portion of the bridge will be required to open for vessels in accordance with the current drawbridge operating regulations set out in 33 CFR 117.255(a). While the drawbridge is operational, coordinators for the construction of the new Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project indicated that the bascule span is not yet fully commissioned and cannot run at full speed, resulting in extended Interstate 95/495 traffic stoppages during openings. Opening the new bascule span for a vessel at this time would take approximately 45 minutes in a best case scenario. This has the potential to have a significant impact upon I-95 traffic, especially during the 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. bridge-opening time frame currently available for commercial vessels, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.255(a). Coordinators requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulation for the new Woodrow Wilson Memorial (I-95) Bridge set out in 33 CFR 117.255(a). Though good progress has been made regarding commissioning of the north and south drawbridges (both now carrying I-95 vehicle traffic), the coordinators are requesting an additional six months of the 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. restriction of bridge operation to proceed with commissioning activities through January 25, 2008. From a river-user standpoint, the coordinators have received no requests from boaters or mariners to open during the 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. timeframe since the restriction was issued in late June 2006. In fact, the coordinators have received no complaints on the 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. restriction. The coordinators requested that the new Outer Loop portion of the new drawbridge not be available for openings for vessels each day between the hours of 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. from Monday, July 23, 2007 through Friday, January 25, 2008, or until the bridge is properly commissioned, whichever comes first. The temporary deviation will only affect vessels with mast heights of 75 feet or greater. Management of the Federal and auxiliary channels will continue to be closely coordinated between the coordinators for the construction of the new Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project, the Coast Guard and vessels requesting transit through the construction zone. Furthermore, all affected vessels with mast heights greater than 75 feet will be able to receive an opening of the new drawbridge in the “off-peak” vehicle traffic hours (evening and overnight) in accordance with 33 CFR 117.255(a). Maintaining the new drawbridge in the closed-to-navigation position each day from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on July 23, 2007 through January 25, 2008, will help reduce the impact to vehicular traffic during this phase of the new bridge construction. The Coast Guard has informed the known users of the waterway of the closure period for the bridge so that these vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. Dated: July 16, 2007. Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Chief, Bridge Administration Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-14261 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [COTP JACKSONVILLE 07-163] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zones; Escorted Vessels in the Captain of the Port Jacksonville Zone AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily establishing security zones around any vessel escorted by one or more Coast Guard, State, or local law enforcement assets within the Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, FL. No vessel or person is allowed within 100-yards of an escorted vessel, while within the navigable waters of the Captain of the Port Zone, Jacksonville, FL, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Jacksonville, FL or designated representative. Additionally, all vessels within 500 yards of an escorted vessel in the Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, FL will be required to operate at a minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course. This action is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and facilities from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other events of a similar nature. DATES: This rule is effective from July 1, 2007, through January 1, 2008. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket (COTP Jacksonville 07-163) and are available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville, 4200 Ocean St, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Austin Ives at Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville Prevention Department, Florida tel:

(904)564-7563. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553 (b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Security zones around escorted vessels are necessary to ensure the safe transit of the escorted vessels as well as the public. Certain vessel movements are more vulnerable to terrorist acts and it would be contrary to the public interest to publish an NPRM which would incorporate a notice and comment period that would delay the effective date of this regulation. For the same reasons and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Background and Purpose The terrorist attacks of September 2001 heightened the need for development of various security measures throughout the seaports of the United States, particularly around vessels and facilities whose presence or movement creates a heightened vulnerability to terrorist acts; or those for which the consequences of terrorist acts represent a threat to national security. The President of the United States has found that the security of the United States is and continues to be endangered following the attacks of September 11 (E.O. 13,273, 67 FR 56215, Sep. 3, 2002). Additionally, national security and intelligence officials continue to warn that future terrorist attacks are likely. King's Bay, GA, and the Ports of Jacksonville, FL, and Canaveral, FL receive vessels that carry sensitive Department of Defense cargoes as well as foreign naval vessels that require additional safeguards. The Captain of the Port

(COTP)Jacksonville has determined that these vessels have a significant vulnerability to subversive activity by vessels or persons within the Jacksonville Captain of the Port Zone, as described in 33 CFR 3.35-20. This rule enables the COTP Jacksonville to provide effective port security, while minimizing the public's confusion and ease the administrative burden of implementing separate temporary security zones for each escorted vessel. Discussion of Rule This rule prohibits persons and vessels from coming within 100 yards of all escorted vessels within the navigable waters of the Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, FL, as described in 33 CFR 3.35-20. No vessel or person may enter within a 100-yard radius of an escorted vessel unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Jacksonville, FL or his designated representative. Persons or vessels that receive permission to enter the security zone must proceed at a minimum safe speed and must comply with all orders issued by the COTP or his designated representative. Additionally, a vessel operating within 500 yards of an escorted vessel must proceed at a minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course, unless otherwise required to maintain speed by the navigation rules, and must comply with the orders of the COTP Jacksonville or his designated representative. It is expected that the duration of this rule will allow us to complete a notice-and-comment rulemaking for a permanent solution to the problem this temporary final rule addresses. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. While recognizing the potential impacts to the public, the Coast Guard believes the security zones are necessary for the reasons described above. However, we expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. There is generally enough room for vessels to navigate around these security zones. Where such room is not available and security conditions permit, the Captain of the Port will attempt to provide flexibility for individual vessels as needed. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit King's Bay and the Ports of Jacksonville and Canaveral in the vicinity of escorted vessels. This rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because the zones are limited in size, leaving in most cases ample space for vessels to navigate around them. The zones will not significantly impact commercial and passenger vessel traffic patterns, and mariners will be notified of the zones via Local Notice to Mariners and marine broadcasts. Where such room is not available and security conditions permit, the Captain of the Port will attempt to provide flexibility for individual vessels to transit through the zones as needed. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would affect it economically. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Although this rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule would not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. We invite your comments on how this rule might impact tribal governments, even if that impact may not constitute a “tribal implication” under the Order. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( *e.g.* , specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A final “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T07-163 to read as follows: § 165.T07-163 Security Zones; Escorted Vessels in the Captain of the Port Jacksonville Zone.

(a)*Definitions.* The following definitions apply to this section: *Designated representatives* means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), Jacksonville, Florida, in the enforcement of the regulated navigation areas and security zones. *Escorted vessel* means a vessel, other than a U.S. naval vessel as defined in § 165.2015 that is accompanied by one or more Coast Guard assets or other Federal, State or local law enforcement agency assets as listed below:

(1)Coast Guard surface or air asset displaying the Coast Guard insignia.

(2)Coast Guard Auxiliary surface asset displaying the Coast Guard Auxiliary insignia.

(3)State and/or local law enforcement asset displaying the applicable agency markings and/or equipment associated with the agency. *Minimum Safe Speed* means the speed at which a vessel proceeds when it is fully off plane, completely settled in the water and not creating excessive wake. Due to the different speeds at which vessels of different sizes and configurations may travel while in compliance with this definition, no specific speed is assigned to minimum safe speed. In no instance should minimum safe speed be interpreted as a speed less than that required for a particular vessel to maintain steerageway. A vessel is not proceeding at minimum safe speed if it is:

(1)On a plane;

(2)In the process of coming up onto or coming off a plane; or

(3)Creating an excessive wake. *State and/or local law enforcement officer* means any State or local government law enforcement officer who has authority to enforce State or local laws.

(b)*Regulated Area.* All navigable waters within the Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, FL, as described in 33 CFR 3.35-20.

(c)*Regulations.*

(1)A 100-yard Security Zone is established around, and centered on each escorted vessel within the Regulated Area. This is a moving security zone when the escorted vessel is in transit and becomes a fixed zone when the Escorted vessel is anchored or moored. The general regulations for Security Zones contained in § 165.33 of this part apply to this section.

(2)A vessel in the Regulated Area operating between 100 yards and 500 yards of an Escorted vessel must proceed at the minimum safe speed, unless otherwise required to maintain speed by the navigation rules, and must comply with the orders of the COTP Jacksonville or his designated representative.

(3)Persons or vessels shall contact the COTP Jacksonville to request permission to deviate from these regulations. The COTP Jacksonville may be contacted at

(904)247-7318 or on VHF channel 16.

(4)The COTP will inform the public of the existence or status of Escorted vessels in the Regulated Area by Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

(d)*Dates.* This section is effective from July 1, 2007, through January 1, 2008. Dated: June 29, 2007. Paul F. Thomas, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Jacksonville. [FR Doc. E7-14207 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [COTP MIAMI 07-065] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Biscayne Bay Yacht Racing Association Full Moon Races, Biscayne Bay, Miami, FL AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for the Biscayne Bay Yacht Racing Association (BBYRA) Full Moon Races, which will temporarily limit the movement of non-participant vessels in Biscayne Bay in Miami, FL. This temporary safety zone is intended to restrict vessels from entering the waters where the event will be held unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Miami, Florida, or designated representative. This regulation is needed to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event to participants, marine spectators and recreational and professional mariner traffic. DATES: This rule is effective from 7 p.m. on June 30, 2007 until 11 p.m. on August 25, 2007. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket COTP MIAMI 07-065 and are available for inspection or copying at Sector Miami, 100 MacArthur Causeway, Miami Beach, FL 33139 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MSTCS R. Johnson, Coast Guard Sector Miami, Florida, at

(305)535-4317. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Notice of these events was not provided to the Coast Guard with sufficient time to publish an NPRM and receive public comment before the event date. Furthermore, good cause exists because this temporary safety zone will not significantly restrict the use of the waterway as all vessels will be able to safely transit around the zone. A Coast Guard Patrol Commander will be available and the Coast Guard will also issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners. This temporary rule is necessary to ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and the general public on the navigable waters of the United States. Under 5 U.S.C. (d)(3), for the same reasons articulated in the preceding paragraph, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Background and Purpose The Biscayne Bay Yacht Racing Association is sponsoring the BBYRA Full Moon Races, approximately 12 sailboats, 20 to 54 feet in the length, are expected to participate. The events will be held on the evenings of June 31, July 28, and August 25, 2007. The public is invited to attend. The high concentration of event participants, spectators, and the general boating public presents an extra hazard to the safety of life on the navigable waters of the United States. A safety zone encompassing the waters in the Biscayne Bay & Intracoastal Waterway is necessary to protect participants as well as spectators from hazards associated with the event. Discussion of Rule This rule establishes a temporary safety zone for the BBYRA Full Moon Races in Biscayne Bay in Miami, FL. The safety zone is 100 yards around all race participants as they transit the waters of Biscayne Bay south of the Rickenbaucker Causeway to Latitude 25°32′00″ . Vessels are prohibited from anchoring, mooring, or transiting within this zone, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Miami, Florida, or designated representative. A succession of not fewer than 5 short whistle or horn blasts from a Coast Guard patrol vessel will be the signal for any and all vessels within the safety zone to take immediate steps to avoid collision. Traffic may resume normal operations at the completion of the scheduled races and exhibitions as determined by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. This regulation will be enforced from 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. on June 30, July 28, and August 25, 2007. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Entry into the safety zone is prohibited for only limited time periods, and all vessels should be able to safely transit around the zone at all times. If the Coast Guard Patrol Commander determines that it is safe for vessels to transit the zone, vessels may proceed through the zone between scheduled racing events. Traffic may resume normal operations at the completion of scheduled races and exhibitions as determined by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. Finally, advance notifications to the maritime community through marine information broadcasts will allow mariners to adjust plans accordingly. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the waters of the Biscayne Bay during the effective period. This temporary safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule will be in effect for only 4.0 hours in the evening when vessel traffic is low, vessel traffic may safely pass around the zone, and vessels may pass through the zone with the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the rule will affect your small business, organization, or government jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for assistance in understanding this rule. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order, because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( *e.g.,* specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A final “Environmental Analysis Checklist” and “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under addresses. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T07-065 to read as follows: § 165.T07-065 Safety Zone; Biscayne Bay Yacht Racing Association Full Moon Races; Biscayne Bay, Miami, FL.

(a)*Location.* A temporary safety zone is established for the BBYRA Full Moon Races, Biscayne Bay, Miami, Florida. The safety zone is 100 yards around all race participants as they transit the waters of Biscayne Bay south of the Rickenbaucker Causeway to Latitude 25°32′00″.

(b)*Definitions.* The following definitions apply to this section: *Designated representative* is a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port of Miami in restricting vessels and persons from entering the temporary safety zone.

(c)*Regulations.*

(1)In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, no person or vessel may anchor, moor or transit a safety zone without permission of the Captain of the Port Sector Miami or his designated representative. To request permission to enter into a safety zone, the designated representative may be contacted on VHF channel 16.

(2)Between scheduled events, the Coast Guard Patrol Commander may permit traffic to resume normal operations for a limited time.

(3)A succession of not fewer than 5 short whistle or horn blasts from a Coast Guard patrol vessel will be the signal for any and all vessels within the safety zone defined in paragraph

(a)to take immediate steps to avoid collision.

(d)*Enforcement Period.* This temporary safety zone will be enforced between the hours of 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. on the following days: June 30, July 28, and August 25, 2007.

(e)*Effective Dates.* This rule is effective from 7 p.m. on June 30, 2007 until 11 p.m. on August 25, 2007. Dated: June 27, 2007. K.L. Schultz, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami, FL. [FR Doc. E7-14265 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 122 and 412 [EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0036; FRL-8444-8] RIN 2040-AE92 Revised Compliance Dates Under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Regulations and Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This rule extends certain compliance dates in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting requirements and Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards

(ELGs)for concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) while EPA works to complete rulemaking to respond to the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in *Waterkeeper Alliance et al.* v. *EPA* , 399 F.3d 486 (2nd Cir. 2005). The sole purpose of this rule is to address timing issues associated with the Agency's response to the *Waterkeeper* decision. This final rule revises the dates established in the 2003 CAFO rule and later modified by a rule published in the **Federal Register** on February 10, 2006, by which facilities newly defined as CAFOs are required to seek permit coverage and by which all permitted CAFOs are required to develop and implement their nutrient management plans (NMPs). EPA is extending the date by which operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, that were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date, must seek NPDES permit coverage, from July 31, 2007, to February 27, 2009. EPA is also amending the date by which operations that become defined as CAFOs after April 14, 2003, due to operational changes that would not have made them a CAFO prior to April 14, 2003, and that are not new sources, must seek NPDES permit coverage, from July 31, 2007, to February 27, 2009. Finally, EPA is extending the deadline by which permitted CAFOs are required to develop and implement NMPs, from July 31, 2007, to February 27, 2009. EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective as of July 24, 2007. ADDRESSES: EPA established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-OW-2005-0036. This is where you can obtain a copy of all materials related to this rulemaking, including the comment response document and the rule. All documents in the docket are listed on the *www.regulations.gov* Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, *e.g.* , CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is

(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is

(202)566-2426. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Roose, Water Permits Division, Office of Wastewater Management (4203M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:

(202)564-0758, e-mail address: *roose.rebecca@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information Does This Action Apply to Me? II. Background A. The Clean Water Act B. History of Actions To Address CAFOs Under the NPDES Permitting Program C. Status of EPA's Response to the Waterkeeper Decision D. History of CAFO Compliance Dates E. Proposed Rule III. This Final Rule A. New Deadlines for Permit Applications and for Permitted CAFOs To Develop and Implement Nutrient Management Plans 1. Application Deadline for Newly Defined CAFOs 2. Deadline for Nutrient Management Plans B. Rationale for This Action IV. Effective Date of This Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. General Information Does This Action Apply to Me? This action applies to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) as defined in section 502(14) of the Clean Water Act and in the NPDES regulations at 40 CFR 122.23. The following table provides a list of standard industrial codes for operations covered under this revised rule. Table 1.—Entities Potentially Regulated by This Rule Category Examples of regulated entities North American industry code

(NAIC)Standard industrial classification code Federal, State, and Local Government Industry Operators of animal production operations that meet the definition of a CAFO Beef cattle feedlots (including veal) 112112 0211 Beef cattle ranching and farming 112111 0212 Hogs 11221 0213 Sheep 11241, 11242 0214 General livestock except dairy and poultry 11299 0219 Dairy farms 11212 0241 Broilers, fryers, and roaster chickens 11232 0251 Chicken eggs 11231 0252 Turkey and turkey eggs 11233 0253 Poultry hatcheries 11234 0254 Poultry and eggs 11239 0259 Ducks 112390 0259 Horses and other equines 11292 0272 This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your facility may be regulated under this rulemaking, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 122.23. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. II. Background A. The Clean Water Act Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (1972), also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters.” 33 U.S.C. 1251(a). Among its core provisions, the CWA established the NPDES permit program to authorize and regulate the discharge of pollutants from point sources to waters of the U.S. 33 U.S.C. 1342. EPA has issued comprehensive regulations that implement the NPDES program at 40 CFR parts 122-124. The Act also provided for the development of technology-based and water quality-based effluent limitations that are imposed through NPDES permits to control the discharge of pollutants from point sources. CWA section 301(a) and (b). B. History of Actions To Address CAFOs Under the NPDES Permitting Program EPA's regulation of wastewater and manure from CAFOs dates from the 1970s. EPA initially issued national effluent limitations guidelines and standards for feedlots on February 14, 1974, (39 FR 5704) and NPDES CAFO regulations on March 18, 1976 (41 FR 11458). In February 2003, EPA revised these regulations. 68 FR 7176 (the “2003 CAFO rule”). The 2003 CAFO rule required owners or operators of all CAFOs 1 to seek coverage under an NPDES permit, unless they demonstrated no potential to discharge. CAFO industry organizations (American Farm Bureau Federation, National Pork Producers Council, National Chicken Council, and National Turkey Federation (NTF), although NTF later withdrew its petition) and several environmental groups (Waterkeeper Alliance, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and American Littoral Society) filed petitions for judicial review of certain aspects of the 2003 CAFO rule. This case was brought before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On February 28, 2005, the court ruled on these petitions and upheld most provisions of the 2003 rule but vacated and/or remanded others. *Waterkeeper Alliance et al.* v. *EPA* , 399 F.3d 486 (2nd Cir. 2005) (hereinafter *Waterkeeper* ). Notably, the court vacated the requirement that all CAFOs apply for an NPDES permit unless a CAFO demonstrates no potential to discharge. The court also remanded the rule for failing to require incorporation of the terms of CAFOs' nutrient management plans

(NMPs)into their permits and for failing to prescribe public review and comment and permitting authority approval of the terms of the NMPs. Other provisions were remanded for further clarification and analysis. 1 To improve readability in this preamble, reference is made to “CAFOs” as well as “owners and operators of CAFOs.” No change in meaning is intended. C. Status of EPA's Response to the Waterkeeper Decision On June 30, 2006, EPA published a proposed rule to revise several aspects of the Agency's regulations governing discharges from CAFOs in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision. 71 FR 37744. EPA is briefly describing the proposed revisions to the 2003 CAFO here for context only. The proposed provisions in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision are beyond the scope of this final rule, and EPA is not addressing those provisions in this final rule. In summary, EPA proposed to require only owners or operators of those CAFOs that discharge or propose to discharge to seek authorization to discharge under a permit. Second, EPA proposed to require CAFOs seeking authorization to discharge under individual permits to submit their NMPs with their permit applications or, under general permits, with their notices of intent. Permitting authorities would be required to review the NMP and provide the public with an opportunity for meaningful public review and comment. Permitting authorities would also be required to incorporate terms of the NMP as NPDES permit conditions. The proposed rule also addressed the remand of issues for further clarification and analysis. These issues concern clarifications regarding the applicability of water quality-based effluent limitations (WQBELs); new source performance standards for swine, poultry, and veal CAFOs; and “best conventional technology” effluent limitations guidelines for fecal coliform. The June 2006 proposed rule reflected the dates for compliance as revised on February 10, 2006 (71 FR 6978), *i.e.* , July 31, 2007, for permit application by newly defined CAFOs and NMP development and implementation by all permitted CAFOs. The public comment period for the June 2006 CAFO proposed rule closed on August 29, 2006. EPA will respond to the comments received when it takes final action on the June 30, 2006, proposed rule. *See* docket EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037. D. History of CAFO Compliance Dates The 2003 CAFO rule amended the definition of “CAFO” to add facilities that had not previously been defined as CAFOs (in the 1976 regulations). 40 CFR 122.23(b). Operations newly defined as CAFOs in the 2003 CAFO rule included veal operations, swine weighing less than 55 pounds, chicken and layer operations using other than liquid manure handling systems, and animal feeding operations

(AFOs)that were previously not defined as CAFOs because they discharged only in the event of a 25-year/24-hour storm. CAFOs in these categories that were in existence when the 2003 CAFO rule took effect (April 14, 2003) represent the group of CAFOs that were initially subject to a February 13, 2006, deadline to apply for an NPDES permit. 68 FR 7267. In addition, other existing facilities that became defined as CAFOs under the revised CAFO definitions in the 2003 CAFO rule include so-called “new dischargers” that, subsequent to the effective date of the 2003 CAFO rule, have become CAFOs due to changes in their operations, where such changes would not have made the operation a CAFO prior to April 14, 2003. This second group of facilities was initially required to seek permit coverage by April 13, 2006, or 90 days after becoming defined as a CAFO, whichever date is later. 68 FR 7268. Thus, each of these groups of CAFOs were allowed three years from the 2003 rule to seek authorization to discharge under an NPDES permit when EPA issued the 2003 CAFO rule. EPA reasoned in the 2003 CAFO rule, and reiterated in the February 2006 date change rule, that allowing newly regulated entities three years to come into compliance was consistent with Congressional intent, as expressed in the Clean Water Act with respect to newly established point sources. Moreover, the Agency stated that the three-year timeframe was necessary for States authorized to administer the NPDES permit program to provide permit coverage for CAFOs that were not previously required to be permitted and to revise State regulatory programs. 68 FR 7204. In addition to the requirements to seek permit coverage, the 2003 CAFO rule also required all permitted CAFOs to develop and implement NMPs by December 31, 2006. EPA believed that this date was reasonable given that CAFOs would have had a little over three and a half years from the issuance of the 2003 rule to develop and implement an NMP. This time frame allowed States to update their NPDES programs and issue permits to reflect the NMP requirements of the 2003 CAFO rule. It also provided flexibility for permitting authorities to establish permit schedules based on specific circumstances, such as prioritization of nutrient management plan development and implementation based on site-specific water quality risks and the available infrastructure for development of NMPs. The timing of these compliance deadlines was affected by EPA's need to revise the CAFO rule as a result of the Second Circuit's decision in the *Waterkeeper* case. On February 10, 2006, prior to the Agency's June 2006 proposed rule responding to the *Waterkeeper* decision, EPA promulgated a rule to revise each of the compliance dates in the 2003 CAFO rule that were affected by the decision (hereinafter “2006 date rule”). 71 FR 6978. Specifically, EPA extended the dates for those newly defined CAFOs described above to seek NPDES permit coverage and the date by which all CAFOs must develop and implement NMPs. EPA revised these dates in order to:

(1)Provide the Agency sufficient time to take final action on the regulatory revisions with respect to the *Waterkeeper* decision; and

(2)require NMPs to be submitted at the time of the permit application, consistent with the court's decision. It was necessary for EPA to revise the dates separately from addressing the rest of the issues raised by the *Waterkeeper* decision because EPA had not completed the final rule responding to the *Waterkeeper* decision prior to the dates by which newly defined CAFOs were required to seek permit coverage under the 2003 rule. E. Proposed Rule On May 10, 2007, EPA proposed to further extend only the date by which certain operations must seek authorization to discharge under an NPDES permit and the date by which all permitted CAFOs must develop and implement their NMPs. 2 EPA proposed to revise these compliance dates because EPA would not complete a final rule revising the 2003 CAFO rule before the July 31, 2007, deadlines. The public comment period closed on June 11, 2007. EPA received a total of 17 comments on the May 10, 2007, proposed rule. 2 Note that in response to the Waterkeeper decision, EPA proposed a variation to the “develop and implement” language of the June 2006 proposal which stated that a CAFO operator must submit an NMP with its permit application or NOI and that it must be implemented upon permit coverage. 71 FR 37744. III. This Final Rule A. New Deadlines for Permit Applications and for Permitted CAFOs To Develop and Implement Nutrient Management Plans This final rule extends certain dates for compliance specified in the 2003 CAFO rule and amended by the 2006 date rule. Because EPA will not have completed the rulemaking responding to the *Waterkeeper* decision prior to the dates by which newly defined CAFOs must seek permit coverage, the Agency is revising these dates to a time that is subsequent to the forthcoming CAFO rule revision. This rule amends the section detailing when operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, that were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date, and operations that become CAFOs after that date due to operational changes that would not have made then a CAFO prior to April 14, 2003, and that are not new sources must seek NPDES permit coverage. Second, EPA is amending the deadline by which permitted CAFOs are required to develop and implement NMPs. This final rule does not modify or otherwise affect any other existing regulatory provisions, nor does it promulgate any regulatory provisions associated with the proposed rule in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision, published on June 30, 2006. 71 FR 37744. 1. Application Deadline for Newly Defined CAFOs EPA is extending the date by which operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, that were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date, must seek NPDES permit coverage, from July 31, 2007, to February 27, 2009. This deadline, found at 40 CFR 122.23(g)(2), applies to “dry” chicken operations, stand-alone immature swine, heifer and calf operations, and those animal feeding operations

(AFOs)that were entitled to the permitting exemption for discharging only in the event of a 25-year, 24-hour storm. EPA is also amending the date by which operations that became defined as CAFOs after April 14, 2003, or that will become CAFOs due to operational changes that would not have made them a CAFO prior to April 14, 2003, and that are not new sources, must seek NPDES permit coverage, from July 31, 2007, to February 27, 2009. An example of an operation affected by this deadline, which is found at 40 CFR 122.23(g)(3)(iii), is an AFO that increases the number of animals in confinement to a level that would result in the operation becoming defined as a CAFO. This final rule does not affect the applicable time for seeking permit coverage for newly constructed CAFOs not subject to new source performance standards

(NSPS)or for new source CAFOs subject to NSPS that discharge or propose to discharge, even those in categories that were added to the definition of a CAFO in the 2003 CAFO rule. Those CAFOs are required by 40 CFR 122.21(a) and 123.23(g)(3)(i) and (g)(4) to seek NPDES permit coverage at least 180 days prior to the time that they commence operating. This final rule does not supersede State requirements. States may choose to require CAFOs to obtain NPDES permits in advance of the dates set in the federal NPDES regulations. Further, CAFOs that are already permitted, *e.g.* , CAFOs that existed prior to the effective date of the 2003 CAFO rule and have been required to seek NPDES permit coverage even before EPA issued the 2003 CAFO rule, continue to be required to maintain permit coverage pursuant to § 122.23(h). EPA is also correcting a typographical error that was created in the 2006 date rule. In that rule, 40 CFR 122.23(g)(1) as promulgated in the 2003 CAFO rule (which provides that existing operations defined as CAFOs prior to April 14, 2003, must seek permit coverage by the effective date of the 2003 rule) was inadvertently replaced with 40 CFR 122.23(g)(2) (which provides extended compliance dates for operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, which were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date). Because the “(2)” was erroneously printed as “(1)”, § 122.23(g)(1) was overwritten and § 122.23(g)(2) was incorrectly left unchanged. As a result, the rule following the February 2006 date extension contained two provisions applicable to “Operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, who were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date” with conflicting dates. EPA is restoring the original § 122.23(g)(1), as promulgated in 2003, and revising the date in § 122.23(g)(2) to reflect the date extension finalized by this rule. 2. Deadline for Nutrient Management Plans EPA is extending the deadline by which permitted CAFOs are required to develop and implement NMPs, from July 31, 2007, to February 27, 2009. This action revises all references to the date by which CAFOs must develop and implement NMPs currently in 40 CFR parts 122 and 412. Thus, this rule revises the deadlines found in 40 CFR 122.21(i)(1)(x), 122.42(e)(1), 412.31(b)(3), and 412.43(b)(2). This final rule does not supersede State requirements, nor does it affect CAFOs operating under existing permits, so long as those permits remain in effect. If their existing permits require development and implementation of an NMP, currently permitted CAFOs must develop and implement their NMPs in accordance with the terms of their current permit, or their applicable State requirements. This rule also does not affect the existing applicable land application limitations and requirements for all CAFOs subject to the new source performance standards under 40 CFR 412.35 and 40 CFR 412.46. Upon permit coverage, new sources must meet all relevant land application requirements. B. Rationale for This Action The amount of time needed to revise the rule in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision has been greater than EPA anticipated at the time it promulgated the 2006 date rule. At the time of the 2006 date rule, EPA believed that July 31, 2007, would allow sufficient time for the Agency to complete the rulemaking to address the *Waterkeeper* decision. EPA also anticipated that the dates established in the 2006 date rule provided sufficient time to ensure compliance with the NPDES regulations within a reasonable timeframe consistent with the dates established in the 2003 CAFO rule. 71 FR 6980-81. However, at that time EPA had not yet proposed revisions to the CAFO rule and could only surmise what the public response to the proposal would be. In light of comments received and after further consideration of the proposed rule, EPA is continuing to explore the best method of implementing the *Waterkeeper* decision. To avoid any potential conflict with existing deadlines that precede the publication of the final rule, it is appropriate to revise the CAFO compliance dates effected by this final rule. Some commenters on the proposed rule raised concerns about the proposed further delay and expressed interest in having the regulatory requirements implemented in a timely fashion. In EPA's view, the deadlines established by this rule are appropriate. Newly defined facilities that are required to apply for an NPDES permit will need sufficient time to develop their permit applications or notices of intent for general permit authorization once EPA has finalized the revised rules in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision. The revised deadlines are also appropriate because permitting authorities will need time following promulgation of the CAFO regulatory revisions to identify the necessary procedures for reviewing NMPs and incorporating them into general permits. Taking into account the time EPA needs to complete the rule in response to *Waterkeeper* and the comments submitted on that proposed rule, as well as the period of time after the final rule is promulgated to allow States, the regulated community, and other stakeholders the opportunity to adjust to the new regulatory requirements, EPA believes that extending the dates to February 27, 2009, is reasonable. Several commenters indicated that as a result of the Second Circuit's decision vacating the duty to apply provision for CAFOs established in the 2003 rule, the deadlines for CAFOs to seek coverage, also initially established in that rule, are now unnecessary. These commenters suggested that EPA should eliminate the deadlines for CAFOs to seek coverage in 40 CFR 122.23(g)(2)-(3), such that only CAFOs that discharge or propose to discharge would be required to seek coverage in accordance with the timing requirements for all NPDES sources in 40 CFR 122.21(c). Several other commenters sought clarity of the duty to apply provision following the *Waterkeeper* decision. These comments are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. EPA reiterates that it will address the various aspects of the court's *Waterkeeper* decision, including the ruling on the “duty to apply” issue, in the final rule in response to *Waterkeeper.* There were a few commenters who requested that EPA provide greater clarity regarding the applicability of the deadline extensions to various classifications of CAFOs. As described above, the February 27, 2009, permit application deadlines revised in this rule do not apply to CAFOs that were defined as CAFOs prior to the 2003 rule, nor do the deadlines affect new sources subject to new source performance standards. The deadlines revised by this rule for developing and implementing NMPs apply to all permitted CAFOs, except that new sources subject to new source performance standards must develop and implement an NMP upon permit coverage. Several commenters expressed the view that EPA needed to take into consideration the time necessary for States to make conforming revisions to State programs following EPA's regulatory revisions and, accordingly, extend the deadlines to a date two to three years after EPA intends to publish the final rule in response to *Waterkeeper.* While EPA agrees that some States may need additional time to modify their programs once EPA has finalized its regulatory revisions in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision, the Agency does not agree that these concerns justify further extension of the compliance dates in this rule. EPA is committed to collaborating with States and other interested parties to work through the procedural challenges and resolve any difficulties that may arise in the implementation of the regulatory revisions. In addition, EPA notes that most of the technical provisions of the 2003 CAFO rule ( *e.g.* , the substantive NMP requirements) were unaffected by the *Waterkeeper* decision, and therefore CAFOs already have the information they need to develop NMPs, and do not need to wait for further EPA action before doing so. Several commenters were opposed to the proposed extension of the compliance dates and expressed concern that such an extension would reward discharging CAFOs that have not yet complied with permitting requirements and that by proposing the extension, EPA is exhibiting a lack of urgency to ensure that discharging CAFOs obtain NPDES permit coverage. In response, EPA notes that the deadline extension applies only to a specific subset of CAFOs, and moreover, nothing in today's rule precludes a CAFO from applying for a permit or seeking authorization to discharge under a general permit (if available) before the February 27, 2009 date. As stated above, this final rule affects only certain compliance dates associated with the timing of EPA's final rule revisions in response to the *Waterkeeper* decision. EPA is working to promulgate those revisions as expeditiously as possible, while giving due attention to the comments received on the June 2006 proposal. EPA is committed to finalizing the rulemaking process and to working with States and agricultural partners to ensure timely development of permit applications and NMPs where necessary. Moreover, many States are actively implementing the CAFO program and issuing permits, and the provisions of this final rule do not supersede existing State requirements. One comment expressed the view that EPA had made an incorrect statement in the preamble to the May 10, 2007, proposed rule regarding the ability of authorized States to require CAFOs to seek NPDES permit coverage in advance of the dates set in the federal regulations. EPA disagrees. The federal regulations establish the outermost limit by which certain CAFOs subject to permitting requirements must seek permit coverage, leaving open all dates preceding the deadline of February 27, 2009. If, for example, a State with an approved program were to continue to require newly defined CAFOs to seek permit coverage by July 31, 2007, such a requirement would be consistent with the federal requirement for newly defined CAFOs to seek permit coverage no later than February 27, 2009. IV. Effective Date of These Actions EPA is making this rule immediately effective upon the date of publication. The immediate effective date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule “grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction” and section 553(d)(3) which allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication “as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.” EPA finds that there is good cause to make the rule effective immediately. The compliance deadlines being revised by this final rule require some CAFOs to seek NPDES permit coverage and prepare and implement nutrient management plans by July 31, 2007, before EPA regulations will be in place to respond to the *Waterkeeper* decision. Making this rule immediately effective is consistent with the purpose of the good cause exemption which is to provide reasonable time for affected parties to comply. A delayed effective date is not necessary because affected parties do not have to take any action to comply with this rule which simply extends deadlines for seeking NPDES permit coverage and developing and implementing nutrient management plans. In addition, consistent with section 553(d)(3), an immediate effective date is justified because this rule relieves certain CAFOs of obligations which would otherwise apply to them, to seek NPDES permit coverage and develop and implement nutrient management plans by July 31, 2007. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” and is therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order. As discussed above, the purpose of this rule is solely to address timing issues associated with the Agency's response to the *Waterkeeper* court ruling on petitions for review challenging portions of the 2003 CAFO rule. After considering the economic impacts of this rule on small entities in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ), I certify that this action will not have a significant adverse impact on a substantial number of small entities since the effect of the final rule is solely to extend certain deadlines related to NPDES CAFO permitting. Additionally, this rule does not affect small governments, as the permitting authorities are State or Federal agencies. EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Thus, this final rule is not subject to sections 202, 203, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) because it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. This final rule does not have federalism implications, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) because it does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State or local governments, nor will it preempt State law. Thus, the requirements of sections 6(b) and 6(c) of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule. This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined under Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health and safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)), which establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. EPA has determined that this rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. This final rule does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This final rule does not impose any new information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. section 3501 *et seq.* ). However, the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR parts 9, 122, 123, and 412 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.,* and has assigned OMB control number 2040-0250. The EPA ICR number for the original set of regulations is 1989.02. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2) and will be effective on July 24, 2007. List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 122 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control. 40 CFR Part 412 Environmental protection, Feedlots, Livestock, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control. Dated: July 18, 2007. Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator. For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency amends 40 CFR parts 122 and 412 as follows: PART 122—EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM 1. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows: Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 *et seq.* § 122.21 [Amended] 2. In § 122.21 paragraph (i)(1)(x), the date “July 31, 2007” is revised to read “February 27, 2009.” 3. Section 122.23 is amended by revising paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3)(iii) to read as follows: § 122.23 Concentrated animal feeding operations (applicable to State NPDES programs, see § 123.25).

(g)* * *

(1)*Operations defined as CAFOs prior to April 14, 2003.* For operations that are defined as CAFOs under regulations that are in effect prior to April 14, 2003, the owner or operator must have or seek to obtain coverage under an NPDES permit as of April 14, 2003, and comply with all applicable NPDES requirements, including the duty to maintain permit coverage in accordance with paragraph

(h)of this section.

(2)*Operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, that were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date.* For all operations defined as CAFOs as of April 14, 2003, that were not defined as CAFOs prior to that date, the owner or operator of the CAFO must seek to obtain coverage under an NPDES permit by a date specified by the Director, but no later than February 27, 2009.

(3)* * *

(iii)If an operational change that makes the operation a CAFO would not have made it a CAFO prior to April 14, 2003, the operation has until February 27, 2009, or 90 days after becoming defined as a CAFO, whichever is later. § 122.42 [Amended] 4. In § 122.42 paragraph (e)(1), the two dates “July 31, 2007” are revised to read “February 27, 2009.” PART 412—CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS

(CAFO)POINT SOURCE CATEGORY 1. The authority citation for part 412 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342, 1361. § 412.31 [Amended] 2. In § 412.31 paragraph (b)(3), the date “July 31, 2007” is revised to read “February 27, 2009.” § 412.43 [Amended] 3. In § 412.43 paragraph (b)(2), the date “July 31, 2007” is revised to read “February 27, 2009.” [FR Doc. E7-14258 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 390 Regulatory Guidance for Recording of Commercial Motor Vehicle Accidents Involving Fires AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Regulatory guidance. SUMMARY: The FMCSA announces regulatory guidance concerning its definition of “accident.” The regulatory guidance is presented in a question-and-answer form. The guidance is generally applicable to drivers, commercial motor vehicles, and motor carrier operations subject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. All prior interpretations and regulatory guidance concerning the term “accident” issued previously in the **Federal Register** , as well as memoranda and letters, may no longer be relied upon as authoritative if they are inconsistent with the guidance published today. This guidance will provide the motor carrier industry and Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials with uniform information for use in determining whether certain vehicle fires must be recorded on the motor carrier's accident register and considered in applying the Agency's safety fitness procedures. EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulatory guidance is effective on July 24, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah M. Freund, Vehicle and Roadside Operations Division, Office of Bus and Truck Standards and Operations,

(202)366-4009, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Legal Basis The Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-554, Title II, 98 Stat. 2832, October 30, 1984) (the 1984 Act) provides authority to regulate drivers, motor carriers, and vehicle equipment. It requires the Secretary to prescribe regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety. The regulations shall prescribe minimum safety standards for commercial motor vehicles. At a minimum, the regulations shall ensure that—(1) commercial motor vehicles are maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely;

(2)the responsibilities imposed on operators of commercial motor vehicles do not impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely;

(3)the physical condition of operators of commercial motor vehicles is adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles safely; and

(4)the operation of commercial motor vehicles does not have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of the operators. (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)) Section 211 of the 1984 Act also grants the Secretary broad power, in carrying out motor carrier safety statutes and regulations, to “prescribe recordkeeping and reporting requirements” and to “perform other acts the Secretary considers appropriate.” (49 U.S.C. 31133(a)

(8)and (10)) The Administrator of FMCSA has been delegated authority under 49 CFR 1.73(g) to carry out the functions vested in the Secretary of Transportation by 49 U.S.C. chapter 311, subchapters I and III, relating to commercial motor vehicle programs and safety regulation. This document provides regulatory guidance to the public with respect to the definition of “accident” in § 390.5 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), and the recording of accidents as required under § 390.15 of the FMCSRs. Members of the motor carrier industry and other interested parties may also access the guidance in this document through the FMCSA's Internet site at *http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov.* Specific questions addressing any of the interpretive material published in this document should be directed to the contact person listed earlier under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , or the FMCSA Division Office in each State. Basis for This Guidance The regulatory guidance in this notice responds to questions concerning the definition of “accident” in 49 CFR 390.5: Are all fires on CMVs considered reportable accidents? Section 390.5 defines “accident” as an occurrence involving a commercial motor vehicle operating on a highway in interstate or intrastate commerce which results in a fatality; bodily injury to a person who, as a result of the injury, immediately receives medical treatment away from the scene of the accident; or one or more motor vehicles incurring disabling damage as a result of the accident, requiring the motor vehicles to be transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other motor vehicle. It excludes occurrences involving only boarding and alighting from a stationary motor vehicle or involving only the loading or unloading of cargo. Fires were included in the original 1962 definition of “recordable accident,” but were not explicitly mentioned in later versions of the FMCSRs. The Interstate Commerce Commission's

(ICC)final rule of August 25, 1962 (27 FR 8551) defined “recordable accident,” (for purposes of filing a form MCS-50T for accidents involving property-carrying vehicles or MCS-50B for accidents involving passenger-carrying vehicles) as Any occurrence in the interstate, foregin [sic], or intrastate operations of a motor carrier subject to Part II of the Interstate Commerce Act, which * * * results in the death or injury of a person, or in property damage * * * to an extent of $240.00 or more * * *. The term included, but was not limited to, eight types of accidents. Item 4 was “fire or explosion in or on a motor vehicle.” A final rule of September 7, 1972 (37 FR 18079) eliminated the list of examples of types of accidents and focused on three different outcomes that would provide the criteria for reporting an accident. The Agency revised the injury criteria to cover only injuries requiring medical attention other than first aid at the accident scene, and increased the threshold for property damage reporting to $2,000. The Agency explained “ *Accidents which formerly fell into those special categories, such as those involving overturn of a vehicle, fire, or explosion, will continue to be reported if they result in death, personal injury, or property damage of $2,000 or more.* ” [emphasis added] The property damage threshold was later raised to $4,400 before being replaced with a “disabling damage” criterion in a final rule published on February 2, 1993 (58 FR 6726). That final rule also revised the injury criteria to cover bodily injury to a person who, as result of the injury, immediately receives medical treatment away from the scene of the accident. It has been the position of FMCSA and its predecessor agencies that the definition of “accident” applies to both collision and non-collision incidents involving commercial motor vehicles. If a fire or explosion results in a fatality, an injury, or disabling damage to a motor vehicle, it must be considered a recordable accident based on the current regulatory definition under 49 CFR 390.5. Therefore, this notice should not be construed to be a revision of the criteria for recording CMV accidents. Rather, its purpose is to emphasize the importance of recording CMV accidents as defined under Section 390.5 that do not necessarily involve collisions. FMCSA acknowledges the potential impact on motor carriers' Safety Status Measurement System (SafeStat) scores that could result from States uploading reports about fires into the Agency's Motor Carrier Management Information System. However, in the interest of safety, we believe that we need to gather data on the prevalence of fires, and that motor carriers must be responsible for documenting these events and taking action to prevent injuries and fatalities associated with CMV fires. The inclusion of fires in the Accident Safety Evaluation Area

(SEA)of SafeStat would, at its worst, only increase the likelihood of an on-site review of the carrier's safety management practices, depending on the number of these events. Regulatory Guidance PART 390—FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS; GENERAL Sections Interpreted Section 390.5 Definitions *Question:* Does an explosion or fire in a commercial motor vehicle

(CMV)that has not collided with other vehicles or stationary objects meet the definition of an “accident” under § 390.5? Guidance: Fires have been included in the definition of “accidents” since 1962. However, in an effort to simplify the regulatory text, the agency removed the specific references to fires, rollovers, and other noncollision accidents in 1972. As the agency indicated, however, its intent was to include all of these items as accidents (37 FR 18079, September 7, 1972). A fire or explosion in a CMV operating on a highway in interstate or intrastate commerce would be considered an “accident” if it resulted in a fatality; bodily injuries requiring the victim to be transported immediately to a medical facility away from the scene; or disabling damage requiring the CMV to be towed. A collision is not a pre-requisite to an “accident” under § 390.5. Any CMV fires that meet the accident criteria in 49 CFR 390.5—that is, fires that occur in a commercial motor vehicle in transport on a roadway customarily open to the public which result in a fatality, bodily injury requiring immediate medical attention away from the scene of the accident, or disabling damage requiring a vehicle to be towed—will be considered in the safety fitness determination. As indicated in Appendix B to 49 CFR Part 385, FMCSA will continue to consider preventability when a motor carrier contests a safety rating by presenting compelling evidence that the recordable rate is not a fair means of evaluating its accident factor. With regard to fires, preventability will be determined according to the following: If a motor carrier, that exercises normal judgment and foresight could have anticipated the possibility of the fire that in fact occurred, and avoided it by taking steps within its control—short of suspending operations—which would not have risked causing another kind of mishap, the fire was preventable. Issued on: July 17, 2007. John H. Hill, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-14092 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 571 [Docket No. NHTSA-2007-28707] RIN 2127-AJ59 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; denial of petition for rulemaking. SUMMARY: This final rule establishes specific test procedures for installing child restraints to a child restraint anchorage system, commonly referred to as a “LATCH” system, in a front passenger seating position in vehicles certified to meet advanced air bag requirements through the use of a suppression system or a low risk deployment

(LRD)system. 1 The test procedures ensure that the child restraints are installed in a repeatable and reproducible manner. 1 The LRD option involves deployment of the air bag in the presence of a Child Restraint Air Bag Interaction (CRABI) test dummy, representing a 12-month-old child, in a rear-facing child restraint. Because vehicle manufacturers need sufficient time to certify that their vehicles meet FMVSS No. 208 suppression or LRD requirements when tested with these procedures, the compliance date of this final rule is September 1, 2008. NHTSA will apply these test procedures to vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2008 that have a LATCH system in a frontal seating position and that are certified to meet advanced air bag requirements through the use of a suppression or LRD system. DATES: The amendments made by this final rule are effective September 1, 2007. The compliance date for this final rule is September 1, 2008. *Petitions for reconsideration:* Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must be received not later than September 7, 2007. ADDRESSES: Note that NHTSA's address has changed. Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer to the docket number set forth above and be submitted to the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC. 20590, with a copy to Docket Management, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading under Rulemaking Analyses and Notices. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents, go to *http://dms.dot.gov,* or to 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC. 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carla Cuentas, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, Light Duty Vehicle Division (telephone 202-366-4583, fax 202-493-2739). For legal issues, contact Ms. Deirdre Fujita, Office of Chief Counsel (telephone 202-366-2992, fax 202-366-3820). Both of these officials can be reached at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background II. Comments on the NPRM and Agency Responses Thereto a. Objectivity of the Test Procedure 1. Variability in Sensor Outcomes 2. Distance Measurement 3. Passive Occupant Detection System B b. Adjustments to Test Procedure 1. Tightening (cinching) the Lower Anchor Straps 2. Order of Steps 3. Seat in Full Rearmost Position—Rigid LATCH 4. Load Angle tolerance—Rigid LATCH 5. Reduction of Load—Rigid LATCH 6. 600 N Force—Correction c. Suggestions Not Taken By NHTSA 1. Base 2. Foot Prop 3. Seat Back Contact III. Compliance Date IV. Denial of Petition for Rulemaking V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices I. Background Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, “Occupant crash protection” (49 CFR 571.208), requires passenger vehicles to be equipped with safety belts and frontal air bags for the protection of vehicle occupants in crashes. On May 12, 2000, NHTSA published a final rule to require that air bags be designed to provide improved frontal crash protection for all occupants, by means that include advanced air bag technology (“Advanced Air Bag Rule,” 65 FR 30680, Docket No. NHTSA 00-7013). Under the Advanced Air Bag Rule, manufacturers are provided several compliance options in order to minimize the risk to infants and small children from deploying air bags, including options to suppress an air bag in the presence of a child restraint system

(CRS)or to provide an LRD system. Manufacturers choosing to rely on an air bag suppression system or LRD system to minimize the risk to children in a CRS must ensure that the vehicle complies with the suppression or LRD requirements when tested with the CRSs specified in Appendix A of the standard (see S19, S21 and S23 of FMVSS No. 208). On November 19, 2003, NHTSA revised Appendix A by adding two CRSs that are equipped with components that attach to a vehicle's LATCH 2 system (68 FR 65179, Docket No. NHTSA 03-16476). Vehicles that have a LATCH system in a front designated seating position and are certified as meeting the suppression or LRD requirements must meet the requirements when tested with the CRSs installed on the LATCH system. 3 2 “LATCH” stands for “Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children,” a term that was developed by industry to refer to the standardized user-ready child restraint anchorage system that vehicle manufacturers must install in vehicles pursuant to FMVSS No. 225, *Child Restraint Anchorage Systems* (49 CFR 571.225). The LATCH system is comprised of two lower anchorages and one tether anchorage. Each lower anchorage is a rigid round rod or bar onto which the connector of a child restraint system can be attached. The upper anchorage is configured to permit the attachment of a tether hook of a CRS. FMVSS No. 225 (paragraph S5(d)) does not permit vehicle manufacturers to install LATCH systems in front designated seating positions unless the vehicle has an air bag on-off switch meeting the requirements of S4.5.4 of FMVSS No. 208. 3 The compliance date of the provision specifying testing with CRSs equipped with components that attach to a LATCH system (hereinafter referred to as “LATCH-equipped CRSs”) was originally delayed from September 1, 2004 to September 1, 2006 (69 FR 51598, Docket 18905) and was later delayed to September 1, 2007 (71 FR 51129, Docket 21244). A new compliance date will be set by today's final rule. When the two child restraints were added to Appendix A by the 2003 final rule, the agency believed that the CRS manufacturer's installation instructions could be used to install the child restraints in a test vehicle. It became apparent, however, that more specific installation instructions were needed to provide a repeatable means of installing the restraints for suppression and LRD testing. To address this need for more specific instructions, NHTSA published the NPRM preceding this final rule (May 19, 2005, 70 FR 28878, Docket 21244; extension of comment period, July 13, 2005, 70 FR 40280). The NPRM proposed a specific procedure for installing the CRSs that the agency believed would ensure repeatable and reproducible installation of the child restraints for compliance test purposes. The procedure was based on how CRSs are installed by trained technicians in the real world. Proposed Test Procedure There are two types of LATCH-equipped child restraint systems: those that have the LATCH components attached to them by means of flexible belt webbing (hereinafter “flexible LATCH CRSs”); and those using a rigid ratchet mechanism built into the CRS (“rigid LATCH CRSs”). The NPRM proposed two sets of procedures for attaching LATCH-equipped CRSs to the LATCH system in subject vehicles, one set for each of these two types of LATCH-equipped child restraint systems. A test report describing the procedures was placed in the docket for the NPRM (“Test Report, FMVSS No. 208; LATCH Equipped Child Restraint Test Procedures, Revision 1,” Docket 21244-2; 21255-5). Proposed Test Procedure for Flexible LATCH CRSs The test procedure for installing flexible LATCH CRSs was developed by NHTSA to replicate real-world CRS installations in vehicles by experienced installers, particularly with respect to the appropriate load vector to be applied and the amount of load relief when LATCH belts were manually tightened (“Test Report,” *id.* ). Child restraints installed by experienced installers are usually more tightly fastened against the vehicle seat than restraints installed by those less experienced. The agency believed that the more tightly fastened a CRS is to the vehicle seat, the greater the likelihood that the suppression system will fail to suppress the air bag (i.e., the greater the likelihood that the air bag system will misread the load on the seat to be that of an adult passenger rather than a load generated by a tightly-cinched CRS). Thus, the agency believed that the tightly-cinched CRS represented a worst-case scenario for the harm addressed by this rulemaking, as compared to a more loosely fastened CRS, and that the worst-case scenario was desirable to ensure that the air bags would be suppressed in more circumstances in the presence of a child restraint than not. Under the proposed procedure, a flexible LATCH CRS would be centered between the vehicle seat's two lower LATCH anchor bars, and the child restraint's LATCH components connected to the vehicle's anchor bars with slack in the straps. A loading device, consisting of a loading bar, load cell, and loading bar foot, would be placed at the CRS seat bight (the intersection of the CRS seat cushion and seat back) at an angle of 15±3 degrees from vertical. It was proposed that the device would apply a load to the CRS, replicating installers using their weight to install a CRS. The loading device would first apply a preload of 50 to 100 Newtons

(N)to the CRS, which would be then increased to 875±10 N. It was proposed that after the load settled to between 845 and 855 N, the flexible LATCH straps, already attached to the anchor bars but not yet in tension, would be manually tightened (cinched) such that the change in the preload is not more than 25 N. The procedure was developed to replicate installations of four experienced installers who worked with three vehicles and four CRSs. 4 Agency tests had demonstrated that the proposed procedure resulted in a CRS installation representative of a real-world installation by these installers. The distance of a target on the side of the CRS to the LATCH anchor bars was measured to determine the positioning of the CRS after various installations. There was no statistically significant difference in the test results between tests in which the installations were made by the technicians using the test procedure and tests in which the CRSs were installed in real-world fashion, *i.e.* , without using the proposed procedure. When the loading device and test procedure were used by individual technicians, the level of positioning repeatability achieved was similar to that achieved by any single installer without the device and procedure. 4 The vehicles used were:

(a)The 2003 GMC Sierra Regular Cab C1500 Truck, certified to the advanced air bag requirements;

(b)the 2003 Toyota Tacoma Regular Cab Truck, certified with depowered air bags; and

(c)the 2004 Ford F150 Regular Cab Truck, certified to the advanced air bag requirements. The CRSs used were:

(a)The Cosco Forerunner convertible child restraint;

(b)the Cosco Alpha-Omega convertible child restraint;

(c)the Graco SnugRide rear-facing child restraint; and

(d)the Britax Expressway convertible child restraint. Accordingly, the agency tentatively concluded that installing a CRS with the test device: • Results in a CRS installation reflective of real-world installation by experienced CRS installers; • Results in a repeatable installation independent of the installer; and • Can result in a suppression system test failure representative of real-world use. 70 FR at 28880. Test Procedure for Rigid LATCH CRSs Rigid LATCH CRS systems typically have a ratchet mechanism built into a rigid structure to obtain a tight/snug fit between the CRS and the vehicle seat. Because flexible webbing material is not used to attach the LATCH components, rigid LATCH CRSs limit the potential variability in installation. They also do not exhibit the tendency of flexible LATCH CRSs to load the vehicle seat cushion with a distinct downward force that some suppression systems have interpreted as being generated by an adult occupant. In the proposed installation procedure for rigid LATCH CRSs, the rigid LATCH CRS would be centered in a vehicle seat. The lower anchor attachments would then be connected to the vehicle's anchor bars pursuant to the CRS manufacturer's instruction. The CRS would then be moved rearward (relative to the vehicle seat) until it contacted the vehicle seat back. If the CRS were equipped with a linear sliding or ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install the CRS, a force of 600 N would be applied to the CRS in a plane parallel to the plane formed by the linear mechanism. The load would then be removed and the suppression or LRD test performed. II. Comments on the NPRM and Agency Responses Thereto NHTSA received comments on the NPRM from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (“the Alliance” 5 ) dated August 17, 2005 and January 20, 2006. In addition, representatives from General Motors

(GM)met with NHTSA staff to discuss GM's evaluation of various procedures for installing LATCH-equipped child restraints, including the NPRM procedure (Docket 21244-9). 5 Members of the Alliance are BMW Group, DaimlerChrysler, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Mazda, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota, and Volkswagen. As discussed below, the Alliance did not support the proposed test procedure for attaching flexible LATCH CRSs. The commenter did not oppose the test procedures for attaching rigid LATCH child restraints, but did suggest changes to the procedures (some of which NHTSA has adopted in this final rule). a. Objectivity of the Test Procedure 1. Variability in Sensor Outcomes The Alliance opposed the proposed test procedure for attaching flexible LATCH CRSs, believing that the procedure “allows too much variability in test outcomes in otherwise identical test circumstances, making the procedure insufficiently objective.” The Alliance stated that it did not believe that the procedure was repeatable and reproducible because many of the installations performed by the installers, with and without the device, resulted in non-suppression of the passenger air bag for both the Sierra and the F-150. Overall, 36 installations resulted in suppression, and 32 installations resulted in non-suppression. The commenter stated that it did “not understand how a test program that yielded a ‘pass/fail’ ratio of approximately 50/50 could be deemed to support a conclusion that the test procedure is repeatable and reproducible.” The commenter believed that the data suggest that NHTSA has not yet defined a sufficiently objective test procedure to differentiate between passing and failing performance in the test. *Response:* The agency does not agree that the inconsistent performance of seat sensors leading to suppression or non-suppression of the air bag demonstrates the lack of repeatability of the test procedure used to install the LATCH restraints. The installation procedure is intended to, and achieves, consistent and repeatable CRS installations on the vehicle seat. As explained in the May 2005 NPRM, NHTSA used the procedure to install four child restraints multiple times in several vehicles, and compared those installations to those done without the procedure by four experienced installers. When the same CRS model was installed in the same vehicle, the child restraints were installed comparably, as indicated by the angle of the installed CRS and the distance between the lower anchor bars and a defined reference point on the CRS. These two parameters were selected as criteria which were reliable and readily determined. (The “distance measurement,” the average of the inboard and outboard distance values, was used in the analysis since the angle of the installed seat was positively correlated with the distance measurement.) There was no statistically significant difference between the installations achieved using the test procedure and those done by the technician alone, following the CRS manufacturer's installation instructions. (“Test Report, FMVSS No. 208, LATCH Equipped Child Restraint Installation Procedures, Revision 1,” *supra.* ) Moreover, as also discussed in the Test Report, *id.,* when the same CRS model was installed in the same vehicle using the test procedure for installing the LATCH restraints, the air bag suppression systems performed consistently; i.e., air bags in the vehicles were suppressed using the procedure in all but one instance. The exception was the installation of the Britax Expressway in the GMC Sierra, which resulted in a suppressed air bag in one trial and a failed suppression in a second trial. This same phenomenon occurred with one of the certified installers not using the device. Because the only instances of a failed suppression occurred with the one vehicle, the difference in air bag suppression status appears to be a reflection of the characteristics of the suppression system rather than that of the repeatability of the test procedure. The commenter believes that the inconsistent performance of the seat sensors across vehicles should be attributed to the test procedure used to install the child restraints on the vehicle seats. We do not agree. The use of the seat sensors as the instrument for evaluating repeatability of the CRS installation across platforms assumes that seat sensors are designed to evaluate LATCH-installed child restraints. There is no basis for that assumption. There are a variety of different sensors for manufacturers to choose from, and a number of design features that can differ from design to design, such as differences in location, shape, algorithms, etc. Therefore, one cannot base the repeatability of this installation procedure on the output of an unknown sensor. In its comment, the Alliance said it did not understand NHTSA's decision to evaluate an advanced air bag test procedure for LATCH CRS installations in the 2003 Toyota Tacoma regular cab truck, a vehicle that has depowered air bags and no advanced air bag system. The agency's test of this vehicle was not at all related to the presence or absence of an advanced air bag system. Instead, we tested this vehicle because the vehicle had a LATCH system in the front passenger seating position, and the agency wished to assess whether the test procedure under consideration resulted in consistent and repeatable installation of the child restraint. Since we were testing the repeatability of the CRS installations, it was of no consequence that the vehicle did not have an air bag suppression system. 6 6 We note that NHTSA conducted follow-up testing on a 2005 Toyota Tacoma with LATCH and a front seat suppression sensing system. As a matter of interest, the 2005 Toyota Tacoma's sensing system was able to properly classify several child restraints used in previous tests and suppress the air bag, when installed using both the NPRM procedure and the procedure in this final rule (the differences between the two are minor and are discussed in the next section of this preamble). It should also be noted that the very tight child restraint installations achieved by the test procedure presented worst-case scenarios (in producing loads on the vehicle seat that were most likely to be misread by a sensor as being generated by an adult occupant). From the information obtained on sensor performance in the aforementioned test program, some sensors may need to be enhanced to distinguish between a tightly-cinched flexible LATCH child restraint and an adult occupant. This final rule provides sufficient lead time for manufacturers to adjust sensing systems to make this distinction using the installation procedures of this final rule. 2. Distance Measurement The Alliance disagreed with the agency's conclusion that there was no statistically significant difference between the installations performed by the installers with and without the use of the loading device per the final procedure. The commenter stated that “this conclusion apparently reflects only the ‘distance between the lower anchor bars and a defined reference point on the CR,’ measured at both the inboard and outboard locations, and then averaged.” The commenter said that NHTSA never explains the significance of the “distance measurement” as a suitable parameter for measuring any performance expectation for the vehicle's air bag system. *Response:* As explained above, the distance measurement is not meant to be correlated to air bag system performance. It is an independent measure of the CRS installation, i.e., it is intended to correlate to how tightly the CRS was installed. For instance, the tighter the CRS installation is, the shorter the distance measurement. As such, NHTSA continues to believe that the distance measurement used for that purpose is valid and meaningful, since the purpose of the test procedure is to assure consistent installation of the LATCH CRS. 3. Passive Occupant Detection System B General Motors

(GM)informed NHTSA that it independently constructed the proposed CRS loading bar device according to the specifications provided in the NPRM (item #9 in NPRM docket). GM stated that it conducted 30 installations according to the proposed procedure, all of which resulted in suppression of the passenger air bag. GM stated that the vehicles it tested used the Passive Occupant Detection System B (PODS-B) for their passenger automatic suppression systems. This sensing system classifies the seat as empty, or the occupant as an adult or child, based on the loading force on the seat. While the occupant classification outcome was consistent in all of GM's tests, GM stated that they noticed that the PODS-B output varied significantly. GM believed that the variance in the output of the PODS-B was mostly a function of the cinching procedure. It stated that when cinching the straps according to the proposed test procedure, the PODS-B pressure counts were not well correlated with the value of the post cinch load, which caused a variance in the PODS-B output. *Response:* We believe that the PODS-B pressure counts may not be valid for use as an indicator of the repeatability or objectivity of the LATCH seat installation procedure, because the expected level of variability in the PODS-B output for a consistent LATCH seat installation has not been shown. NHTSA reviewed the data supplied by GM to try to understand why the results from the GM data-set differed from the NHTSA data-set (item #5 in NPRM docket) for the same vehicle model regarding suppression status of the air bags. On September 21, 2005, a NHTSA engineer evaluated both the NHTSA loading device and the GM loading device at the GM Proving Grounds. The results of the testing performed are included in a memorandum entered into the docket for this final rule. When compared in side-by-side tests, the devices produced comparable installations. While the testing revealed no explanation for the differences between the NHTSA NPRM data set and the GM data set entered into the docket, it appears that the PODS-B systems used in the test vehicles at GM were not in the factory-calibrated production condition. Discussions with GM (see docketed memorandum) indicated that adjustment of key parameters may have occurred for the PODS-B software after factory calibration. Post-production calibration of the system could account for the disagreement of the NHTSA NPRM data set and the GM data set with respect to suppression status. NHTSA also calibration checked our test device to make sure that the complete loading system accurately reflected the true load applied by the loading device to the CRS. The calibration tests showed that the setup was accurate within 2 N for the entire load range from 0-900 N. The agency also applied exaggerated eccentric or off-axis loads to the device, to evaluate whether the device was accurate even under the most extreme conditions. The tests showed negligible (1-3 N) off-axis affects. NHTSA later obtained a used 2004 Chevrolet Silverado in the fall of 2005 and conducted tests using both the NPRM procedure and the final rule test procedure. Both procedures produced similar results and closely matched the original NHTSA test results. *Id.* Based on the agency's follow-on testing, NHTSA has concluded that the original testing performed in support of this rule was valid. b. Adjustments To Test Procedure 1. Tightening (Cinching) the Lower Anchor Straps The NPRM proposed that the loading device would first apply a preload of 75±25 N to the CRS, and that the preload would then be increased to 875±10 N. The proposed procedure specified that after the load settles to between 850±5 N, the flexible LATCH straps would be manually tightened such that the load would only be reduced by 15±10 N within 2 seconds (proposed S20.2.1.6.1(f) and (g); S22.2.1.6.1(g) and (h)). In its August 17, 2005 comment, the Alliance observed that sometimes it was difficult to tighten the flexible straps before the load would drop below 825 N. The commenter indicated that seat cushion stiffness can cause the load on the test device to decrease at a fairly significant rate within the time window provided. *Response:* We have observed in our follow-up test program that for certain vehicles (see “Test Report, FMVSS No. 208 LATCH Installation Procedures, Follow-on Testing in Response to NPRM Comments,” April 5, 2007, placed in the docket for this final rule), after achieving the appropriate load condition, the applied load measured on the CRS continued to drop if the seat cushion was not very stiff, making it difficult to tighten the flexible straps to a consistent tension before the load dropped below 825 N. To address this observed load drift, we have added two one-minute settling periods to the test procedure. Under the revised procedure (see S20.2.1.6.1(g) through

(j)of this final rule), after achieving the 875 N load for the first time, we will allow the load to settle for 60 seconds, after which the load will be increased to 875±25 N within 10 seconds. The load will again be allowed to settle until 120 seconds has elapsed since first achieving 875±25 N, after which it will be increased to 875±25 N within 10 seconds. When the load settles to 850±5 N, or when 180 seconds has elapsed since first achieving the 875±25 N load, whichever comes first, we will tighten the lower anchor strap(s) such that the load as measured by the load cell on the loading device is reduced 15±10 N within 2 seconds. These changes do not significantly affect the installation location of the CRS, but they do make it easier for a technician to perform the cinching action. In addition, after testing various vehicles, we also determined that settling times could be better stabilized if the loading device were supported by a rigid mount against the upper door frame structure, rather than the vehicle's roof structure as specified in the NPRM (see April 5, 2007 test report). The roof structure has padding and other materials that can affect the loads applied to the child restraint when the loading bar support is mounted against it. Using a rigid mount against the upper door frame structure improves the ability to achieve the proper loads for the cinching procedure. Thus, the agency's compliance test procedure will specify that the loading bar is supported by a rigid mount against the upper door frame structure. 2. Order of Steps The Alliance has recommended that we switch the order of steps S20.2.1.6.1(c) and (d), as well as steps S22.2.1.6.1(c) and (d). The commenter stated that, based on GM's testing experience, it is easier to connect the lower anchor straps before the restraint is moved rearward. *Response:* Based on our testing and analysis, we concur with the recommendation and have made the appropriate changes to the procedure in this final rule. 3. Seat in Full Rearmost Position—Rigid LATCH The Alliance stated that, while in some cases it is possible to fit a force gauge between the instrument panel and the child restraint at mid-track position, the space for loading is not conducive for achieving the proposed 600 N load. The Alliance recommended that the installation be conducted with the seat in the full rearward position. *Response:* Based on our test experience, we agree that the installation can be difficult in the forward and mid-track positions. Therefore, NHTSA has changed the procedure to specify that the CRS is installed with the vehicle seat in the rearmost position and that the vehicle seat is moved forward for the suppression or LRD test after CRS installation. This change has been made to sections S20.2.1.6.2(a), S20.2.1.6.2(i), S22.2.1.6.2(a), and S22.2.1.6.2(i) of the final rule regulatory text. 4. Load Angle Tolerance—Rigid LATCH The Alliance stated that it is difficult to control loading when applying the handheld force gage “in a parallel plane located within ±100 mm of the plane formed by the linear mechanism,” as stated in S20.2.1.6.2(f) and S22.2.1.6.2(g) of the proposed regulatory text. The Alliance recommended that a tolerance be applied to the required loading angle. *Response:* NHTSA concurs with the suggestion. Based on agency testing and in consideration of the tolerances included in FMVSS No. 210 and No. 225, we are incorporating a ±10 degree tolerance to the required loading angle in sections S20.2.1.6.2(g) and S22.2.1.6.2(h) of today's regulatory text. 5. Reduction of Load—Rigid LATCH The Alliance suggested that we change the applied load value from 600 N to 475±25N for installation of rigid mount LATCH seats. The commenter believes that it is “extremely difficult” to apply 600 N of load without using a reaction surface somewhere in the vehicle, but that a reaction surface on or in front of the instrument panel “could potentially cause damage to vital vehicle components and is not recommended.” In addition, the commenter stated that an installer can apply 600 N of load, but once the force on the seat is released, the load backs off to the last “click” on the ratcheting device of the CRS. For these reasons, the Alliance believed that an applied load of 475±25 N would be more reasonable than the proposed load, “yet it still requires a substantial amount of effort by the installer.” *Response:* The commenter did not provide any data supporting this request for the reduction in the applied load. However, as a result of our own testing, we agree with the suggestion to adjust the applied load value to 475±25N. The April 5, 2007 test report discusses additional tests supporting the adjusted change to 475±25N for the applied load. The data indicate that using a load of 475±25N achieves an installation comparable to that of certified CPS technicians. 6. 600 N Force—Correction The proposed procedure specified that “to securely install the child restraint, in 25±5 seconds, apply a 600N force * * *” The Alliance stated that it interprets this phrase as meaning that the force will be applied within 25±5 seconds, not maintained for 25±5 seconds. *Response:* The commenter's understanding is correct. We have clarified the regulatory text of this final rule in sections S20.2.1.6.2(g) and S22.2.1.6.2(h). c. Suggestions Not Taken By NHTSA 1. Base The Alliance recommended that the suppression testing installation procedures include instructions on removing the carrier from the base and to attach the base to the vehicle separately. The commenter suggested adding the phrase “Place the child restraint, or removable base” to the installation procedures. *Response:* In the testing performed by NHTSA, this step has not been necessary to install these types of infant restraints. Further, the commenter did not provide any specific examples of CRSs that would require the use of the suggested procedure. Because the procedure is not needed for the test procedure, we are declining the request. 2. Foot Prop The Alliance suggested an additional step for CRSs, such as the Britax Baby-Safe, that include a foot prop that needs to be adjusted after the base has been attached. The additional step would instruct the installer to install these items per the manufacturer's instructions. *Response:* We are declining this request. A step about adjusting a foot prop is not necessary. If a particular CRS incorporates features and adjustments, the agency will continue to follow the CRS manufacturer's installation instructions to the extent possible in positioning the adjustments as specified in S20.2.1.6.1(b) and other similar sections of the standard. We also note that the CRS in question is no longer in production in the U.S. market. 3. Seat Back Contact The NPRM included the following statement in sections S20.2.1.6.1(c), S20.2.1.6.2(e), S22.2.1.6.1(c), and S22.2.1.6.2(d): “Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat back.” The Alliance considered this statement redundant to the CRS manufacturer's installation instructions and recommended eliminating it. The commenter also stated that there may be instances where the CRS contacts the head restraint before contacting the seat back. The Alliance did not refer to any specific examples of CRSs that raised the concern. *Response:* Although the statement at issue may in some cases be redundant, we are retaining this step for cases where the CRS manufacturer's instructions are silent on the issue. With regard to head restraint contact, NHTSA has specifications for positioning the head restraint in the general provisions of the test setup. Further, we view the head restraint to be a part of the seat back setup. Thus, under the installation procedures adopted today, the CRS would be placed in a stable position with the planes aligned per step S20.2.1.6.1(a) on the seat cushion and moved rearward following the surface of the seat cushion until contact is made between the CRS and the seat back (including the head restraint). III. Compliance Date The compliance date for this final rule is September 1, 2008. This compliance date provides enough lead time for manufacturers to evaluate and certify their vehicles using the test procedures specified in this final rule, while ensuring the satisfactory performance of vehicles' suppression and LRD systems in an expeditious manner. IV. Denial of Petition for Rulemaking On March 20, 2006, the Alliance petitioned NHTSA to remove the Britax Expressway ISOFIX CRS from FMVSS No. 208, Appendix A, Section C. The Britax Expressway ISOFIX CRS was one of the two LATCH CRSs added by the November 19, 2003 FMVSS No. 208 final rule ( *supra* ). The Alliance believed that this CRS should be removed from Appendix A because it is no longer available on the market, few were sold, and because its inclusion is inconsistent with the principles and criteria that the agency announced that it would use to select CRSs for Appendix A. (In a November 2003 final rule responding to petitions for reconsideration of the amendments made in December 2001 to our May 2000 Advanced Air Bag rule, we stated that we would limit Appendix A to those restraints that represented large portions of the CRS market, while including exceptionally large or small restraints. See 68 FR 65188.) *Response:* NHTSA has decided to deny the petition. The agency is undertaking an assessment of the CRSs currently on the market to assure the CRS fleet is adequately represented in Appendix A. Information provided by the Alliance in its petition in support of removing the Britax Expressway ISOFIX will be included in our assessment. Upon completion of that assessment, NHTSA will determine whether revisions to Appendix A are warranted, including the appropriateness of the inclusion of the Britax Expressway ISOFIX. We prefer to take a comprehensive evaluation of the CRSs in Appendix A rather than focusing on a solitary restraint such as the Britax Expressway ISOFIX, to best ensure the robustness of air bag suppression or LRD systems when tested with CRSs under conditions representative of real world use. Prior to the comprehensive assessment, we cannot agree that a particular CRS should be excluded, and so we are denying the Alliance's petition on the Britax Expressway ISOFIX. NHTSA will be issuing an NPRM proposing to update Appendix A shortly. V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866. It is not considered to be significant under E.O. 12866 or the Department's Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979). This document establishes procedures for installing LATCH-equipped CRSs to demonstrate compliance with the advanced air bag requirements. The procedures will provide a repeatable and reproducible method for installing LATCH-equipped CRSs in a manner representative of a secure attachment in the real world. This final rule specifies procedures that NHTSA will use; it does not require manufacturers to use the procedures. The equipment necessary for the procedure will cost vehicle manufacturers and testing laboratories choosing to use the procedure less than $50. The minimal impacts of today's amendment do not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 60l *et seq.* , NHTSA has evaluated the effects of this action on small entities. I hereby certify that this final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule affects motor vehicle manufacturers, multistage manufacturers and alterers. Those entities that qualify as small businesses will not be significantly affected by this rule because they are already required to comply with the advanced air bag requirements. This final rule does not establish new requirements, but instead provides specific procedures that NHTSA will use to determine compliance with existing requirements. C. Executive Order 13132 NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that the rule does not have federalism implications because the rule does not have “substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the preemptive effect of today's rule. NHTSA rules can have preemptive effect in at least two ways. First, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemptive provision: “When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter.” 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command that preempts State law, not today's rulemaking, so consultation would be inappropriate. In addition to the express preemption noted above, the Supreme Court has also recognized that State requirements imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed by State tort law, can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of a NHTSA safety standard. When such a conflict is discerned, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes their State requirements unenforceable. See *Geier* v. *American Honda Motor Co.,* 529 U.S. 861 (2000). NHTSA has not outlined such potential State requirements in today's rulemaking, however, in part because such conflicts can arise in varied contexts, but it is conceivable that such a conflict may become clear through subsequent experience with today's standard and test regime. NHTSA may opine on such conflicts in the future, if warranted. See id. at 883-86. D. National Environmental Policy Act NHTSA has analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that implementation of this action would not have any significant impact on the quality of the human environment. E. Paperwork Reduction Act Under the procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control number. This final rule does not establish any new information collection requirements. F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), “all Federal agencies and departments shall use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies and departments.” There are no voluntary consensus standards that address the installation of LATCH-equipped CRSs. G. Executive Order 12988 With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation, section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform” (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996) requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation:

(1)Clearly specifies the preemptive effect;

(2)clearly specifies the effect on existing Federal law or regulation;

(3)provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;

(4)clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any;

(5)adequately defines key terms; and

(7)addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement. Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The preemptive effect of this rule is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that there is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceeding before they may file suit in court. H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This final rule will not result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector in excess of $100 million annually. I. Executive Order 13045 Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:

(1)Is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under E.O. 12866, and

(2)concerns an environmental, health, or safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. This final rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866. J. Executive Order 13211 Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 18, 2001) applies to any rule that:

(1)Is determined to be economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866, and is likely to have a significantly adverse effect on the supply of, distribution of, or use of energy; or

(2)that is designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13211. K. Plain Language Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1, 1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language. Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration of the following questions: • Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs? • Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated? • Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that isn't clear? • Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand? • Would more (but shorter) sections be better? • Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams? • What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand? If you have any responses to these questions, please include them in your comments on this proposal. L. Regulation Identifier Number

(RIN)The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier number

(RIN)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. You may use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda. M. Privacy Act Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571 Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, and Tires. In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as set forth below. PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS 1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. 2. Section 571.208 is amended by: a. Revising S20.2.1.1 through S20.2.1.5, S20.4.6, S22.2.1, S22.2.1.4, S22.2.1.5, S22.2.1.6 through S22.2.1.6.2, S22.2.1.7, S22.2.1.8, S24.2, S24.2.2, and section C of Appendix A; b. Adding S20.2.1.6, S20.2.1.6.1, S20.2.1.6.2, S22.2.1.7.1 through S22.2.1.7.3, S22.2.1.8.1 through S22.2.1.8.4, Figures A1 and A2 at the end of Appendix A; and c. Removing S22.2.1.5.1, S22.2.1.5.2, S22.2.1.5.3, S22.2.1.6.3, S22.2.1.6.4, to read as follows: § 571.208 Standard No. 208; Occupant crash protection. S20.2.1.1 The vehicle shall comply in tests using any child restraint specified in section B and section C of Appendix A of this standard, installed in the front outboard passenger vehicle seat in the following orientations:

(a)With the section B and section C child restraints facing rearward as appropriate; and

(b)With the section C child restraints facing forward. S20.2.1.2 The vehicle shall comply with the child restraint attached to the vehicle in the following manner:

(a)Using the vehicle safety belts as specified in S20.2.1.5; and

(b)If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of § 571.213, and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in § 571.225, using only the mechanism provided by the child restraint manufacturer for attachment to the lower anchorages as specified in S20.2.1.6. S20.2.1.3 Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred to as “Plane A.” S20.2.1.4 For bucket seats, “Plane B” refers to a vertical plane parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline through the longitudinal centerline of the front outboard passenger vehicle seat cushion. For bench seats, “Plane B” refers to a vertical plane through the front outboard passenger vehicle seat parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline the same distance from the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle as the center of the steering wheel. S20.2.1.5 *Installation with vehicle safety belts.*

(a)Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the vehicle manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male occupant.

(b)Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system components specified in S5.9 of § 571.213 to a vehicle child restraint anchorage system specified in § 571.225, align the child restraint system facing rearward or forward, depending on the orientation being tested, such that Plane A is aligned with Plane B.

(c)While maintaining the child restraint positions achieved in S20.2.1.5(b), secure the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding proper installation of the restraint for the orientation being tested. Cinch the vehicle belts to any tension from zero up to 134 N to secure the child restraint. Measure belt tension in a flat, straight section of the lap belt between the child restraint belt path and the contact point with the belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away from the buckle (to avoid interference from the shoulder portion of the belt).

(d)Position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for seating infants.

(e)Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the “on” position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated. S20.2.1.6 *Installation using the lower anchor bars and the child restraint manufacturer provided attachment mechanism.* S20.2.1.6.1 If the attachment mechanism provided by the manufacturer incorporates a strap(s), use the following procedure:

(a)Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing rearward or forward, depending on the orientation being tested, with Plane A of the child restraint aligned within ±10 mm with a longitudinal vertical plane passing though a point midway between the centers of the two lower anchor bars.

(b)Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent possible according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.

(c)Connect the lower anchor straps of the restraint to the lower anchor bars of the seat and remove the slack, but do not apply any load using these straps.

(d)Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat back.

(e)Use the loading device equipped with the loading foot shown in Figure A1 and position it as shown in Figure A2 of Appendix A of this section. The 15±3 degree angle of the loading device illustrated in Figure A2 is determined with an initial preload of 75±25N.

(f)Over a period of 90±30 seconds, increase the load to 875N±25 N.

(g)After achieving the 875 N load in step

(f)of this section, hold the bar length at present position and allow the load to settle for 60 seconds.

(h)Following the one-minute settling period specified in step

(g)of this section, increase the load to 875±25 N such that the 875±25 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling period.

(i)Hold the bar length at present position and allow the load to settle for 120 seconds after achieving the load in step

(f)of this section.

(j)Following the settling period specified in step

(i)of this section, increase the load to 875±25 N such that the 875±25 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling period.

(k)Observe the settling of the load and tighten the lower anchor straps when the load is 850±5N or 180 seconds has elapsed since achieving the 875±25 N load in step

(f)of this section, whichever comes first. Tighten the lower anchor straps at the same time such that the load is reduced 15±10 N and the change occurs within 2 seconds.

(l)Remove the loading device and position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for seating infants.

(m)Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the “on” position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated. S20.2.1.6.2 If the mechanism provided by the manufacturer does not incorporate a strap(s), use the following procedure:

(a)Place the vehicle seat in the rearmost and mid-height position.

(b)Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing rearward or forward, depending on the orientation being tested, with Plane A of the child restraint aligned within ±10 mm with a longitudinal vertical plane passing though a point midway between the centers of the two lower anchor bars.

(c)Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent possible, according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.

(d)Connect the lower anchor attachments to the lower anchor bars following, to the extent possible, the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.

(e)Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat back.

(f)If the child restraint does not use a linear sliding or ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install the child restraint, follow, to the extent possible, the CRS manufacturer's instructions for installing the child restraint onto the seat. Do not load the seat as provided in S20.2.1.6.2(g).

(g)If the child restraint uses a linear sliding or ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install the child restraint, within 25± 5 seconds, apply a 475 N force, that has no lateral component, aligned angularly ±10 degrees with a parallel plane located within ±100 mm of the plane formed by the linear mechanism. Release the force.

(h)Position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for seating infants.

(i)Move the vehicle seat to the seat position being tested (full rear, mid, full forward).

(j)Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the “on” position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated. S20.4.6 If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of § 571.213, and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in § 571.225, attach the child restraint to the vehicle seat anchorage as specified in S20.2.1.6. Do not attach the top tether of the child restraint system. Do not attach the vehicle safety belt. 22.2.1 *Belted test with forward facing or booster seat child restraint* S22.2.1.4 The vehicle shall comply with the child restraint belted to the vehicle in the following manner:

(a)Using the vehicle safety belts as specified in S22.2.1.5 with section C and section D child restraints of Appendix A of this section designed to be secured to the vehicle seat even when empty; and

(a)Place any adjustable safety belt anchorages at the vehicle manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male occupant.

(b)Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system components specified in S5.9 of § 571.213 to a vehicle child restraint anchorage system specified in § 571.225, align the child restraint system facing forward, such that Plane A is aligned with Plane B.

(c)While maintaining the child restraint positions achieved in S22.2.1.5(b), secure the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding proper installation of the restraint. Cinch the vehicle belts to any tension from zero up to 134 N to secure the child restraint. Measure belt tension in a flat, straight section of the lap belt between the child restraint belt path and the contact point with the belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away from the buckle (to avoid interference from the shoulder portion of the belt). S22.2.1.6 *Installation using the lower anchor bars and the attachment mechanism provided by the child restraint manufacturer.* S22.2.1.6.1 If the mechanism provided by the manufacturer incorporates a strap(s), use the following procedure.

(a)Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing forward, with Plane A of the child restraint aligned within ±10 mm with a longitudinal vertical plane passing through a point midway between the centers of the two lower anchor bars.

(b)Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent possible, according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.

(c)Connect the lower anchor straps to the lower anchor bars and remove most of the slack, but do not apply any load using these straps.

(d)Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat back.

(e)Do not attach any top tethers.

(f)Use the loading device equipped with the loading foot shown in Figure A1 and position it as shown in Figure A2 of Appendix A of this standard. The 15±3 degree angle of the loading device is determined with an initial preload of 75±25 N.

(g)Over a period of 90±30 seconds, increase the load to 875±25 N.

(h)After achieving the 875 N load in step

(g)of this section, hold the bar length at the present position and allow the load to settle for 60 seconds.

(i)Following the one-minute settling period specified in step

(h)of this section, increase the load to 875± 25 N such that the 875± 25 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling period.

(j)Hold the bar length at present position and allow the load to settle for 120 seconds after achieving the load in step

(g)of this section.

(k)Following the settling period specified in step

(j)of this section, increase the load to 875± 25 N such that the 875± 25 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling period.

(l)Observe the settling of the load and tighten the lower anchor straps when the load is 850±5N or 180 seconds has elapsed since achieving the 875± 25 N load in step

(g)of this section, whichever comes first. Tighten the lower anchor straps at the same time such that the load is reduced 15± 10 N and the change occurs within 2 seconds.

(m)Remove the loading device. S22.2.1.6.2 If the mechanism provided by the manufacturer does not incorporate a strap(s), use the following procedure.

(a)Place the vehicle seat in the rear-most and mid-height position.

(b)Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing forward with Plane A of the child restraint aligned within ±10 mm with a longitudinal vertical plane passing through a point midway between the centers of the two lower anchor bars.

(c)Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent possible, according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.

(d)Connect the lower anchor attachments to the lower anchor bars following, to the extent possible, the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.

(e)Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat back.

(f)Do not attach any top tethers.

(g)If the child restraint does not use a linear sliding or ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install the child restraint, follow, to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions for installing the child restraint onto the seat. Do not load the seat as provided in S22.2.1.6.2(h).

(h)If the child restraint uses a linear sliding or ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install the child restraint, within 25±5 seconds apply a 475 N force, that has no lateral component, aligned angularly ±10 degrees with a parallel plane located within ±100 mm of the plane formed by the linear mechanism. Release the force.

(i)Move the vehicle seat to the seat position being tested (full rear, mid, full forward). S22.2.1.7 *Forward facing child restraint.* S22.2.1.7.1 After installation of a forward facing child restraint, position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart P 3-year-old child dummy in the child restraint such that the dummy's lower torso is centered on the child restraint and the dummy's spine is against the seat back of the child restraint. Place the arms at the dummy's sides. S22.2.1.7.2 Attach all belts that come with the child restraint that are appropriate for a child of the same height and weight as the 3-year-old child dummy, if any, by following, to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for seating children. S22.2.1.7.3 Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the “on” position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated. S22.2.1.8 *Booster seat child restraint.* S22.2.1.8.1 After installation of a booster seat child restraint, position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart P 3-year-old child dummy in the booster seat such that the dummy's lower torso is centered on the booster seat cushion and the dummy's back is parallel to and in contact with the booster seat back or, if there is no booster seat back, the vehicle seat back. Place the arms at the dummy's sides. S22.2.1.8.2 If applicable, attach all belts that come with the child restraint that are appropriate for a child of the same height and weight as the 3-year-old child dummy, if any, by following, to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for seating children. S22.2.1.8.3 If applicable, place the Type 2 manual belt around the test dummy and fasten the latch. Remove all slack from the lap belt portion. Pull the upper torso webbing out of the retractor and allow it to retract; repeat this four times. Apply a 9 to 18 N (2 to 4 lb) tension load to the lap belt. Allow the excess webbing in the upper torso belt to be retracted by the retractive force of the retractor. S22.2.1.8.4 Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the “on” position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close all vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated. S24.2 *Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall result in deactivation of the passenger air bag.* Each vehicle that is certified as complying with S23.2 of FMVSS No. 208 shall meet the following test requirements with the child restraint in the front outboard passenger vehicle seat under the following conditions:

(a)Using the vehicle safety belts as specified in S22.2.1.5 with section D child restraints designed to be secured to the vehicle seat even when empty;

(c)Without securing the child restraint with either the vehicle safety belts or any mechanism provided with a child restraint certified to S5.9 of § 571.213. S24.2.2 *Exceptions.* The tests specified in the following paragraphs of S22.2 need not be conducted: S22.2.1.7, S22.2.2.3, S22.2.2.5, S22.2.2.6, S22.2.2.7, and S22.2.2.8. Appendix A to § 571.208 C. Any of the following forward facing toddler and forward-facing convertible child restraint systems, manufactured on or after December 1, 1999, may be used by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to test the suppression system of a vehicle that is manufactured on or after the effective date and prior to the termination date specified in the table below and that has been certified as being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S19, or S21. ( **Note** : Any child restraint listed in this subpart that is not recommended for use in a rear-facing position by its manufacturer is excluded from use in testing in a rear-facing configuration under S20.2.1.1(a)). Effective and termination dates January 17, 2002 September 1, 2008 Britax Roundabout 161 Effective Remains Effective. Britax Expressway Effective. Century Encore 4612 Effective Remains Effective. Century STE 1000 4416 Effective Remains Effective. Cosco Olympian 02803 Effective Remains Effective. Cosco Touriva 02519 Effective Remains Effective. Evenflo Horizon V 425 Effective Remains Effective. Evenflo Medallion 254 Effective Remains Effective. Safety 1st Comfort Ride 22-400 Effective. BILLING CODE 4910-59-P ER24JY07.000 ER24JY07.001 Issued on July 9, 2007. Nicole R. Nason, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-13565 Filed 7-23-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Transportation Security Administration 49 CFR Part 1540 RIN 1652-ZA13 Prohibited Items; New Enforcement Policy Regarding Lighters AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration (TSA), DHS. ACTION: Notice of enforcement policy. SUMMARY: The Transportation Security Administration

(TSA)is providing notice that, in accordance with section 530 of Public Law 109-295, TSA will not enforce the prohibition on bringing lighters onboard commercial aircraft. The effect of the new enforcement policy will be to allow passengers to carry a lighter onboard commercial aircraft. This action is being taken to enable Transportation Security Officers

(TSOs)to concentrate on more effectively confronting the threat of concealed explosives and improvised explosive devices being brought into the cabin of an aircraft. DATES: Effective August 4, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Donovan, Office of Security Operations, TSA-29, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220; telephone

(571)227-3230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability of Documents You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by—

(1)Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html;* or

(2)Visiting TSA's Security Regulations Web page at *http://www.tsa.gov* and accessing the link for “Research Center” at the top of the page. In addition, copies are available by writing or calling the individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Statutory and Regulatory Background TSA is responsible for security in all modes of transportation, including aviation. See 49 U.S.C. 114(d). TSA restricts what passengers may carry into the sterile areas of airports and into the cabins of air carrier aircraft. Under TSA's regulation for acceptance and screening of individuals and accessible property, 49 CFR 1540.111, an individual (other than a law enforcement or other authorized individual) may not have a weapon, explosive, or incendiary, on or about the individual's person or accessible property— • When performance has begun of the inspection of the individual's person or accessible property before entering a sterile area, or before boarding an aircraft for which screening is conducted under § 1544.201 or § 1546.201; • When the individual is entering or in a sterile area; or • When the individual is attempting to board or onboard an aircraft for which screening is conducted under § 1544.201 or § 1546.201. On March 1, 2005 (70 FR 9877), TSA announced, via a notice in the **Federal Register** , a prohibition on passengers' ability to bring lighters onboard the cabin of an aircraft consistent with sec. 4025 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA) (Pub. L. 108-458, 118 Stat. 3710, Dec. 13, 2004), which required TSA to add butane lighters to the prohibited items list and to make any other modifications that TSA deemed appropriate. Specifically, TSA prohibited passengers from carrying any type of lighter on their person or in accessible property in airport sterile areas or on board an aircraft for which screening is conducted. Through this notice, TSA is changing its enforcement policy with respect to lighters. Under the new policy, TSA will no longer enforce the prohibition on lighters. The effect of this change in policy is to allow passengers to carry a lighter through a passenger screening checkpoint and into the cabin of an aircraft. Micro-torches and gas torches will continue to be prohibited. New Enforcement Policy Regarding Lighters In sec. 530 of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (Pub. L. 109-295, 120 Stat. 1355, Oct. 4, 2006), Congress provided TSA with the authority to refrain from enforcing the statutory butane lighter ban, if the Assistant Secretary determines that butane lighters are not a significant threat to civil aviation security. If the Assistant Secretary determines that butane lighters are not a significant threat, the Assistant Secretary must notify the Appropriations Committees of the Senate and House of Representatives 15 days in advance of the determination and include a report on whether the effectiveness of screening operations is enhanced by suspending enforcement of the prohibition. In accordance with this authority granted by Congress, TSA has determined, based on intelligence-driven threat assessments, that the carriage of butane and other types of lighters by passengers on board commercial aircraft does not pose a significant threat to civil aviation security. TSA has further determined that aviation security is better served if TSOs focus their efforts on detecting improvised explosive devices, firearms, and other deadly devices rather than searching for butane and other types of lighters. The search for lighters at screening checkpoints is a time consuming process that ultimately distracts TSOs from efforts to detect the type of deadly weapons likely to be used by terrorists and which could be used to inflict catastrophic damage to an aircraft and loss of lives. Since TSA prohibited lighters on March 1, 2005, TSA continues to intercept more than 22,000 lighters each day at screening checkpoints across the country. Lighters represent approximately 85 percent of prohibited items discovered by TSA and abandoned by passengers at screening checkpoints. The number of lighters discovered at checkpoints and the time and effort dedicated to positively identifying them is clearly disproportionate to any threat they may pose. Results from field surveys indicate that the greater the numbers of items TSOs are required to identify and evaluate, the more difficult it is to detect any one item. Accordingly, TSA has determined that aviation security is better served if TSOs are focused on detecting improvised explosive devices, firearms, and other deadly devices instead of employing resources in the search for lesser threats, such as lighters. Shifting attention from lower security risks to address markedly higher security risks is fundamental to a risk-based approach. TSA believes the effectiveness of screening operations will be enhanced if the time and resources devoted to detecting, collecting, and disposing of lighters is shifted to the search for higher threat items. Freeing TSOs from searching for lighters will not only enable them to focus on finding explosives, it will also enhance their ability to use behavior recognition, conduct random screening procedures, and deploy other measures that increase complexity in the security system and make its security protocols less transparent and predictable to potential terrorists. It is noteworthy that the United States is currently the only country that bans lighters. Permitting passengers to carry lighters will align the United States with the international security standards on lighters. This will serve as another step in our efforts to harmonize security measures with international partners. Further, this change will better harmonize TSA's regulations with current Department of Transportation

(DOT)regulations regarding the carriage of hazardous materials on board aircraft. Under the DOT regulations (49 CFR 175.10), a passenger may carry one lighter for the individual's use on his or her person or in carry-on baggage. Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on July 19, 2007. Kip Hawley, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-3630 Filed 7-20-07; 1:37 pm]

Connectionstraces to 44

Traces to 44 documents

U.S. Code