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

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-08-21 · Federal Aviation Administration, DOT · Rules and Regulations

Rules and Regulations. Final rule; request for comments

15,883 words·~72 min read·/register/2007/08/21/07-4091

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

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28971; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-32-AD; Amendment 39-15163; AD 2007-17-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model S92-A Helicopters AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S92-A helicopters. This action requires, within a specified time, borescope inspecting a certain part-numbered tail rotor pitch change shaft and bearing assembly (shaft and bearing assembly) and also inspecting after any installation. This amendment is prompted by an incident involving failure of a shaft and bearing assembly and servo clevis shaft resulting in loss of tail rotor control. The actions specified in this AD are intended to prevent failure of a shaft and bearing assembly, loss of tail rotor pitch and yaw control, and subsequent loss of control of a helicopter. DATES: Effective August 21, 2007. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of August 21, 2007. Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before October 22, 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; • *Hand Delivery:* Deliver to the “Mail” address between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. You may get the service information identified in this AD from Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical Support, mailstop s581a, 6900 Main Street, Stratford, Connecticut, phone
(203)383-4866, e-mail address *tsslibrary@sikorsky.com* . *Examining the Docket:* You may examine the docket that contains the AD, any comments, and other information 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 in Room W12-140 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 DMS receives them. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Gaulzetti, Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803, telephone
(781)238-7156, fax
(781)238-7170. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This amendment adopts a new AD for Sikorsky Model S92-A helicopters. This action requires, within a specified time, borescope inspecting a certain part-numbered shaft and bearing assembly and also inspecting after any installation. This amendment is prompted by an incident involving failure of a shaft and bearing assembly and servo clevis shaft resulting in loss of tail rotor control. This condition, if not detected, could result in loss of tail rotor pitch and yaw control and subsequent loss of control of a helicopter. We have reviewed Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin No. 92-64-002, dated August 3, 2007 (ASB), which describes procedures for doing a one-time borescope inspection of the shaft and bearing assembly. The ASB requires inspecting the shaft and bearing assembly within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS). This AD requires the inspection within 20 hours TIS based on the ease of the inspection, the availability of borescopes, the flight hours per day for the high time helicopters (about 8 hours), and the potential for a helicopter to ditch while servicing the oil rig industry. Also, this AD requires this inspection between 10 and 15 hours TIS following any installation of a shaft and bearing assembly. The inspections required by this AD are interim actions; the manufacturer continues to investigate failure of the shaft and bearing assembly and we may either develop follow-on actions or a terminating action for the requirements of this AD. This unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of the same type design. Therefore, this AD is being issued to prevent failure of a shaft and bearing assembly, loss of tail rotor pitch and yaw control, and subsequent loss of control of a helicopter. This AD requires, within 20 hours TIS, inspecting each affected shaft and bearing assembly at the tail rotor side and on the servo side through the oil filler cap. This AD also requires borescope inspecting each shaft and bearing assembly that is installed as a replacement. This inspection must be done between 10 and 15 hours TIS after installation. Replacing any unairworthy shaft and bearing assembly is required before further flight. The short compliance time involved is required because the previously described critical unsafe condition can adversely affect the controllability or structural integrity of the helicopter. Therefore, borescope inspecting the affected shaft and bearing assembly within 20 hours TIS and before further flight following any installation of an affected shaft and bearing assembly are required, and this AD must be issued immediately. Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days. We estimate that this AD will affect 34 helicopters, and the borescope inspection of the shaft and bearing assembly will take about 2 work hours to do at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts will cost about $30,864 per helicopter. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators to be $1,054,816. 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 written data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-28971; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-32-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of our docket web site, you can find and read the comments to any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment. 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* . 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 an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD. See the DMS to examine the economic evaluation. 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. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration 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. Section 39.13 is amended by ad ding a new airworthiness directive to read as follows: **2007-17-05 Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation:** Amendment 39-15163. Docket No. FAA-2007-28971; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-32-AD. Applicability Model S-92A helicopter, with a tail rotor pitch change shaft and bearing assembly (shaft and bearing assembly) part number 92358-06303-041, installed, certificated in any category. Compliance Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously. To prevent failure of a shaft and bearing assembly, loss of tail rotor pitch and yaw control, and subsequent loss of control of a helicopter, do the following:
(a)Within 20 hours time-in-service (TIS), borescope inspect as follows:
(1)Inspect each affected shaft and bearing assembly at tail rotor side by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.A.(1) through
(7)and Figure 4 of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin No. 92-64-002, dated August 3, 2007 (ASB). If the shaft bearing fails the inspection, replace the shaft and bearing assembly before further flight.
(2)Inspect each shaft and bearing assembly on the servo side through the oil filler cap by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs B.(1) through
(9)and Figures 2 and 3, of the ASB. If the shaft bearing fails the inspection, replace the shaft and bearing assembly before further flight. Note: Maintenance Manual SA S92A-ANM-000 pertains to the subject of this AD.
(b)Between 10 and 15 hours TIS after installing a shaft and bearing assembly, borescope inspect it by following paragraph
(a)of this AD.
(c)To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Contact the Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, ATTN: Wayne Gaulzetti, Aviation Safety Engineer, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803, telephone
(781)238-7156, fax
(781)238-7170, for information about previously approved alternative methods of compliance.
(d)The inspections of the shaft and bearing assembly shall be done by following Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin No. 92-64-002, dated August 3, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical Support, mailstop s581a, 6900 Main Street, Stratford, Connecticut, phone
(203)383-4866, e-mail address *tsslibrary@sikorsky.com* . Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.*
(e)This amendment becomes effective on August 21, 2007. Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 9, 2007. Mark R. Schilling, Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-15980 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29014; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-179-AD; Amendment 39-15165; AD 2007-17-07] 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; request for comments. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)originated 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: The Bombardier CL-600-2B19 airplanes have had a history of flap failures at various positions for several years. Flap failure may result in a significant increase in required landing distances and higher fuel consumption than planned during a diversion. This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: This AD becomes effective September 5, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications, listed in the AD as of September 5, 2007. We must receive comments on this AD by September 20, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *DOT Docket Web Site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *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. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 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: Discussion Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-10, dated July 18, 2007 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: On November 22, 2006, due to weather conditions a CRJ 100 executed a missed approach. At the same time, a flaps malfunction resulted in the flaps becoming unresponsive while in the fully deployed position (45 degree). The pilot declared an emergency and diverted to the alternate airport. Due to high fuel consumption when flying in this configuration, the aircraft landed at a diversion airport with 512 pounds of fuel remaining. The Bombardier CL-600-2B19 airplanes have had a history of flap failures at various positions for several years. Flap failure may result in a significant increase in required landing distances and higher fuel consumption than planned during a diversion. The nature of the malfunction is related to the design and reliability of some of the components of the flap system. To lower the risk of exposure until a permanent solution becomes available, Transport Canada is implementing the following four mandatory actions: Part I: AFM Change. This action is mandated to provide the crew with additional guidance information for the FLAPS FAIL abnormal procedure, to address the possibility of fuel exhaustion resulting from a flaps failure at other than 0 degrees, in combination with a diversion to an alternate airport. Part II: Operational Procedures: The operational procedures mandated herein are aimed at reducing or eliminating the risk caused by flaps failures. These Operational Procedures cover the three most critical flaps failure modes. Part III: Training Procedures: This action is mandated to provide personnel with training on the operational procedures of Part II of this directive and instruction on reduced or zero flap landing. Part IV: Maintenance Actions: The maintenance actions are mandated to improve overall Flaps System reliability and bring the failure rate to an acceptable level, until permanent solutions are implemented. The corrective “maintenance actions” include the cleaning and lubrication of the flexible shafts, and applicable related investigative and corrective actions (which include a detailed inspection of the actuator connector sealant bead for signs of damage or delamination, repair of damaged sealant, and if necessary, a low temperature torque check on the actuator and if torque test results are not satisfactory, an installation of a serviceable actuator or, if no serviceable actuators are available, contacting the FAA for corrective action). The corrective “maintenance actions” also include installation of metallic seals in the flexible drive-shafts, and applicable related investigative and corrective actions (which include a detailed inspection of the mating surfaces on the flexible drive-shaft for damage (scratches or dents), and if mating surfaces have damage, cleaning the sealing washer and mating surfaces and applying sealant). You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 601R-27-150, including Appendix A, dated July 12, 2007; and Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision RJ/165, dated July 6, 2007, to the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A-012. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because the Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes have a history of flap failure during cold weather operations. Flap failure may result in a significant increase in required landing distances and higher fuel consumption than planned during a diversion; therefore, corrective actions are necessary prior to the onset of cold weather operations. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-29014; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-179-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this AD. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD 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 the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-17-07 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair):** Amendment 39-15165. Docket No. FAA-2007-29014; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-179-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective September 5, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 7003 through 7990 and 8000 and subsequent. Subject
(d)Air Transport Association
(ATA)of America Code 27: Flight Controls. Reason
(e)The mandatory continued airworthiness information
(MCAI)states: On November 22, 2006, due to weather conditions a CRJ 100 executed a missed approach. At the same time, a flaps malfunction resulted in the flaps becoming unresponsive while in the fully deployed position (45 degree). The pilot declared an emergency and diverted to the alternate airport. Due to high fuel consumption when flying in this configuration, the aircraft landed at a diversion airport with 512 pounds of fuel remaining. The Bombardier CL-600-2B19 airplanes have had a history of flap failures at various positions for several years. Flap failure may result in a significant increase in required landing distances and higher fuel consumption than planned during a diversion. The nature of the malfunction is related to the design and reliability of some of the components of the flap system. To lower the risk of exposure until a permanent solution becomes available, Transport Canada is implementing the following four mandatory actions: Part I: AFM Change. This action is mandated to provide the crew with additional guidance information for the FLAPS FAIL abnormal procedure, to address the possibility of fuel exhaustion resulting from a flaps failure at other than 0 degrees, in combination with a diversion to an alternate airport. Part II: Operational Procedures: The operational procedures mandated herein are aimed at reducing or eliminating the risk caused by flaps failures. These Operational Procedures cover the three most critical flaps failure modes. Part III: Training Procedures: This action is mandated to provide personnel with training on the operational procedures of Part II of this directive and instruction on reduced or zero flap landing. Part IV: Maintenance Actions: The maintenance actions are mandated to improve overall Flaps System reliability and bring the failure rate to an acceptable level, until permanent solutions are implemented. The corrective “maintenance actions” include the cleaning and lubrication of the flexible shafts, and applicable related investigative and corrective actions (which include a detailed inspection of the actuator connector sealant bead for signs of damage or delamination, repair of damaged sealant, and if necessary, a low temperature torque check on the actuator and if torque test results are not satisfactory, an installation of a serviceable actuator or, if no serviceable actuators are available, contacting the FAA for corrective action). The corrective “maintenance actions” also include installation of metallic seals in the flexible drive-shafts, and applicable related investigative and corrective actions (which include a detailed inspection of the mating surfaces on the flexible drive-shaft for damage (scratches or dents), and if mating surfaces have damage, cleaning the sealing washer and mating surfaces and applying sealant). Actions and Compliance
(f)Unless already done, do the following actions.
(1)Part I. Airplane Flight Manual
(AFM)Change: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A-012, by incorporating the information in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision
(TR)RJ/165, dated July 6, 2007, into the AFM. Note 1: The actions required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD may be done by inserting a copy of Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165, dated July 6, 2007, into the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A-012. When this TR has been included in general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted in the AFM.
(2)Part II. Operational Procedures: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the Limitations Section of the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A-012, to include the following statement. This may be done by inserting a copy of paragraph (f)(2) of this AD in the AFM. “1. Flap Extended Diversion Upon arrival at the destination airport, an approach shall not be commenced, nor shall the flaps be extended beyond the 0 degree position, unless one of the following conditions exists: a. When conducting a precision approach, the reported visibility (or RVR) is confirmed to be at or above the visibility associated with the landing minima for the approach in use, and can be reasonably expected to remain at or above this visibility until after landing; or b. When conducting a non-precision approach, the reported ceiling and visibility (or RVR) are confirmed to be at or above the ceiling and visibility associated with the landing minima for the approach in use, and can be reasonably expected to remain at or above this ceiling and visibility until after landing; or c. An emergency or abnormal situation occurs that requires landing at the nearest suitable airport; or d. The fuel remaining is sufficient to conduct the approach, execute a missed approach, divert to a suitable airport with the flaps extended to the landing position, conduct an approach at the airport and land with 1000 lb (454 kg) of fuel remaining. Note 1: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM TR/165) shall be applied to the normal fuel consumption for calculation of the flaps extended missed approach, climb, diversion and approach fuel consumption. Note 2: Terrain and weather must allow a minimum flight altitude not exceeding 15,000 feet along the diversion route. Note 3: For the purpose of this AD, a “suitable airport” is an airport that has at least one usable runway, served by an instrument approach if operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), and the airport is equipped as per the applicable regulations and standards for marking and lighting. The existing and forecast weather for this airport shall be at or above landing minima for the approach in use. 2. Flap Failure After Takeoff When a takeoff alternate is filed, terrain and weather must allow a minimum flight altitude not exceeding 15,000 feet along the diversion route to that alternate, or other suitable airport. The fuel at departure shall be sufficient to divert to the takeoff alternate or other suitable airport with the flaps extended to the takeoff position, conduct and approach and land with 1000 lb (454 kg) of fuel remaining. Note: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM TR/165) shall be applied to the normal fuel consumption for calculation of the flaps extended, climb, diversion and approach fuel consumption. 3. Flap Zero Landing Operations where all useable runways at the destination and alternate airports are forecast to be wet or contaminated (as defined in the AFM) are prohibited during the cold weather season (December to March inclusive in the northern hemisphere) unless one of the following conditions exists: a. The flap actuators have been verified serviceable in accordance with Part C (Low Temperature Torque Test of the Flap Actuators) of SB 601R-27-150, July 12, 2007, or b. The flight is conducted at a cruise altitude where the SAT is -60 deg C or warmer. If the SAT in flight is colder than -60 deg C, descent to warmer air shall be initiated within 10 minutes, or c. The Landing Distance Available on a useable runway at the destination airport is at least equal to the actual landing distance required for flaps zero. This distance shall be based on Bombardier performance data, and shall take into account forecast weather and anticipated runway conditions, or d. The Landing Distance Available on a useable runway at the filed alternate airport, or other suitable airport is at least equal to the actual landing distance for flaps zero. This distance shall be based on Bombardier performance data, and shall take into account forecast weather and anticipated runway conditions. Note 1: If the forecast destination weather is less than 200 feet above DH or MDA, or less than 1 mile (1500 meters) above the authorized landing visibility (or equivalent RVR), as applied to the usable runway at the destination airport, condition 3.a., 3.b., or 3.d. above must be satisfied. Note 2: When conducting No Alternate IFR (NAIFR) operations, condition 3.a., 3.b., or 3.c. above must be satisfied.”
(3)Part III. Training: As of 30 days after the effective date of this AD, no affected airplane may be operated unless the flight crewmembers of that airplane and the operational control/dispatch personnel for that airplane have received training that is acceptable to the Principal Operations Inspector
(POI)on the operational procedures required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD.
(4)Part IV. Maintenance Actions: Within 120 days after the effective date of this AD, do the cleaning and lubrication of the flexible shafts, installation of metallic seals in the flexible drive-shafts, and all applicable related investigative and corrective actions by doing all the applicable actions specified in “PART A” of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-27-150, dated July 12, 2007; except if torque test results are not satisfactory, before further flight, install a serviceable actuator in accordance with the service bulletin or, if no serviceable actuators are available, contact the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, for corrective action. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. FAA AD Differences Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows:
(1)This AD does not require the following actions specified in the MCAI: the training specified in Paragraph 2. of “Part III. Training;” and the maintenance tasks specified in the second and third rows of the table in “Part IV. Maintenance Actions.” The planned compliance times for those actions would allow enough time to provide notice and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of those actions. Therefore, we are considering further rulemaking to address this issue.
(2)The MCAI does not specify a corrective action if an actuator is not serviceable (i.e. torque test results are not satisfactory). This AD requires contacting the FAA or installing a serviceable actuator before further flight if torque test results are not satisfactory (corrective actions are specified in paragraph (f)(4) of this AD). Other FAA AD Provisions
(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Dan 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. 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, 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 Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-10, dated July 18, 2007; Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-27-150, dated July 12, 2007; and Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision RJ/165, dated July 6, 2007, to the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A-012; for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference
(i)You must use Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-27-150, including Appendix A, dated July 12, 2007; and Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision RJ/165, dated July 6, 2007, to the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A-012; as applicable, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202)741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.* Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 13, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-16367 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28253; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-031-AD; Amendment 39-15064; AD 2007-11-07] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a typographical error in an existing airworthiness directive
(AD)that was published in the **Federal Register** on May 22, 2007 (72 FR 28597). The error resulted in a confusing compliance time. This AD applies to all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This AD requires repetitive detailed inspections for damage of the electrical wire and sleeve that run to the fuel boost pump through a conduit in the fuel tank, and arcing damage of the conduit and signs of fuel leakage into the conduit; replacement of the sleeve with a new, smaller-diameter sleeve; and related investigative and corrective actions, as applicable. DATES: Effective June 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: The AD docket contains the proposed AD, comments, and any final disposition. 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 level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. This docket number is FAA-2007-28253; the directorate identifier for this docket is 2007-NM-031-AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Lucier, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)917-6438; fax
(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 2, 2007, the FAA issued AD 2007-11-07, amendment 39-15064 (72 FR 28597, May 22, 2007), for all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The AD requires repetitive detailed inspections for damage of the electrical wire and sleeve that run to the fuel boost pump through a conduit in the fuel tank, and arcing damage of the conduit and signs of fuel leakage into the conduit; replacement of the sleeve with a new, smaller-diameter sleeve; and related investigative and corrective actions, as applicable. As published, paragraph
(k)of AD 2007-11-07 reads “* * * Thereafter, repeat the detailed inspection at intervals not to exceed 15,000 flight cycles. * * *” The correct term, “flight hours” (not flight cycles), appears in all other compliance times cited in the AD, as intended. No other part of the regulatory information has been changed; therefore, the final rule is not republished in the **Federal Register** . The effective date of this AD remains June 6, 2007. § 39.13 [Corrected] In the **Federal Register** of May 22, 2007, on page 28600, in the third column, paragraph
(k)of AD 2007-11-07 is corrected to read as follows:
(k)At the applicable time specified by paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for damage of the sleeve and electrical wire of the fuel boost pump; and, before further flight, install a new, smaller-diameter sleeve, and do related investigative and corrective actions, as applicable; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-28A1263, Revision 1, dated March 19, 2007. Thereafter, repeat the detailed inspection at intervals not to exceed 15,000 flight hours. Accomplishment of the initial inspection, applicable corrective actions, and sleeve installation required by this paragraph terminates the requirements of paragraphs (f), (g), (h), and
(i)of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 14, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-16304 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 232 [Release Nos. 33-8834; 34-56256; 39-2448; IC-27928] RIN 3235-AG96 Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) is adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (EDGAR) Filer Manual to reflect updates to the EDGAR system. Revisions are being made primarily to support the expansion of the current interactive data voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit supplemental tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses on Form N-1A. The EDGAR system is being upgraded to support this functionality on August 20, 2007. The filer manual is also being revised to incorporate changes in support of several final rules previously adopted by the Commission and implemented in EDGAR. Those rules include the termination of a foreign private issuer's registration of a class of securities under Section 12(g) and duty to file reports under Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”); the electronic filing of Transfer Agent (“TA”) forms TA-1, TA-2 and TA-W; and revisions to the accelerated filer definition under the Exchange Act. Other revisions were made to allow an issuer to indicate whether it is subject to reporting obligations after terminating registration of a class of equity securities under the Exchange Act and to remove references to submission types N-14AE and N-14AE/A for the filing of Form N-14 from “Table 3-5: Investment Company Submission Types Accepted by EDGAR” of the Filer Manual. Revisions to the Filer Manual reflect changes within Volumes I and II, entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 4 (August 2007) and EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 5 (August 2007) respectively. The updated manual will be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations. DATES: *Effective Date:* August 20, 2007. The incorporation by reference of the EDGAR Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of August 20, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In the Office of Information Technology, Rick Heroux, at
(202)551-8800; in the Division of Investment Management, for questions concerning the expansion of the current interactive data voluntary reporting program, Alberto H. Zapata, Senior Counsel, or Brent J. Fields, Assistant Director, Office of Disclosure Regulation, at
(202)551-6784, and for questions concerning investment company filings, Ruth Armfield Sanders, Senior Special Counsel, Office of Legal and Disclosure, at
(202)551-6989; in the Division of Market Regulation, for questions concerning the electronic filing of Transfer Agent forms, Catherine Moore, Special Counsel, Office of Clearance and Settlement, at
(202)551-5710; and in the Division of Corporation Finance, for questions concerning the definition of accelerated filer for periodic reports, Katherine W. Hsu, Special Counsel, Office of Rulemaking, at
(202)551-3430 and for questions concerning termination of a foreign private issuer's registration, Elliot Staffin, Special Counsel, Office of International Corporate Finance, at
(202)551-3450. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Today we are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volumes I and II. The Filer Manual describes the technical formatting requirements for the preparation and submission of electronic filings through the EDGAR system. 1 It also describes the requirements for filing using EDGARLink 2 and the Online Forms/XML Web site. 1 We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993, with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April 1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the Filer Manual on February 6, 2006. *See* Release No. 33-8656 (January 27, 2006) [71 FR 5596]. 2 This is the filer assistance software we provide filers filing on the EDGAR system. The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. Filers must comply with the applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic format. 3 Filers should consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for electronic submission. 4 3 *See* Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301). 4 *See* Release Nos. 33-6977 (February 23, 1993) [58 FR 14628], IC-19284 (February 23, 1993) [58 FR 14848], 35-25746 (February 23, 1993) [58 FR 14999], and 33-6980 (February 23, 1993) [58 FR 15009] in which we comprehensively discuss the rules we adopted to govern mandated electronic filing. *See also* Release No. 33-7122 (December 19, 1994) [59 FR 67752], in which we made the EDGAR rules final and applicable to all domestic registrants; Release No. 33-7427 (July 1, 1997) [62 FR 36450], in which we adopted minor amendments to the EDGAR rules; Release No. 33-7472 (October 24, 1997) [62 FR 58647], in which we announced that, as of January 1, 1998, we would not accept in paper filings that we require filers to submit electronically; Release No. 34-40934 (January 12, 1999) [64 FR 2843], in which we made mandatory the electronic filing of Form 13F; Release No. 33-7684 (May 17, 1999) [64 FR 27888], in which we adopted amendments to implement the first stage of EDGAR modernization; Release No. 33-7855 (April 24, 2000) [65 FR 24788], in which we implemented EDGAR Release 7.0; Release No. 33-7999 (August 7, 2001) [66 FR 42941], in which we implemented EDGAR Release 7.5; Release No. 33-8007 (September 24, 2001) [66 FR 49829], in which we implemented EDGAR Release 8.0; Release No. 33-8224 (April 30, 2003) [68 FR 24345], in which we implemented EDGAR Release 8.5; Release Nos. 33-8255 (July 22, 2003) [68 FR 44876] and 33-8255A (September 4, 2003) [68 FR 53289] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 8.6; Release No. 33-8409 (April 19, 2004) [69 FR 21954] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 8.7; Release No. 33-8454 (August 6, 2004) [69 FR 49803] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 8.8; Release No. 33-8528 (February 3, 2005) [70 FR 6573] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 8.10; Release No. 33-8573 (May 19, 2005) [70 FR 30899] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 9.0; Release No. 33-8612 (September 21, 2005) [70 FR 57130] in which the Commission granted the authorization to publish the release adopting the reorganized EDGAR Filer Manual; Release No. 33-8633 (November 1, 2005) [70 FR 67350] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 9.2; and Release No 33-8656 (January 27, 2006) [71 FR 5596] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 9.3. Revisions are being made primarily to support the final rule 5 adopted by the Commission to extend the current interactive data voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit supplemental tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses from Form N-1A using the mutual fund risk/return summary taxonomy developed by the Investment Company Institute (“ICI”). As with the voluntary interactive data program initiated by the Commission in 2005, in which companies voluntarily agree to furnish financial data as exhibit documents in eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“XBRL”) format, the risk/return summary data submitted by mutual funds must also be provided as exhibit documents in XBRL format. A mutual fund submitting tagged risk/return summary information as an exhibit to Form N-1A will be required to name each document “EX-100” as specified in the EDGAR Filer Manual. In addition, the XBRL exhibit documents submitted require the use of the appropriate version of standard taxonomies supported by EDGAR. Those standard taxonomies, including the ICI's Mutual Fund Risk/Return Summary Taxonomy, are provided on the SEC's “Information for EDGAR Filers” webpage and include a listing of applicable XBRL schemas and linkbases. Core XBRL, XBRL linkbase, eXtensible Markup Language (XML), and XLink schemas and specifications are listed in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing”. A mutual fund choosing to tag its risk/return summary information also would continue to file this information in HTML or ASCII format, as currently required. 5 See Release No. 33-8823 (July 11, 2007) [72 FR 39290]. The filer manual is also being revised to incorporate changes made to support final rules previously adopted by the Commission and implemented in EDGAR. Those rules and EDGAR changes are described below. • The termination of a foreign private issuer's 12(g) reporting obligations 6 regarding a class of debt securities and to cease its duty to file reports under Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; 6 See Release No. 34-55540 (March 27, 2007) [72 FR 16934]. This revision included the addition of new submission types 15F-12B, 15F-12B/A, 15F-12G, 15F-12G/A, 15F-15D, 15F-15D/A which can be submitted using the EDGARLink software and Submission Template #3. • The electronic filing of forms 7 TA-1, TA-2 and TA-W; 7 See Release No. 34-54864 (December 4, 2006) [71 FR 74698]. This revision included the addition of electronic forms for the filing of the registration, annual report, and withdrawal from registration of transfer agents. The EDGARLite application was introduced as the tool for filers to use in the creation of their EDGAR submissions. Filers download the EDGARLite package from the EDGAR OnlineForms/XML Web site and install it on their desktop. EDGARLite consists of a Commercial off the Shelf
(COTS)software package, Microsoft InfoPath 8 (MS InfoPath), and electronic form templates provided by the Commission. The forms are encoded in Extensible Markup Language
(XML)and are submitted to EDGAR using the OnlineForms/XML Web site. • Revisions to the accelerated filer definition 9 and accelerated periodic report filing deadlines under the Exchange Act; 8 MS InfoPath 2003 or MS InfoPath 2007 can be used and comes with the Professional Enterprise Edition of Microsoft Office or can be purchased separately for approximately $200. 9 See Release No. 33-8644 (December 21, 2005) [70 FR 76626]. The addition of a required “Accelerated Filer Status” indicator to EDGARLink submission headers for 10-K, 10-K/A, 10-KT, 10-KT/A, 20-F, and 20-F/A forms allows filers of these form types to select one of the following accelerated filer classification values: Large Accelerated Filer, Accelerated Filer, Non-accelerated Filer, and Not Applicable (should be used if a filer is filing an amendment to a Form 10-K or Form 20-F submission for a period that occurred before the accelerated filer definition went into effect). The accelerated filer classification is directly related to the filer's reporting deadline as illustrated in the following: 10 10 See Release No. 33-8644 (December 21, 2005) [70 FR 76626]. Category of filer Revised deadlines for filing periodic reports Form 10-K deadline Form 10-Q deadline Large Accelerated Filer ($700MM or more) 75 days for fiscal years ending before December 15, 2006 and 60 days for fiscal years ending on or after December 15, 2006 40 days. Accelerated Filer ($75MM or more and less than $700MM) 75 days 40 days. Non-accelerated Filer (less than $75MM) 90 days 45 days. Additional revisions were made to permit a domestic issuer to indicate whether reporting obligations still exist after terminating registration of a class of equity securities under the Exchange Act. The addition of a required “Duty to File Reports Remains” indicator in EDGARLink submission headers for submission types 15-12B, 15-12B/A, 15-12G, 15-12G/A, 15-15D and 15-15D/A allows filers of these form types to indicate whether it is still subject to reporting obligations under the Exchange Act. Finally, we removed from “Table 3-5: Investment Company Submission Types Accepted by EDGAR” of the Filer Manual the reference to submission types N-14AE and N-14AE/A for the filing of Form N-14. All open-end investment companies, including those filed with automatic effectiveness under Rule 488 (business combinations), are to use submission types N-14 and N-14/A for these filings. For the extension of the current interactive data voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit supplemental tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses being implemented in EDGAR Release 9.7, the EDGARLink software and submission templates will not be updated. Notice of the new release has previously been provided on the EDGAR Filing Web site and on the Commission's public Web site. The discrete updates are reflected in the updated Filer Manual Volumes. Along with adoption of the Filer Manual, we are amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of today's revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain paper copies of the updated Filer Manual at the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Room 1580, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. We will post electronic format copies on the Commission's Web site; the address for the Filer Manual is *http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml.* You may also obtain copies from Thomson Financial, the paper document contractor for the Commission, at
(800)638-8241. Since the Filer Manual relates solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). 11 It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 12 do not apply. 11 5 U.S.C. 553(b). 12 5 U.S.C. 601-612. The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the rule amendments is August 20, 2007. In accordance with the APA, 13 we find that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules. The EDGAR system upgrade to Release 9.7 is scheduled to become available on August 20, 2007. The Commission believes that it is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated Filer Manual with the scheduled system upgrade. 13 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Statutory Basis We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under Sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 14 Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, and 35A of the Exchange Act, 15 Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, 16 and Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. 17 14 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a). 15 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78 *l* , 78m, 78n, 78o, 78w, and 78 *ll* . 16 15 U.S.C. 77sss. 17 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37. List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232 Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities. Text of the Amendment In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 232—REGULATION S-T—GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS 1. The authority citation for part 232 continues to read in part as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78 *l* , 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78 *ll* (d), 79t(a), 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, and 7201 *et seq.* ; and 18 U.S.C. 1350. 2. Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows: § 232.301 EDGAR Filer Manual. Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets out the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 4 (August 2007). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 5 (August 2007). Additional provisions applicable to Form N-SAR filers are set forth in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume III: “N-SAR Supplement,” Version 1 (September 2005). All of these provisions have been incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You must comply with these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and accepted. You can obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Room 1580, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., or by calling Thomson Financial at
(800)638-8241. Electronic copies are available on the Commission's Web site. The address for the Filer Manual is *http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml.* You can also photocopy the document 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.* Dated: August 15, 2007. By the Commission. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary . [FR Doc. E7-16414 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 172 [Docket No. 2006F-0059] Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption; Polydextrose AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is amending the food additive regulations to provide for the safe use of polydextrose as a bulking agent, formulation aid, humectant, and texturizer in all foods, except meat and poultry, baby foods, and infant formula. This action is in response to a petition filed by Danisco USA, Inc. DATES: This rule is effective August 21, 2007. Submit written or electronic objections and requests for a hearing by September 20, 2007. See section VII of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for information on the filing of objections. The Director of the Office of the Federal Register approves the incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of certain publications in § 172.841(b) (21 CFR 172.841(b)) as of August 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit written or electronic objections and requests for a hearing, identified by Docket No. 2006F-0059, by any of the following methods: Electronic Submissions Submit electronic objections in the following ways: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Agency Web site: *http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the agency Web site. *Written Submissions* Submit written objections in the following ways: • FAX: 301-827-6870. • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions]: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. To ensure more timely processing of objections, FDA is no longer accepting objections submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages you to continue to submit electronic objections by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal or the agency Web site, as described in the *Electronic Submissions* portion of this paragraph. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All objections received will be posted without change to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* , including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting objections, see the “Objections” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or objections received, go to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew J. Zajac, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835, 301-436-1267. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction In a notice published in the **Federal Register** of February 15, 2006 (71 FR 7975), amended April 27, 2006 (71 FR 24856), FDA announced that a food additive petition (FAP 6A4763) had been filed by Danisco USA, Inc., 440 Saw Mill River Rd., Ardsley, NY 10502-2605. The petition proposed to amend the food additive regulations in § 172.841 *Polydextrose* (21 CFR 172.841). Currently, § 172.841 lists 13 specific categories of foods in which polydextrose may be used safely as a bulking agent, formulation aid, humectant, and texturizer. The petition proposed to amend § 172.841 to provide for the safe use of polydextrose as a bulking agent, formulation aid, humectant, and texturizer in all foods, except meat and poultry. The petition also proposed to incorporate by reference the specifications for polydextrose in the 5th edition of the Food Chemicals Codex (FCC V), effective January 1, 2004. After the petition was filed, Danisco amended the petition to exclude the proposed uses of polydextrose in baby food and infant formula. II. Determination of Safety Under the general safety standard in section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 348), a food additive cannot be approved for a particular use unless a fair evaluation of the data available to FDA establishes that the additive is safe for that use. FDA's food additive regulations (21 CFR 170.3(i)) define safe as “a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use.” To establish with reasonable certainty that a food additive is not harmful under its intended conditions of use, FDA considers the projected human dietary intake of the additive, existing toxicological data, and other relevant information (such as published literature) available to the agency. FDA compares an individual's estimated daily intake
(EDI)of the additive from all sources to an acceptable intake level established by toxicological data. The EDI is determined by projections based on the amount of the additive proposed for use in particular foods and on data regarding the amount consumed from all sources of the additive. The agency commonly uses the EDI for the 90th percentile consumer of a food additive as a measure of high chronic dietary intake. The petitioner estimates that the cumulative intake of polydextrose from all currently-regulated and proposed uses of the additive will result in an exposure to the additive of 16 grams per person per day (g/p/d)
(mean)and 31 g/p/d (90th percentile) for all ages (Ref. 1). The previous FDA intake estimate for polydextrose from currently-regulated uses was 18 g/p/d and 30 g/p/d at the mean and 90th percentile, respectively, for persons aged 2 years and above. Despite the additional proposed uses, the petitioner's intake estimate for polydextrose did not differ significantly from the previous FDA intake estimate because it is based on revised use levels and current uses of polydextrose that are more representative of actual uses of polydextrose in food than those used in FDA's previous intake estimate. FDA agrees with the petitioner's intake estimate for polydextrose and concludes that it is sufficiently conservative (Ref. 1). Because consumer exposure to polydextrose has not changed significantly as a result of the petitioned uses, no new toxicological testing is necessary to ensure that the additional uses proposed in the petition, as amended, will be safe. Therefore, FDA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm from exposure to polydextrose would result from the additional petitioned uses. The agency also considered the potential for laxation effect due to excessive consumption of polydextrose in sensitive individuals. Currently, the regulation setting out approved food additive uses for polydextrose requires that consumers be informed of this potential effect through special labeling of products containing more than 15 g of polydextrose per serving (21 CFR 172.841(e)). The agency has considered the cumulative effect of the additional petitioned uses and has concluded that because there will be effectively no increase in dietary exposure to polydextrose the current labeling requirement is adequate to protect the public. Accordingly, the agency is amending § 172.841 of the food additive regulations to provide for the use of polydextrose in all foods, except meat, poultry, baby food, and infant formula. III. Specifications for Polydextrose As stated previously, the petition proposes that § 172.841 be amended by adopting the specifications for polydextrose in FCC V. Currently, § 172.841 incorporates by reference the specifications of the 4th edition of the Food Chemicals Codex (FCC IV), 1996. The differences between the specifications in the monograph for polydextrose in FCC IV and FCC V are discussed in the amended filing notice published in the **Federal Register** of April 27, 2006. FDA received no comments on the proposed adoption of the FCC V specifications for polydextrose. Subsequent to the publication of the amended filing notice, FDA learned that FCC published an erratum to the polydextrose monograph in the First Supplement to the 5th Edition of the Food Chemicals Codex (effective March 1, 2006). The erratum contained additional instructions on preparing a standard curve for the assay, but did not include any changes to the specifications. FDA has reviewed the specifications in FCC V and agrees that § 172.841 should be amended by adopting the specifications in FCC V. IV. Conclusion FDA reviewed data and information in the petition and other relevant material to evaluate the safety of the proposed use of polydextrose in all foods, except meat and poultry, baby food, and infant formula. Based on its evaluation, FDA concludes that the uses proposed in the petition are safe, and therefore, § 172.841 should be amended as set forth in this document. In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition and the documents that FDA considered and relied upon in reaching its decision to approve the petition will be made available for inspection at the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by appointment with the information contact person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). As provided in § 171.1(h), the agency will delete from the documents any materials that are not available for public disclosure before making the documents available for inspection. V. Environmental Impact The agency has carefully considered the potential environmental effects of this action. FDA has concluded that the action will not have a significant impact on the human environment, and that an environmental impact statement is not required. The agency's finding of no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding, contained in an environmental assessment, may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This final rule contains no collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required. VII. Objections Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may file with the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) written or electronic objections. Each objection shall be separately numbered, and each numbered objection shall specify with particularity the provisions of the regulation to which objection is made and the grounds for the objection. Each numbered objection on which a hearing is requested shall specifically so state. Failure to request a hearing for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered objection for which a hearing is requested shall include a detailed description and analysis of the specific factual information intended to be presented in support of the objection in the event that a hearing is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on the objection. Three copies of all documents are to be submitted and are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Any objections received in response to the regulation may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. VIII. References The following reference has been placed on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) and may be seen by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 1. Memorandum from Folmer, Chemistry Review Team, Division of Petition Review, to DeLeo, Regulatory Group I, Division of Petition Review, June 20, 2006. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 172 Food additives, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and redelegated to the Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 172 is amended as follows: PART 172—FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED FOR DIRECT ADDITION TO FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 172 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 342, 348, 371, 379e. 2. Section 172.841 is amended by revising paragraphs
(b)and
(c)to read as follows: § 172.841 Polydextrose.
(b)The additive meets the specifications of the “Food Chemicals Codex,” 5th ed. (January 1, 2004), pp. 336-339, and the First Supplement to the 5th Edition of the Food Chemicals Codex (March 1, 2006), p. 37, which are incorporated by reference. The Director of the Office of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy from The National Academies Press, 500 Fifth St. NW., Washington, DC 20001 (Internet address *http://www.nap.edu* ). You may inspect a copy at the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Library, Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740, 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* .
(c)When standards of identity established under section 401 of the act do not preclude such use, polydextrose may be used in accordance with current good manufacturing practices as a bulking agent, formulation aid, humectant, and texturizer in all foods, except meat and poultry, baby food, and infant formula. Dated: August 14, 2007. Leslye M. Fraser, Director, Office of Regulations and Policy, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. [FR Doc. E7-16322 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0526; FRL-8446-1] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona—Phoenix PM-10 Nonattainment Area; Salt River Area Plan for Attainment of the 24-hour PM-10 Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval under the Clean Air Act
(CAA)of provisions of the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan
(SIP)for the Salt River Area submitted by the State of Arizona to EPA in October and November 2005. These submittals include adopted rules, resolutions and measures that address particulate matter (PM-10) emissions from fugitive dust sources. DATES: *Effective Date:* This rule is effective on September 20, 2007. ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0526 for this action. The index to the docket is available electronically at *www.regulations.gov* and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., Confidential Business Information). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX,
(415)947-4124, *wang.mae@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action On July 12, 2006 (71 FR 39251), EPA proposed to approve the rules, resolutions and measures listed below into the Arizona PM-10 SIP pursuant to the cited CAA sections. We also proposed on July 12, 2006, to approve Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) Rule 316, “Nonmetallic Mineral Processing,” adopted on June 8, 2005. In this final rule we are approving all the items listed below. EPA is not, however, including Rule 316 in this final action because we are re-evaluating the rule and expect to address it in a separate rulemaking. Table I Rule/measure/commitment Relevant CAA section(s) Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) Rule 325, “Brick and Structural Clay Products
(BSCP)Manufacturing,” adopted August 10, 2005 189(b)(1)(B) and 188(e). MCAQD Rule 310, “Fugitive Dust,” adopted April 7, 2004 189(b) and 188(e) for subsections 304.5 and 502. 110(a) for other subsections. MCAQD Rule 310.01, “Fugitive Dust From Open Areas, Vacant Lots, Unpaved Parking Lots, and Unpaved Roadways,” adopted February 17, 2005 110(a). MCAQD Appendix C, “Fugitive Dust Test Methods,” adopted April 7, 2004 189(b) and 188(e) for subsection 3.3.2. 110(a) for other subsections. MCAQD Appendix F, “Soil Designations,” adopted April 7, 2004 189(b) and 188(e). MCAQD “Application for Dust Control Permit,” adopted June 22, 2005 1 189(b) and 188(e) for Section 2, subsections 10 and 11, and Section 3, subsection I. 110(a) for other subsections. MCAQD ‘Guidance for Application for Dust Control Permit,” adopted June 22, 2005 2 189(b) and 188(e) for Section 2, subsection 13, and Section 3. 110(a) for other subsections. Maricopa County Board Resolution No. C-85-05-005-0-00, adopted January 19, 2005 189(b) for enforcement resource provisions of Measures 1 through 4. 110(a) for other provisions, including Measure 5. City of Phoenix Resolution No. 20114, adopted June 16, 2004 110(a). Resolutions from 17 municipalities 3 and the Arizona Department of Transportation, adopted on various dates 110(a). 1 The reference to an adoption date of July 1, 2005, in the proposed rule was a clerical error (71 FR at 39253). 2 See footnote 1. 3 The reference to resolutions from 18 municipalities in the proposed rule was a clerical error (71 FR at 39253). These provisions were submitted as part of the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), September 2005 (Salt River plan) submitted to EPA on October 7, 2005, and the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area, Additional Submittals (Maricopa County Rule 310.01, Maricopa Dust Control Permit and Guidance for Application for Dust Control Permit), ADEQ, September 2005, Additional Submittal in November 2005, (Salt River supplement), submitted on November 29, 2005. Located in metropolitan Phoenix, the Salt River area is a 32-square mile subarea of the metropolitan Phoenix (Maricopa County) serious PM-10 nonattainment area. For additional background on the Salt River portion of the Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area, see 67 FR 19148 (April 18, 2002) and 67 FR 44369 (July 2, 2002). 1 1 On July 25, 2002, EPA approved multiple documents submitted to EPA by Arizona for the Phoenix area as meeting the CAA requirements for serious PM-10 nonattainment areas for the 24-hour and annual PM-10 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Among these documents is the Revised Maricopa Association of Governments
(MAG)1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM-10 for the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area, February 2000 (MAG plan), that includes the Best Available Control Measures
(BACM)demonstrations for all significant source categories (except agriculture) for both the 24-hour and annual PM-10 standards and the State's request and supporting documentation, including the most stringent measure
(MSM)analysis (except for agriculture) for an attainment date extension to 2006 for both standards. EPA's July 25, 2002, final action included approval of these elements of the MAG plan. See EPA's proposed and final approval actions at 65 FR 19964 (April 13, 2000), 66 FR 50252 (October 2, 2001) and 67 FR 48718 (July 25, 2002). EPA revoked the annual PM-10 standard effective December 18, 2006. 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). We proposed to approve the specified rules, resolutions and measures in the Salt River plan and supplement because we determined that they complied with the referenced CAA requirements. CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) requires serious area PM-10 plans to provide for the implementation of Best Available Control Measures (BACM). CAA section 188(e) requires a state seeking an extension of a serious PM-10 area's attainment deadline to demonstrate to our satisfaction that its serious area plan includes the most stringent measures
(MSM)that are included in the implementation plan of any state or are achieved in practice in any state and can be feasibly implemented in the area. Our proposed action contains more information on the rules, resolutions and measures and our evaluation of them. II. Public Comments and EPA Responses EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received comments from Joy Herr-Cardillo, Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest (ACLPI). ACLPI's comment letter and our response are summarized below. We also received a comment letter from the Arizona Rock Products Association
(ARPA)on our proposed action as it relates to MCAQD Rule 316. Because, as explained above, our final action does not include Rule 316, we are not responding to ARPA's letter here. *Comment:* ACLPI comments that our proposed approval does not address the contingency measures discussed in the Salt River plan. ACLPI states that the two measures designated as contingency measures for the Phoenix area in the Arizona State Implementation Plan are already implemented, and that the purpose of contingency provisions is to assure that the State will act promptly to protect public health if a milestone for reasonable further progress or the attainment date is not met. ACLPI notes that the attainment date for the Phoenix area is December 31, 2006. ACLPI contends that the CAA envisions additional measures which are automatically and immediately implemented if and when the deadline is missed without additional EPA or state action. ACLPI states that the fact that Arizona did not rely upon the existing contingency measures in its attainment demonstration is not relevant. ACLPI concludes that because the Salt River plan fails to include meaningful contingency measures, it does not satisfy the CAA requirements. *Response:* Our current action on the Salt River plan and supplement is limited to the rules, resolutions and measures in these documents. On June 6, 2007, we determined that the Phoenix area did not attain the 24-hour PM-10 standard by the required December 31, 2006, deadline. 72 FR 31183. Under CAA section 189(d), the State must therefore submit plan revisions by December 31, 2007, that provide for “attainment of the PM-10 air quality standard and, from the date of such submission until attainment, for an annual reduction in PM-10 or PM-10 precursor emissions within the area of not less than 5 percent of the amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent inventory prepared for such area.” In addition to the attainment demonstration and 5 percent requirements, the plan must address all applicable requirements of the CAA, including sections 110(a), 172(c), 176(c) and 189(c)(1). III. EPA Action As discussed above, this action does not address MCAQD Rule 316. With respect to the other submitted rules, resolutions and measures that we proposed for approval on July 12, 2006 (71 FR 39251), and that are listed in Table I above, we received no comments that change our assessment that they comply with the applicable CAA requirements. Therefore, as authorized in CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA is fully approving the rules, resolutions and measures in Table I as meeting the CAA requirements indicated therein. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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. section 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 22, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: July 12, 2007. Keith Takata, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart D—Arizona 2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(137) and (138)to read as follows: § 52.120 Identification of plan.
(c)* * *
(137)The Administrator is approving the following elements of the *Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area,* September 2005, submitted on October 7, 2005, by the Governor's designee.
(i)*Incorporation by reference.*
(A)Maricopa County Air Quality Department. ( *1* ) Rule 325, adopted on August 10, 2005. ( *2* ) Rule 310, revised on April 7, 2004. ( *3* ) Appendix C, “Fugitive Dust Test Methods,” adopted on June 16, 1999, and revised on April 7, 2004. ( *4* ) Appendix F, “Soil Designations,” adopted on April 7, 2004. ( *5* ) Resolution No. C-85-05-005-0-00: Resolution to Implement Additional Measures for the Maricopa County, Arizona Serious PM-10 Nonattainment Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on January 19, 2005.
(B)City of Apache Junction. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 04-24: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on September 21, 2004.
(C)City of Avondale. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 2448-04: A Resolution of the Council of the City of Avondale, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on September 20, 2004.
(D)Town of Buckeye. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 58-04: A Resolution of the Mayor and Town Council of the Town of Buckeye, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emission from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on November 16, 2004.
(E)City of Chandler. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 3782: Resolution to Implement Measures to Reduce Re-entrained Dust Emissions from Identified Paved Roads in Chandler As Part of the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for Air Quality (including Exhibit A and Exhibit B), adopted on October 14, 2004.
(F)City of El Mirage. ( *1* ) Resolution No. R04-10-54: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of El Mirage, Maricopa County, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Re-entrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on October 28, 2004.
(G)Town of Fountain Hills. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 2004-63: A Resolution of the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Protocol to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads), adopted on November 18, 2004.
(H)Town of Gilbert. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 2575: A Resolution of the Common Council of the Town of Gilbert, Arizona to Implement Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Town of Gilbert Protocol for Reducing PM-10 Emissions from “High Dust” Paved Roads), adopted on March 29, 2005.
(I)City of Glendale. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 3796 New Series: A Resolution of the Council of the City of Glendale, Maricopa County, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Re-entrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Glendale Targeted Street Sweeping Protocol to Reduce Dust Emissions), adopted on September 14, 2004.
(J)City of Goodyear. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 04-941: A Resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Goodyear, Maricopa County, Arizona, to Authorize the City Manager to Implement Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Protocol for Reducing Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads), adopted on October 25, 2004.
(K)City of Mesa. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 8344: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mesa, Maricopa County, Arizona, Stating the City's Intent to Implement Measures to Reduce Particulate Pollution (including Exhibit A), adopted on October 4, 2004.
(L)Town of Paradise Valley. ( *1* ) Resolution Number 1084: Resolution to Implement Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on September 23, 2004.
(M)City of Peoria. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 04-235: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Peoria, Maricopa County, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and City of Peoria Targeted Paved Roadways Dust Control Protocol, September 24, 2004), adopted on October 5, 2004.
(N)City of Phoenix. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 20114: A Resolution Stating the City's Intent to Implement Measures to Reduce Air Pollution (including Exhibit A, City of Phoenix 2004 Protocol and Implementation Plan for Paved Streets with Potential for Dust Emissions, and Attachment A), adopted on June 16, 2004.
(O)City of Scottsdale. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 6588: A Resolution of the Council of the City of Scottsdale, Maricopa County Arizona, Authorizing Implementation of Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Attachment #1—Protocol to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads), adopted on December 6, 2004.
(P)City of Surprise. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 04-163: A Resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Surprise, Arizona, to Implement Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Protocol), adopted on September 23, 2004.
(Q)City of Tempe. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 2004.84: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Tempe, Arizona, to Implement Measures to Reduce Re-entrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Protocol for Reducing Re-entrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads, September 30, 2004), adopted on September 30, 2004.
(R)City of Tolleson. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 947: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Tolleson, Maricopa County, Arizona, Implementing Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on September 28, 2004.
(S)Town of Youngtown. ( *1* ) Resolution No. 05-01: Resolution to Implement Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A), adopted on January 20, 2005.
(T)Arizona Department of Transportation. ( *1* ) Resolution to Implement Measures to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads in the Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area (including Exhibit A and Arizona Department of Transportation Plan to Reduce Reentrained Dust Emissions from Targeted Paved Roads), adopted on September 17, 2004.
(138)The Administrator is approving the following elements of the *Revised PM-10 State Implementation Plan for the Salt River Area* , Additional Submittals, September 2005, Additional Submittal in November 2005, submitted on November 29, 2005, by the Governor's designee.
(i)*Incorporation by reference.*
(A)Maricopa County Air Quality Department. ( *1* ) Rule 310.01, adopted on June 16, 1999, and revised on February 17, 2005. ( *2* ) Application for Dust Control Permit, adopted on June 22, 2005. ( *3* ) Guidance for Application for Dust Control Permit, adopted on June 22, 2005. [FR Doc. E7-16223 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs 41 CFR Part 60-300 RIN 1215-AB46 Affirmative Action and Nondiscrimination Obligations of Contractors and Subcontractors Regarding Disabled Veterans, Recently Separated Veterans, Other Protected Veterans, and Armed Forces Service Medal Veterans; Correction AGENCY: Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Labor. ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is correcting a final rule that appeared in the **Federal Register** of August 8, 2007, (72 FR 44393). That document set forth the final regulations implementing the amendments to the affirmative action provisions of the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 (“VEVRAA”) that were made by the Jobs for Veterans Act (“JVA”) enacted in 2002. DATES: *Effective Date:* These final regulations are effective September 7, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn A. Clements, Acting Director, Division of Policy, Planning, and Program Development, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N3422, Washington, DC 20210. Telephone:
(202)693-0102 (voice) or
(202)693-1337 (TTY). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. E7-15385, beginning on page 44393 in the issue of Wednesday, August 8, 2007, make the following correction. On page 44401, in the first column, correct the words of issuance to read: “Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, Chapter 60 of Title 41 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended by adding Part 60-300 to read as follows:” Dated: August 15, 2007. Charles E. James, Sr., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Federal Contract Compliance. [FR Doc. E7-16361 Filed 8-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-CM-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 061020273-7001-03] RIN 0648-XC05 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Commercial Quota Harvested for Massachusetts AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the 2007 summer flounder commercial quota allocated to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has been harvested. Vessels issued a commercial Federal fisheries permit for the summer flounder fishery may not land summer flounder in Massachusetts for the remainder of calendar year 2007, unless additional quota becomes available through a transfer from another state. Regulations governing the summer flounder fishery require publication of this notification to advise Massachusetts that the quota has been harvested and to advise vessel permit holders and dealer permit holders that no commercial quota is available for landing summer flounder in Massachusetts. DATES: Effective 0001 hours, August 16, 2007 through 2400 hours, December 31, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Bryant, Fishery Management Specialist,
(978)281-9244. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulations governing the summer flounder fishery are found at 50 CFR part 648. The regulations require annual specification of a commercial quota that is apportioned on a percentage basis among the coastal states from North Carolina through Maine. The process to set the annual commercial quota and the percent allocated to each state is described in § 648.100. The initial total commercial quota for summer flounder for the 2007 calendar year was set equal to 7,789,800 lb (3,533 mt) (71 FR 75134, December 14, 2006). This quota was increased through an emergency action to 10,267,098 lb (4,658 mt) (72 FR 2458, January 19, 2007). The percent allocated to vessels landing summer flounder in Massachusetts is 6.82046 percent, resulting in a commercial quota of 700,270 lb (318 mt). The 2007 allocation was reduced to 684,331 lb (310 mt) when research set-aside was deducted and then reduced to 654,285 (297 mt) after the 2006 overages had been applied. Section 648.101(b) requires the Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) to monitor state commercial quotas and to determine when a state's commercial quota has been harvested. NMFS then publishes a notification in the **Federal Register** to advise the state and to notify Federal vessel and dealer permit holders that, effective upon a specific date, the state's commercial quota has been harvested and no commercial quota is available for landing summer flounder in that state. The Regional Administrator has determined, based upon dealer reports and other available information, that Massachusetts has harvested its quota for 2007. The regulations at § 648.4(b) provide that Federal permit holders agree, as a condition of the permit, not to land summer flounder in any state that the Regional Administrator has determined no longer has commercial quota available. Therefore, effective 0001 hours, August 16, 2007, further landings of summer flounder in Massachusetts by vessels holding summer flounder commercial Federal fisheries permits are prohibited for the remainder of the 2007 calendar year, unless additional quota becomes available through a transfer and is announced in the **Federal Register** . Effective 0001 hours, August 16, 2007, federally permitted dealers are also notified that they may not purchase summer flounder from federally permitted vessels that land in Massachusetts for the remainder of the calendar year, or until additional quota becomes available through a transfer from another state. Classification This action is required by 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: August 15, 2007. James P. Burgess, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 07-4091 Filed 8-16-07; 1:23 pm]
Connectionstraces to 27
Traces to 27 documents
9 references not yet in our index
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 17 CFR 232
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • 21 CFR 172
  • 40 CFR 52
  • Pub. L. 104-4
  • 41 CFR 60
  • 50 CFR 648
Citation graph
cites case law
Rules and Regulations
Final rule; request for comments
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 106
C.F.R.§ 39.19
U.S.C.§ 552
C.F.R.§ 232.301
U.S.C.§ 553
U.S.C.§ 77f
U.S.C.§ 78c
Cite14 CFR 39
Cite1 CFR 51
Cite17 CFR 232
Cites 36 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

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

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