Rules and Regulations. Final rule

21,426 words·~97 min read·/register/2007/08/23/07-4128

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

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 30566; Amdt. No. 3232] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This rule amends Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of changes in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding of new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.

These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports. DATES: This rule is effective August 23, 2007. The compliance date for each SIAP is specified in the amendatory provisions. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of August 23, 2007. ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows: *For Examination* — 1.

FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is located; 3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or, 4. 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* . *Availability* —All SIAPs are available online free of charge.

Visit *nfdc.faa.gov* to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from: 1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is located. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address:

P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone:

(405)954-4164. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and § 97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make their verbatim publication in the **Federal Register** expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure and the amendment number. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs. The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30 days. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days. Conclusion The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97 Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and Navigation (Air). Issued in Washington, DC on August 10, 2007. James J. Ballough, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows: PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722. 2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: §§ 97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35 and 97.37 [Amended] By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, LDA w/GS, SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, MLS, TLS, GLS, WAAS PA, MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, § 97.37 Takeoff Minima and Obstacle Departure Procedures. Identified as follows: * * * Effective Upon Publication FDC date State City Airport FDC No. Subject 07/27/07 NM Albuquerque Albuquerque Intl Sunport 7/0201 ILS or LOC RWY 3, Amdt 2. 07/27/07 DC Washington Ronald Reagan Washington National 7/0249 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 5. 07/27/07 MD Elkton Cecil County 7/0250 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Orig. 07/27/07 MA Beverly Beverly Muni 7/0251 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2. 07/27/07 PA Johnstown John Murtha/Johnstown—Cambria County 7/0252 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 3. 07/27/07 CT Willimantic Windham 7/0254 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 3. 07/27/07 PA Harrisburg Harrisburg Intl 7/0253 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 6. 08/02/07 CA Hawthorne Jack Northrop Field/Hawthorne Muni 7/0851 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 3. 07/20/07 AK McGrath McGrath 7/9340 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2. 07/23/07 AK Anchorage Merrill Field 7/9597 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 1. 07/27/07 GA Monroe Monroe—Walton County 7/0255 Takeoff Mins and (Obstacle) DP, Orig. 08/07/07 WA Puyallup Pierce County—Thun Field 7/1688 GPS Rwy 34, Orig-A. [FR Doc. E7-16410 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 30565; Amdt. No. 3231] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This Rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports. DATES: This rule is effective August 23, 2007. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of August 23, 2007. ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows: *For Examination* — 1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is located; 3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or, 4. 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* . *Availability* —All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from: 1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is located. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry. J. Hodges, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone:

(405)954-4164. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or revoking SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA Forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A. The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, in addition to their complex nature and the need for a special format make publication in the **Federal Register** expensive and impractical. Furthermore, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA forms is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of SIAPs and the effective dates of the SIAPs, the associated Takeoff Minimums,and ODPs. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as contained in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center

(FDC)Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided. Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure before adopting these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days. Conclusion The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

(GPS)RWY 4, Orig Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 17, Orig Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 22, Orig Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 35, Orig Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, VOR/DME RWY 17, Amdt 4 Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, VOR RWY 4, Amdt 3 Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, VOR RWY 35, Amdt 12 Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, NDB RWY 35, Amdt 3A, CANCELLED Liberal, KS, Liberal Mid-America Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5 * * * Effective 27 SEP 2007 Alabaster, AL, Shelby County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 Prattville, AL, Prattville-Grouby Field, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 3 Fresno-Chandler, CA, Fresno-Chandler Executive, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1 Long Beach, CA, Long Beach/Daugherty Field, RNAV

(RNP)RWY 25R, Orig Falmouth, KY, Gene Snyder, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Old Town, ME, Dewitt Field, Old Town Municipal Airport, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Stevensville, MD, Bay Bridge, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Toms River, NJ, Robert J. Miller Air Park, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Schenectady, NY, Schenectady County, NDB RWY 28, Amdt 10B, CANCELLED Bradford, PA, Bradford Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Charleston, SC, Charleston Executive, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 9, Orig-A Spartanburg, SC, Spartanburg Downtown Memorial, VOR-B, Amdt 2B, CANCELLED Brookneal, VA, Brookneal/Campbell County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Chase City, VA, Chase City Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig * * * Effective 25 OCT 2007 Birmingham, AL, Birmingham Intl, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 24, Amdt 1 Russellville, AL, Russellville Muni, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 2, Orig Russellville, AL, Russellville Muni, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 20, Orig Russellville, AL, Russellville Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Selma, AL, Craig Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 1 Selma, AL, Craig Field, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 15, Orig Selma, AL, Craig Field, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 33, Orig Selma, AL, Craig Field, NDB RWY 33, Amdt 4 Selma, AL, Craig Field, VOR RWY 15, Amdt 1 Selma, AL, Craig Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 Chevak, AK, Chevak, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 2, Orig Chevak, AK, Chevak, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 20, Orig Chevak, AK, Chevak, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 14, Orig-A, CANCELLED Chevak, AK, Chevak, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 32, Orig-A, CANCELLED Chevak, AK, Chevak, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, Orig Okeechobee, FL, Okeechobee County, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 5, Orig Okeechobee, FL, Okeechobee County, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 23, Orig Okeechobee, FL, Okeechobee County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, Orig Americus, GA, Souther Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, Orig Russell, KS, Russell Muni, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 17, Orig Russell, KS, Russell Muni, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 35, Orig Russell, KS, Russell Muni, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 5 Russell, KS, Russell Muni, GPS RWY 17, Orig, CANCELLED Russell, KS, Russell Muni, GPS RWY 35, Orig, CANCELLED Russell, KS, Russell Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1 Crookston, MN, Crookston Muni/Kirkwood FLD, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 13, Orig Crookston, MN, Crookston Muni/Kirkwood FLD, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 31, Orig Crookston, MN, Crookston Muni/Kirkwood FLD, NDB RWY 13, Amdt 8 Crookston, MN, Crookston Muni/Kirkwood FLD, GPS RWY 31, Amdt 1, CANCELLED Crookston, MN, Crookston Muni/Kirkwood FLD, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 New Albany, MS, New Albany-Union Co, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 18, Orig New Albany, MS, New Albany-Union Co, RNAV

(GPS)RWY 36, Orig New Albany, MS, New Albany-Union Co, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, Orig Newberry, SC, Newberry County, NDB RWY 22, Amdt 5 Newberry, SC, Newberry County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, Orig [FR Doc. E7-16409 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 48 and 602 [TD 9346] RIN 1545-BC08 Entry of Taxable Fuel; Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to final regulations. SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to final regulations (TD 9346) that were published in the **Federal Register** on Friday, July 27, 2007 (72 FR 41222) relating to the tax on the entry of taxable fuel into the United States. DATES: The correction is effective August 23, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Celia Gabrysh at

(202)622-3130 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The final regulations that are the subject of this correction are under section 4081 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, final regulations (TD 9346) contain an error that may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the publication of the final regulations (TD 9346), which was the subject of FR Doc. E7-14491, is corrected as follows: On page 41222, column 3, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “Background”, the last line of the last paragraph of the column, the language “nonsubstantive, clerical changes need to” is corrected to read “nonsubstantive, clerical changes needed to”. LaNita Van Dyke, Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E7-16626 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 301 [TD 9344] RIN 1545-BG24 Change to Office to Which Notices of Nonjudicial Sale and Requests for Return of Wrongfully Levied Property Must Be Sent; Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to final and temporary regulations. SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to final and temporary regulations that were published in the **Federal Register** on Friday, July 20, 2007 relating to the discharge of liens under section 7425 and return of wrongfully levied property under section 6343. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin M. Ferguson at

(202)622-3630. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The final and temporary regulations (TD 9344) that are the subject of these corrections are under sections 7425 and 6343 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, the final and temporary regulations (TD 9344) contain errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the final and temporary regulations (TD 9344) that were the subject of FR Doc. E7-14053 are corrected as follows: 1. On page 39738, column 1, in the preamble, under the caption “ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :”, line 2, the language “Robin M. Ferguson,

(202)622-3610 (not” is corrected to read “Robin M. Ferguson,

(202)622-3630 (not”. 2. On page 39739, column 1, in the preamble, under paragraph heading “Drafting Information”, lines 4 and 5, the language “and Administration (Collection, Bankruptcy and Summonses Division)” should be corrected to read “and Administration.” LaNita Van Dyke, Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E7-16651 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. CGD05-07-081] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone upon certain waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, and Inner Harbor during the movement of the historic sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the tow of the vessel from its berth at the Inner Harbor in Baltimore, Maryland, to a point on the Patapsco River near the Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine in Baltimore, Maryland, and return. This action will restrict vessel traffic in portions of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, and Inner Harbor during the event. DATES: This rule is effective from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. local time on September 14, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket CGD05-07-081 and are available for inspection or copying at Commander, U. S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, Waterways Management Division, Baltimore, Maryland, 21226-1791 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, at telephone number

(410)576-2674 or

(410)576-2693. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM and for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Publishing an NPRM and delaying its effective date would be contrary to the public interest, because there is not sufficient time to publish a proposed rule in advance of the event and for safety concerns, it is in the public interest to have a safety zone in place for the event, since immediate action is needed to protect persons and vessels against the potential hazards associated with the towing and turn-around of the historic sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION, such as collisions with other vessels operating in the confined waterways. Background and Purpose The USS CONSTELLATION Museum is planning to conduct a “turn-around” ceremony involving the sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION in Baltimore, Maryland on Friday, September 14, 2007. Planned events include a three-hour, round-trip tow of the CONSTELLATION in the Port of Baltimore, with an onboard salute with navy pattern cannon while the historic vessel is positioned off Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Site. The historic Sloop-of-War USS CONSTELLATION will be towed “dead ship,” which means that the vessel will be underway without the benefit of mechanical or sail propulsion. The return dead ship tow of the CONSTELLATION to its berth in the Inner Harbor is expected to occur immediately upon execution of a tug-assisted turn-around of the CONSTELLATION on the Patapsco River near Fort McHenry. The Coast Guard anticipates a large recreational boating fleet during this event, scheduled on a late Friday afternoon during the summer in Baltimore, Maryland. Operators should expect significant vessel congestion along the planned route. The purpose of this rule is to promote maritime safety and protect participants and the boating public in the Port of Baltimore immediately prior to, during, and after the scheduled event. The rule will provide for a clear transit route for the participating vessels, and provide a safety buffer around the participating vessels while they are in transit. The rule will impact the movement of all vessels operating upon certain waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor and Inner Harbor. Discussion of Rule The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary moving safety zone on all waters within 200 yards ahead of or 100 yards outboard or aft of the historic Sloop-of-War USS CONSTELLATION, surface to bottom, while operating in the Inner Harbor, the Northwest Harbor and the Patapsco River, at Baltimore, Maryland. The temporary safety zone will be enforced from 2 p.m. to 7 p.m. on September 14, 2007. The effect will be to restrict general navigation in the area during the event. With the exception of USS CONSTELLATION “turn-around” participants, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the safety zone. Vessels will be allowed to transit the waters of the Inner Harbor, the Northwest Harbor and the Patapsco River outside the safety zone. This safety zone is needed to control vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety of transiting vessels. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. Although this rule prevents traffic from transiting a portion of the Inner Harbor, the Northwest Harbor, and the Patapsco River during the towing and turn-around of the historic sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION, the effect of this rule will not be significant due to the size and duration of the safety zone, and the extensive notifications that will be made to the maritime community via marine information broadcasts and local notices to mariners, so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to operate, remain or anchor within certain waters of the Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor and Inner Harbor, in Baltimore, Maryland, from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. on September 14, 2007. Because the zone is of limited size and duration, it is expected that there will be minimal disruption to the maritime community. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories widely available to users of the river and harbors to allow mariners to make alternative plans for transiting the affected areas. In addition, smaller vessels not constrained by their draft, which are more likely to be small entities, may transit around the safety zone. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. However, we received no requests for assistance from any small entities. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule establishes a safety zone. A final “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T05-081 to read as follows: § 165.T05-081 Safety Zone; Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD.

(a)Definitions. For the purposes of this section:

(1)*Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland* means the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to act on his or her behalf.

(2)*USS CONSTELLATION “turn-around” participants* means the USS CONSTELLATION, its support craft, and the accompanying towing vessels.

(b)Location. The following area is a moving safety zone: All waters within 200 yards ahead of or 100 yards outboard or aft of the historic Sloop-of-War USS CONSTELLATION, surface to bottom, while operating in the Inner Harbor, the Northwest Harbor, and the Patapsco River.

(c)Regulations:

(1)The general regulations governing safety zones, found in Sec. 165.23, apply to the safety zone described in paragraph

(b)of this section.

(2)With the exception of USS CONSTELLATION “turn-around” participants, entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.

(3)Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the moving safety zone must first request authorization from the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to seek permission to transit the area. The Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland can be contacted at telephone number

(410)576-2693. The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio VHF Channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the person or vessel shall proceed as directed. If permission is granted, all persons or vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland, and proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course while within the zone.

(d)Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State and local agencies.

(e)Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. on September 14, 2007. Dated: August 9, 2007. Austin J. Gould, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland. [FR Doc. E7-16630 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 1 RIN 2900-AM65 Disclosure of Information to Organ Procurement Organizations AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. ACTION: Interim final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends the Department of Veterans Affairs

(VA)regulations to implement section 204 of the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006. This regulatory change will provide authority for VA to provide individually-identifiable VA medical records of veterans or dependents of veterans who are deceased or whose death is imminent to representatives of organ procurement organizations

(OPOs)as defined in section 371(b) of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act), eye banks, and tissue banks to determine whether the patients are suitable potential donors. DATES: *Effective Date:* This interim final rule is effective August 23, 2007. Comments must be received by VA on or before October 22, 2007. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through *http://www.Regulations.gov;* by mail or hand-delivery to the Director, Regulations Management (00REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to

(202)273-9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to RIN 2900-AM65—“Disclosure of Information to Organ Procurement Organizations.” Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call

(202)273-9515 for an appointment. In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System

(FDMS)at *http://www.Regulations.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephania Putt, Veterans Health Administration Privacy Officer, Office of Information (19F2), Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington DC 20420,

(727)320-1839. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Organ procurement organizations, eye banks, and tissue banks in the United States operate under specific statutory and regulatory authority. The statutory authority is contained in specific provisions of the Social Security Act

(Act)and the PHS Act. As noted in the preface to the 1988 edition of the United States Code, because title 42, United States Code (USC), has not been enacted into positive law, the provisions in title 42, U.S.C., are prima facie evidence of the laws rather than legal evidence of the laws. Consequently, the Secretary of Health and Human Services

(HHS)generally uses and refers to the provisions of the Act and the PHS Act rather than the provisions as codified in title 42, U.S.C., when implementing the provisions of those laws in regulations. *e.g.* , 21 CFR 1271.1, 1271.10. Congress enacted title 38, U.S.C., into positive law, (Pub. L. 85-857

(1958)and reorganized and renumbered in Pub. L. 102-40 and 102-83 (1991)); as a result, the provisions of title 38 as published are legal evidence of the laws contained therein. People who deal with the VA are accustomed to using the section numbering in title 38, U.S.C., as published. Because VA cites the code sections contained in title 38 and HHS cites the sections of the public laws underlying title 42, the VA will use the HHS citation form for laws under its responsibility, and title 38 section numbers in the regulations. However, for the convenience of the persons who will interact with the VA in the course of the VA's implementation of these regulations, the VA includes the title 42, U.S.C., cross-reference for the provisions of the Act and PHS Act when first cited in the preamble and the rule. Section 1138(a) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b-8(a)), requires all hospitals or critical access hospitals to establish written protocols for the identification of potential organ donors, and for referrals of potential donors to qualified OPOs that meet the criteria of section 1138(b)(1)(A) of the Act. Section 1138(b) provides that a qualified OPO:

(1)Is described in section 371(b) of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 273(b)) that is operating under a grant made under section 371(a) of the PHS Act, or

(2)has been certified or recertified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS Secretary) within the previous two years, or four years if the Secretary determines that the organization's past practices merits such treatment as meeting the HHS Secretary's standards to be a qualified OPO. The HHS Secretary shall designate only one OPO for each service area as provided in section 371(b)(1)(E) of the PHS Act. The implementing regulations are at 42 CFR 486.301-.348. Ocular tissue and other tissues are regulated by HHS under section 361 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 264). The implementing regulations are in 21 CFR part 1271. These regulations establish the requirements for eye banks and tissue banks. Under these respective sets of regulations, OPOs on the one hand and eye banks and tissue banks on the other hand are provided access by medical facilities to the protected health information of patients who are deceased or whose death is imminent without the prior written authorization of the patients so that representatives of the OPOs and eye banks and tissue banks may determine whether the patients may be suitable potential donors. The rule promulgated by HHS under section 264 of the administrative simplification provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) (Pub. L. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936, 2033-34 (1996)) (commonly referred to as the HIPAA Privacy Rule) provides express authority at 45 CFR 164.512(h) for disclosures of protected health information by covered health care providers to “OPOs, or other entities engaged in the procurement, banking or transplantation of organs, eyes, or tissue for the purpose of facilitating organ, eye or tissue donation and transplantation” conducted under the provisions of the PHS Act and its implementing regulations. Disclosures to eye banks and tissue banks are authorized under this language. The Veterans Health Administration

(VHA)is a covered entity under the HIPAA Privacy Rule for purposes of care provided under chapter 17 of title 38, U.S.C. However, VHA protected health information covered by the HIPAA Privacy Rule is also covered by sections 5701 and 7332 of title 38, U.S.C. Prior to enactment of section 204 of Public Law 109-461, section 5701(a) limited VA's authority to release the names and home addresses of veterans and their dependents, and section 7332 precluded VHA from releasing protected health information concerning treatment for sickle cell anemia, drug abuse and alcoholism and alcohol abuse, and testing and treatment for the human immunodeficiency virus infection for all but a very limited number of purposes. Neither section provided statutory authority for VHA to provide protected health information on deceased patients or patients whose death was imminent to OPOs, eye banks, and tissue banks for consideration as non-living donors in the national donation programs. Although not subject to the mandatory provisions of section 1138 of the Act and section 361 of the PHS Act, VHA tried to collaborate with OPOs, eye banks, and tissue banks in accordance with the statutes and regulations governing these entities to the extent possible within the restrictions on disclosure of individually-identified patient medical information imposed by sections 5701 and 7332. However, VHA discovered that the limitations of these statutes rendered VHA collaboration with these entities ineffective. Consequently, VA requested legislation to amend sections 5701 and 7332 to provide specific statutory authority for VHA to disclose protected health information covered by these statutes to OPOs, eye banks, and tissue banks without the prior written authorization of deceased patients or patients whose death is imminent for evaluation whether the patients may be suitable potential donors. Congress responded by enacting section 204 of Public Law 109-461, which amended sections 5701 and 7332 of title 38, U.S.C., to authorize VHA to release information about deceased or near-death veterans or their dependants to donor organizations, so that they may determine whether these individuals are, or after death, will be suitable organ, tissue or eye donors. The legislation directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to prescribe regulations implementing VA's new disclosure authority by June 20, 2007. New section 5701(k)(2) of title 38, U.S.C., specifically states that an OPO for purposes of disclosure authority under section 5701 (and under section 7332 as that statute was amended) has the meaning given the term “qualified organ procurement organization” in section 371(b) of the PHS Act. Section 5701(k)(1)(B)(i) provides that OPOs include eye and tissue banks. However, section 5701, as amended, does not define eye and tissue banks, and the definition of OPOs in section 371(b) of the PHS Act does not include eye and tissue banks. In fact, OPOs are not tissue banks or eye banks, although some OPOs have eye banks or tissue banks that are administratively separate from the OPOs. The amendment to section 5701 also provides that OPOs include entities that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs has determined are “(I) substantially similar in function, professionalism, and reliability to an organ procurement organization [as defined in section 371(b) of the PHS Act]; and

(II)should be treated for purposes of this subsection in the same manner as an organ procurement organization.” 38 U.S.C. 5701(k)(1)(B)(ii). The VA construes this language to provide authority for VA to promulgate regulations to authorize disclosure of protected health information to eye and tissue banks regulated by HHS under the authority of section 361 of the PHS Act, and the implementing regulations in 21 CFR part 1271. As discussed above, there are long-established, dynamic, national organ, eye and tissue donation programs in the United States involving non-VHA medical facilities. HHS periodically certifies and recertifies OPOs and requires eye banks and tissue banks to register with the Food and Drug Administration in order to participate in these programs. VHA medical facilities also perform organ, eye and tissue transplants with organs, eyes and tissues received from hospitals subject to section 1138(a) of the Act and the regulation at 42 CFR 482.45. The regulation requires every Medicare and Medicaid hospital to perform the following concerning organ, eye, and tissue procurement activities: Have an agreement with its designated OPO to report all deaths and imminent deaths to the OPO in a timely manner, collaborate with the OPO to inform families of potential donors of their donation options, and cooperate with the OPO to maintain potential donors while testing takes place. The regulation also requires hospitals to cooperate with tissue banks and eye banks to ensure that all usable tissues and eyes are obtained. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in the exercise of the Secretary's discretion in administering title 38, U.S.C., has determined that in light of all factors, it is unnecessary, counterproductive and confusing to the general public for VHA to establish a separate approval process for OPOs, eye banks, and tissue banks so that VHA's medical facilities can provide information about potential donors to these entities. Consequently, VHA will disclose protected health information to certified OPOs, and to eye banks and tissue banks that have registered with the FDA, and are procuring organs, corneas, and tissues from deceased donors for the purpose of transplantation in compliance with the applicable HHS regulations. VHA will not require these organizations to submit any information or meet any requirements beyond those required by HHS. These regulations provide that VHA medical facilities are to periodically confirm with HHS its approval or certification of each OPO, eye bank or tissue bank that seeks to obtain access to VHA protected health information in order to perform its duties under HHS statutes and regulations. Sections 5701 and 7332, as amended by section 204 of Public Law 109-461, and as implemented by these regulations, are limited to disclosure of information about veterans and their dependents. Consequently, the regulations do not address disclosure of protected health information about other individuals who may be treated in VHA medical facilities to OPOs, eye banks, or tissue banks. For example, these regulations do not apply to disclosure of protected health information about members of the armed forces because disclosure of their protected health information for donation purposes is governed by 10 U.S.C. 1109 and the implementing Department of Defense regulations. The regulations implementing the amendments to 38 U.S.C. 5701 and 7332 are inserted in the VA regulations implementing those provisions. The regulations addressing section 7332 are at 38 CFR 1.460-.499, and the regulations concerning section 5701 are at 38 CFR 1.500-.527. As part of the interim final rule, VA is amending the definitions contained in 38 CFR 1.460 to include definitions for terms used in the new 1.485a implementing the organ donation amendments to section 7332. The amendments to sections 5701 and 7332 concerning living patients are intended to be limited to disclosures of information about individual patients whose death is imminent. VA has provided a definition of what the term “near death” means for donation purposes. This definition was drafted by the VA National Transplant Program in association with the Veterans Health Administration

(VHA)National Center for Ethics, which provides guidance to VHA health care practitioners on medical ethics issues in VHA. VHA understands the proposed definition of “near death” to be consistent with the standard historically applied in non-VHA health care facilities when determining whether to make a living patient's medical records available for representatives of OPOs, eye banks and tissue banks, specifically under 42 CFR 482.45(a) Medicare and Medicaid hospitals will make available records on “an individual whose death is imminent.” However, VHA recognizes that this issue may be a sensitive subject. VA therefore specifically solicits comments on the definition of “near death” used in the regulations. Administrative Procedure Act Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), we find that there is good cause to dispense with advance public notice and opportunity to comment on this rule because any delay in promulgating the rule would be contrary to the public interest. In enacting section 204 of Public Law 109-461, Congress recognized the public's immediate need for VA's disclosure of organ donor information and specified that VA shall prescribe rules implementing the new law within 180 days. Also, as documented by information and data on *www.organdonor.gov,* the number of patients awaiting organ transplants far exceeds the number of available organs. Every day, 17 patients die waiting for an organ. VA's immediate collaboration with OPOs, eye banks, and tissue banks to facilitate organ, eye and tissue donation will result in individuals receiving life-saving or life-enhancing transplants that otherwise would be unavailable. Accordingly, it would be contrary to the intent of Congress to delay an initiative that seeks to address a compelling public need, while VA engages in advance notice and opportunity to comment. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), and for the reasons stated above, we also find that there is good cause to dispense with the requirement that a substantive rule be published no less than 30 days before its effective date. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Secretary hereby certifies that this interim final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612. This rule governs VA's disclosure of individuals' medical records to certain Organ Procurement Organizations, eye banks, and tissue banks, some of which may be small entities. However, it will not affect a substantial number of small entities and will not have a significant economic impact on any such entity. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this interim final rule is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. Executive Order 12866 Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive Order classifies a “significant regulatory action,” requiring review by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)unless OMB waives such review, as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1)Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

(2)create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3)materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4)raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this interim final rule have been examined and it has been determined to be a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 because it is likely to result in a rule that may raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or principles set forth in the Executive Order. Unfunded Mandates The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1 year. This rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers and Titles The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for the programs affected by this document are 64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care; and 64.011, Veterans Dental Care. List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 1 Administrative practice and procedure, Archives and records, Cemeteries, Claims, Courts, Crime, Flags, Freedom of information, Government contracts, Government employees, Government property, Infants and children, Inventions and patents, Parking, Penalties, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seals and insignia, Security measures, Wages. Approved: June 18, 2007. Gordon H. Mansfield, Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs. For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs amends 38 CFR part 1 to read as follows: PART 1—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), and as noted in specific sections. 2. In § 1.460, add definitions for “Agreement”, “Deceased”, “Eye bank and tissue bank”, “Individual”, “Near death”, “Organ Procurement Organization”, “Procurement organization”, and “VHA health care facility” in alphabetical order to read as follows: § 1.460 Definitions. *Agreement.* The term “agreement” means a document that a VA health care facility develops in collaboration with an Organ Procurement Organization, eye bank or tissue bank with written, detailed responsibilities and obligations of the parties with regard to identifying potential donors and facilitating the donation process. *Deceased.* The term “deceased” means death established by either neurological criteria (brain death) or cardiopulmonary criteria (cardiac death). Brain death is the irreversible cessation of all brain function. Cardiac death is the irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory function. In both cases, “irreversible” means that function will not resume spontaneously and will not be restarted artificially. *Eye bank and tissue bank.* The term “eye bank and tissue bank” means an “establishment” as defined in 21 CFR 1271.3, pursuant to section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264) that has a valid, current registration with the Federal Food and Drug Administration

(FDA)as required under 21 CFR part 1271. *Individual.* The term “individual” means a veteran, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(2), or a dependent of a veteran, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(3) and (4)(A). *Near death.* The term “near death” means that in the clinical judgment of the patient's health care provider, the patient's death is imminent. *Organ Procurement Organization.* The term “Organ Procurement Organization”

(OPO)means an organization that performs or coordinates the procurement, preservation, and transportation of organs and maintains a system of locating prospective recipients for available organs. *Procurement organization.* The term “procurement organization” means an organ procurement organization, eye bank, and/or tissue banks as defined in this section. *VHA health care facilty.* The term “VHA health care facility” means a VA medical center, VA emergency room, VA nursing home or other facility as defined in 38 U.S.C. 1701(3). 3. Add new § 1.485a, to read as follows: § 1.485a Eye, organ and tissue donation. A VHA health care facility may disclose the individually-identified medical record information of an individual covered by §§ 1.460 through 1.499 of this part to an authorized representative of a procurement organization for the purpose of facilitating determination of whether the individual is a suitable potential organ, eye, or tissue donor if:

(a)The individual is currently an inpatient in a VHA health care facility;

(b)The individual is, in the clinical judgment of the individual's primary health care provider, near death or deceased;

(c)The VHA health care facility has a signed agreement with the procurement organization in accordance with the applicable requirements of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); and

(FDA)that an eye bank and tissue bank has complied with the FDA registration requirements of 21 CFR part 1271 before permitting an eye bank or tissue bank to receive protected health information. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5701(k), 7332(b)(2)(E)) 4. Add new § 1.514b, to read as follows: § 1.514b Disclosures to procurement organizations. A VHA health care facility may disclose the name and home address of an “individual” as defined in § 1.460 to an authorized representative of a “procurement organization” as also defined in § 1.460 for the purpose of facilitating a determination by the procurement organization of whether the individual is a suitable potential organ, eye, or tissue donor if:

(a)The individual is currently an inpatient in a VHA health care facility;

(b)The individual is, in the clinical judgment of the individual's primary health care provider, near death or is deceased as defined in § 1.460;

(d)The VHA health care facility has confirmed with HHS that it has certified or recertified the organ procurement organization as provided in the applicable HHS regulations. VA medical centers must verify annually in January of each calendar year with FDA that an eye bank or tissue bank has complied with the FDA registration requirements of 21 CFR Part 1271 before permitting an eye bank or tissue bank to receive protected health information. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5701(k), 7332(b)(2)(E)) [FR Doc. E7-16648 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P 72 163 Thursday, August 23, 2007 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29029; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-175-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-200C Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for all Boeing Model 737-200C series airplanes. This proposed AD would require revising the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program to include inspections that will give no less than the required damage tolerance rating for each structural significant item (SSI), doing repetitive inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, and repairing cracked structure. This proposed AD results from a report of incidents involving fatigue cracking and corrosion in transport category airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their design service objective. We are proposing this AD to maintain the continued structural integrity of the entire fleet of Model 737-200C series airplanes. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • *DOT Docket Web site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Government-wide rulemaking Web site:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Fax:*

(202)493-2251. • *Hand Delivery:* Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)917-6440; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2007-29029; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-175-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed 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 proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is located on the ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion In the early 1980's, as part of its continuing work to maintain the structural integrity of older transport category airplanes, we concluded that the incidence of fatigue cracking may increase as these airplanes reach or exceed their design service objective (DSO). In light of this, and as a result of increased utilization, and longer operational lives, we determined that a supplemental structural inspection program

(SSIP)was necessary to maintain the continued structural integrity for all airplanes in the transport fleet. Issuance of Advisory Circular

(AC)As a follow-on from that determination, we issued AC No. 91-56, “Supplemental Structural Inspection Program for Large Transport Category Airplanes,” dated May 6, 1981. That AC provides guidance material to manufacturers and operators for use in developing a continuing structural integrity program to ensure safe operation of older airplanes throughout their operational lives. This guidance material applies to transport airplanes that were certified under the fail-safe requirements of part 4b (“Airplane Airworthiness, Transport Categories”) of the Civil Air Regulations or damage tolerance structural requirements of part 25 (“Airworthiness Standards: Transport Category Airplanes”) of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(FAR)(14 CFR part 25), and that have a maximum gross weight greater than 75,000 pounds. The procedures set forth in that AC are applicable to transport category airplanes operated under subpart D (“Special Flight Operations”) of part 91 of the FAR (14 CFR part 91); part 121 (“Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental Operations”); part 125 (“Certification and Operations: Airplanes having a Seating Capacity of 20 or More Passengers or a Maximum Payload of 6,000 Pounds or More”); and part 135 (“Operating Requirements: Commuter and On-Demand Operations”) of the FAR (14 CFR parts 121, 125, and 135). The objective of the SSIP was to establish inspection programs to ensure timely detection of fatigue cracking. Development of the SSIP In order to evaluate the effect of increased fatigue cracking with respect to maintaining fail-safe design and damage tolerance of the structure of Boeing Model 737-200C series airplanes, Boeing conducted a structural reassessment of those airplanes, using damage tolerance evaluation techniques. Boeing accomplished this reassessment using the criteria contained in AC No. 91-56, as well as Amendment 25-45 of section 25.571 (“Damage-tolerance and fatigue evaluation of structure”) of the FAR (14 CFR 25.571). During the reassessment, members of the airline industry participated with Boeing in working group sessions and developed the SSIP for Model 737-200C series airplanes. Engineers and maintenance specialists from the FAA also supported these sessions. Subsequently, based on the working group's recommendations, Boeing developed the Supplemental Structural Inspection Document (SSID). Other Related Rulemaking We previously issued AD 98-11-04 R1, amendment 39-10984 (64 FR 987, January 7, 1999), applicable to all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes (which refers to Boeing Document No. D6-37089, “Supplemental Structural Inspection Document” (SSID), Revision D, dated June 1995, as the appropriate source of service information for doing the required actions). That AD requires the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program be revised to include inspections that will give no less than the required damage tolerance rating

(DTR)for each structural significant item (SSI), and repair of cracked structure. The affected SSIs include, but are not limited to, the wing, fuselage, empennage, and strut. For Model 737-200C series airplanes, that AD requires inspecting SSIs affected by cargo configuration changes only. For Model 737-100 and -200 series airplanes, that AD requires inspecting all affected SSIs. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Document No. D6-37089, “Supplemental Structural Inspection Document for Model 737-100/200/200C Airplanes,” Revision E, dated May 2007 (hereafter “Revision E”). Revision E describes procedures for revising the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program to include inspections that will give no less than the required damage tolerance rating

(DTR)for each SSI, doing repetitive inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, and repairing cracked structure. The inspections specified in Revision E are essentially identical to those in Revision D. The applicability of Revision E has been updated, among other editorial changes, to show that for the Model 737-200C, SSIs not affected by cargo configuration changes are subject to the same inspections as Model 737-100 and -200 series airplanes. Accomplishing the actions specified in Revision E is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require the following actions: Paragraph

(g)of the proposed AD would require incorporation of a revision into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program that provides no less than the required DTR for each SSI listed in Revision E. Paragraph

(h)of the proposed AD would require repetitive inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs. Paragraph

(i)of the proposed AD would require repairing any cracked structure in accordance with a method approved by the FAA or an Authorized Representative

(AR)for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the FAA to make those findings. Paragraph

(j)of the proposed AD specifies the requirements of the inspection program for transferred airplanes. Before any airplane that is subject to this proposed AD can be added to an air carrier's operations specifications, a program for doing the inspections required by this proposed AD must be established. Accomplishing the actions required by paragraphs

(g)and

(h)of this AD ends the requirements of AD 98-11-04 R1 for Model 737-200C series airplanes only. Operators of Model 737-100 and -200 series airplanes must continue to do the actions required by AD 98-11-04 R1. Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information For Model 737-200C series airplanes, Section 3.0, “Structural Significant Items (SSIs),” of Revision E specifies a threshold of 66,000 or 46,000 flight cycles for accomplishing the initial inspections, depending on the airplane configuration; however, it does not specify a grace period for airplanes that are near or have passed that threshold. This proposed AD would allow a grace period of 12 months after the effective date of the AD to incorporate Revision E into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program. This proposed AD also would allow a grace period of 4,000 flight cycles measured from 12 months after the effective date of the AD to initiate the applicable inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs. Revision E does not specify instructions on how to repair certain conditions. This proposed AD would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways: • Using a method that we approve; or • Using data that have been approved by an AR for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings. Costs of Compliance There are about 49 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Cost Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Revision of maintenance inspection program 1,000, per operator (3 U.S. operators) $80 $80,000 per operator 9 $240,000. Inspections 500 per airplane 80 $40,000, per airplane, per inspection cycle 9 $360,000, per inspection cycle. The number of work hours, as indicated above, is presented as if the accomplishment of the actions in this proposed AD is to be conducted as “stand alone” actions. However, in actual practice, these actions for the most part will be done coincidentally or in combination with normally scheduled airplane inspections and other maintenance program tasks. Therefore, the actual number of necessary additional work hours will be minimal in many instances. Additionally, any costs associated with special airplane scheduling will be minimal. Further, compliance with this proposed AD would be a means of compliance with the aging airplane safety final rule (AASFR) for the baseline structure of Model 737-200C series airplanes. The AASFR final rule requires certain operators to incorporate damage tolerance inspections into their maintenance inspection programs. These requirements are described in 14 CFR 121.370(a) and 129.16. Accomplishment of the actions required by this proposed AD will meet the requirements of these CFR sections for the baseline structure. The costs for accomplishing the inspection portion of this proposed AD were accounted for in the regulatory evaluation of the AASFR final rule. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2007-29029; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-175-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October 9, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph

(g)and the initial inspections required by paragraph

(h)of this AD ends the requirements of AD 98-11-04 R1, amendment 39-10984, for Model 737-200C series airplanes only. Operators of Model 737-100 and -200 series airplanes must continue to do the actions required by AD 98-11-04 R1. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all Boeing Model 737-200C series airplanes, certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report of incidents involving fatigue cracking and corrosion in transport category airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their design service objective. We are issuing this AD to maintain the continued structural integrity of the entire fleet of Model 737-200C series airplanes. Compliance

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

(f)The term “Revision E,” as used in this AD, means Boeing Document No. D6-37089, “Supplemental Structural Inspection Document for Model 737-100/200/200C Airplanes,” Revision E, dated May 2007. Revision of the FAA-Approved Maintenance Inspection Program

(g)At the applicable time specified in Table 1 of this AD, incorporate a revision into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program that provides no less than the required damage tolerance rating

(DTR)for each structural significant item

(SSI)listed in Revision E. (The required DTR value for each SSI is listed in Revision E.) The revision to the maintenance inspection program must include and must be implemented in accordance with the procedures in Section 5.0, “Damage Tolerance Rating

(DTR)System Application,” and Section 6.0, “SSI Discrepancy Reporting” of Revision E. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements contained in this AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Table 1.—Compliance Time for Revising Maintenance Inspection Program For airplanes with SSIs— Compliance time

(1)Affected by the cargo configuration Before the accumulation of 46,000 total flight cycles, or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(2)Not affected by the cargo configuration Before the accumulation of 66,000 total flight cycles, or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. Initial and Repetitive Inspections

(h)At the applicable time specified in Table 2 of this AD, do the applicable initial inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, in accordance with Revision E. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the intervals specified in Section 3.0, “Implementation” of Revision E. Table 2.—Compliance Time for Initial Inspections For airplanes with SSIs— Compliance time

(1)Affected by the cargo configuration Before the accumulation of 46,000 total flight cycles, or within 4,000 flight cycles measured from 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(2)Not affected by the cargo configuration Before the accumulation of 66,000 total flight cycles, or within 4,000 flight cycles measured from 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. Repair

(i)If any cracked structure is found during any inspection required by paragraph

(h)of this AD, before further flight, repair the cracked structure using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph

(k)of this AD. Inspection Program for Transferred Airplanes

(j)Before any airplane that is subject to this AD and that has exceeded the applicable compliance times specified in paragraph

(h)of this AD can be added to an air carrier's operations specifications, a program for the accomplishment of the inspections required by this AD must be established in accordance with paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

(1)For airplanes that have been inspected in accordance with this AD: The inspection of each SSI must be done by the new operator in accordance with the previous operator's schedule and inspection method, or the new operator's schedule and inspection method, at whichever time would result in the earlier accomplishment for that SSI inspection. The compliance time for accomplishment of this inspection must be measured from the last inspection accomplished by the previous operator. After each inspection has been done once, each subsequent inspection must be performed in accordance with the new operator's schedule and inspection method.

(2)For airplanes that have not been inspected in accordance with this AD: The inspection of each SSI required by this AD must be done either before adding the airplane to the air carrier's operations specification, or in accordance with a schedule and an inspection method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. After each inspection has been done once, each subsequent inspection must be done in accordance with the new operator's schedule. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO)has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

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

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

(3)An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair approval must specifically refer to this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 12, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-16656 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-26110; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-112-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of comment period. SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes. The original NPRM would have required replacement of an electronic flight instrument system/engine indicating and crew alerting system (EFIS/EICAS) interface unit

(EIU)located on the E2-6 shelf of the main equipment center with a new or modified EIU. The original NPRM resulted from two instances where all six integrated display units

(IDUs)on the flight deck panels went blank in flight. This action revises the original NPRM by reducing the compliance time for replacing the EIU. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent loss of the IDUs due to failure of all three EIUs, which could result in the inability of the flightcrew to maintain safe flight and landing of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by September 17, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this supplemental NPRM. • *DOT Docket Web site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Government-wide rulemaking Web site:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Fax:*

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

(425)917-6494; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this supplemental NPRM. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “Docket No. FAA-2006-26110; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-112-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this supplemental NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this supplemental NPRM in light of those comments. We will post all comments submitted, 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 supplemental NPRM. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov* . Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone

(NPRM)for an AD (the “original NPRM”) for certain Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes. The original NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on October 26, 2006 (71 FR 62568). The original NPRM proposed to require replacement of an electronic flight instrument system/engine indicating and crew alerting system (EFIS/EICAS) interface unit

(EIU)located on the E2-6 shelf of the main equipment center with a new or modified EIU. Comments We have considered the following comments on the original NPRM. Support for the Original NPRM Boeing and the National Transportation Safety Board

(NTSB)support the original NPRM. Request To Reduce Compliance Time The NTSB requests that we revise the original NPRM to reduce the compliance time from 60 months to 24 months. The NTSB asserts that replacing the EIUs does not require an airplane to be out of service for a long period of time, and that the replacement is more limited by the availability of modified units. The NTSB suggests that a 24-month compliance time would allow operators enough time to replace the units as soon as they become available without eliminating an operator's operational flexibility. We agree to reduce the compliance time to 24 months for replacing an EIU with a modified EIU. At the time we issued the original NPRM, there was an insufficient number of modification kits available to require a compliance time of less than 60 months. However, since issuance of the NPRM the manufacturer has confirmed that enough kits will be available to replace at least one EIU on the affected airplanes within the shorter compliance time. In light of this new information, we have determined that a 24-month compliance time will ensure an acceptable level of safety and allow the replacement to be done during scheduled maintenance intervals for most affected operators. We have revised paragraph

(f)of this supplemental NPRM accordingly. Request To Require Replacement of All Three EIUs The NTSB requests that we revise the original NPRM to require replacement of all three EIUs. As justification, the NTSB states that if only one EIU is replaced and that modified unit suffers an unrelated fault removing it from operation, the airplane would still be exposed to the potential for the integrated display units

(IDUs)to go blank without the EIU auto restart capability. The NTSB further states that it would like to ensure that the minimum equipment list

(MEL)and dispatch requirements are reviewed to minimize this potential. Although we understand the NTSB's concern, we do not agree to revise this supplemental NPRM. We have considered the probability of the modified EIU failing and have concluded that such a failure is remote enough that an acceptable level of safety is maintained by replacement of only one EIU. Further, according to sections 121.628(b)(2) and 91.213(b)(2) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 121.628(b)(2) and 91.213(b)(2)), instruments and equipment required by an AD to be in operable condition may not be included in the MEL unless the AD provides otherwise. This means that an operator cannot dispatch an airplane if the modified unit fails. To dispatch the airplane, the operator must replace the failed unit with an operable unit equipped with the auto restart circuitry. Further, since we have reduced the compliance time, the parts manufacturer will only be able to produce enough modification kits in time to allow all operators to replace one EIU. For fleet management reasons, operators are likely to eventually replace all three EIUs with modified parts, as parts become available. The unsafe condition has been further mitigated by the issuance of the Boeing 747-400 Flight Crew Operations Manual Bulletin TB1-20, “Flight Deck Display Unit Blanking Anomaly,” dated February 25, 2003, to the Boeing 747 Flight Crew Operations Manual. That document advises flightcrews of the problem and provides instructions for restarting the EIUs should there be a display blanking problem during operation. We have not revised this supplemental NPRM in this regard. FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM The change discussed above expands the scope of the original NPRM; therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on this supplemental NPRM. Costs of Compliance There are about 639 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This supplemental NPRM would affect about 79 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts would cost about $2,840 per airplane (for one EIU). Based on these figures, the estimated cost of this supplemental NPRM for U.S. operators is $230,680, or $2,920 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this supplemental NPRM and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2006-26110; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-112-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 17, 2007. Affected ADs

(b)Accomplishing paragraph

(f)of this AD for all three electronic flight instrument system/engine indicating and crew alerting system (EFIS/EICAS) interface units

(EIUs)terminates certain requirements of AD 2004-10-05, amendment 39-13635. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-31-2368, Revision 1, dated July 24, 2006. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from two instances where all six integrated display units

(IDUs)on the flight deck panels went blank in flight. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of the IDUs due to failure of all three EIUs, which could result in the inability of the flightcrew to maintain safe flight and landing of the airplane. Compliance

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

(f)Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, replace at least one of the three EIUs, part number (P/N) 622-8589-104, located on the E2-6 shelf of the main equipment center with a new or modified EIU, P/N 622-8589-105, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-31-2368, Revision 1, dated July 24, 2006. Note 1: Boeing Service Bulletin 747-31-2368, Revision 1, dated July 24, 2006, refers to Rockwell Collins Service Bulletin EIU-7000-31-502, dated March 21, 2006, as an additional source of service information for modifying an EIU by adding auto restart circuitry, which converts EIU P/N 622-8589-104 to P/N 622-8589-105. Credit for Actions Done According to Previous Service Bulletin

(g)Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-31-2368, dated November 22, 2005 (Revision 1 of the service bulletin specifies that the original issue is dated December 1, 2005), are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of paragraph

(f)of this AD. Credit for AD 2004-10-05

(h)Replacing all three EIUs with new or modified EIUs in accordance with paragraph

(f)of this AD is acceptable for compliance with only the EIU replacement of paragraph (d)(1) of AD 2004-10-05. All other actions required by paragraph (d)(1) of AD 2004-10-05 must be complied with. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 16, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-16659 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-128224-06] RIN 1545-BF80 Section 67 Limitations on Estates or Trusts; Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to notice of proposed rulemaking that was published in the **Federal Register** on Friday, July 27, 2007 providing guidance on which costs incurred by estates or non-grantor trusts are subject to the 2-percent floor for miscellaneous itemized deductions under section 67(a). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer N. Keeney at

(202)622-3060. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-128224-06) that is the subject of these corrections is under section 67 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-128224-06) contains errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-128224-06) that was the subject of FR Doc. E7-14489 is corrected as follows: On page 41245, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “Drafting Information”, line 3, the language “of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel” is corrected to read “of the Associate Chief Counsel”. LaNita Van Dyke, Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E7-16615 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 26 [REG-128843-05] RIN 1545-BE70 Severance of a Trust for Generation-Skipping Transfer

(GST)Tax Purposes II; Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to notice of proposed rulemaking that was published in the **Federal Register** on Thursday, August 2, 2007 providing guidance regarding the generation-skipping transfer

(GST)tax consequences of the severance of trusts in a manner that is effective under state law, but that does not meet the requirements of a qualified severance. These proposed regulations also provide guidance regarding the GST tax consequences of a qualified severance of a trust with an inclusion ratio between zero and one into more than two resulting trusts and provide special funding rules applicable to the non pro rata division of certain assets between or among resulting trusts. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mayer R. Samuels at

(202)622-3090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-128843-05) that is the subject of this correction is under section 2642 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-128843-05) contains an error that may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-128843-05) that was the subject of FR Doc. E7-14850 is corrected as follows: § 26.2642-6 [Corrected] On page 42343, column 3, § 26.2642-6(k)(1), lines 7 through 10, the language “severances occurring on or after [DATE THIS DOCUMENT IS PUBLISHED IN THE **Federal Register** AS FINAL REGULATIONS]. Paragraph (d)(4) and” is corrected to read “severances occurring on or after August 2, 2007. Paragraph (d)(4) and”. LaNita Van Dyke, Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E7-16619 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 301 [REG-148951-05] RIN 1545-BF54 Change to Office To Which Notices of Nonjudicial Sale and Requests for Return of Wrongfully Levied Property Must Be Sent; Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations. SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations that was published in the **Federal Register** on Friday, July 20, 2007 relating to the discharge of liens under section 7425 and return of wrongfully levied property under section 6343. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin M. Ferguson at

(202)622-3630. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-148951-05) that is the subject of these corrections is under sections 7425 and 6343 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-148951-05) contains errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-148951-05) that was the subject of FR. Doc. E7-14051 is corrected as follows: 1. On page 39771, column 3, in the preamble, under the caption “ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ”, line 1, the language “Robin M. Ferguson,

(202)622-3610; is corrected to read “Robin M. Ferguson,

(202)622-3630;”. 2. On page 39772, column 1, in the preamble, under paragraph heading “Drafting Information”, lines 4 and 5, the language “and Administration (Collection, Bankruptcy and Summonses Division)” should be corrected to read “and Administration.” LaNita Van Dyke, Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E7-16624 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. CGD01-07-102] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Head of the Connecticut Regatta AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to change the special local regulations for the Head of the Connecticut Regatta by moving the regulated area of the race from the southern tip of Gildersleeve Island and Light Number 87 to the northern tip of Gildersleeve Island and Light Number 87. This regulation is needed to better protect race participants from recreational and commercial vessel traffic. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before September 24, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound, 120 Woodward Ave., New Haven, CT 06512-3628. Sector Long Island Sound maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Sector Long Island Sound between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Douglas Miller, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound at

(203)468-4596. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD01-07-102], indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like assurance that they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a request for such a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the **Federal Register** . Background and Purpose The permanent special local regulations for the Head of the Connecticut Regatta are found at 33 CFR 100.105. The Coast Guard is proposing to change regulation 100.105(a), which states the boundaries of the regulated area. The new boundary increases the size of the regulated area. Historically, the number of vessels mustering at the start of the race has grown to such a level that it is no longer safe to allow non-participant recreational and commercial vessels to transit near the southern tip of Gildersleeve Island. Regardless of the amount of planning and control in past years, recreational vessel traffic has steadily encroached into the starting area of the race. Accordingly, the Coast Guard proposes to alter section 100.105(a) to permanently move the regulated area of the race zone from the southern tip of Gildersleeve Island and Light Number 87 to the northern tip of Gildersleeve Island and Light Number 87. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to amend the regulations at 33 CFR 100.105 to expand the regulated area of the Head of the Connecticut Regatta. The changes are necessary to improve the safety of participant and spectator vessels in vicinity of the start area of the race. These proposed changes are needed to control vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety of participants, spectators and transiting vessels. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This regulation may have some impact on the public, but the potential impact will be minimized for the following reasons: The zone would only be enforced for a temporary period on the day of the event and vessels may transit in all areas around the zone at all times. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the vicinity of Gildersleeve Island on the day of the event. For the reasons outlined in the Regulatory Evaluation section above, this rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Douglas Miller, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound at

(203)468-4596. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is not likely to have a significant effect on the human environment. Draft documentation supporting this preliminary determination will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 2. Amend § 100.105 to revise paragraph

(a)to read as follows: § 100.105 Head of the Connecticut Regatta.

(a)*Regulated Area.* The regulated area is that section of the Connecticut River between the northern tip of Gildersleeve Island and Light Number 87. Dated: August 10, 2007. Timothy V. Skuby, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-16627 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD 36 CFR Parts 1190 and 1191 [Docket No. 2007-04] RIN 3014-AA22 Accessibility Guidelines for Emergency Transportable Housing AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. ACTION: Notice of establishment; appointment of members; date of first meeting. SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) has decided to establish an advisory committee to assist it in developing accessibility guidelines for emergency transportable housing. This notice also announces the time and place of the first committee meeting. DATES: The first meeting of the committee is scheduled for September 24 and 25, 2007 beginning at 10 a.m. on September 24 and 9 a.m. on September 25 and ending at 5 p.m. on each day. Decisions with respect to future meetings will be made at the first meeting and from time to time thereafter. ADDRESSES: The first meeting of the Committee will be held at the Access Board's offices, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marsha Mazz, Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-1111. Telephone number

(202)272-0020 (Voice);

(202)272-0082 (TTY). These are not toll-free numbers. E-mail address: *mazz@access-board.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 25, 2007, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) published a notice of intent to establish an advisory committee to provide recommendations for possible revisions to the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA)and Architectural Barriers Act

(ABA)Accessibility Guidelines to include provisions for emergency transportable housing (72 FR 34652; June 25, 2007). For the reasons stated in the notice of intent, the Access Board has determined that establishing the Emergency Transportable Housing Advisory Committee (Committee) is necessary and in the public interest. The Access Board has appointed the following organizations as members to the Committee: • Advocacy Center. • Coalition for Citizens with Disabilities. • Department of Housing and Urban Development. • Department of Justice. • Federal Emergency Management Agency. • Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform. • Manufactured Housing Institute. • National Center for Environmental Health Strategies, Inc. • National Council on Independent Living. • National Fire Protection Association. • Recreation Park Trailer Industry Association. • Recreation Vehicle Industry Association. • United Spinal Association. The Access Board regrets its inability to accommodate all requests for membership on the Committee. It was necessary to limit membership to maintain balance among members representing different interests such as disability organizations and the transportable housing industry. The Committee membership identified above provides representation for interests affected by the issues to be discussed. Committee meetings will be open to the public, and interested persons can attend the meetings and communicate their views. Members of the public will have opportunities to address the Committee on issues of interest to them and the Committee. Members of groups or individuals who are not members of the Committee may also have the opportunity to participate if subcommittees of the Committee are formed. Additionally, all interested persons will have the opportunity to comment when proposed rules are issued in the **Federal Register** by the Access Board. The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Individuals who require sign language interpreters, real-time captioning, or materials in alternate formats should contact Marsha Mazz by September 14. Persons attending Committee meetings are requested to refrain from using perfume, cologne, and other fragrances for the comfort of other participants. Notices of future meetings will be published in the **Federal Register** . Tricia Mason, Chair, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. [FR Doc. E7-16707 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8150-01-P ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD 36 CFR Parts 1193 and 1194 RIN 3014-AA22 Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines; Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) has established a Telecommunications and Electronic and Information Technology Advisory Committee (Committee) to assist it in revising and updating accessibility guidelines for telecommunications products and accessibility standards for electronic and information technology. This notice announces the dates, time, and location of the next committee meeting. DATES: The meeting is scheduled for September 4-6, 2007 (beginning at 9 a.m. and ending at 5 p.m. on each day). ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the National Science Foundation. All attendees should report to the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, to pick up security passes and then report to 4121 Wilson Boulevard, Stafford Place II, Room 555, Arlington, VA 22230 for the meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy Creagan, Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-1111. Telephone number: 202-272-0016 (Voice); 202-272-0082 (TTY). Electronic mail address: *creagan@access-board.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) established the Telecommunications and Electronic and Information Technology Advisory Committee (Committee) to assist it in revising and updating accessibility guidelines for telecommunications products and accessibility standards for electronic and information technology. The next meeting of the Committee will take place on September 4-6, 2007. On September 4, there will be panel discussions in the morning focusing on feedback on the Committee's current draft provisions. Following the panel presentations there will be an open discussion. After the panel presentations and open discussion are completed, the remainder of the meeting on September 4 and the meetings on September 5 and 6 will focus on discussion of outstanding issues from the following subcommittees: • Software, Web, and Content • General Interface Requirements and Functional Performance Criteria • Computer Hardware • Subpart A • Documentation and Technical Support • Telecommunications • Audio/Visual • Self Contained, Closed Products The full agenda along with information about the Committee, including future meeting dates, is available at the Access Board's Web site ( *http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/update-index.htm* ) or at a special Web site created for the Committee's work ( *http://teitac.org* ). Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons can attend the meetings and communicate their views. Members of the public will have opportunities to address the Committee on issues of interest to them during public comment periods scheduled on each day of the meeting. Members of groups or individuals who are not members of the Committee are invited to participate on subcommittees; participation of this kind is very valuable to the advisory committee process. The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Sign language interpreters, an assistive listening system, and real-time captioning will be provided. For the comfort of other participants, persons attending Committee meetings are requested to refrain from using perfume, cologne, and other fragrances. Due to security measures at the National Science Foundation, all attendees must notify the Access Board's receptionist at 202-272-0007 or *receptionist@access-board.gov* by August 27, 2007 of their intent to attend the meeting. This notification is required for expeditious entry into the facility and will enable the Access Board to provide additional information as needed. Lawrence W. Roffee, Executive Director. [FR Doc. E7-16635 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8150-01-P ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD 36 CFR Part 1195 [Docket No. 2007-02] RIN 3014-AA22 Architectural Barriers Act

(ABA)Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. ACTION: Notice of hearing. SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) will hold a hearing on proposed accessibility guidelines for outdoor developed areas designed, constructed, or altered by Federal agencies subject to the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968. The guidelines cover trails, outdoor recreation access routes, beach access routes, and picnic and camping facilities. DATES: The hearing will be on September 26, 2007 from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held at the Indiana Convention Center, Room 102, 100 South Capitol Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46225. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Botten, Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-1111. Telephone number

(202)272-0014 (Voice);

(202)272-0082 (TTY). These are not toll-free numbers. E-mail address: *botten@access-board.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 20, 2007, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) published proposed accessibility guidelines in the **Federal Register** for outdoor developed areas designed, constructed, or altered by Federal agencies subject to the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968. 72 FR 34074 (June 20, 2007). The Architectural Barriers Act applies to federally financed facilities. The guidelines cover trails, outdoor recreation access routes, beach access routes, and picnic and camping facilities. The guidelines are available for public comment until October 18, 2007. The Board is also holding hearings on the proposed guidelines. One hearing was held in Westminster, CO on July 24 (comments from the hearing can be viewed at *http://www.access-board.gov/outdoor/nprm/comments/index.htm* ). Another hearing will take place during the Access Board's regularly scheduled Board meeting on September 6, 2007 from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. at the Madison Hotel, 1177 Fifteenth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. 72 FR 34074 (June 20, 2007). The final hearing will take place on September 26, 2007 from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. at the Indiana Convention Center, Room 102, 100 South Capitol Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46225 in conjunction with the National Recreation and Park Association's annual Congress and Exposition. The hearing location is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Sign language interpreters and real-time captioning will be provided. For the comfort of other participants, persons attending the hearing are requested to refrain from using perfume, cologne, and other fragrances. Tricia Mason, Chair, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. [FR Doc. E7-16623 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8150-01-P 72 163 Thursday, August 23, 2007 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Commodity Credit Corporation Information Collection: 2005-2006 Dairy Disaster Assistance Payment (DDAP-III) Program AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, USDA. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Commodity Credit Corporation

(CCC)is seeking comments from all interested individuals and organizations on a currently approved information collection with revision associated with Dairy Disaster Assistance Payment (DDAP-III) Program. This collection is necessary to gather specific information from producers on their dairy production losses suffered in counties declared a natural disaster during the period of January 2, 2005, through February 27, 2007. The collection of information is to be used to establish eligibility and to determine payment amounts. DATES: We will consider comments received by October 22, 2007. ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on this Notice. In your comment, include the volume, date, and page number of this issue of the **Federal Register** . You may submit comments by any of the following methods: *E-Mail:* Send comments to: *Danielle_Cooke@wdc.fsa.usda.gov* . *Fax:*

(202)690-1536. *Mail:* Farm Service Agency, USDA, Attn: Grady Bilberry, Director, Price Support Division, Farm Service, USDA, FSA, STOP 0512, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0513. Comments also should be sent to the Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Danielle Cooke, Special Program Manager, phone:

(202)720-1919, or Grady Bilberry, Director, Price Support Division,

(202)720-7901. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Description of Information Collection *Title:* 2005-2006 Dairy Disaster Assistance Payment Program. *OMB Control Number:* 0560-0252. *Type of Request:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Abstract:* Dairy operations are eligible to receive direct payments provided they make certifications that attest to their eligibility to receive such payments. As appropriate, these operations must certify and identify:

(1)That the dairy operation is physically located in a county declared a natural disaster after January 1, 2005 and before February 28, 2007 (that is the period of January 2, 2005 through February 27, 2007);

(2)the identity of actual persons associated with that operation during that period;

(3)the pounds of dairy production losses incurred as a result of the declared natural disaster;

(4)the number of cows in the dairy operation during the calendar year applicable to the disaster declaration;

(5)that they understand the dairy operation must provide adequate proof of annual milk production commercially marketed by all persons in the dairy operation during the period specified by the Commodity Credit Corporation

(CCC)to determine the total pounds of eligible losses incurred by the operation. The information collection is used by CCC to determine the program eligibility of the dairy operations. CCC considers the information collected essential to prudent eligibility determinations and payment calculations. The revision on the information collection covers only the dairy production losses this time, and the number of respondents increases in this information collection. Additionally, without accurate information on dairy operations, the national payment rate would be inaccurate, resulting in payments being made to ineligible recipients, and the integrity and accuracy of the program could be compromised. *Estimate of Burden:* Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes (.25 hour) per response. The average travel time, which is included in the total annual burden, is estimated to be 1 hour per respondent. *Respondents:* Dairy Operations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 40,000. *Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent:* 1. *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 35,250 hours. Comments *Comments are invited on:*

(1)Whether this collection information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of the information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public records. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission for Office of Management and Budget approval. OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information contained in the proposed regulations between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the **Federal Register** . Therefore, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Signed at Washington, DC, on August 16, 2007. Glen L. Keppy, Acting Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation, Administrator, Farm Service Agency. [FR Doc. E7-16671 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Information Collection: A Wood Education and Resource Center Training Registry AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice; request for comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Forest Service is seeking comments from all interested individuals and organizations on the new information collection for a Wood Education and Resource Center Training Registry. DATES: Comments must be received in writing on or before October 22, 2007 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable. ADDRESSES: Comments concerning this notice should be addressed to Al Steele, Forest Service, USDA, 180 Canfield Street, Morgantown, WV 26505. Comments also may be submitted via facsimile to 304-285-1505 or by e-mail to: *asteele@fs.fed.us.* The public may inspect comments received at Room #215 Forest Service, USDA, 180 Canfield Street, Morgantown, WV 26505 during normal business hours. Visitors are encouraged to call ahead to 304-285-1588 to facilitate entry to the building. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Steele, Forest Service, USDA, 180 Canfield Street, Morgantown, WV 26505. Phone: 304-285-1588. Individuals who use TDD may call the Federal Relay Service

(FRS)at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, every day of the year, including holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Wood Education and Resource Center Training Registry *OMB Number:* 0596-New. *Type of Request:* New. *Abstract:* The USDA Forest Service is developing an online training information system that will enable individuals (trainees) from the primary and secondary wood products industries to locate continuing education training opportunities (such as workshops and short courses) that meet criteria they have established. Trainees can browse through or search for available training opportunities contained in the database, or be informed of relevant workshops and short courses via an e-mail notification system. Information will be collected through a voluntary online registration system. Training providers will register courses and workshops through an online registration system. Trainees will register through an online form and specify their training needs from a select list of pre-defined categories. Information to be collected from Training Providers includes: Name, Organization, Location, Telephone Number, Organizational Category and E-mail address, Title of the Training Program, Organization Sponsoring/Conducting the Program, Program Instructors and short biographical information and picture, Workshop Dates and Times, Workshop Location, Registration Fee, Short Description of the Program (30 words), Long Description of the Program (300-1200 words), Course Benefits, Target Audience, Name of Contact Person for Further Information, Telephone Number for Further Information, E-mail Address for Further Information, URL of Web site for Further Information, and Workshop Category from a Predefined List of Categories and Subcategories. Information to be collected from trainees includes: Name, Occupation/Job Title, Company Name, Industry Category, Location and E-mail address, Training Interests selected from a predefined list of training categories and subcategories, and Frequency of Notification. Information will be collected from organizations, academic institutions, trade associations, government agencies, companies and consultants that offer continuing education courses for the primary and secondary forest products industry; and individuals within the primary and secondary forest products industry that seek training opportunities. The collected information will enable trainees to browse through or search for available training opportunities contained in the database, or be informed of relevant workshops and short courses via an e-mail notification system. The automated notification system will operate by matching training preferences that have been predefined by the trainee with training offerings available from training providers. Participating training organizations (training providers) will register available courses online thru the Online Training Services Registry System. Once a match has been made between the trainee's needs and a course(s) available from a training organization, a notice will be sent to the trainee with additional information on course content, contact information, and related data. The U.S. Forest Service Wood Education Resource Center will operate and maintain the training information system including use statistics. The Training Information System is designed to provide a service to training providers and employees (trainees) associated with the primary and secondary forest products industry. Enhancing training opportunities for this industry will keep these national industries competitive in a world market. *Estimate of Annual Burden:* 10-20 minutes per respondent (10 minutes for trainees; 20 minutes for training providers). *Type of Respondents:* Respondents include individuals (trainees, from the primary and secondary forest products industries) and businesses (providers of continuing education training opportunities, such as workshops and short courses, for the primary and secondary wood products industries). *Estimated Annual Number of Respondents:* 3,325 (3,200 trainees and 125 training providers). *Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent:* 5 for trainees; 20 for training providers. *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 3,501 hours (2,667 hours—trainees, 834 hours—trainers). Comment is invited on:

(1)Whether this collection of information is necessary for the stated purposes and the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical or scientific utility;

(2)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments received will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. Dated: August 17, 2007. Robin L. Thompson, Associate Deputy Chief. [FR Doc. E7-16663 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Ouachita-Ozark Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Meeting notice for the Ouachita-Ozark Resource Advisory Committee under Section 205 of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393). SUMMARY: This notice is published in accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Meeting notice is hereby given for the Ouachita-Ozark Resource Advisory Committee pursuant to Section 205 of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of 2000, Public Law 106-393. Topics to be discussed include: General information, proposed new Title II projects, updates on current or completed Title II projects, election of officers, and, if appropriate, next meeting date and agenda. DATES: The meeting will be held on September 11, 2007, beginning at 6 p.m. and ending at approximately 9 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Scott County Courthouse, 100 W. First Street, Waldron, AR 71958. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caroline Mitchell, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Ouachita National Forest, P.O. Box 1270, Hot Springs, AR 71902. (501-321-5318). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff, Committee members, and elected officials. However, persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Individuals wishing to speak or propose agenda items must send their names and proposals to Bill Pell, DFO, P.O. Box 1270, Hot Springs, AR 71902. Dated: August 16, 2007. Bill Pell, Designated Federal Official. [FR Doc. 07-4128 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 33

Traces to 33 documents

U.S. Code