Rules and Regulations. Direct final rule

31,764 words·~144 min read·/register/2007/10/22/07-5109

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

BILLING CODE 4810-39-M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 97 [EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0140; FRL-8481-4] Limited Approval of Implementation Plans of Indiana: Clean Air Interstate Rule AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is promulgating a limited approval of a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan

(SIP)submitted on February 28, 2007. This revision incorporates provisions related to the implementation of EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated on May 12, 2005, and subsequently revised on April 28, 2006, and December 13, 2006, and the CAIR Federal Implementation Plans (CAIR FIP) concerning SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season emissions for the State of Indiana, promulgated on April 28, 2006, and subsequently revised December 13, 2006. EPA is not making any changes to the CAIR FIP. It is, however, to the extent EPA approves Indiana's SIP revision, amending the appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note that approval. On September 20, 2007, Indiana requested that EPA act on a portion of the February 28, 2007, submittal as an “abbreviated SIP.” Consequently, EPA is approving this abbreviated SIP revision, which addresses: The applicability provisions for the NO X ozone season trading program and supporting definitions of terms; the methodology to be used to allocate NO X annual and ozone season NO X allowances and supporting definitions of terms; the compliance supplement pool

(CSP)provisions for the NO X annual trading program; and provisions for SO 2 and NO X opt-in units, all under the CAIR FIP. DATES: This direct final rule is effective *December 21, 2007* without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by *November 21, 2007* . If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** and inform the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0140, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov* : Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov* . 3. *Fax:*

(312)886-5824. 4. *Mail:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 5. *Hand Delivery:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0140. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* , your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption and should be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm* . *Docket:* All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We recommend that you telephone John Paskevicz, Engineer, at

(312)886-6084, before visiting the Region 5 office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Paskevicz, Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,

(312)886-6084, *paskevicz.john@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. What Action Is EPA Taking? II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals? V. Analysis of Indiana's CAIR SIP Submittal A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs C. Applicability Provisions for Non-EGU NO X SIP Call Sources D. NO X Allowance Allocations E. Allocation of Allowances From Compliance Supplement Pool F. Individual Opt-In Units VI. Final Action VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What Action Is EPA Taking? CAIR SIP Approval EPA is approving a revision to Indiana's SIP, submitted on February 28, 2007, that would modify the application of certain provisions of the CAIR FIPs concerning SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season emissions. (As discussed more fully below, this less comprehensive CAIR SIP is termed an “abbreviated SIP.”) Indiana is subject to the CAIR FIP that implements the CAIR requirements by requiring certain Electric Generating Units

(EGUs)to participate in the EPA-administered Federal CAIR SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season cap-and-trade programs. The SIP revision provides a methodology for allocating NO X allowances for the NO X annual and NO X ozone season trading programs. The CAIR FIPs provide that this methodology will be used to allocate NO X allowances to sources in Indiana, instead of the federal allocation methodology otherwise provided in the FIPs. The SIP revision also provides a methodology for allocating the compliance supplement pool allowances in the CAIR NO X annual trading program, expands the applicability provisions of the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program, and allows for individual units not otherwise subject to the CAIR trading programs to opt into such trading programs under the opt-in provisions of the CAIR FIP. Consistent with the flexibility provided in the FIP, these provisions will also be used to replace or supplement, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions in the CAIR FIP for Indiana. EPA is not making any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is amending to the extent EPA approves Indiana's SIP revision, the appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note that approval. II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? EPA published CAIR on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA determined that 28 States and the District of Columbia contribute significantly to nonattainment and interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for fine particles (PM 2.5 ) and/or 8-hour ozone in downwind States in the eastern part of the country. As a result, EPA required those upwind States to revise their SIPs to include control measures that reduce emissions of SO 2 , which is a precursor to PM 2.5 formation, and/or NO X , which is a precursor to both ozone and PM 2.5 formation. For jurisdictions that contribute significantly to downwind PM 2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual State-wide emission reduction requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO 2 and annual State-wide emission reduction requirements for NO X . Similarly, for jurisdictions that contribute significantly to 8-hour ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction requirements for NO X for the ozone season (May 1st to September 30th). Under CAIR, States may implement these emission budgets by participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs or by adopting any other control measures that the State shows will result in compliance with the applicable SO 2 and NO X budgets. CAIR explains to subject States what must be included in SIPs to address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA)with regard to interstate transport with respect to the 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA made national findings on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147), effective May 25, 2005, that the States had failed to submit SIPs meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were due in July 2000, three years after the promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS. These findings started a two-year clock for EPA to promulgate a FIP to address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). Under CAA section 110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP anytime after such findings are made and must do so within two years unless a SIP revision correcting the deficiency is approved by EPA before the FIP is promulgated. On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated FIPs for all States covered by CAIR in order to ensure the emissions reductions required by CAIR are achieved on schedule. Each CAIR State is subject to the FIPs until the State fully adopts, and EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting the requirements of CAIR. The CAIR FIPs require certain EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone-season model trading programs, as appropriate. The CAIR FIP SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season trading programs impose essentially the same requirements as, and are integrated with, the respective CAIR SIP trading programs. The integration of the CAIR FIP and SIP trading programs means that these trading programs will work together to create effectively a single trading program for each regulated pollutant (SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season) in all States covered by the CAIR FIP or SIP trading program for that pollutant. The CAIR FIPs also allow States to submit abbreviated SIP revisions that, if approved by EPA, will automatically replace or supplement the corresponding CAIR FIP provisions ( *e.g.* , the methodology for allocating NO X allowances to sources in the State), while the CAIR FIP remains in place for all other provisions. On April 28, 2006, EPA published two more CAIR-related final rules that added the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the list of States subject to CAIR for PM 2.5 and announced EPA's final decisions on reconsideration of five issues without making any substantive changes to the CAIR requirements. III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs? CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO 2 and NO X and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase of NO X reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014, while the first phase of SO 2 reductions starts in 2010 and continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both NO X and SO 2 starts in 2015 and continues thereafter. CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:

(1)Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs: or,

(2)adopting other control measures of the State's choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in compliance with the applicable State SO 2 and NO X budgets. The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006, CAIR promulgations provide model rules that States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired) if they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One exception is for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered trading programs. The other exception is for States that include all non-EGUs from their NO X SIP Call trading programs in their CAIR NO X ozone season trading programs. IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals? States have the flexibility to choose the type of control measures they will use to meet the requirements of CAIR. EPA anticipates that most States will choose to meet the CAIR requirements by selecting an option that requires EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR cap-and-trade programs. For such States, EPA has provided two approaches for submitting and obtaining approval for CAIR SIP revisions. States may submit full SIP revisions that adopt the model CAIR cap-and-trade rules. If approved, these SIP revisions will fully replace the CAIR FIPs. Alternatively, States may submit abbreviated SIP revisions. These SIP revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs; however, the CAIR FIPs provide that, when approved, the provisions in these abbreviated SIP revisions will be used instead of or in conjunction with, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIP (e.g., the NO X allowance allocation methodology). An abbreviated SIP revision may establish certain applicability and allowance allocation provisions that, as provided by CAIR FIPs, will be used instead of or in conjunction with the corresponding provisions in the CAIR FIP rules in that State. Specifically, the abbreviated SIP revisions may: 1. Include NO X SIP Call trading sources that are not EGUs under CAIR in the CAIR FIP NO X ozone season trading program; 2. Provide for allocation of NO X annual or ozone season allowances by the State, rather than the Administrator, and using a methodology chosen by the State; 3. Provide for allocation of NO X annual allowances from the CSP by the State, rather than by the Administrator, and using the State's choice of allowed, alternative methodologies; and/or 4. Allow units that are not otherwise CAIR units to opt individually into the CAIR FIP cap-and-trade programs under the opt-in provisions in the CAIR FIP rules. With approval of an abbreviated SIP revision, the CAIR FIP remains in place, as tailored to sources in the State by that approved SIP revision. In some situations, EPA determines that a SIP submission does not fully meet all applicable CAA requirements but that the submission nonetheless strengthens the implementation plan. In such cases, EPA uses its “limited approval” authority under Sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act to adopt regulations that are considered necessary to further air quality. Abbreviated SIP revisions can be submitted in lieu of, or as part of, full CAIR SIP revisions. States may want to designate part of their full SIP as an abbreviated SIP for EPA to act on first when the timing of the State's submission might not provide EPA with sufficient time to approve the full SIP prior to the deadline for recording NO X allocations. This will help ensure that the elements of the trading programs where flexibility is allowed are implemented according to the State's decisions. Submission of an abbreviated SIP revision does not preclude future submission of a full CAIR SIP revision. In this case, although the February 28, 2007, submittal from Indiana was submitted as a full SIP revision, by a letter dated September 20, 2007, the State requested that certain portions be approved as an abbreviated SIP revision. V. Analysis of Indiana's CAIR SIP Submittal A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations The CAIR NO X annual and ozone season budgets were developed from historical heat input data for EGUs. Using these data, EPA calculated annual and ozone season regional heat input values, which were multiplied by 0.15 lb/mmBtu, for phase 1, and 0.125 lb/mmBtu, for phase 2, to obtain regional NO X budgets for 2009-2014 and for 2015 and thereafter, respectively. EPA derived the State NO X annual and ozone season budgets from the regional budgets using State heat input data adjusted by fuel factors. The CAIR State SO 2 budgets were derived by discounting the tonnage of emissions authorized by annual allowance allocations under the Acid Rain Program under title IV of the CAA. Under CAIR, each allowance allocated in the Acid Rain Program for the years in phase 1 of CAIR (2010 through 2014) authorizes 0.50 ton of SO 2 emissions in the CAIR trading program, and each Acid Rain Program allowance allocated for the years in phase 2 of CAIR (2015 and thereafter) authorizes 0.35 ton of SO 2 emissions in the CAIR trading program. The CAIR FIPs established the budgets for Indiana as 108,935 tons (for 2009-2014) and 90,779 tons (for 2015 and thereafter) for NO X annual emissions, 55,729 tons (for 2009-2014) and 49,050 tons (for 2015 and thereafter) for NO X ozone season emissions, and 254,599 tons (for 2009-2014) and 178,219 tons (for 2015 and thereafter) for SO 2 emissions. The NO X ozone season budget properly reflects the inclusion of NO X SIP Call trading program units that are brought into the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program, as discussed below. Indiana's SIP revision, approved in this action, sets these budgets as the total amounts of allowances available for allocation for each year under the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs under the CAIR FIP. B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs CAIR NO X annual and ozone-season FIPs both largely mirror the structure of the NO X SIP Call model trading rule in 40 CFR part 96, subparts A through I. While the provisions of the NO X annual and ozone-season FIPs are similar, there are some differences. For example, the NO X annual FIP (but not the NO X ozone season FIP) provides for a CSP, which is discussed below and under which allowances may be awarded for early reductions of NO X annual emissions. As a further example, the NO X ozone season FIP reflects the fact that the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program replaces the NO X SIP Call trading program after the 2008 ozone season and is coordinated with the NO X SIP Call program. The NO X ozone season FIP provides incentives for early emissions reductions by allowing banked, pre-2009 NO X SIP Call allowances to be used for compliance in the CAIR NO X ozone-season trading program. In addition, States have the option of continuing to meet their NO X SIP Call requirement by participating in the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program and including all their NO X SIP Call trading sources in that program. The provisions of the CAIR SO 2 FIP are also similar to the provisions of the NO X annual and ozone season FIPs. However, the SO 2 FIP is coordinated with the ongoing Acid Rain SO 2 cap-and-trade program under CAA title IV. The SO 2 FIP uses the title IV allowances for compliance, with each allowance allocated for 2010-2014 authorizing only 0.50 ton of emissions and each allowance allocated for 2015 and thereafter authorizing only 0.35 ton of emissions. Banked title IV allowances allocated for years before 2010 can be used at any time in the CAIR SO 2 cap-and-trade program, with each such allowance authorizing one ton of emissions. Title IV allowances are to be freely transferable among sources covered by the Acid Rain Program and sources covered by the CAIR SO 2 cap-and-trade program. EPA used the CAIR model trading rules as the basis for the trading programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR FIP trading rules are virtually identical to the CAIR model trading rules, with changes made to account for Federal rather than State implementation. The CAIR model SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season trading rules and the respective CAIR FIP trading rules are designed to work together as integrated SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season trading programs. Indiana is subject to the CAIR FIPs for ozone and PM 2.5 , and the CAIR FIP trading programs for SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season apply to sources in Indiana. Consistent with the flexibility it gives to States, the CAIR FIPs provide that States may submit abbreviated SIP revisions that will replace or supplement, as appropriate, certain provisions of the CAIR FIP trading programs. The February 28, 2007, submission from Indiana is such an abbreviated SIP revision. C. Applicability Provisions for Non-EGU NO X SIP Call Sources In general, the CAIR FIP trading programs apply to any stationary, fossil-fuel-fired boiler or stationary, fossil-fuel-fired combustion turbine serving, at any time since the later of November 15, 1990, or the start-up of the unit's combustion chamber, a generator with nameplate capacity of more than 25 megawatt electrical

(MWe)producing electricity for sale. States have the option of bringing in, for the CAIR NO X ozone season program only, those units in the State's NO X SIP Call trading program that are not EGUs as defined under CAIR. EPA advises States exercising this option to add the applicability provisions in the State's NO X SIP Call trading rule for non-EGUs to the applicability provisions in 40 CFR 97.304 in order to include in the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program all units required to be in the State's NO X SIP Call trading program that are not already included under 40 CFR 97.304. Under this option, the CAIR NO X ozone season program must cover all large industrial boilers and combustion turbines, as well as any small EGUs (i.e., units serving a generator with a nameplate capacity of 25 MWe or less) that the State currently requires to be in the NO X SIP Call trading program. Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIP, Indiana has chosen to expand the applicability provisions of the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program to include non-EGUs in the State's NO X SIP Call trading program. However, Indiana's abbreviated SIP submission fails to cover all such units and to include certain related definitions. As such, the SIP submission fails to meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.123(ee)(1), which requires a State that chooses this option to expand the applicability provisions in a way that brings into the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program all units that are subject to the State's NO X SIP Call trading program but are not covered by the applicability provisions of the CAIR NO X ozone season FIP. Specifically, 326 IAC 24-3-1(a)(2) of Indiana's CAIR NO X ozone season rule expands the CAIR applicability provisions to include, as CAIR NO X ozone season units, NO X SIP Call units not otherwise subject to the CAIR program that do not generate electricity for sale (i.e., units defined as “large affected units” under 326 IAC 10-4-2(27)) but fails to bring into the CAIR program NO X SIP Call units not otherwise subject to CAIR that do generate electricity for sale (i.e., units defined as “electric generating units” under 326 IAC 10-4-2(16)). In addition, 326 IAC 24-3-1(b) of Indiana's rule applies to these “large affected units” the exemptions established under the CAIR model rule for cogeneration units and solid waste incineration units even though the State's NO X SIP Call trading program lacks any such exemptions. Moreover, Indiana's rule does not include certain definitions that are necessary to apply the State's NO X SIP Call applicability provisions and to apply other provisions of the State's rule to NO X SIP Call units. The terms for which definitions are missing, or for which different definitions than those currently in Indiana's rule are needed, include: “commence commercial operation,” “electricity for firm sale to the electric grid,” “fossil-fuel-fired,” and “unit”. In light of these deficiencies, EPA concludes that Indiana's abbreviated SIP submission does not fully meet the requirements for such submissions under CAIR. However, EPA finds that, despite these deficiencies concerning applicability, Indiana's submission strengthens the implementation plan for Indiana by bringing into the CAIR FIP trading program units from the NO X SIP Call that would not otherwise be covered by the requirements of the CAIR FIP and thereby making progress toward meeting Indiana's obligation under the NO X SIP Call to make NO X emission reductions. Under the NO X SIP Call, Indiana was required to make certain emissions reductions. Indiana met this requirement by making “large affected units” under 326 IAC 10-4-2(27) and “electric generating units” under 326 IAC 10-4-2(16) subject to the NO X SIP Call trading program. Starting with the 2009 control period, EPA will no longer administer the NO X SIP Call trading program (i.e., the NO X Budget Trading Program), which will therefore cease to exist. *See* 40 CFR 51.121(r)(1). With EPA's termination of the NO X SIP Call trading program starting with the 2009 ozone season, Indiana will need to take further action to achieve the post-2009 reductions that would otherwise have been achieved under the NO X SIP Call trading program by those NO X SIP Call units that are not covered by the CAIR FIP NO X ozone season rule. *See* 40 CFR 51.121(r)(2) and 51.123(bb)(1)(i). Consequently, Indiana will need to either bring all those units into the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program or adopt other controls that will achieve the necessary post-2009 reductions. Indiana's abbreviated SIP makes progress toward achieving these needed reductions by bringing most, but not all, of such NO X SIP Call units into the CAIR FIP NO X ozone season trading program. EPA also notes that, as discussed below, despite having deficiencies concerning NO X ozone season applicability, Indiana's submission meets most of the requirements for abbreviated SIPs. Moreover, while these deficiencies create the potential for erroneous exclusion from the CAIR program of units that may meet the NO X SIP Call applicability criteria in the future, EPA is not aware of any existing NO X SIP Call units that would be erroneously excluded from the CAIR program at the present time because of these deficiencies. For these reasons and the additional reasons discussed below, EPA is proposing a limited approval of Indiana's abbreviated SIP submission. D. NO X Allowance Allocations Under the NO X allowance allocation methodology in the CAIR model trading rules and in the CAIR FIP, NO X annual and ozone season allowances are allocated to units that have operated for five years, based on heat input data from a three-year period that are adjusted for fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6 for oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. The CAIR model trading rules and the CAIR FIP also provide a new unit set-aside from which units without five years of operation are allocated allowances based on the units' prior year emissions. The CAIR FIP provides States the flexibility to establish a different NO X allowance allocation methodology that will be used to allocate allowances to sources in the States if certain requirements are met concerning the timing of submission of units' allocations to the Administrator for recordation and the total amount of allowances allocated for each control period. In adopting alternative NO X allowance allocation methodologies, States have flexibility with regard to: 1. The cost to recipients of the allowances, which may be distributed for free or auctioned; 2. The frequency of allocations; 3. The basis for allocating allowances, which may be distributed, for example, based on historical heat input or electric and thermal output; and 4. The use of allowance set-asides and, if used, their size. Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIP, Indiana has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR NO X annual FIP concerning the allocation of NO X annual allowances with its own methodology. Indiana has chosen to distribute NO X annual allowances based on the methodology in the CAIR FIP with some minor modifications. For example, the allocation methodology in both the CAIR FIP and in Indiana's rule makes a proportional allocation of allowances to individual EGUs based on baseline heat input to the boiler or combustion turbine. However, unlike the CAIR FIP methodology that uses a fixed baseline heat input value based on five years of data, the Indiana rule updates the baseline heat input information using the most current eight years of data every six years. Indiana believes that the longer look back period for the initial allocation (1998-2005) is more appropriate than the timeframe in the CAIR FIP because many Indiana sources were installing equipment to comply with the NO X SIP Call, thus making the shorter time period in the CAIR FIP non-representative of normal operations. Further, with the Indiana heat input baseline being updated over time, retired units, no longer in operation and no longer part of the State's inventory, would eventually stop receiving allowances. The Indiana rule also includes a new unit set-aside for the NO X annual trading program. The annual trading program in Indiana includes a new unit set-aside equal to 4.5 percent and 2.5 percent respectively for Phase I and Phase II unlike the CAIR FIP rule, which provides for a new unit set-aside of 5 percent and three percent for these periods. The one-half percent difference from the CAIR NO X annual FIP is used to provide annual NO X allowances for an energy efficiency and renewable (EE/RE) set-aside consistent with the NO X SIP Call EE/RE program. Indiana's CAIR EE/RE program is intended to provide incentives for EE/RE projects that reduce NO X emissions starting in 2009. Applicants apply for allowances in one year, and the actual transfer of allowances occurs after the year is over, based on the emission reductions actually achieved. Half of any unallocated allowances for a year in the set-aside will be allocated to the CAIR units, and the other half of such unallocated allowances will be retained by Indiana, and transferred to the Indiana Office of Energy and Defense Development, to fund a grant program for smaller scale EE/RE projects. Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIPs, Indiana has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR NO X ozone season FIP concerning allowance allocations with its own methodology. Indiana will distribute NO X ozone season allowances based upon the methodology in the CAIR FIP with some changes. For example, Indiana's rule takes into account the fact that allowances for the 2009 ozone season trading period have already been allocated, and recorded by the Administrator, under Indiana's NO X SIP Call trading program. This is the first year for which allowances are allocated under the CAIR FIP NO X ozone season trading rule. The Indiana rule provides that these 2009 NO X SIP Call allowances are the CAIR NO X ozone season allowances for 2009, and thus no additional allocations for the 2009 ozone season for Indiana sources (except for CAIR NO X ozone season opt-in units, as discussed below) will be made under the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program. Consistent with this provision of Indiana's rule, the Administrator, in operating the CAIR NO X Ozone Season Tracking System, will treat each 2009 NO X SIP Call allowance issued by Indiana as usable for compliance with the allowance-holding requirements of the CAIR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program by any CAIR NO X ozone season source that holds the allowance in the source's compliance account as of the allowance transfer deadline, regardless of the State in which the source is located. For control periods after 2009, Indiana's rule provides for the allocation of new allowances for the CAIR NO X ozone season program. For units covered by the CAIR NO X ozone season program under the applicability provisions of the CAIR FIP, Indiana's rule adopts an allocation methodology similar to that described above concerning CAIR NO X annual allowance allocations. For NO X SIP Call units brought into the CAIR trading program, Indiana's rule adopts a methodology that allocates allowances based on maximum design heat input as well as on baseline heat input. The Indiana rule also provides separate new unit set-asides for units covered by the applicability provisions in the CAIR FIP and for NO X SIP Call units brought into the CAIR program. Further, Indiana included in its NO X ozone season trading program an EE/RE set-aside program and a hardship set-aside for NO X SIP Call units brought into the CAIR program. The NO X ozone season EE/RE set-aside is similar to the NO X annual EE/RE set-aside except that half of any unallocated allowances for a year in the set-aside will be returned to the NO X SIP Call units in the program, and the rest will go to the grant program. EPA's limited approval of Indiana's abbreviated SIP will allow implementation of the allocation methodologies selected by Indiana and, in particular, Indiana's methodology to address the allowances already issued, and recorded by the Administrator, in the NO X SIP Call trading program for the 2009 ozone season. E. Allocation of NO X Allowances From Compliance Supplement Pool The CAIR establishes a CSP to provide an incentive for early reductions in NO X annual emissions. The CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR NO X annual allowances of vintage 2009 for the entire CAIR region, and a State's share of the CSP is based upon the projected magnitude of the emission reductions required by CAIR in that State. States may distribute CSP allowances, one allowance for each ton of early reduction, to sources that make NO X reductions during 2007 or 2008 beyond what is required by any applicable State or Federal emission limitation. States also may distribute CSP allowances based upon a demonstration of need for an extension of the 2009 deadline for implementing emission controls. The CAIR annual NO X FIP establishes specific methodologies for allocations of CSP allowances. States may choose an allowed, alternative CSP allocation methodology to be used to allocate CSP allowances to sources in the States. Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the CAIR FIP, Indiana has chosen to modify the provisions of the CAIR NO X annual FIP concerning the allocation of allowances from the CSP. The CSP provision of the Indiana rule differs from the one included in the CAIR NO X annual FIP by providing a mechanism for Indiana to reserve allowances for all eligible units in advance of allocations to provide some certainty to sources regarding the minimum amount of allowances that will be available to them for early reduction credits. Under Indiana's rule, an eligible unit is one that has or will have post-combustion control equipment installed before December 31, 2008, or, for all other units, one that is able to achieve a NO X emission rate that is at least 10 percent lower than the heat input weighted average NO X emission rate for 2003 through 2005, excluding the ozone season of each year. Eligible units must be coal-fired CAIR NO X units. The amount of reserved allowances reflects the difference between the eligible unit's non-ozone season emission rate in 2003-2005 and the unit's non-ozone season emission rate in 2007 and 2008. Indiana also included an incentive for control configurations that maximize mercury reduction co-benefits within the CSP program. The intent of this option is to encourage new selective catalytic reduction

(SCR)installation and year-round SCR operation at units that have or will have electrostatic precipitators

(ESP)and flue gas desulfurization

(FGD)in 2007 and 2008. This option is offered to sources because the above control configuration of SCR, ESP and FGD can achieve up to 90 percent mercury reduction. The Indiana rule awards a bonus to units that achieve reductions in excess of their reserved allowances and, for units with SCR, ESP, and FGD, the bonus is 1.5 times the NO X reductions achieved. However, the State's rule contains a limitation that precludes any eligible unit from receiving CSP allowances in excess of the actual NO X reductions achieved beyond the reserved amount. F. Individual Opt-In Units The opt-in provisions of the CAIR FIP allow certain non-EGUs that do not meet the applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program to participate voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program. A non-EGU may opt into one or more of the CAIR trading programs. In order to qualify to opt into a CAIR trading program, a unit must vent all emissions through a stack and be able to meet monitoring, recordkeeping, and recording requirements of 40 CFR part 75. The owners and operators seeking to make a choice to include a unit in a CAIR trading program must apply for a CAIR opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit, the unit becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated allowances, and must meet the same allowance-holding and emissions monitoring and reporting requirements as other units subject to the CAIR trading program. The opt-in provisions provide methodologies for allocating allowances for opt-in units, one that applies to opt-in units in general and a second that allocates allowances only to opt-in units that the owners and operators intend to re-power before January 1, 2015. States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions. The rules for each of the CAIR FIP trading programs include opt-in provisions that are essentially the same as those in the respective CAIR SIP model rules, except that the CAIR FIP opt-in provisions become effective in a State only if the State's abbreviated SIP revision adopts opt-in provisions as provided for in § 51.123(p)(3). The State may adopt the opt-in provisions entirely, or may adopt them but exclude one of the allowance allocation methodologies. The State also has the option of not adopting any opt-in provisions in the abbreviated SIP revision and thereby providing for the CAIR FIP trading program to be implemented in the State without the ability for units to opt into the program. Consistent with the flexibility given to States in the FIP, Indiana has chosen to allow non-EGUs meeting certain requirements to opt into the CAIR NO X annual trading program, the CAIR NO X ozone season trading program and the CAIR SO 2 trading program. The State has allowed both opt-in allocation methodologies for each program as specified in 40 CFR part 97, subparts II, III, and IIII. EPA notes that Indiana's abbreviated SIP includes opt-in provisions for the CAIR NO X annual and ozone season and SO 2 programs that are essentially the same as the opt-in provisions in the model rules for these programs and in the CAIR FIP. The Indiana opt-in provisions include most, but not all, of the most recent revisions that EPA made to the model rule and CAIR FIP opt-in provisions. Indiana has indicated that it intends to submit a revised full SIP that adopts all of the most recent revisions to the opt-in provisions. Consequently, EPA considers Indiana's rule to include provisions that are substantively identical to the opt-in provisions in part 96 of this chapter. Thus, units in Indiana may opt into the CAIR trading programs as provided for in subparts II, III, and IIII of the CAIR FIP. VI. Final Action EPA is approving Indiana's abbreviated CAIR SIP revision submitted on February 28, 2007, as amended by letter of September 20, 2007. Indiana is covered by the CAIR FIP, which requires participation in the EPA-administered CAIR FIP cap-and-trade programs for SO 2 , NO X annual, and NO X ozone season emissions. Under this abbreviated SIP revision, Indiana adopts provisions for allocating allowances under the CAIR FIP NO X annual and ozone season trading programs. Indiana also adopts in the abbreviated SIP revision provisions that establish a methodology for allocating allowances in the CSP, and expands the applicability provisions for the CAIR FIP NO X ozone season trading program. Indiana also allows units to opt-in to the CAIR NO X annual, NO X ozone season, and SO 2 trading programs, and utilizes the two methodologies set forth in the FIP for allocating allowances to such units. Therefore, the opt-in provisions provided as an option in the CAIR FIP trading programs (in parts 40 CFR part 97, subparts II, III and IIII), will apply to units in Indiana. As provided for in the CAIR FIPs, these provisions in the abbreviated SIP revision will replace or supplement the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIP in Indiana. EPA is not proposing to make any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is proposing, to the extent EPA approves Indiana's SIP revision, to amend the appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note that approval. EPA is making limited approval of Indiana's abbreviated SIP revision because, despite the deficiencies in the NO X ozone season applicability provisions and related definitions that result in the submission not meeting the requirements of CAIR in 40 CFR 51.123(ee)(1), the submission strengthens the implementation plan for Indiana. (A detailed description of how these deficiencies can be corrected is set forth in a technical support document that is included in the docket of this rulemaking.) As discussed above, Indiana's SIP is strengthened because it makes progress toward meeting Indiana's emission reduction requirements under the NO X SIP Call. EPA further believes that the limited approval is appropriate because incorporation of Indiana's rules into the SIP will allow EPA to implement the methodology selected by Indiana to address the allowances for the 2009 ozone season that already have been allocated, and recorded by the Administrator, under Indiana's NO X SIP Call trading program. This limited approval incorporates the rules in the abbreviated SIP revision into the SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. EPA notes that Indiana has indicated in its September 20, 2007, letter that it intends to submit revised elements of the full SIP that address the above-described deficiencies related to applicability, as well as some other issues concerning its current full SIP submission. EPA intends to propose subsequently a limited disapproval of the abbreviated SIP unless the deficiencies are corrected. VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves State law as making progress toward meeting Federal requirements and would impose no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this action approves pre-existing requirements under State law and would not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it 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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it would not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule making progress toward implementing a Federal standard and to amend the appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules to note that approval. It does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it would approve a State rule making progress toward implementing a Federal Standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule would not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 21, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric utilities, Incorporation by Reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide. 40 CFR Part 97 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric utilities, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide. Dated: September 27, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 52 and 97 of chapter 1 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart P—Indiana 2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(185) to read as follows: § 52.770 Identification of plan.

(c)* * *

(185)The Indiana Department of Environmental Management submitted amendments on September 20, 2007 to the State Implementation Plan to Control Emissions from electric generating units

(EGU)and non-EGUs. Rules affecting these units include: 326 Indiana Administrative Code

(IAC)24-1-2, 326 IAC 24-1-8, 326 IAC 24-1-12, 326 IAC 24-2-11, 326 IAC 24-3-1, 326 IAC 24-3-2, 326 IAC 24-3-8 and 326 IAC 24-3-12 respectively.

(i)Incorporation by reference. The following sections of the Indiana Administrative Code

(IAC)are incorporated by reference: 326 IAC 24-1-2(36) “Control period”; 326 IAC 24-1-2(38) “Energy efficiency or renewable energy projects”; 326 IAC 24-1-2(60) “Rated energy efficiency”; 326 IAC 24-1-8 “CAIR NO X allowance allocations”; 326 IAC 24-1-12 “CAIR NO X opt-in units”; 326 IAC 24-2-11 “CAIR SO 2 opt-in units”; 326 IAC 24-3-1 “Applicability”; 326 IAC 24-3-2(38) “Energy efficiency or renewable energy projects”; 326 IAC 24-3-2(49) “Large affected unit”; 326 IAC 24-3-2(61) “Rated energy efficiency”; 326 IAC 24-3-8 “CAIR NO X ozone season allowance”; and 326 IAC 24-3-12 “CAIR NO X ozone season opt-in units”. Approved by the Attorney General January 12, 2007. Approved by the Governor January 23, 2007. Filed with the Publisher January 26, 2007. Published on the Indiana Register Web site February 28, 2007, Document Identification Number (DIN): 20070221-IR-326050117FRA. Effective February 25, 2007. PART 97—[AMENDED] 3. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7403, 7410, 7426, 7601, and 7651, et seq. 4. Appendix A to subpart EE is amended by adding in alphabetical order the entry “Indiana” under paragraph 1. and 2. to read as follows: Appendix A to Subpart EE of Part 97—States With Approved State Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning Allocations 1. * * * Indiana 2. * * * Indiana 5. Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 97 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the entry “Indiana” under paragraphs 1. and 2. to read as follows: Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 97—States With Approved State Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning CAIR NO X Opt-In Units 1. * * * Indiana 2. * * * Indiana 6. Appendix A to Subpart III of Part 97 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the entry “Indiana” under paragraphs 1. and 2. to read as follows: Appendix A to Subpart III of Part 97—States With Approved State Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning CAIR SO 2 Opt-In Units 1. * * * Indiana 2. * * * Indiana 7. Appendix A to Subpart EEEE of Part 97 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the entry “Indiana” to read as follows: Appendix A to Subpart EEEE of Part 97—States With Approved State Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning Allocations Indiana 8. Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 97 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the entry “Indiana” under paragraphs 1. and 2. to read as follows: Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 97—States With Approved State Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning CAIR NO X Ozone Season Opt-In Units 1. * * * Indiana 2. * * * Indiana [FR Doc. E7-20249 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4128; MB Docket No. 07-39; RM-11360] Radio Broadcasting Service; Prineville, OR AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Audio Division grants a petition for rulemaking filed by Terry A. Cowan for a new allotment at Prineville, Oregon. Channel 299C3 can be allotted at Prineville, Oregon in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements at 44-26-17 North Latitude and 120-57-12 West Longitude with a site restriction of 11.4 kilometers (7.1 miles) north of city reference. DATES: Effective November 19, 2007. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2738. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's *Report and Order* , MB Docket No. 07-39, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC's Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* The Commission will send a copy of this *Report and Order* in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, *see* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. As stated in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oregon, is amended by adding Channel 299C3 at Prineville. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20744 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4130; MB Docket No. 06-200] Radio Broadcasting Services; Boswell, OK, and Detroit, TX AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Audio Division, on its own motion, deletes Channel 282C3 at Boswell, Oklahoma to resolve existing distance spacing conflicts. It is Commission policy to refrain from maintaining an allotment in instances where there are no *bona fide* expressions of interest. DATES: Effective November 19, 2007. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's *Report and Order* , MB Docket No. 06-200, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the Commission's Reference Information Center, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* The Commission will send a copy of this *Report and Order* in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, *see* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. As stated in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oklahoma, is amended by removing Boswell, Channel 282C3. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20745 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P 72 203 Monday, October 22, 2007 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 944 [SATS No. UT-044-FOR; State Amendment Identification Number UT-1196] Utah Regulatory Program AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment. SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the Utah regulatory program (hereinafter, the Utah program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Utah proposes revisions to and additions of rules and statutes about waiving specific application requirements with a written determination by the Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM), clarification that applications shall be filed with the county clerk “for public inspection,” and allowing the area covered by a permit to be extended by an application for a significant permit revision. Utah intends to revise its program to be consistent with the corresponding Federal regulations and SMCRA, clarify ambiguities, and to improve operational efficiency. This document gives the times and locations that the Utah program and proposed amendment to that program are available for your inspection, the comment period during which you may submit written comments on the amendment, and the procedures that we will follow for the public hearing, if one is requested. DATES: We will accept written comments on this amendment until 4 p.m., m.s.t., November 21, 2007. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on the amendment on November 16, 2007. We will accept requests to speak until 4 p.m., m.s.t., on November 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by “UT-044-FOR” by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* OSM is listed as Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail:* James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, P.O. Box 46667, Denver, CO 80201-6667. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999 Broadway, suite 3320, Denver, CO 80202-5733. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and UT-044-FOR. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Comment Procedures” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket:* Access to the docket, to review copies of the Utah program, this amendment, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in response to this document, may be obtained at the addresses listed below during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the amendment by contacting Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM's) Denver Field Division. In addition, you may review a copy of the amendment during regular business hours at the following locations: James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999 Broadway, suite 3320, Denver, CO 80202-5733, Telephone:

(303)844-1400, extension 1424, E-mail: *jfulton@osmre.gov.* John R. Baza, Director, Division of Oil, Gas and Mining, 1594 West North Temple, suite 1210, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5801, Telephone:

(801)538-5340, Internet: *http://www.ogm.utah.gov.* Or anytime at: *http://www.regulations.gov.* OSM is listed as Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James F. Fulton, Telephone:

(303)844-1400 extension 1424. Internet: *jfulton@osmre.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background on the Utah Program II. Description of the Proposed Amendment III. Public Comment Procedures IV. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Utah Program Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its State program includes, among other things, “a State law which provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the requirements of this Act * * *; and rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to this Act.” See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Utah program on January 21, 1981. You can find background information on the Utah program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval of the Utah program in the January 21, 1981, **Federal Register** (46 FR 5899). You can also find later actions concerning Utah's program and program amendments at 30 CFR 944.15 and 944.30. II. Description of the Proposed Amendment By letter dated August 31, 2007, Utah sent us a proposed amendment to its program (SATS No. UT-044-FOR, administrative record number UT-1196) under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 *et seq.* ). Utah sent the amendment to propose changes made at its own initiative. The full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at the locations listed above under ADDRESSES . Specifically, Utah proposes to amend Utah Code Annotated

(UCA)§ 40-10-10(2)(d)(ii) to clarify the specific permit application requirements which may be waived by the Division with a written determination that the requirements are unnecessary. Without this proposed specification, the provision could be interpreted as allowing the Division to waive a broader range of requirements. The proposed amendment to UCA § 40-10-10(5) reinstates a provision that was inadvertently deleted in S.B. 72 in 2002. The proposed addition clarifies that permit applications are to be filed with the county clerk “for public inspection.” The above proposed revisions to UCA § 40-10-10(2)(d)(ii) and UCA § 40-10-10(5) address topics that were originally addressed in SATS No. UT-042-FOR (administrative record number UT-1171) and included in the February 21, 2003, concern letter (administrative record number UT-1180) from OSM to DOGM. Proposed changes to UCA § 40-10-12(1)(c) add a provision allowing extensions to area covered by a permit to be made through significant permit revisions. Additional changes recodify the provision and do not change the meaning of the existing statute. The proposed change to Administrative Rule R645-303-222 implements the proposed changes to UCA § 40-10-12(1)(c) and reflects the procedural requirements referenced for permit revisions rather than the previous reference to new permit application requirements. The above proposed amendment to R645-303-222 was originally proposed in UT-043-FOR (admin record number UT-1181). OSM raised concerns regarding a conflict with the Utah statute

(UCA)§ 40-10-12(1)(c) in a phone conversation on January 23, 2006, documented as administrative record number UT-1190. Utah formally withdrew the proposed amendment to R645-303-222 on February 16, 2006 (admin record number UT-1194) pending their submittal of a proposed change to UCA § 40-10-12(1)(c). III. Public Comment Procedures Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking your comments on whether the amendment satisfies the applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it will become part of the Utah program. Written Comments Send your written or electronic comments to us at the addresses given above. Your written comments should be specific, pertain only to the issues proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in support of your recommendations. We will not consider or respond to your comments when developing the final rule if they are received after the close of the comment period (see DATES ). We will make every attempt to log all comments into the record for this rulemaking, but comments delivered to an address other than the those listed above may not be logged in. Public Availability of Comments Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Public Hearing If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 p.m., m.s.t. on November 6, 2007. If you are disabled and need special accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . We will arrange the location and time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold the hearing. To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if possible, that each person who speaks at a public hearing provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in the audience who wish to speak, have been heard. Public Meeting If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . All such meetings are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES . We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record. IV. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections

(a)and

(b)of that section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met. Executive Order 13132—Federalism This rule does not have federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to “establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.” Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that State programs contain rules and regulations “consistent with” regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA. Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federally recognized Indian Tribes and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects 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. The rule does not involve or affect Indian Tribes in any way. Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is

(1)considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and

(2)likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required. National Environmental Policy Act This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq* ). Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). The State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million. b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S. based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal which is the subject of this rule is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule. Unfunded Mandates This rule will not impose an unfunded Mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 944 Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining. Dated: September 12, 2007. Allen D. Klein, Regional Director, Western Region. [FR Doc. E7-20697 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket No. CGD07-122] RIN 1625-AA01 Anchorage Regulation; Port Everglades, FL AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend the anchorage regulations for Port Everglades, Florida. The amendment would modify the current anchorage area by eliminating that portion of the anchorage closest to sensitive coral reef areas, expand that portion of the anchorage area that poses less risk to these areas, and limit the amount of time a vessel may remain in the anchorage area. These changes would ensure all vessels have fair access to the anchorage area, and provide a higher degree of vessel and environmental safety by reducing the possibility of vessels grounding in sensitive coral reef areas. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before November 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division, 100 MacArthur Causeway, Miami Beach, Florida, 33139. Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division 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 Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Junior Grade Chris Svencer, Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division at

(305)535-4550. 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 [CGD07-122], 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 to know 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 a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division 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 During the last ten years, nine known groundings and six known anchor mishaps have occurred while vessels were attempting to anchor inside the current anchorage described in 33 CFR 110.186, or after a vessel anchored inside the anchorage dragged her anchor outside of the anchorage area. Anchoring mishaps include both misplacement of the anchor itself upon coral reefs as well as contact between the anchor cable and coral reefs. Adverse weather conditions, proximity to the reef, anchorage congestion, and poor seamanship were contributing factors to the groundings and anchoring mishaps. This proposed rule is necessary to modify existing anchoring requirements and guidelines in order to provide a higher degree of protection to the coastal area and sensitive benthic coral reef ecosystems, and to provide a safer anchorage for mariners. This amendment is intended to re-designate the anchorage areas to account for anchor position and cable lay and limit the amount of time vessels may remain at anchorage. Placing a limitation on the amount of time a vessel can spend at the anchorage area will reduce the number of vessels routinely utilizing the anchorage area for purposes other than awaiting berth inside Port Everglades. The Coast Guard has also researched alternative solutions for restructuring the anchorage. These alternatives have included: Change nothing and continue to use the current anchorage; create anchorage circles to control the location of vessels in the anchorage area; and remove the anchorage completely. The dramatic impact of recent vessel groundings on the sensitive coral reefs in the vicinity of the current anchorage area necessitates modification of the current anchorage area to provide a greater distance between the anchorage and shore. Creating anchorage circles for precision anchorage does not eliminate the threat to the local reefs due to ever changing weather conditions that may drag properly anchored vessels over the coral reefs to the west. Finally, removing the anchorage altogether is not feasible due to commercial traffic in need of a location to anchor while awaiting a berth in Port Everglades. Discussion of Proposed Rule This adjustment of the anchorage area off Port Everglades is necessary to protect life, minimize injury to the marine environment, and provide a greater margin of safety for vessels and property from the associated hazards resulting from vessel groundings. This proposal will close anchorage area “A” and expand anchorage area “B”. The new anchorage area will be farther away from sensitive coral reef species. The Coast Guard has completed an environmental assessment and has confirmed that the relocated anchorage will greatly reduce the impact on the delicate coral structures currently located near anchorage “A”. The time period a vessel may remain at anchor in the anchorage will be limited to 72 hours to provide all vessels calling on the port equal and fair access to the anchorage grounds. These amendments will improve navigation, provide a safer anchorage area, and minimize negative impacts on the environment by giving the vessels one specified anchorage location. 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. The existing commercial anchorage is used by container vessels, tank vessels, and other general cargo vessels awaiting a berth in Port Everglades, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and the new anchorage is expected to be used by the same type and number of vessels for the same purpose. The new proposed commercial anchorage will allow for enough anchorage space to sufficiently support operations in Port Everglades, and is expected to have little, if any, economic impact. This proposed regulation is expected to have little or no economic impact because all of the vessels previously using the anchorage will be able to continue using the new anchorage. 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. This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to utilize the anchorage area outside Port Everglades, Florida. This proposed rule would not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the same reasons given above in the “Regulatory Evaluation” section of this preamble. 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. 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 Junior Grade Chris Svencer, Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division at

(305)535-4550. 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 will 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 affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This 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 which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and although this action may have qualified for a categorical exclusion under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f) of the Instruction, the Coast Guard found good reason to further investigate the effects the anchorage area modification would have on the environment. A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . Furthermore, as part of section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR part 402, 16 U.S.C. 1536), the U.S. Coast Guard opened consultation with a number of stakeholders. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(FWS)have reviewed all restructuring plans and believe the proposed action would not likely affect the West Indian Manatee, Johnson's Seagrass, Smalltooth Sawfish, and all local turtle species because the project does not have any elements with the potential to affect these listed species. NOAA also found that the restructuring into deeper waters, farther away from the easternmost reef, is likely to have an indirect beneficial effect on Elkhorn and Staghorn coral by potentially reducing vessel groundings and anchor damage that have adversely affected corals and other important near shore benthic resources in the project area. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 Anchorage grounds. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows: PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170. 2. Amend § 110.186 by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(3) through (6), and adding paragraphs (b)(7) through

(9)to read as follows: § 110.186 Port Everglades, Florida. *(a) The anchorage grounds.* The anchorage grounds, the center of which is located approximately two and one half miles northeast of the entrance to Port Everglades, is an area bounded by a line connecting points with the following North American Datum 83 coordinates: 26-08′26.934″ N 080-04′28.240″ W 26-08′08.560″ N 080-04′16.158″ W 26-07′56.000″ N 080-04′17.486″ W 26-07′56.000″ N 080-02′42.623″ W 26-07′19.500″ N 080-02′53.153″ W 26-07′19.500″ N 080-04′28.800″ W 26-06′35.160″ N 080-04′28.800″ W 26-06′35.160″ N 080-04′38.694″ W *(b) The regulations.*

(3)All vessels within the designated anchorage area shall maintain a 24-hour bridge watch by a licensed deck officer proficient in English, monitoring VHF-FM channel 16. This individual shall confirm that the ship's crew performs frequent checks of the vessel's position to ensure the vessel is not dragging anchor.

(4)Vessels may anchor anywhere within the designated anchorage area provided that: such anchoring does not interfere with the operations of any other vessels currently at anchorage; and all anchor and chain or cable is positioned in such a manner to preclude dragging over reefs.

(5)No vessel may anchor in a “dead ship” status (i.e. propulsion or control unavailable for normal operations) without the prior approval of the Captain of the Port. Vessels experiencing casualties such as a main propulsion, main steering or anchoring equipment malfunction or which are planning to perform main propulsion engine repairs or maintenance, shall immediately notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port via Coast Guard Sector Miami on VHF-FM Channel 16.

(6)No vessel may anchor within the designated anchorage for more than 72 hours without the prior approval of the Captain of the Port. To obtain this approval, contact the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, via the Port Everglades Harbor Master, on VHF-FM Channel 14.

(7)The Coast Guard Captain of the Port may close the anchorage area and direct vessels to depart the anchorage during periods of adverse weather or at other times as deemed necessary in the interest of port safety or security.

(8)Commercial vessels anchoring under emergency circumstances outside the anchorage area shall shift to new positions within the anchorage area immediately after the emergency ceases.

(9)Whenever the maritime or commercial interests of the United States so require, the Captain of the Port, U.S. Coast Guard, Miami, Florida, may direct relocation of any vessel anchored within the anchorage area. Once directed, such vessel must get underway at once or signal for a tug, and must change position as directed. Dated: October 4, 2007. D.W. Kunkel, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-20608 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 34 CFR Chapter VI Office of Postsecondary Education; Notice of Negotiated Rulemaking for Programs Authorized Under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as Amended AGENCY: Department of Education. ACTION: Notice of establishment of negotiated rulemaking committee. SUMMARY: We announce our intention to establish one or two negotiated rulemaking committees to prepare proposed regulations under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA). Each committee will include representatives of organizations or groups with interests that are significantly affected by the subject matter of the proposed regulations. We also announce three public hearings where interested parties can suggest issues that should be considered for action by the negotiating committees. In addition, we request nominations for individual negotiators who represent key stakeholder constituencies that are involved in the student financial assistance programs authorized under Title IV of the HEA to serve on these committees. DATES: We must receive your nominations for negotiators to serve on the committees on or before November 29, 2007. The dates, times, and locations of the public hearings are listed under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. ADDRESSES: Please send your nominations for negotiators to Patty Chase, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8050, Washington, DC 20006, or by fax to Patty Chase at

(202)502-7874. You may also e-mail your nominations to: *Patty.Chase@ed.gov.* Those nominated will be notified via letter as to whether or not they have been selected as a negotiator as soon as the Department's review process is completed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about the hearings and the nomination submission process, contact: Patty Chase, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8050, Washington, DC 20006. Telephone:

(202)502-7905. You may also e-mail your questions about the hearings and the nomination submission process to: *Patty.Chase@ed.gov.* For information about negotiated rulemaking in general, contact: John Kolotos, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8018, Washington, DC 20006. Telephone

(202)502-7762. You may also e-mail your questions about negotiated rulemaking to: *John.Kolotos@ed.gov.* If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an alternative format ( *e.g.* , Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the person responsible for information about the hearings and the nomination submission process listed in this section under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 492 of the HEA requires that, before publishing any proposed regulations to implement programs authorized under Title IV of the HEA, the Secretary obtain public involvement in the development of the proposed regulations. After obtaining advice and recommendations from the public, the Secretary uses a negotiated rulemaking process to develop the proposed regulations. We intend to develop proposed regulations by following the negotiated rulemaking procedures in section 492 of the HEA. We intend to select participants for the negotiated rulemaking committees that represent the interests significantly affected by the proposed regulations. To the extent possible, we will select individual negotiators who reflect the diversity among program participants, in accordance with section 492(b)(1) of the HEA. Regulatory Issues We intend to conduct negotiated rulemaking to develop proposed regulations for the new TEACH Grant program, which was added to Title IV of the HEA by the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (CCRAA), Pub. L. 110-84. We will also address regulatory changes that will be needed for the Federal Family Education Loan Program

(FFEL)and the William D. Ford Direct Loan Program resulting from the enactment of the CCRAA including, but not limited to: rules for income-based repayment; changes to the maximum repayment period; reductions to the lender insurance rates and loan forgiveness for public service employees; and definitions of terms used in the programs. We will also consider whether the regulations need to be amended to implement or reflect Pub. L. 110-93, which made permanent the Secretary's authority under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 (HEROES Act). We note that there is legislation currently pending in Congress to reauthorize the HEA. If reauthorization of the HEA is completed prior to the first negotiating session, we may also include on the negotiating agenda additional changes to the regulations that may be needed. We also expect to conduct negotiated rulemaking on other regulatory issues. These may include issues raised by the public during the regional hearings. Other issues the Department identifies as necessary to improve program administration and accountability will also be negotiated, including potential Federal preemption of State laws that may conflict with the Department's regulations on improper inducements and the use of preferred lender lists in the FFEL program. We may also consider the establishment of competitive preference priorities within the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) program. Structure of the Committees We anticipate having one or two negotiating committees based upon the nature of the topics to be negotiated. The number of committees and their organization will be determined as necessary, depending upon the comments received as a result of this notice. If one negotiating committee is established, it will address all of the regulatory issues that we identify. If two negotiating committees are established, one negotiating committee would address issues related to the Federal student loan programs authorized by Title IV, Parts B and D of the HEA and the other committee would focus on TEACH Grants and other issues. Our goal is to establish committees that will allow significantly affected parties to be represented while keeping the committees' size manageable. We strongly encourage nominations of individuals from coalitions of individuals and organizations representing the constituencies identified below. Moreover, the Department encourages nominations of individuals who are actively involved in administering the Federal programs that are the subject of these negotiated rulemaking sessions and who can represent the interests of groups that are significantly affected by the regulations. The committee or committees can create subgroups to discuss particular topics, such as TEACH Grants, Income-Based Repayment, or the definition of a non-profit holder. The subgroup can also involve in its discussions additional individuals who are not members of the committees. Individuals who are not selected as members of a committee can attend committee meetings, access the individuals representing their constituencies, and participate in informal working groups on various issues between the meetings. Committee meetings will be open to the public. We have identified the following constituencies as having interests that are significantly affected by the subject matter of the negotiated rulemaking process. The Department anticipates that individuals representing each of these constituencies will participate as members of one or more of the negotiated rulemaking committees. These constituencies are: • Students. • Legal assistance organizations that represent students. • Financial aid administrators at institutions of higher education. • Business officers and bursars at institutions of higher education. • Institutional servicers (including collection agencies). • Trustees. • State higher education executive officers. • State Attorneys General and other appropriate State officials. • Business and industry. • Institutions of higher education eligible to receive Federal assistance under Title III, Parts A and B, and Title V of the HEA, which include Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, American Indian Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions, and other institutions with a substantial enrollment of needy students as defined in Title III of the HEA. • Two-year public institutions of higher education. • Four-year public institutions of higher education. • Private, non-profit institutions of higher education. • Private, for-profit institutions of higher education. • Institutions of higher education that prepare teachers. • Organizations that represent teachers. • Guaranty agencies and guaranty agency servicers (including collection agencies). • Lenders, secondary markets, and loan servicers. • Accrediting agencies. While an individual selected to represent a constituency may be an employee, official, or representative of a specific group, institution, or industry participant, the individual will be expected to represent the interests of the entire constituency that the individual has been designated to represent on the committee and to confer with other individuals and representatives of groups within that constituency. Nominations should include the following information: • The name of the nominee, the organization the individual works for, if any, and a description of the interests that the individual represents. • Evidence of support from individuals or groups of the constituency that the nominee will represent. • The nominee's commitment that the nominee will actively participate in good faith in the development of the proposed regulations. • The nominee's contact information, including address, phone number, fax number, and e-mail address. Schedule for Negotiations We anticipate that the negotiating committee(s) will meet in the Washington, DC, area three or more times beginning in January 2008 and concluding no later than April 2008. The dates and locations of these meetings will be published in a subsequent notice in the **Federal Register** , and will be posted on the Department's Web site at: *http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2008/index2008.html* . We will post the schedule for negotiations on this same Web site. Each committee must use electronic mail to exchange documents and discuss proposals between meetings. We anticipate that the schedule will allow sufficient time for us to provide the public with a 60-day comment period for the proposed regulations resulting from the negotiated rulemaking process and sufficient time to address any issues raised in the comment period, while meeting the November 1 statutory deadline for publishing student financial assistance final regulations. Regional Hearings We will hold three public regional hearings for interested parties to discuss the agenda for the negotiated rulemaking sessions. These hearings will be held on— November 2, 2007, at the Sheraton New Orleans, 500 Canal Street, in New Orleans, Louisiana; November 16, 2007, at the U.S. Department of Education in Washington, DC; and November 29, 2007, at the Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego, One Market Place, San Diego, California. The regional hearings in New Orleans and San Diego will be held from 11 a.m.-3 p.m., local time. The hearing in Washington, DC will be held from 9 a.m.-4 p.m., local time. Individuals desiring to present comments at the hearings are encouraged to do so. It is likely that each participant choosing to make a statement will be limited to five minutes. Individuals interested in making oral statements will be able to register to make a statement beginning at 10 a.m. for the regional hearings and at 8:30 a.m. on the day of the Washington hearing at the Department's on-site registration table on a first-come, first-served basis. If additional time slots remain, individuals may be given additional time to speak. If no time slots remain, the Department has reserved one additional hour at the end of the day for individuals who were not able to register to speak. The amount of time available will depend upon the number of individuals who register to speak. Speakers may also submit written comments. In addition, for anyone unable to attend any of the regional hearings, the Department will also accept written comments. You should send your comments to: John Kolotos, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8018, Washington, DC 20006. All comments must be received by November 29, 2007. All of the hearing sites are accessible to individuals with disabilities. Individuals needing an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service, assistive listening device, or materials in alternative format), should notify the contact person for information about hearings listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in this notice in advance of the scheduled meeting date. Although we will attempt to meet any request we receive, we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to arrange it. Further information on the regional hearing sites is available on *http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2008/index2008.html* . *Electronic Access to This Document:* You can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the **Federal Register** , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format

(PDF)on the Internet at the following site: *http://www.ed.gov/news/federalregister* . To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC area at

(202)512-1530. Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the **Federal Register** . Free Internet access to the official edition of the **Federal Register** and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html* . Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1098a. Dated: October 17, 2007. Diane Auer Jones, Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education. [FR Doc. E7-20785 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service 36 CFR Part 223 RIN 0596-AB81 Sale and Disposal of National Forest System Timber; Special Forest Products and Forest Botanical Products AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comment. SUMMARY: The Department is issuing this proposed rule governing the disposal of special forest products from National Forest System lands. Special forest products include, but are not limited to, wildflowers, mushrooms, moss, nuts, seeds, tree sap, and Christmas trees. This proposed rule also formally establishes a pilot program to charge and collect fees for the harvest and sale of forest botanical products on National Forest System lands. This proposed rule is intended to facilitate sustainable harvest of special forest products and forest botanical products. Public comment is invited and will be considered in the development of the final rule. DATES: Comments must be received in writing by December 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Director, Forest Management Staff, USDA Forest Service, Mail Stop 1105, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-1105, or by e-mail to *wospecialproducts@fs.fed.us.* Comments also may be submitted via the world wide web/Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov.* All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are placed in the record and are available for public inspection and copying at the Office of the Director, Forest Management Staff Third Floor NW., Yates Building, 201 14th Street, SW., Washington, DC. Persons wishing to inspect the comments are encouraged to call ahead

(202)205-1766 to facilitate entrance into the building. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Fitzgerald, Forest Service, Forest Management Staff,

(202)205-1753. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction This proposed rule adds Subparts G and H to 36 CFR part 223. Subpart G governs the commercial harvest and sale of special forest products and also establishes regulations for limited free use of these products. Subpart H, in turn, implements a pilot program for the harvest and sale of forest botanical products, as authorized by the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2000, (Pub. L. 106-113, Div. B, sec. 1000(a)(3), 113 Stat. 135 (enacting into law sec. 339 of Title III of H.R. 3423)), as amended in 2004 by section 335 of Public Law 108-108 (“the pilot program law”). Subpart H also contains regulations governing free, personal use of forest botanical products, as authorized under the pilot program law. II. Background A. Special Forest Products: Commercial Harvest and Sale and Free Use 1. Commercial Harvest and Sale The Forest Service presently sells special forest products from National Forest System lands under the authorities contained in the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended (16 U.S.C. 528-531); the National Forest Management Act of 1976, as amended (16 U.S.C. 472a *et seq.* ), the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1600-1614); and the timber sale regulations at 36 CFR part 223. Historically, timber-related products, such as firewood, posts, poles, and Christmas trees, have comprised most of the sales. However, the Forest Service also sells smaller amounts of non-timber special forest products, such as boughs, mushrooms, berries, and floral greeneries. On an annual basis, the total revenue from the sale of special forest products sold from National Forest System lands is approximately $3 million. Sales of special forest products are relatively small-scale in comparison to timber sales. Purchasers are frequently individuals or small business, and most special forest product sales do not exceed $10,000 in value. Generally, these smaller sales are not sold through competitive bidding; rather, a prospective purchaser asks to harvest certain forest products, and either enters into a simplified contract with the Forest Service, or buys a permit that allows the purchaser to conduct operations. Consistent with existing regulations, the Forest Service follows competitive bidding procedures for sales of special forest products valued at $10,000, or more. The Forest Service presently uses the following standard documents for smaller sales: Permit FS-2400-1, Forest Products Removal Permit; Contract Forest Products FS-2400-3P for pre-measured products, and Contract FS-2400-4, Forest Products Contract. These documents contain standard conditions and allow the parties to add provisions, as may be necessary given the conditions of the sale. For larger sales of special forest products, the Forest Service uses the standard timber sale contract, Contract FS-2400-6. The responsible Forest Officer selects the appropriate document in light of the value of the sale and other circumstances. The Forest Service anticipates that it will continue to use these standard documents after issuance of this proposed rule. Over the past 10 years, public demand for both timber and non-timber special forest products has increased. Given this growing demand and the related need to ensure resource sustainability, the Forest Service has determined that it is impractical to continue to rely on the timber sale regulations and corresponding sections of the Forest Service Manual

(FSM)and Handbook

(FSH)to facilitate the sale of special forest products. Thus, the Forest Service has developed regulations specifically applicable to these products. The Forest Service is issuing this proposed rule to establish a new subpart G to 36 CFR part 223 to address fees, bidding, sustainability, and other issues associated with the commercial harvest and sale of special forest products. This framework, along with direction in the Forest Service Handbook 2409.18, Chapter 80 will govern commercial disposal of special forest products. 2. Free Use of Special Forest Products This proposed rule also contains measures allowing for free use of special forest products. Historically, the agency has granted limited free use of these products to individuals and to members of federally-recognized Indian tribes holding reserved treaty gathering rights. The regulations will ensure that responsible Forest Officers administer free use of forest products uniformly across National Forest System lands and will provide greater transparency to the public. The Forest Service relies upon its broad multi-use mandate under the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended, as authority for allowing free use of special forest products. B. Forest Botanical Products: Commercial Harvest and Sale and Personal Use 1. Commercial Harvest and Sale In recent years, bio-prospecting activities on National Forest System lands have increased. Bio-prospecting generally refers to gathering of natural products that have innate nutritional or medicinal properties for commercial development and sale. Historically, the Forest Service has addressed bio-prospecting activities under the same authority and regulations that it has applied to special forest products. However, in the pilot program law, Congress directed the Secretary to initiate a pilot program for charging and collecting fees for the harvest and sale of forest botanical products—such as mosses, fungi, bryophytes, roots, bulbs, berries, seeds, and wildflowers—which are often the focus of bio-prospecting activities. Accordingly, the Forest Service is establishing in this proposed rule a new subpart H to 36 CFR part 223 to formally govern the pilot program. For the duration of the program, these regulations will apply to the sale of this subset of special forest products. The pilot program law provides a mechanism for funding the environmental analyses and administrative tasks necessary for its implementation. Generally, the law requires the agency to charge and collect a fee covering at least a portion of the fair market value of the products and a portion of the costs incurred by the agency in administering the program. The law specifies that retained funds shall be available for expenditure without further appropriation for activities associated with the program, through September 30, 2010. Subpart H of this proposed rule will terminate on September 30, 2010, unless Congress extends the pilot program, or makes it permanent. 2. Personal Use of Forest Botanical Products Section

(e)of the pilot program law directs the Forest Service to permit limited, free use of forest botanical products. It mandates that the Forest Service establish a “personal use harvest level” for each product and directs that a person's harvest of a product below that level shall be exempt from otherwise applicable fees. Additionally, the law authorizes the Secretary to waive fees “pursuant to such regulations as the Secretary may prescribe.” For the duration of the pilot program, free use of forest botanical products shall be conducted under this mandate, and under additional waivers, as established by the Secretary. III. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Proposed Rule A. Subpart G—Special Forest Products *Section 223.215—Applicability.* This section establishes that subpart G of part 223 governs the disposal of special forest products including both commercial operations and free use. However, for the duration of the pilot program covering forest botanical products, the disposal of this subset of special forest products shall also be subject to the requirements set forth in subpart H, which implements that program. Upon termination of the pilot program, all special forest products, including forest botanical products, shall be disposed of pursuant to subpart G. *Section 223.216—Definitions.* This section sets out the definition of special forest products as used in this subpart and provides common examples of such products. The definition also lists other products that do not fall under the definition. *Section 223.217—Authority to dispose of special forest products.* This section sets out the Forest Service's statutory authorities for the disposal of special forest products on National Forest System lands. For commercial harvest and sale, the agency relies upon three sources of authority: The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended (16 U.S.C. 528-531); the National Forest Management Act of 1976, as amended (16 U.S.C. 472a *et seq.* ), and the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1600-1614). For example, the National Forest Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 472a, authorizes the Secretary to sell “at not less than appraised value, trees, portions of trees, or forest products on National Forest Systems lands.” In addition, the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, 16 U.S.C. 529, authorizes and directs the Secretary of Agriculture to “develop and administer the renewable surface resources of the national forests for multiple use and sustained yield of the several products and services obtained therefrom.” The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended, provides authority for the agency to permit limited free use of special forest products. Under the Act, the Forest Service has expansive authority to manage National Forest System lands “in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American people” (16 U.S.C. 531). The Act identifies “outdoor recreation,” as one of several Congressional objectives that must inform the agency's management (16 U.S.C. 528). Thus, while the Forest Service must consider the “relative values of the various resources,” its multiple-use management is “not necessarily the combination of uses that will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output” (16 U.S.C. 531). Limited free use of special forest products, as a recreational activity, is fully consistent with the objectives and obligations established under the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960. *Section 223.218—Consistency with plans, environmental standards, and other management requirements.* This section requires the disposal of special forest products on National Forest System lands to be consistent with applicable land management plans. This section also requires contracts, permits, or authorizing instruments to include provisions, as appropriate, addressing among other things: fire protection and suppression; protection of natural resources; regeneration of harvested products; and, minimization of soil erosion. *Section 223.219—Sustainable harvest of special forest products.* This section generally requires the Forest Service to determine the sustainable harvest level for each naturally occurring special forest product prior to offering that product for sale or free use. (The requirement would not include “man-made” products such as mine props and rails.) The sustainable harvest level for a naturally occurring special forest product is the aggregate quantity of the product that may be disposed of from a National Forest annually in perpetuity on a sustained yield basis. Special forest products shall be disposed of in a manner that does not exceed the sustainable harvest level for the product. In the absence of a determined sustainable harvest level for a product, the Forest Service may nevertheless sell, or offer the product for free use under measures designed to protect its renewable resource values. These measures may include consideration of past harvest levels and regular monitoring of the product, the site, and the harvest operations. This section prohibits the Forest Service from issuing or approving contracts, permits, or instruments for disposal of special forest products that are listed as endangered or threatened, or that have been proposed or listed under The Endangered Species Act. This restriction would not apply when the disposal is authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Service for scientific or other purposes related to sustainability of species. Under these rare situations a permit from the Forest Service is also required. This section also identifies when the Forest Service may issue permits authorizing disposal of special forest products listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), or included on the Regional Forester's sensitive plant list, or list of species of concern. Finally, this section provides for monitoring and revision of harvest levels. *Section 223.220—Quantity determination.* This section describes the acceptable methods for determining the quantity of special forest products. The quantity may be determined by scaling, measuring, weighing, counting, or other reliable means. *Section 223.221—Establishing minimum rates.* This section provides that the Chief of the Forest Service shall issue agency directives in Forest Service Handbook 2409.18, Chapter 80, containing approved methods for setting minimum rates for sale of special forest products. *Section 223.222—Appraisal.* This section specifies that the Chief of the Forest Service shall issue agency directives setting forth methods for appraising special forest products to determine their fair market value. The directives shall be contained at Forest Service Handbook 2409.18, Chapter 80. It also provides that special forest products must be sold at minimum rates or appraised value, whichever is higher. *Section 223.223—Advance payment.* This section establishes the requirement for advance payment or payment guarantee for special forest products. It also directs the Forest Service to refund advance payments found to be in excess of that needed by the United States, subject to obligations established under the Debt Collection Improvement Act. *Section 223.224—Performance bonds and security fees.* This section authorizes the Forest Service to require a purchaser to post a performance bond or security fee in conjunction with special forest products sale contracts, permits, or other instruments. *Section 223.225—Contract, permit, and instrument term.* In accordance with section 14(c) of the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. 472a(c)), this section establishes that the term of any contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the sale of special forest products may not exceed 10 years, unless the Chief of the Forest Service finds that a longer term is consistent with the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended (16 U.S.C. 528-531). Any such finding by the Chief shall be made in writing. *Section 223.226—Adjustment of term of contract, permit, or other instrument for force majeure delay.* This section provides that each contract, permit, or other instrument shall contain a provision allowing the Forest Service to extend the term in the event that circumstances beyond the purchaser's reasonable control delay performance. Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to acts of God, acts of public enemy, acts of Government, labor disputes, fires, insurrections, or floods. Before granting an adjustment, the approving officer must find that the purchaser has diligently performed in accordance with the contract, permit or other instrument, or that the substantial public interest justifies the extension. *Section 223.227—Sale advertisement.* This section generally requires the Forest Service to advertise for at least 30 days any sale of special forest products which has an appraised value of $10,000, or more. For any sale with an appraised value under $10,000, the Forest Service may offer the sale without advertisement. Regardless of the value of the sale, the agency may sell special forest products without advertisement, or in its discretion, advertise for less than 30 days if

(1)deterioration of the product threatens its value;

(2)if the products were previously advertised for competitive bidding but were not sold because of an absence of satisfactory bids; or,

(3)if the products remain from expired, cancelled, or abandoned contracts, permits, or other instruments. Under this section, if a potential purchaser approached the Forest Service and proposed to purchase special forest products valued at less than $10,000, then the Forest Service could proceed with the sale without advertising if there is absence of competitive interest. *Section 223.228—Contents of advertisement.* This section sets forth the required contents of advertisements for special forest products sales. It requires the agency to provide information about the location and the estimated quantities of special forest products offered for sale, the time and place at which sealed bids will be opened in public, a provision asserting the agency's right to reject any and all bids, the place where complete information on the offering may be obtained, and notice that a prospectus is available to the public and to interested potential bidders. *Section 223.229—Contents of prospectus.* This section establishes the minimum contents of a prospectus accompanying the sale of special forest products. A prospectus is required for all products which are to be advertised for sale. *Section 223.230—Bid restriction on resale of incomplete contracts, permits, or other instruments.* This section prohibits the Forest Service from considering a bid from any person, or affiliate of such person, who failed to complete or defaulted the original contract, permit, or other instrument covering the products offered for sale. The Forest Service may waive this prohibition when doing so would serve the public interest. *Section 223.231—Bidding methods.* This section sets forth bidding methods and other requirements for the sale of special forest products from National Forest System lands. The Forest Service must use either sealed bidding, or sealed bidding followed by oral auction. The method used must ensure open and fair competition; that the Government receives not less than fair market value for the resource; and consistency with the National Forest Management Act and other federal laws. The section also requires the Chief of the Forest Service, or authorized designee, to use sealed bids, or a mix of bidding methods to guard against collusive bidding, if there is a reasonable belief that anticompetitive or abnormal bidding practices are occurring. *Section 223.232—Disclosure of relation to other bidders.* This section authorizes the Forest Service to require any prospective purchaser of special forest products to disclose its relationship to other potential purchasers or operators. *Section 223.233—Award to highest bidder.* This section requires the Forest Service to award an advertised sale of special forest products to the highest bidder whose bid conforms to the conditions of the sale, as set forth in the prospectus. If the highest bidder cannot meet the requirements under which the special forest products were advertised, then the Forest Service may offer the sale to the next highest conforming bidder at the high bid level, and so on, until the offer is either accepted, or refused by all qualified bidders. In the event of a tie between two or more conforming high bidders, the Forest Service shall make the award based upon the drawing of lots. This section also specifies that if the Forest Service does not accept the highest bid, then the Forest Service may reject all bids and readvertise the sale. *Section 223.234—Determination of purchaser responsibility.* This section requires the Forest Service to make an affirmative determination of purchaser responsibility before awarding a contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the sale of special forest products. It sets forth the factors that the Forest Service must consider in making this finding, including: That the purchaser has adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them; that the purchaser is able to perform the contract within the contract term, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental business commitments; and that the purchaser has a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics. *Section 223.235—Unilateral delay, suspension and modification of contracts, permits, or other instruments authorizing the sale of special forest products.* This section establishes the conditions under which the Forest Service may unilaterally delay, suspend or modify a contract, permit, or other instrument governing the sale of special forest products. Pursuant to this section, the Forest has broad delay, suspension, and modification authority, in particular for circumstances related to protection of the environment or compliance with federal laws. The section provides that in the event of a delay, suspension, or modification, the Forest Service shall compensate a purchaser in accordance with the provisions of the relevant contract, permit, or instrument. In the absence of such provisions, the Forest Service may compensate the purchaser in accordance with agency methods and procedures in effect at the time of submission of the claim, but not to exceed 5 percent of the contract value of the unharvested permit products in which case the appropriate Forest Service officer shall give due consideration to the cause, duration, and financial impact of the delay, suspension, or modification. Compensation shall be awarded only if it is justified under applicable provisions or other relevant circumstances. If the provisions of the governing contract, permit, or instrument do not address the mechanics/procedure at claim submission, the rule provides that a purchaser must make a written submission that is fully supported by relevant documents. This requirement will assist Forest Service personnel in evaluating the merits of a claim and ensure that it is handled promptly. Because most harvests of special forest products are relatively small scale operations, the Forest Service believes that delays, suspensions, or modifications will arise infrequently, and that in such cases, the parties will be able to amicably resolve issues pertaining to compensation. The section also empowers Contracting Officers and/or their superiors to make decisions regarding delays, suspensions, or modifications. *Section 223.236—Unilateral termination.* This section establishes the conditions under which the Forest Service may unilaterally terminate a contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the sale of special forest products. Pursuant to this section, the agency has broad authority to terminate an agreement, in particular for circumstances related to protection of the environment, compliance with federal laws, or the purchaser's fitness and integrity. The section provides that in the event of a termination, the Forest Service shall compensate a purchaser in accordance with the provisions of the relevant contract, permit, or instrument, or, in the absence of such provisions, as described in the preceding section on delay, suspension, and modification. Again, compensation shall be awarded only if justified under applicable provisions or other relevant circumstances. However, compensation shall not be available when the Forest Service terminates a contract, permit, or instrument for reasons related to the purchaser's fitness, integrity, or breach of contract. The section also empowers contracting officers and/or their superiors to make decisions regarding terminations. *Section 223.237—Request by Purchaser for delay, suspension, modification, or termination.* This section allows a purchaser to request delay, suspension, modification, or termination of their contract, permit or other authorizing instrument. It is designed primarily for smaller sales when the request is not covered by an agreement provision and when the circumstances warrant a mutually agreed upon resolution. In this case, the Forest Service may address the request in light of the supporting reasons offered by the purchaser and other relevant circumstances. A purchaser's request should have a plausible foundation, such as substantially changed market conditions, and should be submitted in writing with a detailed explanation of all relevant circumstances supporting the request. The Forest Service may deny a request, in whole or in part, in its discretion. When governing contract, permit, or instrument provisions would apply to the request, the Forest Service shall adhere to those provisions. The responsible Forest Officer, or his or her superior, shall have authority to respond to any request by the purchaser for delay, modification, suspension, or termination. *Section 223.238—Free use authorization to U.S. Army and Navy.* This section authorizes Regional Foresters, by delegation from the Chief of the Forest Service, to approve the harvest of special forest products by the U.S. Army and Navy for the purposes identified at 16 U.S.C. 492. *Section 223.239—Free use by individuals.* This section authorizes individuals to harvest special forest products from National Forest System lands without charge. This section is not intended to affect subsistence uses implemented under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 3101-3126. An individual person may obtain authorization to harvest a special forest product for personal, non-commercial use in a quantity not to exceed the amount allowed by the appropriate Forest Service officer pursuant to 36 CFR 223.8. Unless the product is located in an area previously designated for free use, a person seeking to harvest a special forest product must obtain a “free use” permit prior to harvesting any such product and must comply with the requirements established by the Regional Forester or subordinate officer. A permit shall indicate the type, amount, and/or value of the products to be harvested and shall contain other related requirements and restrictions. The permit request may be denied outright to ensure the personal safety of the individual, to prevent interference with Forest Service and/or commercial operations in the forest, to protect the product as a sustainable resource, and to otherwise protect the forest. The issuing officer or any superior officer may revoke a permit at any time. *Section 223.240—Indian tribes and treaty reserved gathering rights.* This section acknowledges that Indian tribes with reserved treaty gathering rights have retained the right to harvest special forest products in accordance with the terms of such treaty rights. Such harvest by Indian tribes shall not be subject to the application and permit requirements pertaining to personal, non-commercial harvest by individuals. By this proposed rule, the Forest Service does not intend to interfere with Indian tribes' harvest of special forest products for traditional, ceremonial, and/or cultural purposes when such use is included as a treaty right. Additionally, this section does not prevent individual Indians from requesting free use of special forest products under section 223.239. *Section 223.241—Disposal of seized special forest products.* This section authorizes the Forest Service to dispose of special forest products that have been illegally obtained from National Forest System lands through commercial sale or by offering such products for free use. The Forest Service may not sell such products to the entity that took them illegally. Additionally, the Forest Service shall not sell or dispose of seized special forest products that are threatened, endangered, or candidates for listing under the Endangered Species Act; that are listed on the Regional Forester's sensitive plant list or list of species of concern or interest; or identified by CITES as being prohibited from international sale or trade. Seized special forest products that are threatened, endangered, proposed or candidates for listing under the Endangered Species Act, that are on the Regional Forester's sensitive plant list or list of species of concern, or interest, or prohibited from international sale or trade may be donated to a recognized scientific institution or university for educational or research purposes. In the absence of commercial interest in a seized product, the Forest Service may offer the product for free use to individuals, to Indian tribes with reserved treaty gathering rights, or to other federally-recognized tribes. B. Subpart H—Forest Botanical Products *Section 223.275—Establishment of a pilot program.* Subpart H to 36 CFR Part 223 governs the pilot program for the sale and harvest of forest botanical products, as required by the Pilot Program Law. This subpart also implements the free, personal use mandate contained in the pilot program law. Reflecting the limited duration of the program, the section indicates that Forest Service may collect fees through fiscal year 2009, which ends September 30, 2009. *Section 223.276—Applicability.* This section establishes that the pilot program applies to the disposal of forest botanical products from National Forest System lands. However, rather than developing and implementing redundant procedures applicable solely to disposal of forest botanical products for the limited duration of the program, the Forest Service shall use the procedures set forth in subpart G. Thus, the Forest Service's treatment of forest botanical products will differ from its treatment of special forest products only to the extent that the pilot program requires segregation of fees and that personal use differs from free use practices. Other aspects of the pilot program, for example those pertaining to prices, bidding, and sustainability, shall be accomplished through forest products regulations and associated Forest Service directives. *Section 223.277—Definitions.* This section defines forest botanical products and provides examples of products that fall within the definition. *Section 223.278—Collection of fees.* This section governs the Forest Service's charging and collection of fees for the harvest of forest botanical products from National Forest System lands. It directs that fees charged for forest botanical products shall cover at least a portion of the products' fair market value and a portion of the costs associated with administering the program. Thus, when forest botanical products are sold through the procedures established under subpart G, the selling price shall incorporate the collection requirements of section (c)(1) of the Law; a portion of the products' fair market value and program administrative costs will be built into the price. Despite the Act's requirement that the Forest Service establish methods and procedures for the sale of forest botanical products, the Forest Service believes that these products may be sold without advertisement under the circumstances provided under 36 CFR part 223.227, which reflects 16 U.S.C. 472a(d). *Section 223.279—Personal use harvest levels and waiver of fees.* This section implements the free personal use authority set forth in section (e)(1) of the pilot program law. The regulation provides that the Forest Service shall not collect fees for a person's harvest of forest botanical products at or below established personal use harvest levels. Regional Foresters shall establish personal use harvest levels by type and quantity, or by value through supplements to the Forest Service Directive System. Personal use harvest levels will be consistent with sustainable harvest levels. A person seeking free use of a forest botanical product subject to personal use harvest levels must submit an application to the appropriate Forest Service officer and obtain a permit, as provided in section 223.239 of subpart G. For the duration of the pilot program, free use of forest botanical products shall be limited to personal use harvest levels. Additionally, in this section, the Chief of the Forest Service employs waiver authority under the section (e)(2) of the Act to waive otherwise applicable fees for the harvest of forest botanical products by federally recognized Indian tribes. Tribal free use of forest botanical products must be non-commercial, and for cultural, ceremonial and/or traditional purposes. The regulation also provides that a Regional Forester or Forest Supervisor, having proper authorization from the Chief of the Forest Service, may waive application of a fee to allow harvest of forest botanical products for scientific research or for salvage when other management activities will destroy or damage the product. The waiver decision must be in writing. *Section 223.280—Monitoring and revising of harvest levels.* This section provides that monitoring and revising of harvest levels for forest botanical products, as required under the pilot program, shall be accomplished pursuant to the regulation at 36 CFR part 223.219. *Section 223.281—Disposition of collected fees.* This section governs the accounting and expenditure of fees collected under the pilot program and follows the requirements set forth in sections

(f)and

(h)of the Act. IV. Conclusion The regulations contained in this proposed rule will allow the Forest Service to manage better its program for the disposal of special forest products, through commercial harvest and sale and free use, and to implement a pilot program for charging and collecting fees for harvest of forest botanical products, pursuant to the pilot program law. Regulatory Certifications Regulatory Impact This proposed rule has been reviewed under USDA procedures and Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review as amended by 13422. OMB has determined that this is not a significant rule. This proposed rule will not have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy nor adversely affect productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, nor State or local governments. This proposed rule will not interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency nor raise new legal or policy issues. Finally, this action will not alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients of such programs. Accordingly, this proposed rule is not subject to OMB review under Executive Order 12866. Proper Consideration of Small Entities This proposed rule has been considered in light of Executive Order 13272 regarding consideration of small entities and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996 (SBREFA), which amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). It has been determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the Executive Order. The proposed rule will have no adverse impact on small business, small not-for-profit organizations, or small units of government. Environmental Impact This proposed rule has no direct or indirect effect on the environment. Section 31.1b of Forest Service Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180; September 18, 1992) excludes from documentation in an environmental assessment or impact statement rules, regulations, or policies to establish Service-wide administrative procedures, program processes, or instructions that do not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The Department's assessment is that this proposed rule falls within this category of actions, and that no extraordinary circumstances exist that would require preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. No Takings Implications This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12360, and it has been determined that this action will not pose the risk of a taking of private property. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. When the final rule is adopted,

(1)all State and local laws and regulations that conflict with the final rule or that would impede full implementation of this rule will be preempted,

(2)no retroactive effect will be given to the final rule; and (3), the Department will not require the use of administrative proceedings before parties could file suit in court challenging its provisions. Unfunded Mandates Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538), which the President signed into law on March 22, 1995, the Department has assessed the effects of this proposed rule on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This action will not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more by any State, local, or tribal government or anyone in the private sector. Therefore, a statement under section 202 of the Act is not required. Federalism The Department has considered this proposed rule under the requirements of Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and concluded that this action will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the Department has determined that no further assessment of federalism implications is necessary at this time. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments, the Forest Service conducted a preliminary assessment of the impact of this proposed rule on Indian Tribal Governments and it determined that the rule does have tribal implications. Therefore, advance consultation with Tribes was required. Consultation in the form of opportunity to review and comment on these regulations and accompanying Forest Service Handbook direction was provided to all interested Tribes in all Forest Service Regions. Regional Foresters and Forest Supervisors determined which Tribes could be affected by these regulations and initiated consultations with Tribal representatives. A 60-day comment period was established, however many Tribes asked for additional time for consultation, which was granted. Recommendations from the Tribes have been incorporated, as appropriate, into this proposed rule. During consultation, it became apparent that the Tribes were concerned about their existing statutory authority, or lack thereof, to gather special forest products for cultural, ceremonial, and/or traditional purposes at no charge. The Tribes believed that current law does not meet their needs. In October 1999, the Chief Operations Officer of the Forest Service commissioned a National Tribal Relations Program Task Force to develop recommendations to improve working relationships with the Tribes. The task force report concluded that free use opportunities offered by the Forest Service were inconsistent with access provided by other government agencies. The report recommended development of legislation that more readily enables the Forest Service to provide free use of forest products to Tribes. The Chief of the Forest Service accepted the recommendation and efforts are underway to advance legislation that would empower the Forest Service to provide products free of charge to Tribes for cultural, traditional, and customary purposes. The proposed legislation has been drafted and is currently in legislative clearance. Tribes may also review and comment on this proposed rule. Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public This proposed rule does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in 5 CFR part 1320, and therefore, imposes no paperwork burden on the public. Accordingly, the review provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) and implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply. Energy Effects This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 2001, and it has been determined that it has no effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. This proposed rule is administrative in nature and, therefore, the preparation of a statement of energy effects is not required. List of Subjects 36 CFR Part 223 Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Forests and forest products, Government contracts, National forests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, proposes to amend 36 CFR part 223 as follows: PART 223—SALE AND DISPOSAL OF NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM TIMBER, SPECIAL FOREST PRODUCTS, AND FOREST BOTANICAL PRODUCTS 1. The authority citation for part 223 is amended to read as follows: Authority: 90 Stat. 2958, 16 U.S.C. 472a; 98 Stat. 2213, 16 U.S.C. 618, 104 Stat. 714-726, 16 U.S.C. 620-620j, 113 Stat. 1501a, 16 U.S.C. 528 note; unless otherwise noted. 2. Revise the part heading as shown above. 3. Add subparts G and H to read as follows: Subpart G—Special Forest Products Sec. 223.215 Applicability. 223.216 Definitions. 223.217 Authority to dispose of special forest products. 223.218 Consistency with plans, environmental standards, and other management requirements. 223.219 Sustainable harvest of special forest products. 223.220 Quantity determination. Appraisal and Pricing 223.221 Establishing minimum rates. 223.222 Appraisal. Contract and permit Conditions and Provisions 223.223 Advance payment. 223.224 Performance bonds and security fees. 223.225 Contract, permit, and instrument term. 223.226 Adjustment of term of contract, permit, or other instrument for force majeure delay. Advertisement and Bids 223.227 Sale advertisement. 223.228 Contents of advertisement. 223.229 Contents of prospectus. 223.230 Bid restriction on resale of incomplete contracts, permits, or other instruments. 223.231 Bidding methods. 223.232 Disclosure of relation to other bidders. Award of Contracts, Permits, or Other Instruments 223.233 Award to highest bidder. 223.234 Determination of purchaser responsibility. 223.235 Unilateral delay, suspension, or modification of contracts, permits, or other instruments authorizing the sale of special forest products. 223.236 Unilateral termination. 223.237 Request by Purchaser for delay, suspension, modification, or termination. 223.238 Free use authorization to U.S. Army and Navy. 223.239 Free use by individuals. 223.240 Indian tribes and treaty reserved gathering rights. 223.241 Disposal of seized special forest products. Subpart H—Forest Botanical Products 223.275 Establishment of a pilot program. 223.276 Applicability. 223.277 Definitions. 223.278 Collection of fees. 223.279 Personal use harvest levels and waiver of fees. 223.280 Monitoring and revising of harvest levels. 223.281 Disposition of collected fees. Subpart G—Special Forest Products § 223.215 Applicability. The regulations contained in this subpart govern the disposal of special forest products from National Forest System lands through commercial harvest and sale and free use. During the duration of the pilot program for the sale of forest botanical products, pursuant to the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2000, (Pub. L. 106-113, Div. B, sec. 1000(a)(3), 113 Stat. 135 (enacting into law sec. 339 of Title III of H.R. 3423)), as amended in 2004 by Section 335 of Public Law 108-108-, special forest products that are also forest botanical products shall be sold, or offered for free use, subject to the requirements of subpart H of this part. A commercial sale of special forest products shall be governed by a contract, permit, or other authorizing instrument. Free use shall be conducted under a permit, unless this requirement has been waived. § 223.216 Definitions. As used in this subpart, the following term shall mean: *Special forest products:* Products collected from National Forest System lands for commercial, personal, tribal, educational, or scientific purposes, including without limitation: bark, berries, boughs, bryophytes, bulbs, burls, Christmas trees, cones, ferns, firewood, forbs, fungi (including mushrooms), grasses, mosses, nuts, pine straw, roots, sedges, seeds, transplants, tree sap, wildflowers, fence material, mine props, posts and poles, shingle and shake bolts, and rails. The term *special forest products* does not include sawtimber, pulpwood, non-sawlog material removed in log form, cull logs, small roundwood, house logs, telephone poles, derrick poles, minerals, animals, animal parts, insects, worms, rocks, water, and soil. § 223.217 Authority to dispose of special forest products. The Forest Service has authority to dispose of special forest products located on National Forest System lands pursuant to the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended (16 U.S.C. 528-531); the National Forest Management Act of 1976, as amended (16 U.S.C. 472a *et seq.* ); and, the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1600-1614). § 223.218 Consistency with plans, environmental standards, and other management requirements. The disposal of special forest products from National Forest System lands shall be consistent with applicable land management plans. Each contract, permit, or other instrument shall include, as appropriate, provisions requiring the purchaser or user to:

(a)Provide fire protection and suppression;

(b)Protect natural resources;

(c)Regenerate harvested species after harvesting operations;

(d)Minimize soil erosion;

(e)Maintain favorable conditions of water flow and quality;

(f)Minimize adverse effects on, protect, or enhance other national forest resources, uses, and improvements; and

(g)Deposit voucher specimens to a curator of a nationally recognized herbarium in North America as identified in the *Index Herbariorum* for all permits authorizing bioprospecting. § 223.219 Sustainable harvest of special forest products.

(a)*Sustainable harvest levels.* Prior to offering special forest product for sale or free use, the responsible officer shall determine the sustainable harvest level for the product. The sustainable harvest level for a special forest product is the total quantity of the product that can be harvested annually in perpetuity on a sustained yield basis. Responsible officers shall not authorize harvest of special forest products in an amount exceeding known sustainable harvest levels. In determining a sustainable harvest level, the responsible officer may consider harvest levels of the product for the previous three years, if such information is available.

(b)*Harvest of protected species.* No contract, permit, or other authorizing instrument may be issued or approved under this subpart for a species listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as endangered or threatened, or that has been proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act, except as authorized by that Service. Moreover, Regional guidelines will identify the conditions when a contract, permit, or instrument may be issued or approved for any product listed on the Regional Forester's sensitive plant list, species of concern list, or *species of interest list,* or that is protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

(c)*Monitoring of established harvest levels.* At least once every three fiscal years, or as otherwise established by the Regional Forester, the Forest Service shall monitor the effects of harvesting a product on its sustainability. Such monitoring may include on-site examination of the product, including both harvested and non-harvested areas, and a review of past and projected harvest levels to the extent such information is available.

(d)*Revision of harvest levels.* The sustainable harvest level for a special forest product may be increased or decreased, as appropriate, based on monitoring. § 223.220 Quantity determination. Sale contracts, permits, or other authorizing instruments may provide for determining the quantity of special forest products by scaling, measuring, weighing, counting, or other reliable means. Appraisal and Pricing § 223.221 Establishing minimum rates. The Chief of the Forest Service shall establish methods for setting minimum rates for sale of special forest products. § 223.222 Appraisal. The Chief of the Forest Service shall set forth methods for appraising special forest products to determine their fair market value. Valid methods to determine fair market value include, but are not limited to, transaction evidence appraisals, analytical appraisals, comparison appraisals, and independent estimates based on average investments. Special forest products must be sold at minimum rates or appraised value, whichever is higher. Contract and Permit Conditions and Provisions § 223.223 Advance payment. Contracts, permits, or other authorizing instruments for the harvest and sale of special forest products shall require advance payment, unless the contract, permit, or instrument authorizes the purchaser to furnish a payment guarantee satisfactory to the Forest Service. Advance payments found to be in excess of amounts due the United States shall be refunded to the purchaser or their successor in interest, subject to the requirements of the Debt Collection Improvement Act. § 223.224 Performance bonds and security fees. A contract, permit, or other authorizing instrument for the sale of special forest products may require the purchaser to furnish a performance bond or other security for satisfactory compliance with its terms. § 223.225 Contract, permit, and instrument term. The term of any contract, permit, or other authorizing instrument for the sale of special forest products shall not exceed 10 years, unless the Chief of the Forest Service finds that a longer term is consistent with the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, as amended (16 U.S.C. 528-531). Any such finding by the Chief shall be made in writing. § 223.226 Adjustment of term of contract, permit, or other instrument for force majeure delay. A contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the harvest and sale of special forest products shall allow for the adjustment of its term to provide additional time to the purchaser in the event that circumstances beyond the purchaser's reasonable control delay performance. Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to acts of God, acts of the public enemy, acts of the Government, labor disputes, fires, insurrections, and floods. The approving officer may grant an extension upon finding that the purchaser has diligently performed in accordance with the contract, permit or other instrument, or that the substantial public interest justifies the extension. Advertisement and Bids § 223.227 Sale advertisement.

(a)The Forest Service shall advertise for a period of 30 days any sale of special forest products for which the appraised value of the sale is equal to, or greater than $10,000, except as provided in paragraph

(c)of this section.

(b)In any instance when the appraised value of the sale is less than $10,000, the Forest Service may sell the products without advertisement; however, if there is competitive interest in a sale valued at less than $10,000, the Forest Service shall advertise for not less than 7 days.

(c)Regardless of the requirement set forth in paragraph

(a)of this section, above, the Forest Service may sell special forest products without advertisement, or at the Agency's discretion, advertise the sale for a period less than 30 days if

(1)Deterioration of a special forest product threatens its value;

(2)If the products were previously advertised for competitive bidding but were not sold because of an absence of satisfactory bids; or

(3)If the products are remaining from expired, cancelled, or abandoned contracts, permits, or other instruments. § 223.228 Contents of advertisement. The Forest Service shall include the following information in an advertisement for the sale of special forest products:

(a)The location and estimated quantities of special forest products offered for sale;

(b)The time and place at which sealed bids will be opened in public;

(c)A provision asserting the agency's right to reject any and all bids;

(d)The place where complete information on the offering may be obtained; and

(e)Notice that a prospectus is available to the public and to interested potential bidders. § 223.229 Contents of prospectus. The prospectus for the sale of special forest products shall include the following:

(a)The minimum acceptable value or unit price and the amount or rate of any additional required deposits;

(b)The amount of the bid guarantee that must accompany each bid;

(c)The amount of the deposit or downpayment to be made by the successful bidder and the time-frame for making such deposit or downpayment;

(d)The location and area of the sale, including acreage;

(e)The estimated volumes, quality, size, or other appropriate measure for the special forest products;

(f)A description of any special harvest and removal requirements for the sale;

(g)The method of bidding that the Forest Service will employ; sealed bid or sealed bid followed by oral auction;

(h)The type of contract, permit, or other instrument to be used for the sale;

(i)The termination date of the contract, permit, or other instrument and the normal operating period;

(j)The amount of performance bond required; and

(k)If circumstances warrant, such additional information about the sale as the Forest Service deems appropriate in order to notify purchasers that an on-site investigation of the products may be prudent. § 223.230 Bid restriction on resale of incomplete contracts, permits, or other instruments. In any resale of special forest products remaining from a previous sale, the Forest Service shall not consider a bid submitted by a person who failed to complete or defaulted the original contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the sale, or from any affiliate of such person except when such consideration serves the public interest. § 223.231 Bidding methods.

(a)The Contracting Officer or designated Forest Officer shall offer advertised sales of special forest products through sealed bid or sealed bid followed by oral auction. The method selected shall:

(1)Ensure open and fair competition;

(2)Ensure that the Federal Government receives not less than fair market value for the public resource; and

(3)Be consistent with the National Forest Management Act and other applicable federal laws.

(b)As a prerequisite to participation in an oral auction, a bidder shall submit a written sealed bid at least equal to the minimum acceptable bid price(s) specified in the prospectus. The Forest Service shall not accept a bid at oral auction that is less than the bidder's initial sealed bid.

(c)The Chief, or authorized designee shall specify the use of sealed bids or a mix of bidding methods in any area where there is a reasonable belief that collusive and/or abnormal bidding practices may be occurring. § 223.232 Disclosure of relation to other bidders. The Forest Service may require any prospective purchaser of special forest products to disclose its relationship with other potential purchasers or operators. Such disclosure may include a certified statement of stockholders or members of the firm; officers of the corporation or members of the board of directors; or holders of bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness. Award of Contracts, Permits, or Other Instruments § 223.233 Award to highest bidder.

(a)The Forest Service shall award contracts, permits, or other authorizing instruments for advertised sales as follows:

(1)The Forest Service will award a sale of special forest products to the responsible bidder that submits the highest bid that conforms to the conditions of the sale as stated in the prospectus.

(2)If the highest bidder cannot meet the requirements for the sale, as specified in the prospectus or otherwise, then the Forest Service may:

(i)Reject all bids and reoffer the sale, or

(ii)Offer the award to the next highest qualified, at the high bid level, until the award is accepted or refused by all of conforming bidders.

(3)In the event of a tie between two or more responsible high bidders submitting conforming bids, the Forest Service shall award the sale by drawing of lots.

(b)If none of the bids meet the specified conditions of the sale, or in the event of other irregularities in the bidding process, the Forest Service may reject all bids, and, if it so decides, reoffer the sale. § 223.234 Determination of purchaser responsibility.

(a)A Contracting Officer shall not award a contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the sale of special forest products to a prospective purchaser unless that officer makes an affirmative determination that the purchaser is responsible. In the absence of information clearly establishing that the prospective purchaser is responsible, the Contracting Officer shall conclude that the purchaser is not responsible.

(b)In order to make an affirmative determination that a prospective purchaser is responsible, the Contracting Officer must find that:

(1)The purchaser has adequate financial resources to perform the contract, permit, or other instrument, or the ability to obtain such resources;

(2)The purchaser is able to perform the contract, permit, or instrument within the relevant term, taking into consideration all of their existing commercial and governmental business commitments;

(3)The purchaser has a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics;

(4)The purchaser has or is able to obtain equipment and supplies suitable for harvesting the products and for meeting applicable resource protection requirements;

(5)The purchaser is otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award of a contract, permit, or instrument under applicable laws and regulations, or

(6)The purchaser has a satisfactory performance record on contracts, permits, or other instruments with the Forest Service. Failure to apply sufficient diligence and perseverance to perform a contract, permit, or other instrument is strong evidence that a purchaser is not responsible. A purchaser that is, or has been deficient in performance shall be deemed not responsible, unless the purchaser demonstrates that the deficiency arose from circumstances beyond their reasonable control. § 223.235 Unilateral delay, suspension, or modification of contracts, permits, or other instruments authorizing the sale of special forest products.

(a)*Reasons for Delay, Suspension or Modification.* The Forest Service may unilaterally delay, suspend, or modify any contract, permit, or instrument authorizing the sale of special forest products for any one of the following reasons:

(1)To prevent actual or potential harm to the environment, including without limit harm to land, water, air, habitat, plants, animals, cave resources, or cultural resources;

(2)To ensure consistency with land management plans or other management documents;

(3)To conduct environmental analyses, including without limitation, consultation under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 1531, *et seq.;*

(4)Because of existing or threatened litigation, which might affect or implicate the purchaser's harvest of special forest products; or

(5)For any reasons or other conditions as may be set forth in the contract, permit, or other instrument governing the sale.

(b)*Compensation.*

(1)The Forest Service may compensate the purchaser for unilateral delay, suspension or modification of any contract, permit, or other instrument in accordance with the applicable provisions set forth in such contract, permit, or instrument, if any, or in the absence of such provisions, in accordance with applicable Forest Service methods and procedures in effect at the time of claim submission, giving due consideration to the cause, duration, and financial impact of the delay, suspension or modification.

(2)A purchaser shall comply with provisions for claim submission contained in the governing contract, permit, or instrument, if any, or, in the absence of such provisions, shall submit a claim for compensation in writing and accompanied by supporting documentation that fully substantiates the amount of the claim.

(c)*Authority.* The Contracting Officer administrating the sale or responsible superior may issue an instruction delaying, suspending, or modifying the contract, permit, or instrument. Such instructions shall be issued to the purchaser in writing, except when exigent circumstances warrant oral communication, in which case the officer shall promptly followup in writing. § 223.236 Unilateral termination.

(a)*Reasons for Termination.* The Forest Service may unilaterally terminate a contract, permit, or other instrument authorizing the sale of special forest products for any of the following reasons:

(1)For any of the reasons enumerated at § 223.235(a)(1) through (5);

(2)For purchaser's material breach or continued violation of the contract or agreement terms;

(3)In the event purchaser is found to be in violation of any Federal or State civil or criminal statute, law, or regulation, when such violation relates to obtaining, attempting to obtain, selling, trading, or processing special forest products; to obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public contract or subcontract; harm or damage to public lands or protected species; or, to purchaser's business integrity, honesty, or responsibility;

(b)*Compensation.*

(1)The Forest Service may compensate the purchaser for unilateral termination of any contract, permit, or other instrument in accordance with the provisions set forth in such contract, permit, or instrument, if any, or, in the absence of such provisions, in accordance with applicable Forest Service methods and procedures in effect at the time of claim submission, giving due consideration to the cause, duration, and financial impact of the termination.

(3)A purchaser shall not be entitled to compensation if the unilateral termination is due in whole or in part to the reasons set forth at § 223.236(a)(2) or (3).

(c)*Authority.* Any unilateral termination of a contract, permit, or instrument for the sale of special forest products shall be made by the Chief, or the Chief's designee. Any such instruction shall be issued to the purchaser in writing, except when exigent circumstances warrant oral communication, in which case a written communication shall follow promptly. § 223.237 Request by Purchaser for delay, suspension, modification, or termination.

(a)*Request.* A purchaser of special forest products may request delay, suspension, modification, or termination of their contract, permit, or other instrument pursuant to the provisions set forth in the contract, permit, or instrument, if any, or for another reasonable cause, including without limit catastrophic damage to the product or substantially changed market conditions. Any such request shall be submitted in writing and shall contain a detailed explanation of all relevant circumstances supporting the request.

(b)*Response.* The Forest Service shall respond to any request for delay, suspension, modification, or termination in accordance with applicable provisions of the contract, permit, or other instrument, and, in the absence of such provisions, may respond in a manner that is fair and reasonable in light of the circumstances of the request. The Forest Service may deny any request, in whole or in part, in accordance with the provisions of the relevant contract, permit, instrument, or at the Agency's discretion in the absence of such provisions.

(c)*Authority.* The Contracting Officer administrating the sale or superior officer shall have authority to respond to any request by a purchaser for delay, modification, suspension, or termination. § 223.238 Free use authorization to U.S. Army and Navy. Subject to delegations of authority by the Chief of the Forest Service, Regional Foresters may approve the harvest of special forest products by the U.S. Army and Navy for the purposes identified at 16 U.S.C. 492. § 223.239 Free use by individuals.

(a)*Free use.* Under a permit, a person may harvest special forest products from National Forest System lands free of charge for personal, non-commercial use, not in excess of the amount or quantity authorized by a designated Forest Service officer, a Forest Supervisor, or a Regional Forester under 36 CFR 223.8.

(b)*Permit requirement.* A person seeking to harvest a special forest product for personal, non-commercial use, must submit an application to a Forest Service officer and obtain a free use permit prior to harvest, unless these requirements have been waived to allow harvesting of a specific product from a designated free use area. The permit shall indicate the type, amount, and/or value of the product to be harvested, and shall contain other restrictions and requirements. The Forest Service officer may set conditions on the proposed harvest, or deny the harvest, to ensure the personal safety of the individual; to prevent interference with Forest Service and/or commercial operations on the forest; to protect the product as a sustainable resource; or to otherwise protect the forest. The issuing officer or any superior officer may terminate for the convenience of the government, without compensation, a free use permit at any time for a number of reasons including, but not limited to, resource concerns including threatened, endangered or sensitive species; weather factors such as fire season or road access; conflicts with other users; or violations of permit requirements.

(c)*Subsistence in Alaska.* This section is not intended to affect subsistence uses implemented under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 3101-3126. § 223.240 Indian tribes and treaty reserved gathering rights. Indian tribes with reserved treaty gathering rights or other adjudicated rights may harvest special forest products in accordance with the terms of such treaty rights. Such harvest by Indian tribes shall not be subject to the application and permitting requirements of subpart G; however, the Regional Forester may set conditions on the harvest, as necessary to protect the product as a sustainable resource, or to otherwise protect the forest. The Regional Forester may only deny the harvest for purposes of health and safety and in some instances in order to conserve the species or resources used. Any decision restricting tribal off-reservation treaty rights needs to be well documented. Consultation with the affected Tribe(s) and local Office of General Counsel on how to exercise such regulatory authority is found in FSM 1563.1 and FSH 1509.13, Chapter 10. § 223.241 Disposal of seized special forest products. The Forest Service may dispose of seized special forest products that have been illegally obtained from National Forest System lands. Any commercial sale of such products shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of this subpart; however, such products shall not be sold to the entity that collected them illegally. The Regional Forester may make seized products available for free use to individuals, Indian Tribes with reserved treaty gathering rights, and other federally recognized tribes. However, the Forest Service shall not dispose of a seized product by sale or free use if that product is threatened, endangered, or a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act; identified as prohibited for sale or trade under CITES, or listed on the Regional Forester's sensitive plant list, list of species of concern, or list of species of interest. Subpart H—Forest Botanical Products § 223.275 Establishment of a pilot program. This subpart governs the Forest Service's pilot program for the disposal of forest botanical products, as authorized by the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2000, (Pub. L. 106-113, Div. B, sec. 1000(a)(3), 113 Stat. 135 (enacting into law sec. 339 of Title III of H.R. 3423)), as amended in 2004 by Section 335 of Public Law 108-108. The pilot program shall be in effect through September 30, 2009. § 223.276 Applicability. This subpart applies to the disposal of forest botanical products, as defined herein, from National Forest System lands, until September 30, 2009 of the pilot program. The Forest Service shall dispose forest botanical products in accordance with the procedures set forth in 36 CFR part 223 subpart G, subject to the requirements of this subpart. § 223.277 Definitions. As used in this subpart, the following term shall mean: *Forest botanical products* —naturally occurring special forest products, including bark, berries, boughs, bryophytes, bulbs, burls, cones, ferns, fungi (including mushrooms), forbs, grasses, mosses, nuts, pine straw, roots, sedges, seeds, shrubs, transplants, tree sap, and wildflowers. The term excludes animals, animal parts, Christmas trees, fence material, firewood, insects, mine props, minerals, posts and poles, rails, rocks, shingle and shake bolts, water, worms, and soil. § 223.278 Collection of fees. The responsible official shall ensure that the price applicable to the harvest and sale of any forest botanical product, as determined in accordance with the procedures set forth in 36 CFR part 223 subpart G, includes at least a portion of the fair market value of the product and a portion of the costs associated with administering the pilot program. § 223.279 Personal use harvest levels and waiver of fees.

(a)In conjunction with determining sustainable harvest levels for special forest products, including forest botanical products, pursuant to § 223.219 of subpart G, the responsible Forest Service officer shall also determine personal use harvest levels, which shall be consistent with sustainable harvest levels.

(b)A person may harvest a forest botanical product from National Forest system lands, without charge, up to but not exceeding the personal use harvest level established for the product. A person seeking such personal use of a forest botanical product must comply with the procedures set forth in § 223.239 of subpart G.

(c)Under the following circumstances, the Forest Service waives the collection of fees otherwise required pursuant to § 223.278 of this subpart:

(1)For federally recognized Indian tribes seeking to harvest forest botanical products for cultural, ceremonial, and/or traditional purposes. Such purposes must be non-commercial, and any such harvest may be conditioned or denied as provided in § 223.240 of subpart G; and,

(2)On any occasion when a Regional Forester or Forest Supervisor, having proper authorization from the Chief, makes a determination in writing that the harvest facilitates scientific research or is for salvage because other management activities will destroy or damage the product. § 223.280 Monitoring and revising of harvest levels. Monitoring and revision of harvest levels for forest botanical products for purposes of the pilot program shall be conducted as provided at § 223.219 of subpart G. § 223.281 Disposition of collected fees.

(a)Funds collected under the pilot program for the harvest and sale of forest botanical products shall be deposited into a special account in the Treasury of the United States. These funds shall be available for expenditure at National Forests or National Grasslands where the funds were collected until September 30, 2010.

(b)Funds deposited into the special account specified in paragraph

(a)of this section shall be expended at a National Forest or National Grassland in proportion to the fees collected at that unit to pay for costs of: conducting inventories of forest botanical products; determining sustainable harvest levels for each species or type of forest botanical product; monitoring and assessing the impact of harvest levels and methods; conducting restoration activities, including vegetation restoration, necessitated by the collection, harvest, or removal of forest botanical products; or administering the pilot program, including environmental or other analyses. Dated: September 25, 2007. Abigail R. Kimbell, Chief, Forest Service. [FR Doc. E7-20658 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 97 [EPA-R05-OAR-2007-IN-0140; FRL-8481-5] Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Indiana: Clean Air Interstate Rule AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing limited approval of a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan

(SIP)submitted on February 28, 2007, as amended by letter on September 20, 2007. This revision addresses the requirements of EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated on May 12, 2005, and subsequently revised on April 28, 2006, and December 13, 2006. EPA is proposing to determine that the Indiana SIP revision strengthens the implementation plan for the State because it makes progress toward meeting Indiana's emission reduction requirements under the NO X SIP Call. DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0140, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov* : Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov* . 3. *Fax:* (312)886-5824. 4. *Mail:* “EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0140”, John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 5. *Hand Delivery or Courier:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Paskevicz, Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,

(312)886-6084, *paskevicz.john@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this **Federal Register** , EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a non-controversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and will address all public comments received in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** . Dated: September 27, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E7-20250 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4129; MB Docket No. 07-210; RM-11399] Radio Broadcasting Services; Butte Falls and Netarts, Oregon AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rule making filed by Oregon Radio Partners, LLC (“Petitioner”) proposing the allotments of Channel 290A at Butte Falls and Channel 232C3 at Netarts, Oregon. The proposed coordinates for Channel 290A at Butte Falls are 42-36-19 NL and 122-24-38 WL with a site restriction of 14.7 km (9.1 miles) northeast of city reference and for Channel 232C3 at Netarts are 45-27-56 NL and 123-58-11 WL with a site restriction of 4.0 km (2.5 miles) northwest of city reference. The petition for rule making is a hybrid contingent filing with two applications:

(1)For Station KTIL-FM, Channel 232C3 at Tillamook, Oregon to move to Channel 232C2 at Government Camp, Oregon (file no. BPH-0070125ADO); and

(2)for an unbuilt station, Channel 225A at Butte Falls, Oregon to move to Talent, Oregon on the same channel (file no. BNPH-20060310ACD). These applications will be reviewed separately. DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 26, 2007, and reply comments on or before December 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the Petitioner and its counsel, as follows: Oregon Radio Partners, LLC, c/o Lee J. Peltzman, Esquire, Shainis & Peltzman, Chartered, 1850 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's *Notice of Proposed Rule Making* , MB Docket No. 07-210, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the Commission's Reference Information Center, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractors, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). The Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all *ex parte* contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. *See* 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible *ex parte* contact. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, *see* 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oregon, is amended by adding Butte Falls, Channel 290A; and by adding Netarts, Channel 232C3. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20747 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4122; MB Docket No. 07-194; RM-11397] Radio Broadcasting Services; Hugo, Oklahoma AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document sets forth a proposal to amend the FM Table of Allotments, section 73.202(b) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 73.202(b). The Commission requests comment on a petition filed by Katherine Pyeatt. Petitioner proposes the allotment of Channel 286A at Hugo, Oklahoma, as a third local service. Channel 286A can be allotted at Hugo in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a site restriction of 8.5 km (5.3 miles) southwest of Hugo. The proposed coordinates for Channel 286A at Hugo are 33-57-21 North Latitude and 95-34-30 West Longitude. *See* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION *infra* . DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 26, 2007, and reply comments on or before December 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the designated petitioner and her counsel as follows: Katherine Pyeatt, 3500 Maple Avenue, #1320, Dallas, Texas 75219; and Gene A. Bechtel, Esq., Law Office of Gene Bechtel, 1050 17th Street, NW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau

(202)418-7072. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 07-194, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554,

(800)378-3160, or via the company's Web site, *http://www.bcpiweb.com* . This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). The Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all *ex parte* contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. *See* 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible *ex parte* contacts. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, *see* 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oklahoma, is amended by adding Hugo, Channel 286A. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20732 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4124; MB Docket No. 07-182; RM-11393] Radio Broadcasting Services; Antlers, Oklahoma AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rulemaking filed by Katherine Pyeatt, requesting the allotment of Channel 284A at Antlers, Oklahoma. The reference coordinates for Channel 284A at Antlers, Oklahoma, are 34-21-00 NL and 95-38-00 WL. There is a site restriction 13.2 kilometers (8.2 miles) north of the community. DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 26, 2007, and reply comments on or before December 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner as follows: Katherine Pyeatt, 3500 Maple Avenue #1320, Dallas, Texas 75219. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 07-182, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractors, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or via e-mail *http://www.BCPIWEB.com* . This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all *ex parte* contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible *ex parte* contacts. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oklahoma, is amended by adding Antlers, Channel 284A. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20735 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4125; MB Docket No. 06-43; RM-11313; MB Docket No. 06-66; RM-11321] Radio Broadcasting Services; Normangee and Oakwood, TX AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule; dismissal. SUMMARY: The Audio Division dismisses the Petitions for Rule Making filed by Charles Crawford, requesting the allotments of Channel 300A at Oakwood, Texas, as its first local service and Channel 299A at Normangee, Texas, as its first local service in compliance with Section 1.420(j) of the Commission's Rules. It is the Commission's policy to refrain from making a new allotment to a community absent an expression of interest. The *Report and Order* also dismissed a counterproposal filed by Linda Crawford in MB Docket No. 06-43 in accordance with Section 1.420(j) of the Rules. Additionally, a counterproposal filed by Roy Henderson in MB Docket No. 06-66 was dismissed. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's *Report and Order* , MB Docket No. 06-43 and 06-66, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. In MB Docket No. 06-43, the *Notice of Proposed Rule Making* proposed the allotment of Channel 300A at Oakwood, Texas. *See* 70 FR 136328, published March 15, 2006. In MB Docket No. 06-66, the *Notice of Proposed Rule Making* proposed the allotment of Channel 299A at Normangee, Texas. *See* 70 FR 20059, published April 19, 2006. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC's Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20054, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. (The Commission, is, therefore, not required to submit a copy of this Report and Order to GAO, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, *see* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the proposed rules were dismissed.) Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20741 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4123; MB Docket No. 07-211; RM-11400] Radio Broadcasting Services; Harper, TX AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document sets forth a proposal to amend the FM Table of Allotments, section 73.202(b) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 73.202(b). The Commission requests comment on a petition filed by Katherine Pyeatt. Petitioner proposes the allotment of Channel 256C3 at Harper, Texas, as a first local service. Channel 256C3 can be allotted at Harper in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a site restriction of 12.9 km (8.0 miles) east of Harper. The proposed coordinates for Channel 256C3 at Harper are 30-16-20 North Latitude and 99-07-25 West Longitude. Concurrence by the Government of Mexico is required for the allotment of Channel 256C3 at Harper, Texas, because the proposed allotment is located within 320 kilometers (199 miles) of the U.S.-Mexican border. *See* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION *infra.* DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 26, 2007, and reply comments on or before December 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the designated petitioner and her counsel as follows: Katherine Pyeatt, 3500 Maple Avenue, #1320, Dallas, Texas 75219; and Gene A. Bechtel, Esq., Law Office of Gene Bechtel, 1050 17th Street, NW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau

(202)418-7072. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 07-211, adopted October 3, 2007, and released October 5, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC, 20554,

(800)378-3160, or via the company's Web site, *http://www.bcpiweb.com.* This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(C)(4). The Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all *ex parte* contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. *See* 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible *ex parte* contacts. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, *see* 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Texas, is amended by adding Harper, Channel 256C3. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20754 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-4126; MB Docket No. 07-183; RM-11394] Radio Broadcasting Services; Cotulla and Dilley, TX AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rulemaking filed by Katherine Pyeatt, requesting the allotment of Channel 291A at Dilley, Texas. The reference coordinates for Channel 291A at Dilley, Texas, are 28-36-06 NL and 99-06-21 WL. There is a site restriction, 9.6 kilometers (6 miles) southeast of the community. To accommodate this proposed allotment, Petitioner requests the relocation of reference coordinates for vacant Channel 289A at Cotulla, Texas. The proposed reference coordinates for Channel 289A at Cotulla are 28-22-00 NL and 99-17-00 WL. This site is located 9.1 kilometers (5.7 miles) southwest of Cotulla. DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 26, 2007, and reply comments on or before December 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner as follows: Katherine Pyeatt, 3500 Maple Avenue #1320, Dallas, Texas 75219. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 07-183, adopted November 26, 2007, and released December 11, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractors, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or via e-mail *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all *ex parte* contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible ex parte contacts. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Texas, is amended by adding Channel 291A at Dilley. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-20766 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P 72 203 Monday, October 22, 2007 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Notice of Meeting; Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, (Title VIII, Pub. L. 108-447) AGENCY: Pacific Southwest Region, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The Pacific Southwest Recreation Resource Advisory Committee (Recreation RAC) will hold its first meeting in Sacramento, California. The purpose of this initial meeting is to receive an orientation of the Recreation Enhancement Act, RRAC roles and responsibilities and to develop the process for making recommendations concerning recreation fee proposals on lands managed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management in California. DATES: The meeting will be held November 5, 2007 from 10 a.m.-5 p.m. and November 6, 2007 from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be in the Ambassador Room, Vagabond Inn Executive, 2030 Arden Way, Sacramento, CA 95825. Send written comments to Marlene Finley, Designated Federal Official for the Pacific Southwest Region Recreation RAC, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, CA 94592, 707-562-8856 or *mfinley@fs.fed.us.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Finley, Designated Federal Official, Pacific Southwest Region Recreation RAC, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, CA 94592. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management staff and Committee members. However, persons who wish to bring recreation fee matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. A public input session will be provided during the meeting and individuals who wish to address the Recreation RAC will have an opportunity at 10 a.m. on November 6. Comments will be limited to three minutes per person. The Recreation RAC is authorized by the Federal Land Recreation Enhancement Act, which was signed into law by President Bush in December 2004. Dated: October 15, 2007. Marlene Finley, Designated Federal Official, Recreation RAC, Pacific Southwest Region. [FR Doc. E7-20693 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Ravalli County Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of Meeting. SUMMARY: The Ravalli County Resource Advisory Committee will be meeting to choose monitors for the projects that were awarded and a presentation on Education Weed Trunks. The meeting is being held pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393). The meeting is open to the public. DATES: The meeting will be held on October 23, 2007, 6:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Bitterroot National Forest Supervisor Office, 1801 N. 1st Street, Hamilton, Montana. Send written comments to Dan Ritter, District Ranger, Stevensville Ranger District, 88 Main Street, Stevensville, MT 59870, by facsimile

(406)777-7423, or electronically to *dritter@fs.fed.us.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Ritter, Stevensville District Ranger and Designated Federal Officer, Phone:

(406)777-5461. Dated: October 10, 2007. Barry Paulson, Acting Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 07-5109 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 39

Traces to 39 documents

CFR