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

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-11-28 · Unknown

Unknown. Final rule

30,905 words·~140 min read·/register/2007/11/28/07-5872

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

--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2007-11-28.xml --- 72 228 Wednesday, November 28, 2007 Contents Actuaries Actuaries, Joint Board for Enrollment See Joint Board for Enrollment of Actuaries Agricultural Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES Grade standards: Livestock and meat marketing claims, naturally raised claim for livestock and meat and meat products derived from such livestock, 67266-67268 E7-23103 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Agricultural Marketing Service See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service See Forest Service Air Force Air Force Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67289-67290 07-5865 Environmental statements; notice of intent:
Utah Test and Training Range military operations area, 67290 E7-23137 Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RULES Exportation and importation of animals and animal products: Classical swine fever; disease status change— Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, 67227-67233 E7-23126 Army Army Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67290 07-5862 Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Organization, functions, and authority delegations:
Office of Mine Safety and Health, 67308 07-5866 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Privacy Act; computer matching programs, 67309-67310 E7-23139 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.: Kahului Bay and Kahului Harbor, Maui, HI, 67251-67256 07-5872 Commerce Commerce Department See International Trade Administration See Minority Business Development Agency See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Patent and Trademark Office Defense Defense Department See Air Force Department See Army Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67288-67289 07-5863 07-5864 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Pesticides; tolerances in food, animal feeds, and raw agricultural commodities:
Acetamiprid, 67256-67262 E7-23055 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67294-67295 E7-23114 Meetings: Scientific Counselors Board, 67295-67296 E7-23136 Pesticide, food, and feed additive petitions: Edwards-Councilor Co., 67299-67300 E7-23056 Quarternary ammonium compounds, 67300-67302 E7-23054 Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.: Chlormequat chloride, 67296-67298 E7-23053 Mefluidide, 67298-67299 E7-23094 Pesticides; emergency exemptions, etc.:
Agency decisions and State and Federal agency crisis declarations, 67302-67303 E7-23092 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Clean Water Act jurisdiction after Rapanos cases; Engineer Corps guidance, 67304 07-5867 Export Export-Import Bank NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee; correction, 67304 07-5854 FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness directives: Boeing, 67236-67239 E7-22854 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), 67247-67249 E7-22635 General Electric Co., 67240-67242 E7-22922 Hawker Beechcraft, 67239-67240 E7-22545 Rolls-Royce Corp., 67242-67245 E7-22810 Societe de Motorisations Aeronautiques, 67245-67247 E7-22812 Standard instrument approach procedures, 67249-67251 E7-23077 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness directives:
Boeing, 67263-67264 E7-23117 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67336-67337 07-5849 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Sitka Rocky Gutierrez Airport, AK, 67337 07-5850 FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Practice and procedure: Technical amendments, 67233-67236 E7-22969 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Natural gas pipeline rate and refund report filings, 67293 E7-23124 Off-the record communications, 67294 E7-23071 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Citizens Electric Co. of Lewisburg, PA, et al., 67290-67291 E7-23069 Ozark Gas Transmission, LLC, 67291 E7-23072 Southern Company Services, Inc., 67291-67292 E7-23066 E7-23067 Wisconsin Electric Power Co., 67292 E7-23068 Yuma Power LLC, 67292-67293 E7-23070 Federal Mine Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 67321 07-5880 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67337-67339 E7-23078 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Commercial Motor Vehicle Operator Safety Training Program, 67339-67340 E7-23108 Motor carrier safety standards: Driver qualifications; vision requirement exemptions, E7-23105 67340-67346 E7-23106 E7-23107 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Endangered and threatened species:
Critical habitat designations— Hawaiian picture-wing flies, 67428-67522 07-5706 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67313-67316 E7-23132 E7-23133 E7-23134 Food Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES Human drugs: Sunscreen drug products for over-the-counter human use; proposed amendment of final monograph, 67264-67265 07-5853 NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Foodborne listeria monocytogenes in soft-ripened cheese; public health impact; risk assessment; scientific data and information request, 67310-67311 E7-23104 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent:
Clearwater National Forest, ID; travel management plan, 67268-67270 07-5861 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Federal Medical Assistance Percentages and Enhanced Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FY 2009), 67304-67306 07-5847 Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Program Support Center, 67306-67308 07-5846 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See Transportation Security Administration Housing Housing and Urban Development Department RULES Mortgage and loan insurance programs:
Hospital Mortgage Insurance Program, 67524-67560 E7-22406 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67312-67313 E7-23116 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Land Management Bureau See National Indian Gaming Commission International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping: Brake rotors from— China, 67270-67271 E7-23143 Glycine from— Japan, 67271-67274 E7-23127 Korea, 67275-67276 E7-23144 Countervailing duties:
In-shell roasted pistachios from— Iran, 67276-67277 E7-23142 Joint Joint Board for Enrollment of Actuaries NOTICES Meetings: Actuarial Examinations Advisory Committee, 67266 E7-23102 Justice Justice Department NOTICES Pollution control; consent judgments: Aspen Petroleun Products, Inc., et al., 67319 07-5868 Shaw, Edward, et al., 67319 07-5870 Wilhelm Enterprises Corp., et al., 67319-67320 07-5869 Labor Labor Department See Occupational Safety and Health Administration Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.:
Nevada, 67316-67318 E7-23121 E7-23140 Survey plat filings: Wyoming, 67318-67319 E7-23138 Legal Legal Services Corporation NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Civil legal services to low-income clients; various States, E7-23009 67320-67321 E7-23011 Mine Mine Safety and Health Federal Review Commission See Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Minority Minority Business Development Agency NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:
Minority Business Enterprise Center Program, 67277-67282 E7-23129 Native American Business Enterprise Center Program, 67282-67287 E7-23128 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67346-67347 E7-23109 National Indian National Indian Gaming Commission RULES Classification standards: Class II gaming; bingo, lotto, etc., played through electronic medium; comment period extension, 67251 E7-23084 Management contract provisions:
Class II gaming; minimum internal control standards; comment period extension, 67251 E7-23083 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Meetings: Alaska; fisheries of Exclusive Economic Zone— Groundfish observer program; workshop, 67287-67288 E7-23141 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Research Performance Progress Report; standardized format; comment request; correction, 67349 C7-5601 National Transportation National Transportation Safety Board NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 67321 07-5871 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Carolina Power & Light Co., 67321-67323 E7-23130 Florida Power & Light Co., 67323-67325 E7-23131 Occupational Occupational Safety and Health Administration PROPOSED RULES Construction safety and health standards: Confined spaces; exposure hazards, 67352-67425 E7-21893 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67288 E7-23115 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67325-67326 E7-23111 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes:
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 67326-67328 E7-23113 NYSE Arca, Inc., 67328-67332 E7-23112 Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc, 67332-67335 E7-23122 E7-23123 State State Department NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Enbridge Pipelines (Southern Lights) LLC, 67335-67336 E7-23135 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Transportation Transportation Security Administration NOTICES Maritime and land transportation security:
Transportation Worker Identification Credential; enrollment— Mobile, AL; Brunswick, GA; Milwaukee, WI; and Philadelphia, PA, 67312 E7-23125 Veterans Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E7-23099 67347-67348 E7-23100 E7-23101 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Labor Department, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 67352-67425 E7-21893 Part III Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 67428-67522 07-5706 Part IV Housing and Urban Development Department, 67524-67560 E7-22406 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 72 228 Wednesday, November 28, 2007 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 9 CFR Parts 92, 93, 94, and 98 [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0106] RIN 0579-AC33 Importation of Live Swine, Swine Semen, Pork, and Pork Products From the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland AGENCY:
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations governing the importation of animals and animal products to add the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the region of the European Union that we recognize as low risk for classical swine fever (CSF). We are also adding the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the list of regions we consider free from swine vesicular disease
(SVD)and adding Latvia and Lithuania to the list of regions considered free from foot-and-mouth disease
(FMD)and rinderpest. These actions will relieve some restrictions on the importation into the United States of certain animals and animal products from those regions, while continuing to protect against the introduction of CSF, SVD, and FMD, and rinderpest into the United States. DATES: *Effective Date:* December 13, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Kelly Rhodes, Regionalization and Evaluation Services, Import, Sanitary Trade Issues Team, National Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;
(301)734-4356. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA)regulates the importation of animals and animal products into the United States to guard against the introduction of animal diseases not currently present or prevalent in this country. The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the regulations) prohibit or restrict the importation of specified animals and animal products to prevent the introduction into the United States of various animal diseases, including classical swine fever (CSF), swine vesicular disease (SVD), foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), and rinderpest. These are dangerous and destructive communicable diseases of swine and/or ruminants. Sections 94.9 and 94.10 of the regulations list regions of the world that are declared free of or low-risk for CSF. The EU-15 1 is currently the only region considered low-risk for CSF; §§ 94.24 and 98.38 specify restrictions necessary to mitigate the risk of introducing CSF into the United States via pork, pork products, live swine, and swine semen from the EU-15. 1 A region consisting of the 15 Member States of the European Union
(EU)that comprised the EU as of April 30, 2004 (the EU-15), that we recognized as a single region of low-risk for CSF in a final rule published in the **Federal Register** on May 19, 2006 (71 FR 29061-29072, Docket No. 02-046-2). Section 94.12 of the regulations lists regions that are declared free of SVD. Section 94.13 of the regulations lists regions that have been determined to be free of SVD, but that are subject to certain restrictions because of their proximity to or trading relationships with SVD-affected regions. Section 94.1 of the regulations lists regions of the world that are declared free of rinderpest or free of both rinderpest and FMD. Section 94.11 of the regulations lists regions that have been determined to be free of rinderpest and FMD, but that are subject to certain restrictions because of their proximity to or trading relationships with rinderpest-or FMD-affected regions. On February 12, 2007, we published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 6490-6499, Docket No. APHIS 2006-0106) a proposal 2 to amend the regulations governing the importation of animals and animal products to add the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the region of the EU that we recognize as low-risk for CSF. In addition, we proposed to add the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the list of regions we consider free from SVD and to add Latvia and Lithuania to the list of regions considered free from FMD and rinderpest. We also proposed to make other miscellaneous changes to the regulations. These actions were intended to relieve some restrictions on the importation into the United States of certain animals and animal products from those regions, while continuing to protect against the introduction of CSF, SVD, FMD, and rinderpest into the United States. 2 To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go to *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2006-0106* . We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending April 13, 2007. We received six comments by that date. They were from private citizens, a State animal health commission, industry groups, and Poland's Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Three of the commenters expressed support for the proposal; however, one of those commenters stated that APHIS should recognize all current and future EU Member States as low-risk for CSF and other animal diseases. While we recognize that countries have to meet certain animal health criteria to qualify for EU membership, we continue to believe it is appropriate and reasonable for us to first prepare a risk assessment and share it with the public before we recognize such countries as being of low risk for an animal disease. One commenter expressed concern that, because CSF is present in the Czech Republic in wild boar, and surveillance for the disease is passive, swine imported into the United States from the Czech Republic present more than a negligible risk of introducing CSF. As stated in the risk assessment, studies show that virus levels in wild boar in the Czech Republic are very low and declining. There have been no CSF outbreaks in domestic swine in the Czech Republic since 1997, which also indicates that the introduction of CSF from the wild boar population into the domestic swine population is a diminishing concern. In addition, the Czech Republic annually carries out both passive and active surveillance for CSF in wild boar and domestic swine populations. Another commenter stated that although we proposed to list Latvia and Lithuania as free of FMD and rinderpest, we would subject imports of ruminant and swine meat products from those countries to additional restrictions, which indicates a risk exists of introducing FMD and rinderpest into the United States. The commenter stated that the risk analyses concluded that FMD and rinderpest could be introduced into Latvia and Lithuania through wildlife, clothing, or vehicles moving across the border from neighboring countries and then subsequently exported to the United States via ruminant or swine meat products. As noted by the commenter, we proposed to apply certain conditions on the importation of meat and other animal products derived from ruminants and swine from Latvia and Lithuania into the United States, due to the risk of introducing FMD into these countries from neighboring countries. The conditions, as detailed in the proposed rule, require that all meat and other animal products from ruminants or swine be certified as having been prepared in a slaughtering establishment that is approved by the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service to export to the United States, and that all live animals slaughtered in an approved slaughtering establishment be born and raised in a region that APHIS considers free of FMD and rinderpest. In addition, commingling of live animals, meat, or other animal products for export with such commodities from regions that APHIS does not consider free of these diseases is prohibited. These conditions already apply to other countries, including other EU Member States, with risk profiles for FMD and rinderpest that are similar to those of Latvia and Lithuania. We have determined that these conditions will mitigate the risk of introducing FMD and rinderpest into the United States from these countries. One commenter also stated that, because some forms of SVD, CSF, and FMD are difficult to detect in live animals or in post-mortem examinations, veterinary inspection is ineffective in some instances. We agree with the commenter that veterinary inspection is unlikely to detect incubating or subclinical infection. Therefore, we do not consider veterinary inspection to be the primary mitigating factor in preventing introduction of CSF, SVD, and FMD into EU Member States. However, veterinary inspection is highly likely to detect clinically diseased animals and, in conjunction with other mitigation measures, creates a substantial barrier to the introduction of FMD, CSF, or SVD into EU Member States. Finally, one commenter expressed concern that, due to the less stringent sourcing requirements for swine and pork imports into the EU, infected animals could potentially come in contact with animals designated for export to the United States or could potentially be exported to the United States themselves. While we agree with the commenter that the European Commission
(EC)legislation imposes less stringent restrictions on sourcing of imported live ruminants and swine, as well as ruminant and swine products, than do APHIS requirements, the potential for the introduction of CSF, SVD, or FMD into EU Member States is mitigated by several factors put in place by the EC. These include, but are not limited to, stringent audits of animal health conditions and slaughter/processing establishments in the exporting region; comprehensive import certification requirements (including certification that the exporting region is free of CSF, SVD, and FMD); veterinary inspection at the point of entry; and isolation and veterinary spot checks at the point of destination within the EU. Miscellaneous We also proposed to revise the definition of *European Union* in § 92.1 to update its list of EU Member States. Our proposed definition listed 25 Member States of the EU. This was incorrect, as there are actually 27 Member States of the EU. Therefore, we have updated the definition of *European Union* to add Romania and Bulgaria to the list of EU Member States. Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with the change discussed in this document. Effective Date This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . This rule adds the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the region of the EU that we recognize as low-risk for CSF. This rule also adds the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the list of regions we consider free from SVD and to add Latvia and Lithuania to the list of regions considered free from FMD and rinderpest and allows breeding swine, swine semen, and pork and pork products to be imported into the United States from these countries subject to certain conditions. We have determined that approximately 2 weeks are needed to ensure that APHIS and Department of Homeland Security, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, personnel at ports of entry receive official notice of this change in the regulations. Therefore, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule should be effective 15 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. We are amending the regulations governing the importation of animals and animal products to add the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the region of the European Union that we recognize as low-risk for CSF. We are also adding the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the list of regions we consider free from SVD and adding Latvia and Lithuania to the list of regions considered free from FMD and rinderpest. The U.S. Swine Industry The U.S. swine industry plays an important role in the U.S. economy. Cash receipts from marketing meat animals were about $15 billion in 2005 (the average between 2001 and 2005 was $12.4 billion). 3 Additionally, swine and related product exports generated over $2.1 billion in sales that year. Other agricultural and nonagricultural sectors are dependent on the swine industry for their economic activity. At present, international trade in U.S. livestock proceeds without CSF or SVD related restrictions. Maintaining such favorable conditions depends in part on continued aggressive efforts to prevent transmission of foreign diseases to U.S. swine. 3 USDA/NASS, Meat Animal Production, Disposition, and Income: 2005 Summary, April 2006. As shown in table 1, U.S. pork production increased from 7,764,000 metric tons
(MT)in 1996 to 9,392,000 MT in 2005, an annual growth rate of about 2.1 percent. Similarly, consumption increased from 7,619 MT to 8,671 MT. During the same period, U.S. exports increased from 440,000 MT to 1,207,000 MT, by far outpacing imports. Net exports increased from 159,000 MT to 743,000 MT. Table 1.—U.S. Pork Production, Consumption, Price, Exports, and Imports, 1996-2005 Year Production (1,000 MT) Consumption (1,000 MT) Price per MT Exports (1,000 MT) Imports (1,000 MT) Net exports (1,000 MT) 1996 7,764 7,619 1,596 440 281 159 1997 7,835 7,631 1,562 473 288 185 1998 8,623 8,305 1,170 558 320 238 1999 8,758 8,594 1,178 582 375 207 2000 8,596 8,455 1,413 584 438 146 2001 8,691 8,389 1,473 707 431 276 2002 8,929 8,685 1,179 731 486 245 2003 9,056 8,816 1,298 779 538 241 2004 9,312 8,817 1,621 989 499 490 2005 9,392 8,671 1,562 1,207 464 743 5-year average (2001-2005) 9,076 8,676 1,427 883 484 399 1 Sources: USDA/FAS, PS&D Online, 1996-2005, *http://www.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/psdquery.aspx* ; prices, reported as $/100 pounds for yearly pork carcass cut-out values, are converted to dollars per metric ton, and are taken from Red Meat Yearbook (94006), *http://usda.manlib.cornell.edu/ers/94006/wholesaleprices.xls* ; net exports are calculated as the difference between exports and imports for each year. The Swine Industry in the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland The four countries (the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland) together produced an average of 2.522 million MT of pig meat between 2001 and 2005. They are net importers of pork, which is the focus of this analysis. They had a 5-year (2001-2005) average level of pork exports of 130,030 MT and an average level of imports of 152,954 MT, yielding an average net export of a negative 22,823 MT. The Czech Republic and Poland accounted for 95 percent of production and export of the above total. Potential Costs of Classical Swine Fever, Swine Vesicular Disease, and Foot and Mouth Disease CSF, also known as hog cholera or swine plague, is a highly contagious and often fatal disease of pigs. Young animals are more severely affected than older animals. Mortality rates may reach up to 90 percent among young pigs. SVD is less severe and does not usually cause death. The overall cost of control and eradication depends on the mitigation methods used to control and eradicate the two diseases. Potential costs include disease control measures such as imposing quarantine measures and movement controls, indemnity payments, vaccination costs, surveillance, and laboratory testing. CSF was eradicated from the United States in 1976 at a cost of about $550 million in 2006 dollars. Several EU countries experienced small- and large-scale CSF outbreaks between 1990 and 1997 and suffered heavy economic losses. One large outbreak cost producers $917.6 million, the national governments $296.9 million, and the EU $1,040.6 million in 2006 dollars. The cost of a small-scale outbreak was $14 million, and the cost of the medium-scale outbreak was $268.8 million. 4 The above costs are direct costs of disease outbreaks and do not include indirect costs such as losses caused by trade restrictions. Little information exists on the cost of control and eradication of SVD in a previously free region. 4 Saatkamp, H.W., P.B.M. Berentsen *et al.* “Economic aspects of the control of classical swine fever outbreaks in the European Union,” Vet Microbiology 73 (2000): 221-237; Stegeman, A., A. Elbers *et al.,* “The 1997-98 epidemic of classical swine fever in the Netherlands,” Vet Microbiology, 73 (2000): 183-196. FMD is a contagious viral disease that affects cloven-hoofed animals. Cattle, pigs, sheep and goats are highly susceptible to FMD. Although the death rates are low, it has serious lasting negative effects on infected animals that survive the disease. It causes decreased milk production, decreased pregnancy rates, weight loss, and lameness. In addition to these losses, an FMD outbreak can lead to economic sanctions, including the loss of export markets. Any outbreak of FMD in the United States could result in a loss of billions of dollars for agriculture and related industries as indicated by the most recent FMD outbreak in the United Kingdom (UK). According to the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), over 6 million cattle, sheep, swine, and goats were slaughtered to stop the spread of the disease and the epidemic is estimated to have cost the UK economy about $12.9 billion. 5 5 D. Thompson, P. Muriel, D. Russell, P. Osborne, A. Bromley, M. Rowland, S. Creigh-Tyte, and C. Brown, “Economic losses of foot and mouth disease outbreak in the U.K,” Rev. sci. tech. int. epiz., 21 (2002): 675-687. Impact of Potential Pork Imports In this section, we estimate the impact of pork imports from the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland on U.S. production, consumption, and prices using a net trade welfare model. 6 The baseline data used are as shown in the last row of table 1. The demand and supply elasticities used are −0.86 and 1, respectively. 7 6 The data used were obtained from Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), Production, Supply and Distribution database ( *http://www.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/psdquery.aspx* ; USDA/ERS, Red Meat Yearbook (94006) ( *http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/ers//wholesaleprices.xls* ); The Global Trade Atlas: Global Trade Information Services, Inc., country Edition, June 2006; and UN/FAO, FAO stat data ( *http://faostat.fao.org* ). 7 John Sullivan, John Wainio, Vernon Roningen, A Database for Trade Liberalization Studies, #AGES89-12, March 1989. Based on the four countries' combined average annual global exports of 130,130 MT (2001-2005), we model three potential levels of pork exports to the United States from the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland:
(1)An amount proportional to the percentage of the EU-15's pork exports sent to the United States (1.87 percent);
(2)an amount proportional to the percentage of Denmark's 8 pork exports sent to the United States (3.99 percent); and
(3)an amount equal to 10 percent of the global pork exports by the four countries. Amounts of pork shipped to the United States under the three scenarios would be 2,433 MT, 5,192 MT, and 13,013 MT. 8 Exports from Denmark to the United States are used as an upper range estimate of possible exports from these countries. Denmark's pork industry is export oriented, and it is the second largest supplier of pork products to the United States, after Canada. Using the proportion of its global pork exports that are shipped to the United States as an estimate of possible imports from the four countries likely overstates potential shipments to the United States from these countries. Table 2.—The Impact of Pork Imports From the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland on the United States Economy Import scenario 1 Import scenario 2 Import scenario 3 Assumed pork imports, MT 1 2,433 2 5,192 3 13,013 Change in U.S. consumption, MT 1,160 2,475 6,202 Change in U.S. production, MT −1,273 −2,717 −6,811 Change in wholesale price of pork, dollars per MT −$0.22 −$0.47 −$1.19 Change in consumer welfare $1,924,230 $4,106,610 $10,294,830 Change in producer welfare −$1,817,020 −$3,877,160 −$9,715,120 Annual net benefit $107,210 $229,450 $579,710 Note: Welfare and benefit are used interchangeably. The baseline data used is a 5-year annual average for production, consumption, price, exports and imports as reported in the last row of table 1. The demand and supply elasticities used are -0.86 and 1, respectively (John Sullivan, John Wainio, Vernon Roningen, A Database for Trade Liberalization Studies, #AGES89-12, March 1989). 1 Calculated by multiplying the total global exports of the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, 130,130 MT, by the proportion (1.87 percent) of EU-15's global export sent to the U.S. EU-15 countries including Denmark exported 50,742 MT to United States from their global exports of 2,719,698 MT. 2 Calculated by multiplying total global exports of the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland by the proportion (3.99 percent) of Denmark exports sent to the United States, 43,037 MT out of 1,077,986 MT. 3 Calculated by multiplying total global exports of the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland by 10 percent. Table 2 presents the changes resulting from the assumed U.S. pork imports from the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. These include annual changes in U.S. consumption, production, wholesale price, consumer welfare, producer welfare, and net welfare. Our medium level of pork imports of 5,192 MT (import scenario 2, assuming pork imports proportional to those received from Denmark) would result in a decline of $0.47 per metric ton in the wholesale price of pork and a fall in U.S. production of 2,717 MT. Consumption would increase by 2,475 MT. Producer welfare would decline by $3.9 million and consumer welfare would increase by $4.1 million, yielding an annual net benefit of about $230,000. Import scenario 1 presents impacts assuming a more likely level of pork imports (proportional to those received from the EU-15). In this case, price would decrease by $0.22 per metric ton, production would decline by 1,273 MT, and consumption would increase by 1,160 MT. Consumer welfare would increase by $1.9 million and producer welfare would decline by $1.8 million. The annual net benefit would be about $107,000. Finally, import scenario 3 presents a case of expanded trade, with pork imports by the United States assumed to equal 10 percent of global exports by the four countries. The wholesale price of pork would decline by $1.19 per metric ton, production would decline by 6,811 MT, and consumption would increase by 6,202 MT. Consumer welfare would increase by $10.3 million, while producer welfare would decline by $9.7 million. The annual net benefit would be about $580,000. In all cases consumer welfare gains would outweigh producer welfare losses. The decline in producer welfare, even in the last scenario, would represent less than one tenth of 1 percent of cash receipts received from the sale of domestic hogs and pork products. 9 Thus, our analysis indicates that U.S. entities are unlikely to be significantly affected by this rule. 9 $9.7 million divided by $12.4 billion equals 0.08 percent. The Small Business Administration
(SBA)has established guidelines for determining which types of firms are to be considered small under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This rule could affect importers of live animals or animal products and swine operations with sales. Meat processing entities (NAICS 311612) and meat and meat product merchant wholesalers (NAICS 424470) may be affected by this rule. Under SBA standards, meat processing establishments with no more than 500 employees and meat and meat product wholesalers with no more than 100 employees are considered small. In 2002, there were 1,335 companies in the United States that processed and sold meat. More than 97 percent of these establishments are considered to be small entities and had average sales of $15.4 million, while large meat processors had average sales of $188 million. In 2002, there were 2,535 meat and meat product wholesalers in the United States. Of these establishments, 2,456 (97 percent) employed not more than 100 employees and are, thus, considered small by SBA standards. Small wholesalers had average sales of $9.3 million, while large entities had average sales of $131 million. 10 10 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census: Manufacturing—Industries Series, Wholesale Trade—Subject Series and Transportation and Warehousing—Subject Series, issued August 2006; and SBA, Small Business Size Standards matched to North American Industry Classification System 2002, effective July 2006. Other entities that could theoretically be affected include refrigerated long-distance trucking firms (NAICS 484230), freight forwarders (NAICS 488510), and deep sea freight transport companies (NAICS 483111). The SBA classifies trucking firms as small if their annual receipts are not more than $23.5 million; freight forwarding firms are small if their annual receipts are not more than $6.5 million, and deep sea freight transport firms are small if they have not more than 500 workers. According to the 2002 Economic Census, there were 3,429 trucking firms, 3,827 freight forwarders, and 195 deep sea freight transport companies. Over 99 percent of trucking firms, 96 percent freight forwarders, and 97 percent of deep sea freight transport firms are considered to be small. Thus, predominant numbers of meat processors, wholesale traders, and transport firms that could be affected by the rule are considered to be small by SBA standards. Average sales of even the smallest packers and wholesalers are large compared to the amount of pork expected to be imported from the four countries. U.S. swine and pork producers (NAICS 112210) might be potentially affected by this rule. According to the 2002 Census of Agriculture, there were 82,028 hog and pig operations with sales of 184,997,686 hogs and pigs valued at $12.4 billion. These facilities are considered to be small if their annual receipts are not more than $750,000. Over 83 percent of these operations (or 68,083) are considered to be small and had sales of fewer than 2,000 hogs and pigs. Small operations had a total inventory of 16,297,158 (8.81 percent) with an average inventory of 237 hogs, while large operations (or 13,945) had sales of 168,700,528 (91.19 percent) with an average inventory of 12,714 hogs. Based on inventory share, small operations had annual sales of $1.3 billion and an average income of about $19,400, while large operations had sales of $11 billion with an average income of about $834,000. As shown in table 3, the impact of potential pork imports on U.S. producers as a result of this rule would be small. The decrease in producer welfare per small entity is less than $133 or about 0.6 percent of average annual sales of small entities when we assume that 10 percent of combined global pork exports by the four countries would be sent to the United States. Table 3.—The Economic Impact of Potential Pork Imports From the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland on U.S. Small Entities, Assuming 10 Percent of Combined Global Pork Exports by the Four Countries Are Sent to the United States, 2005 Dollars Total decline in producer welfare 1 $9,715,120 Decrease in welfare incurred by small entities 2 $855,902 Average decrease per head of inventory, small entities 3 $0.05 Average decrease per small entity 4 $124 Average decrease as percentage of average sales, small entities 5 0.6% 1 From table 2. The change in producer welfare is negative indicating a decline. 2 Change in producer welfare multiplied by 8.81 percent from the above text. We assume that the change in producer welfare would be proportional to inventory share. 3 Decrease in producer welfare for small entities divided by 16,297,158 (see text above). 4 Average decrease per head of inventory multiplied by 237 (see text above). 5 Average decrease per small entity divided by $19,400 (see text above). Because quantities of swine, swine semen, ruminants, and ruminant products imported from these countries, if such imports were to occur, are likely to be very small, effects of the rule with respect to these commodities are not included in the analysis. The amounts of pork shipped to the United States under the three scenarios discussed above would be 2,433 MT, 5,192 MT, and 13,013 MT. Even when the largest import quantity is assumed, the welfare effect for U.S. small-entity producers would be equivalent to less than 1 percent of their average revenue. Predominant numbers of producers, meat processors, and wholesale traders are considered to be small entities. Other small entities that could theoretically be affected by the rule include refrigerated long-distance trucking firms, freight forwarders, and deep sea freight transport companies. In all cases, any effects of this rule for these types of businesses are expected to be very minor. Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Executive Order 12988 This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule:
(1)Preempts all State and local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this rule;
(2)has no retroactive effect; and
(3)does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. National Environmental Policy Act Environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact have been prepared for each country within this final rule. The environmental assessments provide the basis for the conclusion that the addition of the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland to the list of EU countries considered to be low-risk for CSF and to the list of regions recognized as free of SVD, but that are subject to certain import restrictions, and the addition of Latvia and Lithuania to the list of regions recognized as free of FMD and rinderpest, but that are subject to certain import restrictions, will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Based on the finding of no significant impact, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. The environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact were prepared in accordance with:
(1)The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ),
(2)regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508),
(3)USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and
(4)APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372). The environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site. 11 Copies of the environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact are also available for public inspection at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to inspect copies are requested to call ahead on
(202)690-2817 to facilitate entry into the reading room. In addition, copies may be obtained by writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . 11 Go to *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2006-0106.* The environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact will appear in the resulting list of documents. Paperwork Reduction Act This final rule contains no new information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). List of Subjects 9 CFR Part 92 Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products, Region, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 9 CFR Part 93 Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 9 CFR Part 94 Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Meat and meat products, Milk, Poultry and poultry products, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 9 CFR Part 98 Animal diseases, Imports. Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR parts 92, 93, 94, and 98 as follows: PART 92—IMPORTATION OF ANIMALS AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS: PROCEDURES FOR REQUESTING RECOGNITION OF REGIONS 1. The authority citation for part 92 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 2. In § 92.1, the definition of *European Union* is revised to read as follows: § 92.1 Definitions. *European Union.* The organization of Member States consisting of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man, and Northern Ireland). PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND POULTRY, AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND POULTRY PRODUCTS; REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING CONTAINERS 3. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 4. In § 93.500, the definition of *European Union-15 (EU-15)* is removed and a definition of *APHIS-defined EU CSF region* is added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows: § 93.500 Definitions. *APHIS-defined EU CSF region.* The European Union Member States of Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man, and Northern Ireland). § 93.505 [Amended] 5. In § 93.505, paragraph (a), the words “region consisting of the EU-15 for the purposes of classical swine fever” are removed and the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” are added in their place, and the note at the end of the paragraph is removed. PART 94—RINDERPEST, FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE, FOWL PEST (FOWL PLAGUE), EXOTIC NEWCASTLE DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, CLASSICAL SWINE FEVER, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY: PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS 6. The authority citation for part 94 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, 7781-7786, and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 7. In § 94.0, the definition of *European Union-15 (EU-15* ) is removed and a definition of *APHIS-defined EU CSF region* is added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows: § 94.0 Definitions. *APHIS-defined EU CSF region.* The European Union Member States of Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man, and Northern Ireland). § 94.1 [Amended] 8. In § 94.1, paragraph (a)(2) is amended by adding the words “Latvia, Lithuania,” immediately after the word “Japan,”. § 94.1a [Removed] 9. Section 94.1a is removed. § 94.9 [Amended] 10. In § 94.9, paragraphs
(b)and (c), the words “EU-15” are removed and the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” added in their place. § 94.10 [Amended] 11. In § 94.10, paragraphs
(b)and (c), the words “EU-15” are removed and the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region “ added in their place. § 94.11 [Amended] 12. In § 94.11, paragraph
(a)is amended by adding the words “Latvia, Lithuania,” immediately after the word “Japan,”. 13. In § 94.12, paragraph
(a)is revised to read as follows: § 94.12 Pork and pork products from regions where swine vesicular disease exists.
(a)Swine vesicular disease is considered to exist in all regions of the world except Australia, Austria, the Bahamas, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Central American countries, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Ireland, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Trust Territories of the Pacific, the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man, and Northern Ireland), Yugoslavia, and the Regions in Italy of Friuli, Liguria, Marche, and Valle d'Aosta. 14. In § 94.13, in the introductory text of the section, the first sentence is revised to read as follows: § 94.13 Restrictions on importation of pork or pork products from specified regions. Austria, the Bahamas, Belgium, Bulgaria, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man, and Northern Ireland), Yugoslavia, and the Regions in Italy of Friuli, Liguria, Marche, and Valle d'Aosta are declared free of swine vesicular disease in § 94.12(a) of this part. * * * § 94.24 [Amended] 15. Section 94.24 is amended as follows: a. In the section heading, by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. b. In paragraph (a), introductory text, and paragraph (a)(1)(i), by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. c. In paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(1)(iii), by removing the words “the EU-15” and adding the words “the APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place and by removing the words “an EU-15” and adding the word “the” in their place. d. In paragraph (a)(5), by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. e. In paragraph (b), introductory text, and paragraph (b)(2)(i), by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. f. In paragraph (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(2)(iii), by removing the words “the EU-15” and adding the words “the APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place and by removing the words “an EU-15” and adding the word “the” in their place. g. In paragraph (b)(6), by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. PART 98—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN ANIMAL EMBRYOS AND ANIMAL SEMEN 16. The authority citation for part 98 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 17. In § 98.30, the definition of *European Union-15 (EU-15)* is removed and a definition of *APHIS-defined EU CSF region* is added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows: § 98.30 Definitions. *APHIS-defined EU CSF region.* The European Union Member States of Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man, and Northern Ireland). § 98.38 [Amended] 18. Section 98.38 is amended as follows: a. In the section heading, by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. b. In the introductory text of the section, paragraph (a), and paragraph (b)(1), by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. c. In paragraph (b)(2), by removing the words “the EU-15” and adding the words “the APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place and by removing the words “an EU-15” and adding the word “the” in their place. d. In paragraph (b)(3), by removing the words “EU-15 established” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region established” in their place and by removing the words “EU-15” immediately before the word “Member”. e. In paragraph (f), by removing the words “Office International des Epizooties” and the parentheses surrounding the words “World Organization for Animal Health”. f. In paragraph (i), by removing the words “EU-15” and adding the words “APHIS-defined EU CSF region” in their place. Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of November 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7-23126 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Part 308 RIN 3064-AD22 Rules of Practice and Procedure AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(FDIC)is amending its procedural regulations implementing sections 8(g) and 8(b) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. The amendments are generally technical in nature, and are necessary to ensure that the rules are consistent with statutory changes effected by sections 708 and 702 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006. DATES: *Effective Date:* November 28, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brett A. McCallister, Review Examiner, FDIC, 1101 Club Village Drive, Suite 101, Columbia, MO 65203; telephone:
(816)234-8099 x 4223; or electronic mail: *bmccallister@fdic.gov* ; or Richard Bogue, Counsel, FDIC, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429; telephone:
(202)898-3726; facsimile:
(202)898-3658; or electronic mail: *rbogue@fdic.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On October 13, 2006, the President signed into law Public Law 109-351, the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (FSRRA). Section 708 of the FSRRA modified section 8(g) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act), in a number of ways. On August 9, 1991, the FDIC issued a final rule entitled “Rules of Practice and Procedure.” 56 FR 37975, August 9, 1991. This rule contained a Subpart N, entitled “Rules and Procedures Applicable to Proceedings Relating to Suspension, Removal, and Prohibition Where a Felony is Charged,” which included sections 308.161-308.164. Section 708 of FSRRA made various modifications to section 8(g) of the FDI Act to clarify the extent of the suspension, removal and prohibition authority of the Federal banking agencies in cases of certain crimes by institution-affiliated parties (IAPs). Minor modifications were made to the predicate and findings requirements of section 8(g)(1), as well as conforming amendments to sections 8(g)(2) and (3). Significantly, section 8(g)(1) was modified to clarify that the appropriate Federal banking agency may suspend or prohibit individuals who are the subject of criminal proceedings involving certain crimes from participation in the affairs of any depository institution, not only the depository institution with which the IAP is or was associated. In addition, because the previous suspension language of section 8(g) had required findings specific to the depositors of the depository institution or to the depository institution itself, it was unclear whether a covered individual could be suspended if the institution had ceased to exist. This problem was addressed by directing the required findings to “any relevant depository institution,” which is defined in a new subsection
(E)to mean any depository institution of which the party is or was an IAP at the time the information, indictment, complaint, suspension notice or order of prohibition is issued. Since much of the language of section 8(g) is repeated in the FDIC's implementing regulations at Part 308, Subpart N—Rules and Procedures Applicable to Proceedings Relating to Suspension, Removal, and Prohibition Where a Felony is Charged, 12 CFR 308.161-164, numerous conforming amendments of the regulations are required. Finally, a few changes are made in order to standardize references contained in the various sections and to make the hearing procedures easier to understand and to conform with current practice and procedure. Section 702 of FSRRA enacted a new section 50 of the FDI Act, codified at 12 U.S.C. 1831aa, entitled “Enforcement of Agreements.” Subsection
(a)of the new section 50 provides that: “Notwithstanding clause
(i)or
(ii)of section 8(b)(6)(A) or section 38(e)(2)(E)(i), the appropriate Federal banking agency for a depository institution may enforce, under section 8, the terms of—
(1)Any condition imposed in writing by the agency on the depository institution or an institution-affiliated party in connection with any action on any application, notice, or other request concerning the depository institution; or
(2)Any written agreement entered into between the agency and the depository institution or an institution-affiliated party.” On August 9, 1991, the FDIC issued a final rule entitled “Rules of Practice and Procedure.” 56 FR 37975, August 9, 1991. This rule contained a Subpart G, entitled “Rules and Procedures Applicable to Proceedings Relating to Cease-and-Desist Orders” which included section 308.127, entitled “Scope.” Section 308.127(a) described the scope of rules applicable to cease-and-desist proceedings under section 8(b) of the FDI Act. Because the new section 50 modifies the requirements for pursuit of affirmative action under section 8(b)(6), it is appropriate that the procedural regulations respecting pursuit of cease-and-desist actions be amended to reflect the applicability of the new section 50. Accordingly, the final rule modifies the procedural regulations with the addition of a cross-reference to the new section 50. II. The Final Rule The following is a section-by-section discussion of the final rule revisions to the FDIC's regulations. Section 308.161—Scope The proposed rule:
(1)Revises the scope of the prohibition from “the bank” to “any depository institution;” and
(2)revises the description of the predicate offenses and the required findings to reflect statutory changes to section 8(g). The predicate offense description changed from “is charged in any state or federal information, indictment, or complaint, with the commission of or participation in” to “is the subject of any state or federal information, indictment, or complaint, involving the commission of or participation in.” The required findings changed from “if continued service or participation by such party poses a threat to the interests of the bank's depositors or threatens to impair public confidence in the depository institution” to “if continued service or participation by such party posed, poses, or may pose a threat to the interests of the depositors of, or threatened, threatens, or may threaten to impair public confidence in, any relevant depository institution.” Section 308.162—Relevant Considerations The proposed rule:
(1)clarifies that the considerations apply to a notice of suspension or prohibition, or a removal or prohibition order; and
(2)revises the required findings recited in subsection (a)(1)(iii) to reflect the statutory changes to section 8(g). Section 308.163—Notice of Suspension, and Orders of Removal and Prohibition The proposed rule:
(1)Revises the title of the section to read “Notice of suspension or prohibition, and orders of removal or prohibition;”
(2)revises the scope of the prohibition from “the bank” to “any depository institution” in subsections (a)(1) and (b)(1); revises the required findings in subsection (b)(1);
(3)corrects the cross reference in subsection (b)(2) from 308.161(a)(ii) to 308.161(a)(2); and moves subsection (a)(2) respecting the filing and content of requests for hearing to a new subsection
(c)to make clear that there is a right to a hearing regarding both notices of suspension and prohibition and orders of removal and prohibition. Section 308.164—Hearings The proposed rule:
(1)Eliminates confusion by changing references to the party filing the request for hearing from the “applicant” to the “institution-affiliated party;”
(2)eliminates confusion in subsection
(c)caused by the apparent ability of the bank to waive a hearing even if the affected individual were to request a hearing;
(3)in subsections
(d)and
(e)makes it clear that there is a right to a hearing regarding both notices of suspension and prohibition and orders of removal and prohibition. Section 308.127—Scope Subpart G The final rule:
(1)Revises the heading for section 308.127(a) from “ *Cease-and-desist proceedings under section 8 of the FDIA* “Cease-and-desist proceeding under sections 8 and 50 of the FDIA;” and
(2)at the end of section 308.127(a), replaces the period with a comma and adds “and section 50 of the FDIA, 12 U.S.C. 1831aa.” III. Exemption From Public Notice and Comment The revisions to part 308 do not constitute a “rule” for which the FDIC is required to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking under section 553(b) of Title 5 of the United States Code. This is because the final rule contains only clarifications and technical changes intended to bring the agency's rules of practice and procedure into conformity with statutory changes and current agency practices and procedures. Thus, the changes to be implemented will have no adverse effect on the public. In addition, the FSRRA changes to the FDI Act took effect on October 13, 2006. It is, therefore, desirable to implement the necessary technical and conforming regulatory amendments as soon as possible. Thus, the FDIC has determined for good cause that public notice and comment are unnecessary, and that the rule should be published in final form. IV. Paperwork Reduction Act The proposed rule will not create or modify any collections of information pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). Consequently, no information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review. V. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires an agency to publish an initial regulatory flexibility analysis, except to the extent provided in 5 U.S.C. 605(b), whenever the agency is required to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for a proposed rule. For the reasons discussed above, the FDIC is publishing this rule as a final rule, for which no publication of a general notice of proposed rulemaking is necessary. No regulatory flexibility analysis is required. VI. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999—Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families The FDIC has determined that the proposed rule will not affect family well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, enacted as part of the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681). VII. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Title II, Pub. L. 104-121) provides generally for agencies to report rules to Congress and the General Accounting Office
(GAO)for review. The reporting requirement is triggered when a federal agency issues a final rule. The FDIC will file the appropriate reports with Congress and the GAO as required by SBREFA. The Office of Management and Budget has determined that the proposed rule does not constitute a “major rule” as defined by SBREFA. VIII. Effective Date The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 *et seq.* ) provides that regulations shall become effective thirty
(30)days after their publication in the **Federal Register** (5 U.S.C. 553). One exception to this requirement is for a finding of “good cause” (Id. At 553(d)). For the final rule, the Board finds “good cause” to make the amendments effective immediately upon publication in the **Federal Register** because the amendments are technical and conforming to pre-existing statutory and regulatory requirements. Lists of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 308 Administrative practice and procedure, Bank deposit insurance, Banks, banking, Claims, Crime, Equal access to justice, Fraud, Investigations, Lawyers, Penalties. Accordingly, 12 CFR part 308 is amended as follows: PART 308—RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE 1. The authority citation for part 308 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 504, 554-557; 12 U.S.C. 93(b), 164, 505, 1815(e), 1817, 1818, 1820, 1828, 1829, 1829b, 1831i, 1831m(g)(4), 1831o, 1831p-1, 1832(c), 1884(b), 1972, 3102, 3108(a), 3349, 3909, 4717, 15 U.S.C. 78(h) and (i), 78o-4(c), 78o-5, 78q-1, 78s, 78u, 78u-2, 78u-3, and 78w, 6801(b), 6805(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 31 U.S.C. 330, 5321; 42 U.S.C. 4012a; Sec. 3100(s), Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321-358; and Pub. L. 109-351. 2. Revise § 308.127(a) to read as follows: § 308.127 Scope.
(a)*Cease-and-desist proceedings under sections 8 and 50 of the FDIA* . The rules and procedures of this subpart, subpart B of the Local Rules and the Uniform Rules shall apply to proceedings to order an insured nonmember bank or an institution-affiliated party to cease and desist from practices and violations described in section 8(b) of the FDIA, 12 U.S.C. 1818(b), and section 50 of the FDIA, 12 U.S.C. 1831aa. 3. Revise Subpart N to read as follows: Subpart N—Rules and Procedures Applicable to Proceedings Relating to Suspension, Removal, and Prohibition Where a Felony Is Charged Sec. 308.161 Scope. 308.162 Relevant considerations. 308.163 Notice of suspension or prohibition, and orders of removal or prohibition. 308.164 Hearings. Subpart N—Rules and Procedures Applicable to Proceedings Relating to Suspension, Removal, and Prohibition Where a Felony Is Charged § 308.161 Scope. The rules and procedures set forth in this subpart shall apply to the following:
(a)Proceedings to suspend an institution-affiliated party of an insured state nonmember bank, or to prohibit such party from further participation in the conduct of the affairs of any depository institution, if continued service or participation by such party posed, poses, or may pose a threat to the interests of the depositors of, or threatened, threatens, or may threaten to impair public confidence in, any relevant depository institution (as defined at section 1818(g)(1)(E) of Title 12), where the individual is the subject of any state or federal information, indictment, or complaint, involving the commission of, or participation in:
(1)A crime involving dishonesty or breach of trust punishable by imprisonment exceeding one year under state or federal law; or
(2)A criminal violation of section 1956, 1957, or 1960 of Title 18 or section 5322 or 5324 of Title 31.
(b)Proceedings to remove from office or to prohibit an institution-affiliated party from further participation in the conduct of the affairs of any depository institution without the consent of the Board of Directors or its designee where:
(1)A judgment of conviction or an agreement to enter a pre-trial diversion or other similar program has been entered against such party in connection with a crime described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section that is not subject to further appellate review, if continued service or participation by such party posed, poses, or may pose a threat to the interests of the depositors of, or threatened, threatens, or may threaten to impair public confidence in, any relevant depository institution (as defined at section 1818(g)(1)(E) of Title 12); or
(2)A judgment of conviction or an agreement to enter a pre-trial diversion or other similar program has been entered against such party in connection with a crime described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section. § 308.162 Relevant considerations. (a)(1) In proceedings under § 308.161(a) and
(b)for a notice of suspension or prohibition, or a removal or prohibition order, the following shall be considered:
(i)Whether the alleged offense is a crime which is punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year under state or federal law and which involves dishonesty or breach of trust; and
(ii)Whether the alleged offense is a criminal violation of section 1956, 1957, or 1960 of Title 18 or section 5322 or 5324 of Title 31; and
(iii)Whether continued service or participation by the institution-affiliated party posed, poses, or may pose a threat to the interests of the depositors of, or threatened, threatens, or may threaten to impair public confidence in, any relevant depository institution (as defined at section 1818(g)(1)(E) of Title 12).
(b)The question of whether an institution-affiliated party is guilty of the subject crime shall not be tried or considered in a proceeding under this subpart. § 308.163 Notice of suspension or prohibition, and orders of removal or prohibition.
(a)Notice of suspension or prohibition.
(1)The Board of Directors or its designee may suspend or prohibit from further participation in the conduct of the affairs of any depository institution an institution-affiliated party by written notice of suspension or prohibition upon a determination by the Board of Directors or its designee that the grounds for such suspension or prohibition exist. The written notice of suspension or prohibition shall be served upon the institution-affiliated party and any depository institution that the subject of the action is affiliated with at the time the notice is issued.
(2)The suspension or prohibition shall be effective immediately upon service on the institution-affiliated party, and shall remain in effect until final disposition of the information, indictment, complaint, or until it is terminated by the Board of Directors or its designee under the provisions of § 308.164 or otherwise.
(b)Order of removal or prohibition.
(1)The Board of Directors or its designee may issue an order removing or prohibiting from further participation in the conduct of the affairs of any depository institution an institution-affiliated party, when a final judgment of conviction not subject to further appellate review is entered against the institution-affiliated party for a crime referred to in § 308.161(a)(1) and continued service or participation by such party posed, poses, or may pose a threat to the interests of the depositors of, or threatened, threatens, or may threaten to impair public confidence in, any relevant depository institution (as defined at section 1818(g)(1)(E) of Title 12).
(2)An order of removal or prohibition shall be entered if a judgment of conviction is entered against the institution-affiliated party for a crime described in § 308.161(a)(2).
(c)The notice of suspension or prohibition or the order of removal or prohibition shall:
(1)Inform the institution-affiliated party that a written request for a hearing, stating the relief desired and grounds therefore, and any supporting evidence, may be filed with the Executive Secretary within 30 days after receipt of the written notice or order; and
(2)Summarize or cite to the relevant considerations specified in § 308.162 of this subpart. § 308.164 Hearings.
(a)*Hearing dates* . The Executive Secretary shall order a hearing to be commenced within 30 days after receipt of a request for hearing filed pursuant to § 308.163. Upon the request of the institution-affiliated party, the presiding officer or the Executive Secretary may order a later hearing date.
(b)*Hearing procedure* .
(1)The hearing shall be held in Washington, DC, or at another designated place, before a presiding officer designated by the Executive Secretary.
(2)The provisions of §§ 308.6 through 308.12, 308.16, and 308.21 of the Uniform Rules and §§ 308.101 through 308.102 and 308.104 through 308.106 of subpart B of the Local Rules shall apply to hearings held pursuant to this subpart.
(3)The institution-affiliated party may appear at the hearing and shall have the right to introduce relevant and material documents and oral argument. Members of the FDIC enforcement staff may attend the hearing and participate as representatives of the FDIC enforcement staff.
(4)There shall be no discovery in proceedings under this subpart.
(5)At the discretion of the presiding officer, witnesses may be presented within specified time limits, provided that a list of witnesses is furnished to the presiding officer and to all other parties prior to the hearing. Witnesses shall be sworn, unless otherwise directed by the presiding officer. The presiding officer may ask questions of any witness. Each party shall have the opportunity to cross-examine any witness presented by an opposing party. The transcript of the proceedings shall be furnished, upon request and payment of the cost thereof, to the institution-affiliated party afforded the hearing.
(6)In the course of or in connection with any hearing under paragraph
(b)of this section, the presiding officer shall have the power to administer oaths and affirmations, to take or cause to be taken depositions of unavailable witnesses, and to issue, revoke, quash, or modify subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum. Where the presentation of witnesses is permitted, the presiding officer may require the attendance of witnesses from any state, territory, or other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at any location where the proceeding is being conducted. Witness fees shall be paid in accordance with § 308.14 of the Uniform Rules.
(7)Upon the request of the institution-affiliated party afforded the hearing, or the members of the FDIC enforcement staff, the record shall remain open for five business days following the hearing for the parties to make additional submissions to the record.
(8)The presiding officer shall make recommendations to the Board of Directors, where possible, within 10 days after the last day for the parties to submit additions to the record.
(9)The presiding officer shall forward his or her recommendation to the Executive Secretary who shall promptly certify the entire record, including the recommendation to the Board of Directors. The Executive Secretary's certification shall close the record.
(c)*Written submissions in lieu of hearing* . The institution-affiliated party may in writing waive a hearing and elect to have the matter determined on the basis of written submissions.
(d)*Failure to request or appear at hearing* . Failure to request a hearing shall constitute a waiver of the opportunity for a hearing. Failure to appear at a hearing in person or through an authorized representative shall constitute a waiver of hearing. If a hearing is waived, the order shall be final and unappealable, and shall remain in full force and effect pursuant to § 308.163.
(e)*Decision by Board of Directors or its designee* . Within 60 days following the Executive Secretary's certification of the record to the Board of Directors or its designee, the Board of Directors or its designee shall notify the institution-affiliated party whether the notice of suspension or prohibition or the order of removal or prohibition will be continued, terminated, or otherwise modified. The notification shall state the basis for any decision of the Board of Directors or its designee that is adverse to the institution-affiliated party. The Board of Directors or its designee shall promptly rescind or modify a notice of suspension or prohibition or an order of removal or prohibition where the decision is favorable to the institution-affiliated party. Dated this 5th day of November, 2007. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-22969 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29259; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-195-AD; Amendment 39-15274; AD 2007-24-08] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD)that applies to all Boeing Model 767 airplanes. That AD currently requires repetitive measurements of the rudder and elevator freeplay, repetitive lubrications of rudder and elevator components, and related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. This new AD instead requires revised repetitive measurements of the rudder freeplay and the elevator freeplay for each of the power control actuators
(PCAs)that move the rudder and elevator, corrective and related investigative actions if necessary, and repetitive lubrications of the rudder and elevator components. For some airplanes, this AD also requires related concurrent actions. This AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the rudder and the elevator. The potential for vibration of the control surface should be avoided because the point of transition from vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are issuing this AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight, which could result in loss of control of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective November 28, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of November 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)917-6421; fax
(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2006-11-12, amendment 39-14616 (71 FR 30272, May 26, 2006). The existing AD applies to all Boeing Model 767 airplanes. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on September 20, 2007 (72 FR 53701). That NPRM proposed to require revised repetitive measurements of the rudder freeplay and the elevator freeplay for each of the power control actuators
(PCAs)that move the rudder and elevator, corrective and related investigative actions if necessary, and repetitive lubrications of the rudder and elevator components. For some airplanes, the NPRM also proposed to require related concurrent actions. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments that have been received on the NPRM. Supportive Comment Boeing concurs with the contents of the proposed AD. British Airways
(BA)also supports the need to do rudder and elevator freeplay checks and lubrications. Request To Extend the Compliance Time of Freeplay Measurements Air Canada, BA, All Nippon Airways (ANA), and Japan Air Lines
(JAL)request that we extend the compliance time in paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD from 12 months after the effective date of the AD to 18 months after the effective date of the AD. JAL suggests that if 18 months after the effective date of the AD is not acceptable, 18 months after the release date of the referenced service bulletin would be an acceptable alternative. Air Canada notes that since Boeing was given enough time to revise a service bulletin, operators should be given enough time to plan the job without significant impact on operational schedules. BA notes they have been unable to accomplish the referenced service bulletins because of the unavailability of tooling, and advises that they would not be able to accomplish the AD within the proposed 12 months compliance time without significant out-of-service time. ANA and JAL state that scheduling their fleets to accomplish the AD within the proposed 12 months compliance time is not practical considering the large size of their Model 767 fleet, the C-check maintenance interval (almost 22 months and almost 18 months respectively), and the schedules of their maintenance facilities. ANA adds that manpower and parts provisioning also contribute to scheduling difficulties. ANA, BA, and JAL note that the service bulletin was approved with an 18-month compliance time. We agree that a change to the compliance time in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD is necessary, since we intended to have the required compliance time coincide with the compliance time recommended in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 767-27-0197 and 767-27-0198, both Revision 1, both dated July 19, 2007. However, we do not agree to change the compliance time to 18 months after the effective date of this AD. As explained in the proposed AD, we have determined that 18 months after the effective date of the AD would not address the unsafe condition soon enough to ensure an adequate level of safety for the fleet. We have revised paragraph (g)(1) to allow a compliance time of 14 months after the effective date of the AD. This compliance time has been coordinated with Boeing. Conclusion We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. We also determined that this change will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance There are about 979 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this AD. No parts are necessary to accomplish any action. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Cost per airplane Number of U.S.- registered airplanes Fleet cost Freeplay measurement 30 $80 $2,400, per measurement cycle 423 $1,015,200, per measurement cycle. Lubrication 27 80 $2,160, per lubrication cycle 423 $913,680, per lubrication cycle. 3 Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-14616 (71 FR 30272, May 26, 2006) and by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-24-08 Boeing:** Amendment 39-15274. Docket No. FAA-2007-29259; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-195-AD. Effective Date
(a)This AD becomes effective November 28, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)This AD supersedes AD 2006-11-12. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to all Boeing Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the rudder and the elevator. The potential for vibration of the control surface should be avoided because the point of transition from vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are issuing this AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight, which could result in loss of control of the airplane. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Service Bulletin References
(f)The term “service bulletin,” as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions and Appendices A, B, and C of the following service bulletins, as applicable:
(1)For Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007; and
(2)For Model 767-400ER series airplanes: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0198, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007. Repetitive Measurements
(g)At the latest of the compliance times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, as applicable: Measure the rudder and elevator freeplay. Repeat the measurement thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12,000 flight hours or 36 months, whichever occurs first. Do all actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the service bulletin.
(1)Within 14 months after the effective date of this AD.
(2)Within 36 months since the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness.
(3)For the elevator freeplay measurement: Within 12,000 flight hours or within 36 months after the last elevator freeplay inspection accomplished in accordance with Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197 or 767-27-0198, both dated October 27, 2005, as applicable, whichever occurs first. Related Investigative and Corrective Actions
(h)If any measurement found during the measurement required by paragraph
(g)of this AD exceeds any applicable limit specified in the service bulletin: Before further flight, do the applicable related investigative and corrective actions in accordance with the service bulletin. Initial Lubrication
(i)At the latest of the compliance times specified in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, as applicable: Lubricate the rudder and elevator components specified in the service bulletin. Do all actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the service bulletin.
(1)Within 9 months after the effective date of this AD, or within 9 months since the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness; whichever occurs later.
(2)For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is not already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: Within 3,000 flight hours or 9 months after the last lubrication accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197 or 767-27-0198, both dated October 27, 2005, whichever occurs first.
(3)For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: Within 6,000 flight hours or 18 months after the last lubrication accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197 or 767-27-0198, both dated October 27, 2005, whichever occurs first. Repetitive Lubrication
(j)Repeat the lubrication required in paragraph
(i)of this AD at the applicable interval specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD.
(1)For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is not already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: At intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours or 9 months, whichever occurs first.
(2)For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: At intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours or 18 months, whichever occurs first. Repetitive Prior or Concurrent Inspection
(k)For airplanes specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD: Prior to or concurrently with the accomplishment of each elevator freeplay measurement specified in paragraph
(g)of this AD, do all applicable actions required by AD 2001-04-09.
(1)Group 1, configuration 2, airplanes as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007.
(2)Group 1, configuration 1, airplanes as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0198, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (l)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2)To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(3)An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2006-11-12 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(5)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2001-04-09, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph
(k)of this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(m)You must use Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007; or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0198, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007; as applicable, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of these documents in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 16, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-22854 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28883; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-106-AD; Amendment 39-15267; AD 2007-24-01] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Model 400A Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for certain Hawker Beechcraft Model 400A series airplanes. This AD requires inspecting the galley cabinets to determine if a certain part number is installed or if a certain size of wire already exists, and doing related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. This AD results from reports of undersized, and consequently unprotected, wire in the galley cabinets. We are issuing this AD to prevent overheating of wire insulation and consequent fire or smoke in the airplane cabin. DATES: This AD becomes effective January 2, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of January 2, 2008. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, 9709 East Central, Wichita, Kansas 67206. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Petty, Aerospace Engineer, Electrical Systems and Avionics, ACE-119W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone
(316)946-4139; fax
(316)946-4107. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to certain Hawker Beechcraft Model 400A series airplanes. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on August 9, 2007 (72 FR 44813). That NPRM proposed to require inspecting the galley cabinets to determine if a certain part number is installed or if a certain size of wire already exists, and doing related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public. Change to Language in Final Rule We have removed the words “if necessary” that were inadvertently added to paragraph
(f)of the NPRM. The actions in paragraph
(f)of this AD are required. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. We have determined that this change will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance There are about 285 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This AD affects about 214 airplanes of U.S. registry. The required inspection takes about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of this AD for U.S. operators is $17,120, or $80 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-24-01 Hawker Beechcraft Corporation:** Amendment 39-15267. Docket No. FAA-2007-28883; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-106-AD. Effective Date
(a)This AD becomes effective January 2, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Hawker Beechcraft Model 400A series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 25-3758, dated June 2006. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from reports of undersized, and consequently unprotected, wire in the galley cabinets. We are issuing this AD to prevent overheating of wire insulation and consequent fire or smoke in the airplane cabin. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Inspection and Related Investigative/Corrective Actions
(f)Within 200 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect the galley cabinets to determine if Precision Pattern galley cabinet, part number (P/N) 20917, 20918, or 20921 is installed, or if 8 American Wire Gauge
(AWG)wire already exists; and, within 20 flight hours or 30 days after the inspection, whichever occurs later, do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions. The actions must be done in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 25-3758, dated June 2006. Note 1: Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 25-3758, dated June 2006, refers to Raytheon Kit 128-3068-0001, Revision 3, dated April 18, 2006, as an additional source of service information for replacing the undersized 10AWG wire with 8AWG wire in the gallery power circuit. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2)To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Material Incorporated by Reference
(h)You must use Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 25-3758, dated June 2006, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, 9709 East Central, Wichita, Kansas 67206, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 8, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-22545 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-0193; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-43-AD; Amendment 39-15273; AD 2007-24-07] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company
(GE)CF6-80C2B1 Turbofan Engine AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for a GE CF6-80C2B1 turbofan engine, serial number
(SN)690203, with fan disk, part number (P/N) 1703M78P11, SN RPMDA662, installed. This AD requires stripping of thermal spray coating, inspection of dovetail slots, and reapplication of thermal spray coating on certain stage 1 fan disks. This AD results from a report that a repair shop did not meet the process requirements when applying copper-nickel-indium (Cu-Ni-In) thermal coating to certain stage 1 fan disks. We are issuing this AD to prevent possible uncontained release of multiple fan blades, resulting in damage to the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective January 2, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of January 2, 2008. We must receive any comments on this AD by January 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this AD: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* U.S. Docket Management Facility, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *Hand Delivery:* Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. Contact General Electric Company via Lockheed Martin Technology Services, 10525 Chester Road, Suite C, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215, telephone
(513)672-8400, fax
(513)672-8422, for the service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Lawrence, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone:
(781)238-7176, fax:
(781)238-7199. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: GE reported that while recertifying a non-GE repair shop, they found the shop's process for coating dovetail slots with a Cu-Ni-In thermal coating did not meet the standard requirements of GE Substantiation Requirements Repair Document No. RSS-012-S2. Further investigation by GE identified twelve affected stage 1 fan disks. We discussed the issue with GE and the repair shop, and we agreed to allow the repair shop to strip, inspect, and recoat the 12 disks instead of issuing an AD to require the actions. The repair shop has stripped, inspected, and recoated 11 of the 12 disks. They have not been able to get the final stage 1 disk, P/N 1703M78P11, SN RPMDA662, to strip, inspect, and recoat that disk and it remains in service. This condition, if not corrected, could result in an uncontained release of multiple fan blades, and possible damage to the airplane Relevant Service Information We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of GE Service Bulletin
(SB)No. CF6-80C2 S/B 72-1121, dated January 23, 2004, that references procedures for stripping, inspecting, and recoating the affected stage 1 fan disks. Differences Between This AD and the Service Information GE SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 72-1121, dated January 23, 2004, recommends performing the actions within 3,500 cycles-since-last Cu-Ni-In thermal spray coating of the dovetail slots. This AD requires performing the actions within 3,500 cycles-since-last Cu-Ni-In thermal spray coating of the dovetail slots, but before March 31, 2008. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD Although no airplanes that are registered in the United States use these GE CF6-80-C2B1 turbofan engines, the possibility exists that the engines could be used on airplanes that are registered in the United States in the future. The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other GE CF6-80C2B1 turbofan engines of the same type design. We are issuing this AD to prevent possible uncontained release of multiple fan blades, resulting in damage to the airplane. You must use the service information described previously to perform the actions required by this AD. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date Since there are currently no domestic operators of this engine model, notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are unnecessary. A situation exists that allows the immediate adoption of this regulation. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment. However, we invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include “AD Docket No. FAA-2007-0193; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-43-AD” in the subject line of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might suggest a need to modify it. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of the DMS Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78). Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a summary of the costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the address listed under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive: **2007-24-07 General Electric Company:** Amendment 39-15273. Docket No. FAA-2007-0193; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-43-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective January 2, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to GE CF6-80C2B1 turbofan engine, serial number 690203, with fan disk, part number (P/N) 1703M78P11, SN RPMDA662, installed. This engine is installed on, but not limited to, a Boeing 747-300 airplane. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from a report that a repair shop did not meet the process requirements when applying copper-nickel-indium (Cu-Ni-In) thermal coating to certain stage 1 fan disks. We are issuing this AD to prevent possible uncontained release of multiple fan blades, resulting in damage to the airplane. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within 3,500 cycles-since-last Cu-Ni-In thermal spray coating of the dovetail slots, but no later than March 31, 2008, unless the actions have already been done. Stripping, Inspecting and Recoating the Stage 1 Fan Disk
(f)Strip the Cu-Ni-In thermal coating from the pressure faces and slot bottoms of the stage 1 fan disk, and perform a microstructure evaluation. Use 3.A.(2)(a) through 3.A.(2)(b) of GE Service Bulletin
(SB)No. CF6-80C2 S/B 72-1121, dated January 23, 2004, to strip the thermal coating and perform the microstructure evaluation.
(g)Ultrasonic inspect, fluorescent penetrant inspect, and eddy current inspect stage 1 fan disk. Use 3.A.(2)(c) of GE SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 72-1121, dated January 23, 2004, to inspect the disk.
(h)Apply Cu-Ni-In thermal coating to the pressure faces and slot bottoms of the stage 1 fan disks, using 3.A.(2)(d) of GE SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 72-1121, dated January 23, 2004. Alternative Methods of Compliance
(i)The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information
(j)Contact James Lawrence, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone:
(781)238-7176, fax:
(781)238-7199, for more information about this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(k)You must use GE Service Bulletin No. CF6-80C2 S/B 72-1121, dated January 23, 2004, to perform the actions required by this AD. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service bulletin in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact General Electric Company via Lockheed Martin Technology Services, 10525 Chester Road, Suite C, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215, telephone
(513)672-8400, fax
(513)672-8422, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, New England Region, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 15, 2007. Peter A. White, Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-22922 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-26966; Directorate Identifier 99-NE-01-AD; Amendment 39-15271; AD 2007-24-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Corporation AE 3007A and AE 3007C Series Turbofan Engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD)for Rolls-Royce Corporation
(RRC)AE 3007A and AE 3007C series turbofan engines. That AD currently prohibits any flight following a ground engine start where the engine oil temperature is below 32 °F (0 °C), unless certain preflight operational procedures are followed. This AD also requires those actions and would also require a terminating action. This AD results from design improvements to components in the accessory gearbox air turbine starter mounting pad. We are issuing this AD to prevent an in-flight engine shutdown due to loss of engine oil from the engine accessory gearbox starter pad shaft seal drain and possible loss of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective January 2, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of January 2, 2008. ADDRESSES: You can get the service information identified in this AD from Rolls-Royce Corporation, P.O. Box 420, Indianapolis, IN 46206; telephone
(317)230-3774; fax
(317)230-8084; e-mail: *indy.pubs.services@rolls-royce.com* . The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kyri Zaroyiannis, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, Small Airplane Directorate, FAA, 2300 E. Devon Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018; telephone
(847)294-7836; fax
(847)294-7834. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 by superseding AD 99-02-51, Amendment 39-11108 (64 FR 16339, April 5, 1999), with a proposed AD. The proposed AD applies to RRC AE 3007A and AE 3007C series turbofan engines. We published the proposed AD in the **Federal Register** on March 29, 2007 (72 FR 14724). That action proposed to: • Prohibit before further flight, any flight following a ground engine start where the engine oil temperature is below 32 °F (0 °C), unless certain preflight operational procedures are followed to ensure that there is no excessive loss of oil from leakage at the air turbine starter shaft; and • Require terminating action to the prohibition requirements of the existing AD, by removing from service certain seal P/Ns from the accessory gearbox air turbine starter mounting pad and installing an improved seal; and • Require removing certain P/N drain caps, drain adapters, and orifice inserts, and installing an open adapter on the starter pad drain. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is provided in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments received. Request To Continue To Allow Existing Approved AMOCs Four commenters, ExpressJet Inc., RRC, Embraer, and Cessna Aircraft Company state that alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) currently approved for AD 99-02-51 should be allowed while this AD is not incorporated or until September 30, 2009. Paragraph
(l)of the proposed rule states that AMOCs approved for AD 99-02-51 are not approved for the new rule. Until all engines are modified as required by paragraph
(g)of the proposed rule, an aircraft may encounter 32 °F temperature or lower and it seems arbitrary to disallow the use of data that has already been approved and in use for over two years. Operators would have the burden of requesting the same AMOC for the superseding AD. Allowing the currently approved AMOCs would bridge the time gap to the Terminating Action compliance date. We agree. We changed Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC), paragraph
(l)from “AMOCs approved for AD 99-02-51 are not approved as AMOCs for this AD.” to “AMOCs currently approved for AD 99-02-51 will remain in effect until the terminating action date for this AD, September 30, 2009. After that date, these AMOCs will expire and not be approved as AMOCs for this AD.” This change will avoid confusion in the field and the AMOCs are still appropriate for the period before the mandatory terminating action date. These AMOCs will expire permanently on September 30, 2009, after which the only allowable configuration option is the new seal, a compatible starter and an open seal drain. Request To Provide a More Accurate Description of the Original Problem Two commenters, RRC and Embraer, ask us to include a more accurate description of the original problem. They state that the nomenclature “Starter shaft seal” may cause confusion with the seal of the pneumatic Air Turbine Starter (ATS). We agree. We changed Unsafe Condition, paragraph
(d)from “* * * due to loss of engine oil from the starter shaft seal” to “* * * due to loss of engine oil from the engine accessory gearbox starter pad shaft seal drain and possible loss of the airplane.” Request To Clarify the Regulatory Text Rolls-Royce Corporation asks us to make the following changes for clarity: • Prohibited Flights, paragraph (f)(2): Change “Oil consumption greater than 0.32 quart per hour (303 cc per hour) * * *” to “Oil consumption greater than 0.32 quart per hour, or 300 cc per hour, * * *” Although it may not be a completely accurate quart-to-cc conversion, 300 cc is the value listed in all RRC manuals. • Terminating Action, paragraph (g): Change “* * * do the following, as applicable to your engine model and configuration.” to “* * * do the following, as applicable to your configuration.” Engine model applicability is already established so it can be deleted here to make a simpler statement. • Terminating Action, paragraph (g)(1): Change “Remove seal part number (P/N) * * * ” to “Remove seal and related component part numbers (P/Ns) * * *” The P/Ns listed are not only currently approved seals but also adjacent hardware including a wave spring and spacer used in one of the approved configurations. This change accounts for all current hardware, not just the seals. • Terminating Action, paragraph (g)(2): Change “Install a new seal, P/N AS3209-026 * * *” to “Install a new O-ring, P/N AS3209-026 or M83248/1-026* * *” RRC lists both of these P/Ns as acceptable alternatives in the engine parts list. Also, the correct nomenclature is O-ring, not seal. • Prohibition of Seals, paragraph (i): Change “Once the terminating action in this AD is performed on an engine, seal P/Ns * * *” to “Once the terminating action in this AD is performed on an engine, seal and related component P/Ns * * *” This change accounts for all current hardware, not just the seals. We agree with the suggestions and incorporated them into the applicable regulatory text of the AD. Request to Not Implement the AD Rolls-Royce North America, Inc., c/o American Eagle Airlines, asks us to not implement the AD, or at least extend the required completion date for the terminating action by at least 6-12 months. They believe that many AE3007A and AE3007C engines are not yet compliant with RRC Service Bulletin AE 3007A-72-321 and or SB AE 3007A-72-330. They state that it would be too much of a burden to modify all of the engines currently out in the field to be compliant with the proposed AD by September 30, 2009. A drastic maintenance campaign such as this would adversely affect the AE3007A and C fleet both in terms of costs and operations to drastic proportions. We don't agree. We have determined that we can better assure long-term continued operational safety by design changes that remove the source of the problem, rather than by repetitive inspections or other special procedures. Based on the availability of the required parts and the support from the vast majority of operators and their ability to comply within the original specified date, we believe this is a reasonable time period and will maintain the final compliance date of September 30, 2009. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect 1,868 RRC AE 3007A and AE 3007C series turbofan engines installed on aircraft of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 4 work-hours per engine to perform the proposed terminating action, and that the average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $2,917 per engine. Based on these figures, if all engines incorporated the terminating action, we estimate the total cost of this AD to U.S. operators to be $6,046,100. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a summary of the costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the address listed under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Amendment 39-11108 64 FR 16339 April 5, 1999, and by adding a new airworthiness directive, Amendment 39-15271, to read as follows: **2007-24-05 Rolls-Royce Corporation (Formerly Allison Engine Company, Inc.):** Amendment 39-15271. Docket No. FAA-2007-26966; Directorate Identifier 99-NE-01-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective January 2, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)This AD supersedes AD 99-02-51, Amendment 39-11108. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Corporation
(RRC)(formerly Allison Engine Company, Inc.) AE 3007A and AE 3007C series turbofan engines. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Cessna Aircraft Company 750 series, and Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S. A. (EMBRAER) EMB-135 and EMB-145 series airplanes. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from design improvements to components in the accessory gearbox air turbine starter mounting pad. We are issuing this AD to prevent an in-flight engine shutdown due to loss of engine oil from the starter shaft seal and possible loss of the airplane. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the actions have already been done. Prohibited Flights
(f)All flights after ground engine starts at engine oil temperatures below 32 °F (0 °C), are prohibited except as follows:
(1)If the engine oil temperature has dropped below 32 °F (0 °C), before flight, perform a high-power leak check on each engine (at least three minutes at takeoff power).
(2)Oil consumption greater than 0.32 quart per hour, or 300 cc per hour, is not permitted. Instructions for performing the high-power leak check for the AE 3007A series engines can be found in the Rolls-Royce AE 3007A Series Maintenance Manual, TASK 72-00-00-700-801, SUBTASK 72-00-00-790-002. Leak check limits for the AE 3007A series engines can be found in the Rolls-Royce AE 3007A Series Maintenance Manual, TASK 71-00-00-200-801.
(3)Instructions for performing the high-power leak check for the AE 3007C series engines (including leak check limits) can be found in the Rolls-Royce AE 3007C Series Maintenance Manual, TASK 72-00-00-700-801, SUBTASK 72-00-00-790-002. Terminating Action
(g)No later than September 30, 2009, as terminating action to the requirements in paragraph
(f)through (f)(3) of this AD, do the following, as applicable to your engine configuration:
(1)Remove seal and related component, part numbers (P/Ns) 42520-71, 42520-196-X, 99004-1-6, 42520-75, or 42520-167, from the accessory gearbox
(AGB)air turbine starter mounting pad.
(2)Install a new O-ring, P/N AS3209-026, M83248/1-026 or other serviceable part, to the shaft of the starter mounting pad.
(3)Install a new bearing locknut, P/N 42520-170, or other serviceable part, and an AGB air turbine starter mounting pad mechanical seal, P/N 42520-192, or other serviceable part.
(4)Use paragraphs 2. through 2.G. of the Accomplishment Instructions of RRC Service Bulletin
(SB)No. AE 3007A-72-321/AE 3007C-72-250, Revision 2, dated November 12, 2007, to do the removals and installations.
(5)For AE 3007A series engines, remove the drain cap or starter drain adapter. Use paragraphs 2. through 2.C.(4)(c) of the Accomplishment Instructions of RRC SB No. AE 3007A-72-274, Revision 1, dated November 12, 2007 to do the removal.
(6)For AE 3007A series engines, install an open starter drain adapter. Use paragraphs 2. through 2.C.(2) of the Accomplishment Instructions of RRC SB No. AE 3007A-72-330, Revision 1, dated November 12, 2007 to do the installation.
(7)For AE 3007C series engines, install an open starter drain adapter. Use paragraphs 2. through 2.E.(2) of the Accomplishment Instructions of RRC SB No. AE 3007C-72-223, Revision 1, dated November 12, 2007 to do the installation. Definition
(h)A serviceable part is any FAA-approved part not being removed from service, or not otherwise specifically addressed by this AD action. Prohibition of Seals
(i)Do not install seal and related component P/Ns 42520-71, 42520-196-X, 99004-1-6, 42520-75, and 42520-167, on the air starter mounting pad after the terminating action in this AD is performed. Previous Credit
(j)Previous credit is allowed for the terminating action in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(7) of this AD, that was done before the effective date of this AD using the Accomplishment Instructions of the SBs listed in the following Table 1: Table 1.—SBs Allowing Previous Credit For AE 3007A Series Engines:
(1)Engine—Accessory Drive Gearbox Assembly—New Starter Shaft Seal; RRC SB No. AE 3007A-72-321/AE 3007C-72-250, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2005; and
(2)Engine—Accessory Gearbox Starter Pad Drain—Remove The Drain Cap or Starter Drain Adapter; RRC SB No. AE 3007A-72-274, dated January 19, 2006; and
(3)Engine—Accessory Gearbox Starter Pad Drain—Install the Open Starter Drain Adapter (23083402 or 23077526); RRC SB No. AE 3007A-72-330, dated January 19, 2006. For AE 3007C Series Engines:
(4)Engine—Accessory Drive Gearbox Assembly—New Starter Shaft Seal; RRC SB No. AE 3007A-72-321/AE 3007C-72-250, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2005; and
(5)Engine—Accessory Gearbox Starter Pad Drain—Install the Open Starter Drain Adapter (23077526 or 23083403); RRC SB No. AE 3007C-72-223, dated January 19, 2006. Alternative Methods of Compliance
(k)The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(l)AMOCs currently approved for AD 99-02-51 will remain in effect until the terminating action date for this AD, September 30, 2009. After that date, these AMOCs will expire and will not be approved as AMOCs for this AD. Related Information
(m)Contact Kyri Zaroyiannis, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, Small Airplane Directorate, FAA, 2300 E. Devon Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018; e-mail: *kyri.zaroyiannis@faa.gov;* telephone
(847)294-7836; fax
(847)294-7834, for more information about this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(n)You must use the service information specified in Table 2 to perform the actions required by this AD. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the documents listed in Table 2 of this AD in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Rolls-Royce Corporation, P.O. Box 420, Indianapolis, IN 46206; telephone
(317)230-3774; fax
(317)230-8084; e-mail: *indy.pubs.services@rolls-royce.com* , for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, New England Region, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Table 2.—Incorporation by Reference Service Bulletin No. Page Revision Date AE 3007A-72-274 ALL 1 November 12, 2007. Total Pages—6 AE 3007A-72-321, AE 3007C-72-250 ALL 2 November 12, 2007. Total Pages—13 AE 3007A-72-330 ALL 1 November 12, 2007. Total Pages—6 AE 3007C-72-223 ALL 1 November 12, 2007. Total Pages—7 Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 14, 2007. Peter A. White, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-22810 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-26102; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-36-AD; Amendment 39-15272; AD 2007-24-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Societe de Motorisations Aeronautiques
(SMA)SR305-230 and SR305-230-1 Reciprocating Engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)provided by the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)to identify and correct an unsafe condition on SMA SR305-230 and SR305-230-1 reciprocating engines. The MCAI states the following: Over a period of time, the alteration of one electronic control unit
(ECU)electronic component can cause a rapid uncontrolled power increase. Several occurrences have already been reported during engine start or during engine warm-up. This condition, if not corrected, could result in the loss of control of the aircraft if the pilot fails to react appropriately by switching to the mechanical backup mode. We are issuing this AD to prevent a rapid uncontrolled power increase and possible loss of control of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective December 13, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of SMA Service Bulletin
(SB)No. SB-01-76-005, dated December 15, 2006, as of December 13, 2007. We must receive comments on this AD by December 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *Hand Delivery:* Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Spinney, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: *Christopher.spinney@faa.gov;* telephone
(781)238-7175; fax
(781)238-7199. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion On October 31, 2006, we issued AD 2006-23-08, Amendment 39-14820 (71 FR 65041, November 7, 2006). That AD required actions intended to address an unsafe condition on the products listed above. Since we issued AD 2006-23-08, SMA developed a terminating action for the unsafe condition. EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, issued AD 2007-0033, dated February 13, 2007. That AD supersedes EASA EAD 2006-0312-E, which mandated a temporary corrective action to the rapid uncontrolled power increase. EASA AD 2007-0033 retains the requirements of EASA AD 2006-0312-E, and also requires replacing all affected ECUs with a new part number ECU as terminating action. EASA AD 2007-0033 states: Over a period of time, the alteration of one electronic control unit
(ECU)electronic component can cause a rapid uncontrolled power increase. Several occurrences have already been reported during engine start or during engine warm-up. This condition, if not corrected, could result in the loss of control of the aircraft if the pilot fails to react appropriately by switching to the mechanical backup mode. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information SMA issued SB No. SB-01-76-005, dated December 15, 2006. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in EASA AD 2007-0033. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of France, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with France, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the EASA AD and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the information provided by EASA and SMA, and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. This AD requires replacing all affected ECUs with a new part number ECU, as terminating action. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because of the short compliance provided to correct the unsafe condition. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2006-26102; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-36-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this AD. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Amendment 39-14820; (71 FR 65041, November 7, 2006) and adding the following new AD: **2007-24-06 Societe de Motorisations Aeronautiques (SMA):** Amendment 39-15272; Docket No. FAA-2006-26102; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-36-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective December 13, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)This AD supersedes AD 2006-23-08, Amendment 39-14820. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to SMA SR305-230 and SR305-230-1 engines equipped with an electronic control unit
(ECU)having one of the following part numbers (P/Ns): SF01160009-0, SF01160011-0, SP01160013, SP01160051-0, SP01160051-1, SP01160051-2, SP01160051-3, SP01160051-4, SP01160051-5, SP01160089-0, SP01160089-1, SP01160089-2. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Cessna 182 series airplanes with Supplemental Type Certificate SA03302AT applied. Reason
(d)European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)AD 2007-0033, dated February 13, 2007, states: Over a period of time, the alteration of one electronic control unit
(ECU)electronic component can cause a rapid uncontrolled power increase. Several occurrences have already been reported during engine start or during engine warm-up. This condition, if not corrected, could result in the loss of control of the aircraft if the pilot fails to react appropriately by switching to the mechanical backup mode. We are issuing this AD to prevent a rapid uncontrolled power increase and possible loss of control of the airplane. Actions and Compliance
(e)Unless already done, do the following actions:
(1)Before further flight, check if the ECU has a P/N listed in the Applicability section of this AD and a serial number
(SN)of 131 or below, except SNs 70, 71, 83, and 88. If it does, then do not operate the engine.
(2)Remove and replace the ECU with an ECU P/N SP01160089-3, using SMA Service Bulletin
(SB)No. SB-01-76-005, dated December 15, 2006.
(3)No later than 30 days after the effective date of this AD, replace all remaining affected P/N ECUs with an ECU P/N SP01160089-3, using SMA SB No. SB-01-76-005, dated December 15, 2006.
(4)After the effective date of this AD, do not install a spare ECU having a P/N listed in the Applicability section of this AD as a replacement part on any SMA SR305-230 or SR305-230-1 engine. FAA AD Differences
(f)This AD differs from the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI)and/or service information as follows:
(1)EASA AD No. 2007-0033 requires compliance with the AD by March 31, 2007.
(2)This AD, written later, requires compliance within 30 days after the effective date of the AD. Other FAA AD Provisions
(g)Alternative Methods of Compliance: The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information
(h)Refer to EASA AD 2007-0033, dated February 13, 2007, for related information.
(i)Contact Christopher Spinney, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: *Christopher.spinney@faa.gov;* telephone
(781)238-7175; fax
(781)238-7199 for more information about this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(j)You must use Societe de Motorisations Aeronautiques Service Bulletin No. SB-01-76-005, dated December 15, 2006, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Societe de Motorisations Aeronautiques, 10-12 Rue Didier Daurat, F-18021 Bourges, France—Telephone +33
(0)2 4867 5600; Fax: +33
(0)2 4850 0141; e-mail: *customer_services@smasr.com* .
(3)You may review service information copies at the FAA, New England Region, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202)741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Burlington, MA, on November 15, 2007. Peter A. White, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-22812 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28987; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-127-AD; Amendment 39-15269; AD 2007-24-03] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR Airplanes and Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: It has been found the development of cracks in the forward fuselage right hand
(RH)side skin during full-scale fatigue tests. Those cracks may quickly reach their critical length, reducing the aircraft structural integrity, with possible rapid decompression of the aircraft. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective January 2, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of January 2, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* or in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)227-2125; fax
(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on August 16, 2007 (72 FR 45963). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: It has been found the development of cracks in the forward fuselage right hand
(RH)side skin during full-scale fatigue tests. Those cracks may quickly reach their critical length, reducing the aircraft structural integrity, with possible rapid decompression of the aircraft. The corrective action includes rework of the aircraft structure on the forward fuselage LH (left-hand) and RH sides. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin 145-53-0067, Revision 02, dated August 28, 2007. We referred to EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-53-0067, Revision 01, dated February 27, 2007, as the appropriate source of service information for doing the actions specified in the NPRM. The procedures in Revision 02 of the service bulletin are essentially the same as those procedures in Revision 01. Revision 02 revises the illustrations and makes editorial changes. We have revised paragraph (f)(1) and Table 1 of this AD to also refer to Revision 02 of the service bulletin. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We considered the comment received. Request To Extend Grace Period American Eagle Airlines requests that we extend the grace period specified in the NPRM. The commenter states that the compliance time of “prior to the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles or within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later” would impose an excessive strain on the operator due to labor requirements and time out of service. The commenter notes that a number of its aircraft are near the 22,000 total flight cycle threshold and suggests that we change the grace period to within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. We do not agree with the commenter's request to extend the grace period. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this action, we considered the urgency associated with the subject unsafe condition, the availability of required parts, and the practical aspect of accomplishing the required modification within a period of time that corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for most affected operators. However, according to the provisions of paragraph
(g)of the final rule, we may approve requests to adjust the compliance time if the request includes data that prove that the new compliance time would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed this final rule in this regard. Conclusion We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. We determined that this change will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a Note within the AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect 624 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 60 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $1,210 per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $3,750,240, or $6,010 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-24-03 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):** Amendment 39-15269. Docket No. FAA-2007-28987; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-127-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective January 2, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to all EMBRAER Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes; certificated in any category. Subject
(d)Air Transport Association
(ATA)of America Code 53: Fuselage. Reason
(e)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)states: It has been found the development of cracks in the forward fuselage right-hand
(RH)side skin during full-scale fatigue tests. Those cracks may quickly reach their critical length, reducing the aircraft structural integrity, with possible rapid decompression of the aircraft. The corrective action includes rework of the aircraft structure on the forward fuselage LH (left-hand) and RH sides. Actions and Compliance
(f)Prior to the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles, or within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later, unless already done, do the following actions:
(1)Add two reinforcements to the forward fuselage skin on the LH and RH sides between frames 9 to 10 and 10 to 11, and stringers 12 to 15. Install supports to the reinforcements and stringers as well as new fasteners to the reinforcements and supports, and reroute the electrical wiring on the affected area. Do all actions in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-53-0067, Revision 01, dated February 27, 2007; or Revision 02, dated August 28, 2007.
(2)Accomplishing the detailed instructions and procedures described in the EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-53-0051, dated July 15, 2004; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-53-0051, Revision 01, dated February 7, 2006; is considered acceptable for compliance with the actions specified in this AD. FAA AD Differences Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions
(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)227-2125; fax
(425)227-1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2)Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information
(h)Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2007-05-01R1, effective July 4, 2007, and the service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD, for related information. Table 1.—Service Bulletins EMBRAER Service Bulletin Revision level Date 145-53-0051 Original July 15, 2004. 145-53-0051 01 February 7, 2006. 145-53-0067 01 February 27, 2007. 145-53-0067 02 August 28, 2007. Material Incorporated by Reference
(i)You must use the service information specified in Table 2 of this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. Table 2.—Material Incorporated by Reference EMBRAER Service Bulletin Revision level Date 145-53-0051 Original July 15, 2004. 145-53-0051 01 February 7, 2006. 145-53-0067 01 February 27, 2007. 145-53-0067 02 August 28, 2007. EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-53-0051, Revision 01, dated February 7, 2006, has the following effective pages: Page No. Revision level shown on page Date shown on page 1, 2 01 February 7, 2006. 3-129 Original July 15, 2004.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225, Sao Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202)741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 13, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-22635 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 30581; Amdt. No. 3246] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This rule amends Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of changes in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding of new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports. DATES: This rule is effective November 28, 2007. The compliance date for each SIAP is specified in the amendatory provisions. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows: *For Examination* — 1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is located; 3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or, 4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html* . *Availability* —All SIAPs are available online free of charge. Visit nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from: 1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is located. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone:
(405)954-4164. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and § 97.20 of title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make their verbatim publication in the **Federal Register** expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure and the amendment number. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs. The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30 days. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days. Conclusion The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97 Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and Navigation (Air). Issued in Washington, DC, on November 16, 2007. James J. Ballough, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows: PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722. 2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: §§ 97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35 [Amended] By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, ISMLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, Identified as follows: * * * Effective Upon Publication FDC date State City Airport FDC No. Subject 11/13/07 NY New York La Guardia 7/4057 ILS or LOC Rwy 4, Amdt 35. [FR Doc. E7-23077 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Indian Gaming Commission 25 CFR Part 546 Class II Classification Standards AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), Interior. ACTION: Notice of Extension of Comment Period. SUMMARY: This notice extends the period for comments on the burden, estimates or any other aspects of the information collection requirements for the proposed Class II game classification standards (72 FR 60483) published in the **Federal Register** on October 24, 2007. DATES: The comment period for comments submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or the NIGC on the burden, estimates or any other aspects of the information collection requirements for the proposed Class II game classification standards is extended from November 23, 2007, to January 24, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Penny Coleman at 202/632-7003; fax 202/632-7066 (these are not toll-free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress established the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC or Commission) under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (25 U.S.C. 2701 *et seq.* )
(IGRA)to regulate gaming on Indian lands. On October 24, 2007, the proposed Class II game classification standards (72 FR 60483) regulations were published in the **Federal Register** . Dated: November 20, 2007. Philip N. Hogen, Chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission. Cloyce V. Choney, Vice Chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission. Norman H. DesRosiers, Commissioner, National Indian Gaming Commission. [FR Doc. E7-23084 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7565-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Indian Gaming Commission 25 CFR Part 547 Technical Standards for Electronic, Computer, or Other Technologic Aids Used in the Play of Class II Games AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), Interior. ACTION: Notice of Extension of Comment Period. SUMMARY: This notice extends the period for comments on the burden, estimates or any other aspects of the information collection requirements of the proposed Class II technical standards (72 FR 60508) published in the **Federal Register** on October 24, 2007. DATES: The comment period for comments submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or the NIGC on the burden, estimates or any other aspects of the information collection requirements for the proposed Class II technical standards regulations is extended from December 10, 2007, to January 24, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Gross at 202/632-7003; fax 202/632-7066 (these are not toll-free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress established the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC or Commission) under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (25 U.S.C. 2701 *et seq.* )
(IGRA)to regulate gaming on Indian lands. On October 24, 2007, the proposed Class II technical standards (72 FR 60508) regulations were published in the **Federal Register** . Dated: November 20, 2007. Philip N. Hogen, Chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission. Cloyce V. Choney, Vice Chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission. Norman H. DesRosiers, Commissioner, National Indian Gaming Commission. [FR Doc. E7-23083 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7565-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2007-0093] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zone; Kahului Harbor, Maui, HI AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary interim rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is creating a temporary security zone in the waters of Kahului Bay and Kahului Harbor, Maui, and on designated adjacent areas of land. This zone is intended to enable the Coast Guard and its law enforcement partners to better protect people, vessels, and facilities in and around Kahului Bay and Kahului Harbor during the transit of the Hawaii Superferry. This rule complements, but does not replace or supersede, existing regulations that establish a moving 100-yard security zone around large passenger vessels like the Superferry. DATES: This rule is effective from 12:01 a.m.
(HST)on December 1, 2007, through 11:59 p.m.
(HST)on January 31, 2008. Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before December 19, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments and related material, identified by Coast Guard docket number USCG-2007-0093, by any of the three methods listed below. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods:
(1)*Mail:* Lieutenant Sean Fahey, U.S. Coast Guard District 14 (dl), Room 9-130, PJKK Federal Building, 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Honolulu, Hawaii 96850.
(2)*Electronically:* E-mail to Lieutenant Sean Fahey at *Sean.C.Fahey@uscg.mil* using the subject line “Comment—Maui Security Zone.”
(3)*Fax:*
(808)541-2101.
(4)*Online: http://www.regulations.gov.* All comments will be reviewed as they are received. We may change this rule based on your comments. Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG-2007-0093 and are available for inspection and copying at U.S. Coast Guard District 14 (dl), Room 9-130, between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Sean Fahey, U.S. Coast Guard District 14 at
(808)541-2106. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)for this temporary rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. It would be contrary to the public interest to delay implementing this temporary rule, as any delay might result in damage or injury to the public, the Hawaii Superferry
(HSF)and its passengers and crew, other vessels, facilities, and law enforcement personnel. Though operation of the HSF from Oahu to Maui was temporarily enjoined by the state circuit court in Maui, that injunction was lifted on November 14, 2007, following action by the Hawaii State legislature, and service to Maui is advertised to resume on December 1, 2007. Given recent assessments by the Maui Police Department that waterborne obstruction tactics similar to those used in Kauai in August 2007 are likely to be employed in Maui as well when the HSF resumes service there, it is critical that this rule be in place so that local, State, and Federal public safety officials can adequately ensure maritime safety and security, and secure the observances of rights and obligations of the United States. The main obstruction tactic employed by waterborne protesters in Kauai in August 2007 was to physically place themselves directly in the path of the HSF as it attempted to enter the harbor. Several obstructers ashore threw rocks and bottles at U.S. Coast Guard personnel. These actions are dangerous not only to the obstructers themselves—some of whom used or incited children and juveniles in support of their obstruction efforts—but also to the HSF, its passengers and crew, and law enforcement personnel working to ensure the vessel's safe passage. Groups opposing the lawful operation of the HSF continue to vow to impede its transit utilizing these same dangerous tactics. These opposition groups have started several internet forums to encourage and coordinate support for their efforts. The danger such obstruction tactics pose is illustrated by an article posted on November 5, 2007, on Surferspath.com, a popular Web site for Hawaiian surfers. In this article, two prominent opposition members urge those who oppose the operation of the Superferry to take “the last step of non-violent resistance,” and prepare themselves for the possibility of “physical injury or death” that may result from obstructing the Superferry. These preparations include making the “proper arrangements,” preparing a “last will and testament” and engaging in a “cleansing ceremony to prepare your body, mind, and spirit to greet the Spiritual Hierarchy that awaits your return.” The letter goes on to say that, “[t]here is also the possibility of accident in the turmoil of numerous boats, swimmers, and surfers in an ocean environment. In that sense you have to be prepared at the level of the Native American who decided when it was ‘a good day to die.’ ” The Coast Guard cannot disregard such adamant safety and security threats. Consequently, this rule is necessary to prevent damage or injury to vessels, persons, and waterfront facilities, including the HSF, its passengers and crew, law enforcement personnel working to ensure the vessel's safe passage, and the obstructers themselves, arising from these dangerous and unlawful obstruction tactics. Any delay in implementing this temporary rule would be contrary to the public interest and would jeopardize the security and safety of the public, the HSF and its passengers and crew, other vessels, facilities, and law enforcement personnel. For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Although the Coast Guard has good cause to issue this temporary rule without first publishing a proposed rule, you are invited to submit post-promulgation comments and related material regarding this rule on or before December 19, 2007. We may change this temporary interim rule based on the comments received. All comments received will be posted, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* and will include any personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation
(DOT)for their Docket Management Facility to process online submissions to Coast Guard dockets. You may review the Department of Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit *http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.* Background and Purpose The Hawaii Superferry
(HSF)is a 349-foot large passenger vessel documented by the U.S. Coast Guard with an endorsement for coastwise trade, and certified for large passenger vessel service in the United States. The HSF, operating Hawaii's first inter-island vehicle-passenger service, is intended to provide service among the islands of Oahu, Maui, and Kauai. The sole port in Maui that can accommodate the HSF is Kahului Harbor. The sole port in Kauai that can accommodate the HSF is Nawiliwili Harbor. The HSF inaugurated commercial service from Oahu to both Maui and Kauai on August 26, 2007. The voyage to and from Maui on that date occurred without incident. However, in Kauai, nearly 40 swimmers and obstructers on kayaks and surfboards blocked Nawiliwili Harbor's navigable channel entrance to prevent the lawful entry of the HSF into Kauai. Other demonstrators ashore threw rocks and bottles at Coast Guard personnel who were conveying detained obstructers to shore. On the following day, August 27, 2007, the HSF again sailed to and from Maui without incident. Upon arrival in Kauai, however, approximately 70 persons entered the water again to physically block the channel entrance, thereby preventing the HSF from docking in Nawiliwili Harbor. Due to the difficulty in maneuvering in the small area of Nawiliwili Harbor, and in the interest of ensuring the safety of the protesters, the HSF's master chose not to enter the channel until the Coast Guard cleared the channel of obstructers. However, because the vessel remained outside the harbor, and because the obstructers did not approach within 100 yards of the vessel, the existing security zone for large passenger vessels (33 CFR 165.1410) did not provide the Coast Guard with the authority to control obstructer entry into Nawiliwili Harbor or clear the channel of obstructers before the HSF commenced its transit into the harbor. After waiting 3 hours, and with nearly 20 obstructers still in the water actively blocking the HSF, the HSF's master, after consulting with company officials, made the decision to return to Oahu without mooring in Kauai. On August 28, HSF officials announced the “indefinite” suspension of commercial operations. Since that date, the HSF has only sailed in commercial service to either Kauai or Maui once; on September 8, 2007, to pick up and return cars to Oahu that were stranded on Maui after the suspension of commercial service on August 28. This sailing was the product of a stipulated agreement in an ongoing lawsuit (discussed further below) involving HSF and environmental groups opposed to the HSF operating in and out of Kahului Harbor, Maui. Shortly after the company announced its suspension of operations on August 28, the trial court judge in the ongoing state court proceeding referenced in the previous paragraph issued a temporary restraining order, which was followed by a preliminary injunction several weeks later, prohibiting HSF from utilizing the harbor improvements in Kahului Harbor, Maui. This injunction was the product of a Hawaii Supreme Court determination that the Hawaii Environmental Protection Act
(HEPA)required the state to conduct an environmental assessment of the effects of the harbor improvements that were necessary to accommodate the HSF in Kahului Harbor. Following the Supreme Court decision, the trial court determined that HEPA required the environmental assessment to be conducted before the HSF could use those harbor improvements; and since that assessment had not occurred, the injunction was a necessary remedy. The injunction only pertained to Kahului Harbor; it did not apply in Nawiliwili Harbor, Kauai. However, the HSF voluntarily decided not to sail to Kauai while the court case was ongoing. In response to this judicial action, the governor called the Hawaii legislature into special session to consider whether to grant legislative relief to HSF. The legislature passed a bill during this special session called Act 2, which the governor signed into law. Act 2 allowed the HSF to utilize the harbor improvements in Maui and Kauai while all necessary environmental assessments were being conducted. The trial judge in Maui determined that this legislation overcame the requirement in HEPA that caused him to enjoin HSF from utilizing of the harbor improvements in Maui, and in a ruling on November 14, 2007, he dissolved and vacated the injunction. This opened the door to HSF resuming commercial service to Maui. Notwithstanding the fact that the HSF did not face waterborne obstructers in Kahului Harbor during any of its commercial voyages there, recent intelligence and assessments by the Maui Police Department indicate a substantial likelihood that certain elements in Maui, disaffected by the process that led to adoption of Act 2 and vacation of the injunction, plan to adopt the dangerous tactics used by the obstructers in Kauai in an effort to prevent the HSF from safely arriving in Maui. Individuals and groups have organized rallies and started several internet forums to encourage and coordinate support for their efforts. The dangerous and unlawful intent of these individuals and groups is clear, as is their resolve. This temporary security zone is in response to the threat posed by would-be obstructers in and around Kahului Harbor to HSF and its crew and passengers, law enforcement officers working to ensure HSF's safe transit, and the obstructers themselves. By designating significant portions of the waters of Kahului Harbor and Kahului Bay, and specified areas of land adjacent to the water, as a security zone, activated for enforcement 60 minutes before the HSF's arrival into the zone through 10 minutes after its departure from the zone, this temporary security zone rule provides the Coast Guard and its law enforcement partners the authority to prevent persons and vessels from entering or remaining in the water with the intent of using themselves as human barriers to impede the HSF's safe passage. Discussion of Rule This rule creates a temporary security zone in most of the waters of Kahului Harbor, Maui; in waters of Kahului Bay, Maui; and on designated areas of land adjacent to Kahului Harbor. This temporary security zone is effective from 12:01 a.m.
(HST)on December 1, 2007, through 11:59 p.m.
(HST)on January 31, 2008. The security zone will be activated for enforcement 60 minutes before the HSF's arrival into the zone, and will remain activated for 10 minutes after the HSF's departure from the zone. The activation of the zone for enforcement will be announced by marine information broadcast and by a red flag, illuminated between sunset and sunrise, posted at the following locations: at Gate 1 at the main entrance to the harbor; on Pier No. 2; and at the harbor entrance on Wharf Street. During its period of activation and enforcement, entry into the land and water areas of the security zone is prohibited without the permission of the Captain of the Port, Honolulu, or his or her designated representative. In preparing this temporary rule, the Coast Guard made sure to consider the rights of lawful protestors. To that end, the Coast Guard excluded from the security zone a defined region which creates a sizeable area of water in which demonstrators may lawfully assemble and convey their message in a safe manner to their intended audience. This area of the harbor not included in the security zone is completely accessible to anyone who desires to enter the water, and is fully visible to observers ashore, at the HSF mooring facility, aboard the HSF when transiting the harbor, and from the air. The Coast Guard also took into account the lawful users of Kahului Harbor and Kahului Bay in its creation of this temporary rule. As previously noted, the rule will only be activated 1 hour before the HSF's arrival into port, and will be deactivated 10 minutes after the HSF departs the port. Kahului Harbor and Kahului Bay are fully available to all users during the period when the zone is not activated. Furthermore, the rule affords those desiring to use the harbor and surrounding waters and land areas with the opportunity to and a process for requesting permission of the Captain of the Port to enter the zone while it is activated in a manner that will not endanger any vessel, waterfront facility, the port, or any person. The security zone incorporates the minimum land and water areas necessary to ensure the purposes underlying the rule's creation are served. Waters outside of the harbor are included in the zone to ensure that the HSF is able to line up, unimpeded, on the range that guides it safely into Kahului Harbor. The breakwaters on either side of the harbor entrance are included in the zone to ensure that would-be obstructers do not have a ready staging point for attempting to block the very narrow entrance to Kahului Harbor. Pier No. 2, to which the HSF ties up, is included in the security zone, is entirely fenced off, and not legally accessible except to authorized personnel. Other than the designated protest area, the waters of Kahului Harbor, including areas of the harbor not navigable by the HSF, are included in the zone to prevent would-be obstructers from interfering with law enforcement vessels in the harbor that are working to ensure the HSF's safe passage. Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry by persons or vessels into the security zone during a period of zone activation is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or her designated representatives. Operation of any type of vessel, including every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water, within the security zone while the zone is activated is prohibited. If a vessel is found to be operating within the security zone without permission of the Captain of the Port, Honolulu while the zone is activated, the vessel is subject to seizure and forfeiture. All persons and vessels permitted in the security zone while the zone is activated must comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene patrol personnel. These personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard and other persons permitted by law to enforce this regulation. Upon being hailed by an authorized vessel or law enforcement officer using siren, radio, flashing light, loudhailer, voice command, or other means, the operator of the vessel must proceed as directed. If authorized passage through the security zone, a vessel must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course and must proceed as directed by the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives. While underway with permission of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives, under 33 CFR 165.1408, no person or vessel is allowed within 100 yards of the HSF when it is underway, moored, position-keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives. When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or his or her designated representatives, may permit vessels that are at anchor, restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by draft to remain within the security zone during the enforcement period in order to ensure navigational safety. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other person permitted by law, may enforce the regulations in this section. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This expectation is based on the short activation and enforcement duration of the security zone created by this temporary rule, as well as the limited geographic area affected by the security zone. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While we are aware that the affected area has small entities, including canoe and boating clubs and small commercial businesses that provide recreational services, we anticipate that there will be little or no impact to these small entities due to the narrowly tailored scope of this temporary rule, as well as the fact that such entities can request permission from the Captain of the Port to enter the security zone when it is activated. 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 offer to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they may better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Sean Fahey, U.S. Coast Guard District 14, at
(808)541-2106. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and either preempts State law or imposes a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. While some obstructers, both on land on and shore, used small children in furtherance of their obstruction activities during the August 26 and 27 HSF arrivals into Kauai, and while online forums and other sources indicate that some organizers are actively recruiting adolescents and small children with the intent of putting them in harm's way should the HSF attempt to enter either Kauai or Maui, any heightened harm faced by children as a result of these tactics has no relation to the creation of this rule. Instead, those heightened risks are entirely the product of persons who recruit and employ adolescents and children to put themselves at risk of death or serious physical injury by attempting to physically obstruct the passage of a large passenger vessel in a small harbor. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. An “Environmental Analysis Checklist” and “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add a new § 165.T14-164 to read as follows: § 165.T14-164 Security Zone; Kahului Harbor, Maui, HI.
(a)*Location* . The following land areas, and water areas from the surface of the water to the ocean floor, are a security zone that is activated as described in paragraph
(c)of this section, and enforced subject to the provisions of paragraph
(d)of this section:
(1)All waters of Kahului Harbor, Maui, shoreward of the Kahului Harbor COLREGS DEMARCATION LINE (see 33 CFR 80.1460), except for a zone extending from the shoreline with the following three legs as boundaries:
(i)A leg extending in a straight line between Buoy “10” (LLNR 28375) and Buoy “12” (LLNR 28380);
(ii)A leg extending in a straight line between Buoy “10” (LLNR 28375) and the nearest shoreline point; and
(iii)A leg extending in a straight line between Buoy “12” (LLNR 28380) and the fence line at the southwestern base of Pier Two, at position (20°53.589′ N, 156°28.084′ W).
(2)Pier No. 2 in Kahului Harbor.
(3)The eastern breakwater at the entrance of Kahului Harbor, beginning at the east break wall (20°53.958′ N, 156°28.161′ W).
(4)The western breakwater at the entrance of Kahului Harbor, beginning at the berm on the west break wall (20°53.925′ N, 156°28.611′ W).
(5)All waters of Kahului Bay bounded on the south by the COLREGS. DEMARCATION LINE (see 33 CFR 80.1460); bounded on the north by line of latitude 20°56′ N; bounded on the west by a straight line drawn from the berm on the west break wall (20°53.925′ N, 156°28.611′ W) at a direction of 330° to the line of latitude 20°56′ N; and bounded on the east by a straight line drawn from the east break wall (20°53.958′ N, 156°28.161′ W) at a direction of 030° and ending at the line of latitude 20°56′ N.
(b)*Effective period* . This section is effective from 12:01 a.m.
(HST)on December 1, 2007, through 11:59 p.m.
(HST)on January 31, 2008. It will be activated for enforcement as described in paragraph
(c)of this section.
(c)*Enforcement periods.* The zone described in paragraph
(a)of this section will be activated for enforcement 60 minutes before the Hawaii Superferry's arrival into the zone and will remain activated until 10 minutes after the Hawaii Superferry's departure from the zone. The activation of the zone for enforcement will be announced by marine information broadcast and by a red flag, illuminated between sunset and sunrise, posted at the following locations: At Gate 1 at the main entrance to the harbor; on Pier No. 2; and at the harbor entrance on Wharf Street.
(d)*Regulations.*
(1)Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry by persons or vessels into the security zone created by this section and activated as described in paragraph
(c)of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or her designated representatives. Operation of any type of vessel, including every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water, within the security zone is prohibited. If a vessel is found to be operating within the security zone without permission of the Captain of the Port, Honolulu, and refuses to leave, the vessel is subject to seizure and forfeiture.
(2)All persons and vessels permitted in the security zone must comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene-patrol personnel. These personnel comprise commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard and other persons permitted by law to enforce this regulation. Upon being hailed by an authorized vessel or law enforcement officer using siren, radio, flashing light, loudhailer, voice command, or other means, the operator of a vessel must proceed as directed.
(3)If authorized passage through the security zone, a vessel must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course and must proceed as directed by the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives. While underway with permission of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives, no person or vessel is allowed within 100 yards of the Hawaii Superferry when it is underway, moored, position-keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives.
(4)Persons desiring to transit the security zone in this section may contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number
(808)927-0865 or on VHF channel 12 to seek permission to transit the area. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives. When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or his or her designated representatives, may permit vessels that are at anchor, restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by draft to remain within the security zone in order to ensure navigational safety.
(e)*Enforcement.* Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative permitted by law, may enforce this temporary security zone. Dated: November 21, 2007. Sally Brice-O'Hara, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fourteenth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 07-5872 Filed 11-26-07; 1:53 pm]
Connectionstraces to 36
Traces to 36 documents
U.S. Code
25 references not yet in our index
  • 9 CFR 94
  • 7 CFR 1
  • 7 CFR 372
  • 9 CFR 92
  • 9 CFR 93
  • 9 CFR 98
  • 7 CFR 2.22
  • 12 CFR 308
  • Pub. L. 109-351
  • 12 CFR 308.161-164
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • Pub. L. 105-277
  • Pub. L. 104-121
  • 15 USC 78(h)
  • Pub. L. 104-134
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 14 CFR 97
  • 25 CFR 546
  • 25 CFR 547
  • 33 CFR 165
  • 44 USC 3501-3520
  • 2 USC 1531-1538
  • 42 USC 4321-4370f
  • Pub. L. 107-295
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final rule
U.S.C.§ 553
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 4321
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 1622
U.S.C.§ 136
U.S.C.§ 9701
U.S.C.§ 450
Cite9 CFR 94
Cite7 CFR 1
Cite7 CFR 372
Cites 61 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

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

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