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 · 2007-11-29 · PROPOSED RULES · Unknown

Unknown. Final rule

32,336 words·~147 min read·/register/2007/11/29/07-5874

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-2007-11-29.xml --- 72 229 Thursday, November 29, 2007 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service See Forest Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E7-23154 67593-67594 E7-23157 Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: National Wildlife Services Advisory Committee, 67594 E7-23198 Broadcasting Broadcasting Board of Governors NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 67595 07-5891 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67603-67605 E7-23163 E7-23164 Commerce Commerce Department See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Defense Defense Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67595-67597 07-5858 07-5859 07-5860 U.S. Court of Appeals for Armed Forces; practice and procedure rule changes, 67597-67599 07-5857 Education Education Department NOTICES Special education and rehabilitative services:
Blind vending facilities under Randolph-Sheppard Act— Arbitration panel decisions, 67599-67600 E7-23153 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission EPA Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES Meetings: Ceramic art studios; modeled dioxin exposure assessment; exploratory study; peer-review workshop, 67602-67603 E7-23158 FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness directives: Cirrus Design Corp., 67566-67568 E7-23118 Grob-Werke GMBH & Co. KG, 67561-67562 E7-23016 Hartzell Propeller Inc., 67564-67566 E7-23119 Rolls-Royce plc, 67568-67571 E7-23020 Turbomeca Arriel, 67562-67564 E7-23031 IFR altitudes, 67571-67572 E7-23176 PROPOSED RULES Class E airspace, 67587-67588 E7-23173 Low altitude area navigation routes, 67588-67589 E7-23175 NOTICES Airport noise compatibility program:
Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport, Ryan Field, LA, 67620-67621 07-5873 FCC Federal Communications Commission RULES Common carrier services: Wireless telecommunications services— 698-806 MHz band service rules, public safety spectrum requirements, and anti-collusion rule reporting requirement; correction, 67577-67580 E7-23096 E7-23097 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 67603 07-5892 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Complaints filed:
PJM Industrial Customer Coalition, 67601 E7-23149 TransCanada Power Marketing Ltd., 67601 E7-23148 Hydroelectric applications, 67602 E7-23147 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* Dynegy Midwest Generation, Inc., 67600-67601 E7-23150 Food Food and Drug Administration RULES Food additives: Secondary food additives— Cetylpyridinium chloride, 67572-67576 E7-23182 NOTICES Meetings: Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee, 67605-67606 E7-23177 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent:
Ashley National Forest, UT; correction, 67595 07-5875 Ashley National Forest, UT and WY; correction, 67594-67595 07-5874 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Food and Drug Administration Interior Interior Department See Land Management Bureau IRS Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Income taxes: Lump-sum timber sales; information reporting, 67589-67591 E7-23098 Partner's distributive share Hearing cancellation, 67592 E7-23192 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 67607-67608 E7-23181 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.: Colorado, 67606-67607 E7-23120 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67621-67622 E7-23152 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fishery conservation and management: Atlantic highly migratory species— Commercial shark management measures, 67580-67586 E7-23160 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 67608-67609 E7-23174 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Pharmacia & Upjohn Co., LLC, 67609-67611 E7-23159 Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Coatesville, PA, 67611-67612 E7-23161 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: American Stock Exchange LLC, 67612-67615 E7-23169 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 67615-67616 E7-23168 Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 67616-67618 E7-23170 Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 67618-67619 E7-23171 State State Department RULES Exchange Visitor Program:
Sanctions and terminations Withdrawn, 67576-67577 E7-23172 NOTICES Meetings: Shipping Coordinating Committee, 67619-67620 E7-23166 E7-23167 Surface Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Railroad operation, acquisition, construction, etc.: Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corp., et al., 67630-67631 E7-23146 *Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:* EJ&E West Co., 67622-67630 E7-23151 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Maritime Administration See Surface Transportation Board Treasury Treasury Department See Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 67631-67632 E7-23155 E7-23156 Government securities; call for Large Position Reports, 67632-67633 07-5890 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. 72 229 Thursday, November 29, 2007 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28670 Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-060-AD; Amendment 39-15277; AD 2007-24-11] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives;
GROB-WERKE GMBH & CO KG Models G102 CLUB ASTIR III, G102 CLUB ASTIR IIIb, and G102 STANDARD ASTIR III Gliders AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: GROB received isolated difficulty reports regarding cracks on welded parts of the flight control system of the type G102, model CLUB ASTIR III & IIIb, and STANDARD ASTIR III. The cracks progress slowly from the welding seams periphery, and may eventually result in rupture at a matured stage. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective January 3, 2008. On January 3, 2008 the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* or in person at 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: Greg Davison, Glider Program Manager, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4130; fax:
(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on September 19, 2007 (72 FR 53493). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: GROB received isolated difficulty reports regarding cracks on welded parts of the flight control system of the type G102, model CLUB ASTIR III & IIIb, and STANDARD ASTIR III. The cracks progress slowly from the welding seams periphery, and may eventually result in rupture at a matured stage. The MCAI requires all welded parts to be inspected and replaced if any cracks are found. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public. For the Model G102 STANDARD ASTIR III, we have reduced the beginning serial number range by 1 glider from 5501 to 5502 to mirror the range of affected airplanes described in the MCAI. Conclusion We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed except for the reduction in serial number applicability as described above. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect 35 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $2,800 or $80 per product. In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would take about 5 work-hours and require parts costing $5,058, for a cost of $5,458 per product. We have no way of determining the number of products that may need these actions. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://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 the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2007-24-11 GROB-WERKE GMBH & CO KG:** Amendment 39-15277; Docket No. FAA-2007-28670; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-060-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective January 3, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to the gliders Model G102 CLUB ASTIR III, serial numbers
(SNs)5501 (suffix C) through 5652 (suffix C); Model G102 CLUB ASTIR IIIb, SNs 5501 (suffix Cb) through 5652 (suffix Cb); and Model G102 STANDARD ASTIR III, SNs 5502 (suffix S) through 5652 (suffix S), that are certificated in any category. Subject
(d)Air Transport Association of America
(ATA)Code 27: Flight Controls. Reason
(e)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)states: GROB received isolated difficulty reports regarding cracks on welded parts of the flight control system of the type G102, model CLUB ASTIR III & IIIb, and STANDARD ASTIR III. The cracks progress slowly from the welding seams periphery, and may eventually result in rupture at a matured stage. The MCAI requires all welded parts to be inspected and replaced if any cracks are found. Actions and Compliance
(f)Unless already done, do the following actions:
(1)Within the next 25 hours time-in-service
(TIS)after January 3, 2008 (the effective date of this AD) or within the next 6 calendar months after January 3, 2008 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first, inspect the welded parts of the flight control system for any cracks, deformations, or distortions following Grob Aerospace Service Bulletin No. MSB 306-35, dated April 27, 2007. Thereafter, repetitively inspect at intervals not to exceed 12 calendar months.
(2)If you find any cracks, deformations, or distortions as a result of any inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further flight, replace the affected part following Grob Aerospace Service Bulletin No. MSB 306-35, dated April 27, 2007. 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, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Greg Davison, Glider Program Manager, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4130; fax:
(816)329-4090. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information
(h)Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)Emergency AD No.: 2007-0135-E, dated May 14, 2007, and Grob Aerospace Service Bulletin No. MSB 306-35, dated April 27, 2007, for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference
(i)You must use Grob Aerospace Service Bulletin No. MSB 306-35, dated April 27, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Grob Aerospace GmbH, Lettenbachstrasse 9, 86874 Tussenhausen-Mattsies, Federal Republic of Germany.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 20, 2007. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-23016 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28125; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-17-AD; Amendment 39-15276; AD 2007-24-10] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca Arriel 2S1 and 2S2 Turboshaft Engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)provided by the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)to identify and correct an unsafe condition on Turbomeca Arriel 2S1 and 2S2 turboshaft engines. The MCAI states the following: During assembly of a new HP/LP fuel pump, the drain screw on the fuel filter unit failed when it was tightened to the torque value specified in the assembly schedule (12 Nm). Investigation of the screw showed that it was fully conformed to its specification, in terms of both dimensions and material. The mechanical calculations show, however, that a torque value of 12 Nm is too high for this screw, exceeding the elastic limit of the material. Failure of the affected screw could cause a fuel leak, resulting in an engine flame-out or engine fire. We are issuing this AD to prevent a fuel leak as a result of a ruptured fuel filter drain screw that could lead to engine flame-out or an engine fire. DATES: This AD becomes effective December 14, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Turbomeca, S.A. Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 292 73 2824, dated February 1, 2007, listed in the AD as of December 14, 2007. We must receive comments on this AD by December 31, 2007. 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. 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 EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD No. 2007-0063, dated March 8, 2007, to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The EASA AD states: During assembly of a new HP/LP fuel pump, the drain screw on the fuel filter unit failed when it was tightened to the torque value specified in the assembly schedule (12 Nm). Investigation of the screw showed that it was fully conform to its specification, in terms of both dimensions and material. The mechanical calculations show, however, that a torque value of 12 Nm is too high for this screw, exceeding the elastic limit of the material. Failure of the affected screw could cause a fuel leak, resulting in an engine flame-out or engine fire. You may obtain further information by examining the EASA AD in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information Turbomeca has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 292 73 2824, dated February 1, 2007. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of 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 MCAI AD and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the information provided by the EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. This AD requires the replacement of the fuel filter drain screw and tightening it to an effective torque of 6.5 Nm. 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 high risk that the drain screw on the fuel filter unit may fail when tightened to the torque value specified in the assembly schedule. Failure of the affected screw could cause a fuel leak, resulting in an engine flame-out or engine fire. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-28125; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-17-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 adding the following new AD: **2007-24-10 Turbomeca:** Amendment 39-15276.; Docket No. FAA-2007-28125, Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-17-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective December 14, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Turbomeca Arriel 2S1 and 2S2 turboshaft engines, all serial numbers that have a hydro mechanical unit
(HMU)installed that was manufactured before December 8, 2006, or repaired/overhauled before December 8, 2006. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Sikorsky S-76C helicopters. Reason
(d)European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)AD No. 2007-0063, dated March 3, 2007, states: During assembly of a new HP/LP fuel pump, the drain screw on the fuel filter unit failed when it was tightened to the torque value specified in the assembly schedule (12 Nm). Investigation of the screw showed that it was fully conforming to its specification, in terms of both dimensions and material. The mechanical calculations show, however, that a torque value of 12 Nm is too high for this screw, exceeding the elastic limit of the material. Failure of the affected screw could cause a fuel leak, resulting in an engine flame-out or engine fire. Actions and Compliance
(e)Unless already done, within 30 HMU operating hours or 45 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the fuel filter drain screw with a new one and tighten it to an effective torque of 6.5 Nm, using Turbomeca Mandatory Service Bulletin
(MSB)No. 292 73 2824, dated February 1, 2007. FAA AD Differences
(f)This AD differs from the EASA AD and/ or service information as follows:
(1)EASA AD No. 2007-0063 requires compliance with the AD within 30 HMU operating hours, but not later than 15 April 2007, whichever occurs first after the effective date of that AD.
(2)This AD, written later, requires compliance within 30 HMU operating hours or 45 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(g)The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information
(h)Refer to EASA AD 2007-0063, dated March 8, 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 Turbomeca Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 292 73 2824, dated February 1, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD.
(k)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.
(l)For service information identified in this AD, contact: Turbomeca, 40220 Tarnos, France; telephone 33 05 59 74 40 00, fax 33 05 59 74 45 15.
(m)You may review service information 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 20, 2007. Peter A. White, Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-23031 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28656; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-31-AD; Amendment 39-15280; AD 2007-24-14] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Hartzell Propeller Inc. Model HC-E5N-3( ), HC-E5N-3( )(L), and HC-E5B-5( ) Propellers 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 Hartzell Propeller Inc. Model HC-E5N-3( ), HC-E5N-3( )(L), and HC-E5B-5( ) propellers. This AD requires a onetime eddy current inspection of the propeller hub mounting bolt holes and replacement of the propeller hub if cracked. This AD results from the discovery of a five-bladed propeller hub with a large crack on the mounting flange of the hub. We are issuing this AD to prevent propeller hub failure, blade separation, damage to the airplane, and possible loss of airplane control. DATES: This AD becomes effective December 14, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of December 14, 2007. 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 Hartzell Propeller Inc., Technical Publications Department, One Propeller Place, Piqua, OH 45356; telephone
(937)778-4200; fax
(937)778-4391, for the service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Smyth, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018; e-mail: *timothy.smyth@faa.gov* ; telephone
(847)294-7132; fax
(847)294-7834. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Recently, a Piaggio P-180 airplane experienced a significant vibration in flight, from one of the propellers. The Hartzell model HC-E5N-3( )(L) propeller assembly was removed and examined. Inspection of the propeller assembly revealed a significant crack in the propeller hub. Although the exact cause of the crack is unknown, a major factor appears to be a pre-existing defect in one of the propeller mounting bolt holes. This defect may cause a crack to grow to catastrophic failure. Operating the propeller in an rpm range restricted by the airplane operating limitations may accelerate the hub crack. Acceleration of the propeller hub crack may also be due to operation beyond the airplane's operating limitations when in ground idle without the propellers feathered, or used in maximum reverse. We determined that the hubs at risk are in two populations. The first population is those hubs with unknown hours, or with between 1,800 and 4,500 hours time-in-service (TIS). The second population is all other hubs with fewer than 1,800 or more than 4,500 hours TIS. This condition, if not corrected, could result in propeller hub cracks, blade separation, damage to the airplane, and possible loss of airplane control. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of Hartzell Propeller Inc. Service Bulletin
(SB)No. HC-SB-61-295, Revision 2, dated August 1, 2007, that describes procedures for a onetime eddy current inspection of the propeller hub mounting bolt holes and replacement of the propeller hub if cracked. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other Hartzell Propeller Inc. Model HC-E5N-3( ), HC-E5N-3( )(L), and HC-E5B-5( ) propellers of the same type design. For that reason, we are issuing this AD to prevent propeller hub failure, blade separation, damage to the airplane, and possible loss of airplane control. You must use the service information described previously to perform the actions required by this AD. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD, we have found that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable, and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days. 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-2007-28656; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-31-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 Federal Docket Management System 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: **2007-24-14 Hartzell Propeller Inc.:** Amendment 39-15280. Docket No. FAA-2007-28656; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-31-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective December 14, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC-E5N-3( ), HC-E5N-3( )(L), and HC-E5B-5( ) propellers. Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC-E5N-3( )and HC-E5N-3( )(L) propellers are installed on, but not limited to, Piaggio P-180 Avanti airplanes with propeller serial numbers
(SNs)up to and including HF229 or KU92, except those SNs listed in the following Table 1. Hartzell Propeller Inc. HC-E5B( ) propellers are installed on Grumman S-2 Tracker airplanes with propeller SNs up to and including HN14. Table 1.—Propeller SNs Not Affected by This AD HC-E5N-3( )L: HF4, HF5, HF6, HF7, HF18, HF20, HF26, HF28, HF30, HF34, HF45, HF50, HF52, HF74, HF76, HF87, HF93, HF94, HF97, HF101, HF109, HF121, HF122, HF126, HF130, HF133, HF135, HF137, HF140, HF147, HF149, HF152, HF153, HF156, HF158, HF164, HF165, HF179, HF183, HF184, HF188, HF190, HF195, HF205, HF213, HF215, HF225, HF226, HF230, HF231, HF232, HF233, HF234, HF235. HC-E5N-3( ): KU1, KU3, KU14, KU15, KU16, KU19, KU34, KU41, KU45, KU51, KU57, KU69, KU74, KU79, KU84, KU86, KU87, KU89, KU93, KU94, KU95, KU96, KU103. HC-E5B-5( ): HN15. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from the discovery of a five-bladed propeller hub with a large crack on the mounting flange of the hub. We determined that the hubs at risk are in two populations. The first population is those hubs with unknown hours, or with between 1,800 and 4,500 hours time-in-service (TIS). The second population is all other hubs with fewer than 1,800 or more than 4,500 hours TIS. We are issuing this AD to prevent propeller hub failure, blade separation, damage to the airplane, and possible loss of airplane control. 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. Propeller Hub Inspection
(f)Using Hartzell Service Bulletin
(SB)HC-SB-61-295, Revision 2, dated August 1, 2007, do a onetime eddy current inspection of the propeller mounting holes and replace the propeller hub if any crack is found. Inspect as follows:
(1)If propeller hub TIS is unknown, or more than 1,800 hours but fewer than 4,500 hours, inspect the mounting holes within 12 calendar months, or within the next 150 hours TIS, or at the next scheduled airframe “A” check inspection.
(2)If the propeller hub TIS is 1,800 hours or fewer, or 4,500 hours or more, inspect the mounting holes within 12 calendar months, or within 600 hours TIS, or at the next scheduled airframe “B” check inspection, whichever comes first. Alternative Methods of Compliance
(g)The Manager, Chicago Aircraft 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
(h)Contact Tim Smyth, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018; e-mail: *timothy.smyth@faa.gov* ; telephone
(847)294-7132; fax
(847)294-7834, for more information about this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(i)You must use Hartzell Service Bulletin HC-SB-61-295, Revision 2, dated August 1, 2007, to perform the inspection 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 Hartzell Propeller Inc., Technical Publications Department, One Propeller Place, Piqua, OH 45356; telephone
(937)778-4200; fax
(937)778-4391, for a copy of this service information. You may review 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, Massachusetts, on November 21, 2007. Peter A. White, Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-23119 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-0250; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-091-AD; Amendment 39-15279; AD 2007-24-13] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Cirrus Design Corporation Model SR22 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for certain Cirrus Design Corporation (Cirrus) Model SR22 airplanes. This AD requires you to install a drain hole in the left and right outboard wing tips. This AD results from reports of pilots' inability to move the aileron control without using excessive force when flying in freezing conditions. Moisture from a prior rain shower entered through a gap at the interface of the left and right outboard wing tips and wing structure. The moisture traveled along the aft wing shear web, accumulated below the aileron control pulley, and froze at an altitude with an outside air temperature below freezing. When this moisture is exposed to freezing conditions, operation of the aileron control pulley is impaired. We are issuing this AD to prevent moisture from accumulating along the wing shear web where it may freeze in certain conditions. This condition could result in operational failure of the aileron control pulley, which could lead to loss of control. DATES: This AD becomes effective on December 4, 2007. On December 4, 2007, the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD. 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.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To get the service information identified in this AD, contact Cirrus Design Corporation, 4515 Taylor Corporation, Duluth, Minnesota 55811; telephone:
(218)727-2737. To view the comments to this AD, go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* The docket number is FAA-2007-0250; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-091-AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy Boffo, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Room 107, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018; telephone:
(847)294-7564; fax:
(847)294-7834. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We received a report that a production flight test pilot engaged the autopilot on a Cirrus Model SR22 airplane after climbing to 17,500 feet with an outside air temperature of −4 °C. While on autopilot, the airplane began drifting to the left. The pilot disengaged the autopilot and noticed that the aileron control was stuck. Using considerable force, the pilot was able to move the aileron control, but then it stuck in another position. After descending to an altitude with an outside air temperature above freezing, the aileron control returned to normal function. The incident airplane was a Cirrus flight test airplane and was stored outside in the rain for at least one day before the flight. Take-off was also during a light rain. The wing on the Cirrus SR22 airplane was recently redesigned. We have determined that the new design allows moisture to enter at the interface between the wing and wing tip. The moisture finds a path along the aft wing shear web and accumulates below the aileron pulley. When the moisture is exposed to freezing conditions, operation of the aileron control pulley is impaired. Two other similar occurrences on production flight test airplanes have been reported. This condition, if not corrected, could result in operational failure of the aileron control pulley. This failure could lead to loss of control. Relevant Service Information We reviewed Cirrus Design Service Bulletin SB 2X-57-08, dated November 2, 2007. The service information describes procedures for installing a drain hole in the left and right outboard wing tips. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. This AD requires you to install a drain hole in the left and right outboard wing tips. In preparing this rule, we contacted type clubs and aircraft operators to get technical information and information on operational and economic impacts. We did not receive any information through these contacts. If received, we would have included a discussion of any information that may have influenced this action in the rulemaking docket. 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 operational failure of the aileron control pulley could lead to loss of control. 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 an opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2007-0250; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-091-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive concerning 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 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. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket that contains the AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information 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 Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is located at the street address stated 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 airworthiness directive (AD): **2007-24-13 Cirrus Design Corporation:** Amendment 39-15279; Docket No. FAA-2007-0250; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-091-AD. Effective Date
(a)This AD becomes effective on December 4, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Model SR22 airplanes, serial numbers 2334, 2420, and 2438 through 2749, that are certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from reports of pilots' inability to move the aileron control without using excessive force when flying in freezing conditions. Moisture entered through a gap at the interface of the left and right outboard wing tips and wing structure. The moisture traveled along the aft wing shear web, accumulated below the aileron control pulley, and froze at an altitude with an outside air temperature below freezing. When this moisture is exposed to freezing conditions, operation of the aileron control pulley is impaired. We are issuing this AD to prevent moisture from accumulating along the wing shear web where it may freeze in certain conditions. This condition could result in operational failure of the aileron control pulley, which could lead to loss of control. Compliance
(e)To address this problem, you must do the following, unless already done: Actions Compliance Procedures Install a drain hole in the left and right outboard wing tips At whichever of the following occurs first:
(1)Within the next 10 hours time-in-service after December 4, 2007 (the effective date of this AD); or
(2)Within the next 30 days after December 4, 2007 (the effective date of this AD) Follow Cirrus Design Service Bulletin SB 2X-57-08, dated November 2, 2007. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(f)The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification
(ACO)Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Roy Boffo, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago ACO, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Room 107, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018; telephone:
(847)294-7564; fax:
(847)294-7834. 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
(g)You must use Cirrus Design Service Bulletin SB 2X-57-08, dated November 2, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)For service information identified in this AD, contact Cirrus Design Corporation, 4515 Taylor Corporation, Duluth, Minnesota 55811; telephone:
(218)727-2737.
(3)You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html* . Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 20, 2007. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-23118 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-26052; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-30-AD; Amendment 39-15275; AD 2007-24-09] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc, RB211 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 Turbofan Engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD)for Rolls-Royce plc
(RR)RB211 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 turbofan engines. That AD currently requires initial and repetitive on-wing or in-shop inspections of the high pressure/intermediate pressure (HP/IP) turbine bearing oil feed tube heat shield. This AD requires the same actions but introduces a terminating action to the repetitive inspections. This AD results from RR introducing a revised HP/IP turbine bearing support structure as terminating action to the repetitive inspections of the HP/IP turbine bearing oil feed tube heat shield. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncontained failure of the HP turbine disc and damage to the airplane. DATES: Effective December 14, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of December 19, 2006 (71 FR 66229, November 14, 2006). The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of December 14, 2007. 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 Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31, Derby, DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom; telephone 44
(0)1332 242424; Fax 44
(0)1332 249936 for a copy of the service information identified in this AD. 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: On November 3, 2006, the FAA issued AD 2006-23-11, Amendment 39-14823 (71 FR 66229, November 14, 2006). That AD requires initial and repetitive on-wing or in-shop inspections of the HP/IP turbine bearing oil feed tube heat shield. That AD was the result of a report that a damaged outer heat shield caused fretting of the oil feed tubes. That condition, if not corrected, could result in an uncontained failure of the HP turbine disc and damage to the airplane. Actions Since AD 2006-23-11 Was Issued Since that AD was issued, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, recently notified us that RR introduced a revised HP/IP turbine bearing support structure to terminate the repetitive inspections. This AD requires initial and repetitive on-wing or in-shop inspections of the HP/IP turbine bearing oil feed tube heat shield, and requires revising the HP/IP turbine bearing support structure as terminating action to the repetitive inspections in this AD. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncontained failure of the HP turbine disc and damage to the airplane. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of RR Service Bulletin
(SB)No. RB.211-72-F117, Revision 2, dated September 25, 2006, RR SB No. RB.211-72-F227, Revision 1, dated October 8, 2007, and RR Immediate Operational Request SB No. RB.211-72-F048, Revision 11, dated September 9, 2006, that describe procedures for revising the HP/IP turbine bearing support structure. EASA classified these SBs as mandatory and issued AD 2007-0260 in order to ensure the airworthiness of these RR engines in Europe. Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement These engine models are manufactured in the United Kingdom and are type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Under this bilateral airworthiness agreement, EASA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the findings of EASA, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD action is necessary for products of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD Although no airplanes that are registered in the United States use these Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 turbofan engines, the possibility exists that these 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 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 turbofan engines of the same type design. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncontained failure of the HP turbine disc and damage to the airplane. This AD requires initial and repetitive on-wing or in-shop inspections of the HP/IP turbine bearing oil feed tube heat shield, and requires revising the HP/IP turbine bearing support structure as terminating action to the repetitive inspections in this AD. 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. Therefore, 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-2006-26052; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-30-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 FDMS 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 removing Amendment 39-14823 (71 FR 66229, November 14, 2006), and by adding a new airworthiness directive, Amendment 39-15275, to read as follows: **2007-24-09 Rolls-Royce plc:** Amendment 39-15275. Docket No. FAA-2006-26052; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-30-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective December 14, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)This AD supersedes AD 2006-23-11, Amendment 39-14823. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc
(RR)RB211 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 turbofan engines. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Airbus A330 series airplanes. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from RR introducing a revised high pressure/low pressure (HP/IP) turbine bearing support structure as terminating action to the repetitive inspections of the HP/IP turbine bearing oil feed tube heat shield. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncontained failure of the HP turbine disc and damage to 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. Initial Inspection
(f)Initially inspect the HP/IP turbine oil feed tube outer heat shield for cracks. Use either 3.A.(1) through 3.A.(3) on-wing procedures or 3.B.(1)(a) through 3.B.(1)(e) in-shop procedures of RR Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB)No. RB.211-72-AF045, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2006, at one of the following compliance times:
(1)At the next shop visit of the 05 Module regardless of the reason for the visit; or
(2)Before one of the following intervals whichever occurs latest:
(i)10,000 hours or 2,500 cycles since new, whichever occurs first, or
(ii)2,500 cycles since overhaul of the 05 Module. Repetitive Inspection
(g)Re-inspect the HP/IP turbine oil feed tube outer heat shield for cracks as specified in the applicable criteria of paragraphs C.(1)(b)(i) through C(1)(b)(vi) or C(2)(b)(i) through C(2)(b)(ii) of RR ASB No. RB.211-72-AF045, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2006. Use either 3.A.(1) through 3.A.(3) on-wing procedures or 3.B.(1)(a) through 3.B.(1)(e) in-shop procedures of RR ASB RB.211-72-AF045, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2006. Remove HP/IP Turbine Oil Feed Tube Outer Heat Shields From Service
(h)Remove from service HP/IP turbine oil feed tube outer heat shields according to the applicable criteria in paragraphs C(1)(b)(vii) through C(1)(b)(vii) or C(2)(b)(iii) of RR ASB No. RB.211-72-AF045, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2006. Terminating Action
(i)At the next 05 Module overhaul after the effective date of this AD, or before May 31, 2010, whichever occurs first, as terminating action to the repetitive inspections in this AD, introduce the revised HP/IP turbine bearing support structure.
(j)Use one of the following to introduce the revised HP/IP turbine bearing support structure:
(1)RR Service Bulletin
(SB)No. RB.211-72-F117, Revision 2, dated September 25, 2006; or
(2)RR SB No. RB.211-72-F227, Revision 1, dated October 8, 2007; or
(3)RR Immediate Operational Request SB No. RB.211-72-F048, Revision 11, dated September 9, 2006. Alternative Methods of Compliance
(k)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
(l)European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2007-0260, dated October 2, 2007, also addresses the subject of this AD.
(m)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
(n)You must use the Rolls-Royce service information in Table 1 of this AD to perform the inspections and terminating action required by this AD. The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the incorporation by reference of Rolls-Royce plc Alert Service Bulletin No. RB.211-72-AF045, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2006, as of December 19, 2006 (71 FR 66229, November 14, 2006).The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the other service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Rolls-Royce plc P.O. Box 31, Derby, DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom; telephone 44
(0)1332 242424; Fax 44
(0)1332 249936 for a copy of this service information. You may review 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* . Table 1.—Material Incorporated by Reference Service Bulletin No. Page Revision Date RB.211-72-AF045 All 2 July 27, 2006. RB.211-72-F048 All 11 September 9, 2006. RB.211-72-F117 All 2 September 25, 2006. RB.211-72-F227 All 1 October 8, 2007. Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 20, 2007. Peter A. White, Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-23020 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 95 [Docket No. 30582; Amdt. No. 471] IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This amendment adopts miscellaneous amendments to the required IFR (instrument flight rules) altitudes and changeover points for certain Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes for which a minimum or maximum en route authorized IFR altitude is prescribed. This regulatory action is needed because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System. These changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace under instrument conditions in the affected areas. DATES: *Effective date:* 0901 UTC, December 20, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald P. Pate, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AMCAFS-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 amendment to part 95 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) amends, suspends, or revokes IFR altitudes governing the operation of all aircraft in flight over a specified route or any portion of that route, as well as the changeover points
(COPs)for Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes as prescribed in part 95. The Rule The specified IFR altitudes, when used in conjunction with the prescribed changeover points for those routes, ensure navigation aid coverage that is adequate for safe flight operations and free of frequency interference. The reasons and circumstances that create the need for this amendment involve matters of flight safety and operational efficiency in the National Airspace System, are related to published aeronautical charts that are essential to the user, and provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. In addition, those various reasons or circumstances require making this amendment effective before the next scheduled charting and publication date of the flight information to assure its timely availability to the user. The effective date of this amendment reflects those considerations. In view of the close and immediate relationship between these regulatory changes and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure before adopting this amendment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and that good cause exists for making the amendment 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 95 Airspace, Navigation (air). Issued in Washington, DC, on November 21, 2007. James J. Ballough, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, part 95 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) is amended as follows effective at 0901 UTC, December 20, 2007. 1. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44719, 44721. PART 95—[AMENDED] 2. Part 95 is amended to read as follows: Revisions to IFR Altitudes & Changeover Points [Amendment 471, effective date December 20, 2007] From To MEA § 95.6001 Victor Routes—U.S. § 95.6006 VOR Federal Airway V6 Is Amended To Read in Part Liter, WY FIX Sidney, NE VORTAC *9500 *7600—MOCA § 95.6081 VOR Federal Airway V81 Is Amended To Read in Part Cheyenne, WY VORTAC Scottsbluff, NE VORTAC 8000 § 95.6101 VOR Federal Airway V101 Is Amended To Read in Part Ogden, UT VORTAC *Krebs, UT FIX 9400 *13,000—MRA Krebs, UT FIX Blida, UT FIX 9400 § 95.6133 VOR Federal Airway V133 Is Amended To Read in Part Mansfield, OH VORTAC Sandusky, OH VOR/DME 3000 Sandusky, OH VOR/DME Gemini, OH FIX *3000 *2000—MOCA Gemini, OH FIX U.S. Canadian Border *3400 *2300—MOCA U.S. Canadian Border Detroit, MI VOR/DME *3400 *2300—MOCA § 95.6166 VOR Federal Airway V166 Is Amended To Read in Part Westminster, MD VORTAC Belay, MD FIX *3000 *2500—MOCA Belay, MD FIX *Bains, MD FIX 2000 *7500—MRA Bains, MD FIX Dupont, DE VORTAC 2000 § 95.6220 VOR Federal Airway V220 Is Amended To Read in Part Kearney, NE VOR Hastings, NE VOR/DME 4300 § 95.6257 VOR Federal Airway V257 Is Amended To Read in Part Delta, UT VORTAC *Verne, UT FIX 11500 *12200—MCA Verne, UT FIX, N BND Verne, UT FIX *Staco, UT FIX 13000 *10500—MCA Staco, UT FIX, S BND Staco, UT FIX Moint, UT FIX *13000 *8900—MOCA Moint, UT FIX *Krebs, UT FIX **13000 *13000—MRA **9600—MOCA Krebs, UT FIX Malad City, ID VOR/DME *11000 *10000—MOCA From To MEA MAA § 95.7001 Jet Routes § 95.7184 Jet Route J184 Is Amended To Read in Part Buckeye, AZ VORTAC Deming, NM VORTAC 23000 45000 [FR Doc. E7-23176 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 173 [Docket No. 2006F-0409] Secondary Direct Food Additives Permitted in Food for Human Consumption AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is amending the food additive regulations to expand the conditions for the safe use of cetylpyridinium chloride
(CPC)as an antimicrobial agent in a pre-chiller or post-chiller solution for application to raw poultry carcasses. This action is in response to a petition filed by Safe Foods Corp. (Safe Foods). DATES: This rule is effective November 29, 2007. Submit written or electronic objections and requests for a hearing by December 31, 2007. See section VIII of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of this document for information on the filing of objections. The Director of the Office of the **Federal Register** approves the incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of certain publications in 21 CFR 173.375(a) as of November 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit written or electronic objections and requests for a hearing, identified by Docket No. 2006F-0409, by any of the following methods: *Electronic submissions* Submit electronic objections in the following ways: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Agency Web site: *http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the agency Web site. *Written Submissions* Submit written objections in the following ways: • FAX: 301-827-6870. • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions]: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. To ensure more timely processing of objections, FDA is no longer accepting objections submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages you to continue to submit electronic objections by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal or the agency Web site, as described in the *Electronic Submissions* portion of this paragraph. *Instructions* : All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All objections received may be posted without change to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* , including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting objections, see the “Objections'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket* : For access to the docket to read background documents or objections received, go to *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm* and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raphael A. Davy, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740, 301-436-1272. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background In a notice published in the **Federal Register** of October 25, 2006 (71 FR 62475), FDA announced that a food additive petition (FAP 6A4767) had been filed by Safe Foods Corp., c/o Keller and Heckman LLP, 1001 G St. NW., suite 500 West, Washington, DC 20001. The petition proposed to amend the food additive regulations in § 173.375 *Cetylpyridinium chloride* (21 CFR 173.375) to expand the conditions for the safe use of CPC as an antimicrobial agent applied in a pre-chiller or post-chiller solution to raw poultry carcasses. CPC is currently approved under § 173.375 for use as an antimicrobial agent to treat the surface of raw poultry carcasses prior to immersion in a chiller when applied as a fine mist spray at a level not to exceed 0.3 grams CPC per pound of raw poultry carcass. As conditions of safe use, the solution must contain food grade propylene glycol
(PG)at a concentration of 1.5 times that of the CPC, and the solution must be used in systems that collect and recycle solution that is not carried out of the system with the treated poultry carcasses. Safe Foods initially petitioned for the use of a solution containing up to 1 percent CPC and PG at a level 1.5 times that of CPC as a liquid aqueous stream for either pre- or post-chiller application without a limit on the amount of CPC applied per carcass. When application of the CPC solution is not followed by immersion in a chiller, the treatment would be followed by a potable water rinse of the carcass. Safe Foods subsequently amended their petition by decreasing the maximum concentration of CPC in the treatment solution from 1 percent to 0.8 percent. As discussed in section II of this document, to mitigate concerns associated with residual PG in the treated poultry becoming a component of animal feed, in particular cat food, Safe Foods also proposed a maximum limit of 5 gallons of solution per carcass and a minimum of 99 percent recovery of the applied solution. 1 1 While typical application volumes would be on the order of 0.5 gallon per carcass, the 5 gallon maximum limit is to account for infrequent occasions during processing when the line speed may temporarily be slowed down or stopped (e.g., to accommodate inspection of the processing line by U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA)personnel). II. Determination of Safety Under the general safety standard in section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 348), a food additive cannot be approved for a particular use unless a fair evaluation of the data available to FDA establishes that the additive is safe for that use. FDA's food additive regulations (21 CFR 170.3(i)) define “safe” as “a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use.” To establish with reasonable certainty that a food additive is not harmful under its intended conditions of use, FDA considers the projected human dietary intake of the additive, existing toxicological data, and other relevant information (such as published literature) available to the agency. FDA compares an individual's estimated daily intake
(EDI)of the additive from all food sources to an acceptable intake level established by toxicological data. The EDI is determined by projections based on the amount of the additive proposed for use in particular foods and on data regarding the amount consumed from all sources of the additive. The agency commonly uses the EDI for the 90th percentile consumer of a food additive as a measure of high chronic dietary intake. At a maximum CPC application concentration of 0.8 percent and assuming the worst-case maximum application volume of 5 gallons of solution per carcass, FDA estimates that the mean EDI of CPC from the petitioned use is 27.5 micrograms per person per day (μg/p/d) and the intake at the 90th percentile is 65 μg/p/d (Ref. 1). These EDIs subsume the exposure from the currently regulated use. As part of FDA's safety evaluation, the agency reviewed data submitted with the petition from two sub-chronic (90-day) toxicity studies on CPC fed to rats and dogs. FDA concluded that the no-observable-effect level
(NOEL)for the dog, which was the most sensitive species tested, is 8.00 milligrams per kilogram body-weight per day (mg/kg-bw/day). By applying a 1,000-fold safety factor to this NOEL, the agency calculated the acceptable daily intake
(ADI)for CPC for a 60 kilogram human as 0.48 mg/p/d. Therefore, taking into account the available safety information and the conservative estimates of intake of CPC, the agency concludes that the proposed use of CPC to treat raw poultry carcasses is safe for humans (Ref. 2). FDA also considered the safety of the proposed use of PG, which is used in the CPC solution to maintain the solubility and stability of the solution and reduce absorption of CPC on the treated poultry. PG is generally recognized as safe as an ingredient in human food for multiple uses and as a processing aid provided that it is used in accordance with good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 184.1666). The agency does not have any safety concerns regarding the proposed use of PG in the CPC solution for treating poultry for human consumption. Because it is common for poultry and poultry byproducts to be used in animal feed, including cat food, the agency considered potential animal exposure from the petitioned use of the CPC solution. As part of the agency's evaluation of the first CPC petition that established § 173.375 (FAP 2A4736), FDA considered the safety of CPC-treated poultry and poultry byproducts used in animal feed. Because PG is toxic to cats, the substance is prohibited from use in cat food unless the use has been authorized by FDA through the issuance of a regulation providing for its safe use as a food additive (21 CFR 589.1001). FDA has previously stated in its rulemaking declaring PG for use in cat food not generally recognized as safe that PG levels at or below 0.02 percent (200 parts per million (ppm)) in cat food is safe (61 FR 19542, May 2, 1996). To mitigate any potential concerns associated with the possibility of residual PG becoming a component of cat food, should it become authorized as a food additive for such use, the petitioner has proposed a maximum limit of 5 gallons of solution per carcass and a minimum of 99 percent recovery of the applied solution. FDA concludes that potential PG residues in cat food from CPC solution containing a maximum level of 0.8 percent CPC, applied at a maximum volume of 5.0 gallons of solution per carcass, and a minimum of 99 percent of the applied CPC solution captured and recovered will ensure that the 200 ppm PG limit will not be exceeded (Ref. 3). III. Updating of Specifications for CPC The agency is updating § 173.375 by citing the specifications for CPC in the 30th edition of the United States Pharmacopeia/National Formulary (USP 30/NF 25) that are incorporated by reference rather than the 24th edition (USP 24/NF 19). We compared the specifications for CPC in the 24th and 30th editions of the USP and found them to be identical. Therefore, the agency is making this editorial change. IV. Comments The agency received several comments in response to the notice announcing the filing of the petition. One comment expressed concern that some microorganisms washed free from the treated carcasses will continue to thrive in the recovered solution and could potentially contaminate poultry as the solution is reused. The agency agrees that microbes washed off the treated carcasses may be present in the recovered solution. However, the agency believes that the growth of these organisms will be controlled by CPC present in the recovered solution. Furthermore, as part of good manufacturing practices, the user of the CPC solution for treating poultry is expected to take appropriate steps to maintain an application solution of acceptable microbiological quality, including sampling and analysis of the solution to ascertain the microbiological quality of the treatment solution and to determine when the solution in the treatment tank needs to be changed. In response to this comment, it should be noted that the trials that were conducted with recycled spray solution showed that aerobic plate counts
(APC)from the carcasses treated with recycled spray solution were extremely low compared to those from the untreated carcasses. If bacteria were continuing to thrive in the recycled solution, the APC from the treated carcasses would have increased. However, this was not the case. For these reasons, FDA has no concerns about contamination of poultry from the recycled solution. One comment concerned an efficacy trial conducted by the petitioner in which carcasses were tested post-chiller and after neutralizing CPC on the treated carcasses with activated carbon. The comment expressed concern that bacteria may have been trapped by the activated carbon producing a “false negative” result for the treated carcasses. However, the petitioner has stated that all 2,300 samples in the trial were “neutralized” with activated carbon whether or not the sample was treated with the CPC solution. The *Salmonella* incidence for the samples not treated with the CPC solution ranged from 20-22 percent positive, while the *Salmonella* incidence was only 4 percent positive for the CPC-treated samples. If the activated carbon was “trapping” the bacteria, the incidence levels in the untreated and treated samples would be expected to be more similar. That is, the fact that the positive incidence rate was significantly lower in the treated samples than in the untreated samples shows the effectiveness of the CPC treatment, not the trapping of the bacteria, which would be expected to occur to a similar extent in both CPC-treated and untreated carcasses. Thus, the available data confirm that the results from this efficacy study were not adversely affected by the use of activated carbon to neutralize CPC on the samples. One comment was from a user of the product who claims that when CPC was used in their plant for the currently-regulated use, they received customer complaints about discoloration of their poultry product. Data from the petitioner showed that CPC does not provide a lasting technical effect and that its use would not result in any organoleptic changes to treated poultry. Furthermore, this customer experienced problems with discoloration of products that were not treated with a CPC solution. Therefore, it is unlikely that CPC was causing the discoloration. In addition, the petitioner stated that CPC solution is being used in similar applications in seven other poultry plants without any complaints of discoloration that can be attributed to CPC. Therefore, FDA does not believe that CPC used in accordance with the conditions in the regulation will cause discoloration of the treated poultry. One comment expressed concern with potential occupational hazards posed by CPC and concentration of CPC in wastewater effluent, specifically:
(1)Over complaints from inspectors for the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS)about the impact of other approved antimicrobial agents on the health of meat and poultry plant employees, and about increased respiratory problems from introduction of antimicrobials into the production process;
(2)that the Material Safety Data Sheet
(MSDS)identified physical hazards if CPC is not used properly (i.e., irritation to the skin, eye, respiratory and digestive systems); and
(3)that CPC is a synthetic enzyme that does not break down easily and will accumulate in recycled water systems used by poultry processing facilities. The agency's response to the first two concerns is that the USDA's New Technology Staff is responsible for reviewing new technologies that companies employ to ensure that their use is consistent with agency regulations and will not adversely affect product safety, inspection procedures, or the safety of FSIS inspectors. USDA is not aware of any health-related complaints from inspection personnel regarding the use of CPC in federally-inspected poultry plants. Furthermore, complaints or potential health issues associated with the use of one particular antimicrobial agent (e.g., tri-sodium phosphate) are not necessarily applicable to every other antimicrobial agent used for the same purpose. The physical hazards listed on the MSDS for CPC (i.e., severe skin irritation, severe eye irritation, severe irritation to the respiratory system, harmful if swallowed, may cause severe irritation to the digestive system) are physical hazards listed on MSDSs for numerous chemical compounds that are used routinely and safely everyday throughout the United States both in industry and by consumers. The physical hazards that are listed on an MSDS inform the user of the potential damaging effects to tissues and organs associated with direct exposure to the compound and remind the user of that substance of precautions that should be taken to avoid these adverse effects. Furthermore, as noted by the petitioner, the CPC solution is applied in a specially designed and fully automated cabinet, which limits worker exposure. In response to the comment that CPC is a synthetic enzyme that does not degrade easily, first, the agency notes that CPC is not classified as an enzyme; it is a quaternary ammonium compound. Second, data provided in the environmental assessment for FAP 2A4736 demonstrated that any CPC that enters poultry facility water systems will quickly bind to organic solids suspended in the water and will not remain solubilized in the water. To support this fact, the petitioner provided results of an experiment in which a solution containing 22.3 ppm CPC was added to publicly owned treatment works sludge material. In less than 1 minute, CPC was not detectable at a sensitivity of approximately 10 parts per billion
(ppb)in the water with the treated sludge. Based on the data submitted in that environmental assessment, it was concluded that CPC would be present in poultry plant wastewater at levels below 0.01 ppb. Therefore, the available data do not indicate a potential for CPC to accumulate in recycled poultry plant water systems. One comment expressed concern that the petitioner:
(1)Did not provide adequate data that demonstrate the expanded use of CPC meets the requirements of a secondary direct food additive;
(2)did not provide sufficient data such as a material balance that accounts for the CPC that is applied; and
(3)did not provide sufficient requirements (flow rate, spray pressure, time, temperature, and spray distance) for the potable water rinse requirements following CPC application. The comment also suggested that the regulation provide details on the recovery system depending on line speed. The agency notes that, regarding CPC's ongoing technical effect, the petitioner presented data in FAP 6A4767 to demonstrate that the food additive does not have an ongoing technical effect in poultry treated with the CPC solution. Because the technical effect of CPC on treated poultry occurs during processing but not after processing, it is considered a processing aid. Therefore, FDA has determined that it is appropriate to regulate the petitioned use of CPC as a secondary direct food additive rather than as a direct food additive. FDA disagrees with the comment about insufficient data to account for the CPC that may enter the environment from use of the additive. Information submitted in the environmental assessment for this petition, which included mass balance information, was used by FDA to estimate environmental introductions from the proposed use of the additive. Based on this information, FDA estimated that environmental concentrations of CPC will be in the low ppb level. The comment contains no information that would cause the agency to change its conclusion that there will be no significant impact to the environment resulting from the petitioned use of the additive. Regarding the comment about insufficient details for ensuring an adequate potable water rinse of CPC-treated poultry, FDA believes that it is sufficient for such requirements to be provided by each company that markets CPC to each poultry processor that uses the product. Because of plant-to-plant variation in processing conditions and equipment, a single set of specific parameters for the potable water rinse would not be appropriate in all processing facilities. The petitioner further noted that testing described in the current petition indicates that the CPC residues remaining on the treated poultry carcass are not significantly affected by the duration or volume of the water rinse. Thus, the comment appears to overstate the effect of these variables on the efficiency of CPC removal and its potential introduction to the environment. As is clear from the agency's review of the data in FAP 2A4736 and in the current petition, the residual levels of CPC in treated carcasses are minimal and do not raise a health or safety concern. Regarding the suggestion of including the details of the recovery system in the regulation, FDA strongly disagrees with this comment. FDA has determined that the petitioned use of the CPC solution containing a maximum level of 0.8 percent CPC, applied at a maximum volume of 5.0 gallons of solution per carcass, and a 99 percent recovery of the applied solution is safe. FDA does not believe it is necessary to include details of recovery system design in order to meet these conditions of safe use. Therefore, the agency concludes that it would be overly prescriptive to have such equipment requirements in a food additive regulation. V. Conclusion FDA reviewed data in the petition and other available relevant material to evaluate the safety of the use of CPC as an antimicrobial agent in a solution applied to raw poultry carcasses either pre- or post-chiller. Based on this information, the agency concludes that the proposed use of the additive is safe. Therefore, the conditions of use listed in § 173.375 should be amended as set forth in this document. In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition and the documents that FDA considered and relied upon in reaching its decision to approve the petition will be made available for inspection at the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by appointment with the information contact person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). As provided in § 171.1(h), the agency will delete from the documents any materials that are not available for public disclosure before making the documents available for inspection. VI. Environmental Impact The agency has carefully considered the potential environmental effects of this action. FDA has concluded that the action will not have a significant impact on the human environment, and that an environmental impact statement is not required. The agency's finding of no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding, contained in an environmental assessment, may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This final rule contains no collection of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required. VIII. Objections Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may file with the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) written or electronic objections. Each objection shall be separately numbered, and each numbered objection shall specify with particularity the provisions of the regulation to which the objection is made and the grounds for the objection. Each numbered objection on which a hearing is requested shall specifically so state. Failure to request a hearing for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered objection for which a hearing is requested shall include a detailed description and analysis of the specific factual information intended to be presented in support of the objection in the event that a hearing is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on the objection. Three copies of all documents are to be submitted and are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Any objections received in response to the regulation may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please note that in January 2008, the FDA Web site is expected to transition to the Federal Dockets Management System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management system. After the transition date, electronic submissions will be accepted by FDA through the FDMS only. When the exact date of the transition to FDMS is known, FDA will publish a **Federal Register** notice announcing that date. IX. References The following references have been placed on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) and may be seen by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 1. Memorandum from Folmer, Chemistry Review Group, Division of Petition Review, to Davy, Division of Petition Review, July 10, 2007. 2. Memorandum from Khan, Toxicology Review Group, Division of Petition Review, to Davy, Division of Petition Review, July 25, 2007. 3. Memorandum from Benjamin, Animal Feed Safety Team, Division of Animal Feeds, to Davy, Division of Petition Review, July 18, 2007. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173 Food additives, Incorporation by reference. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 173 is amended as follows: PART 173—SECONDARY DIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN FOOD FOR HUMAN COUNSUMPTION 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 173 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348. 2. Revise § 173.375 to read as follows: § 173.375 Cetylpyridinium chloride. Cetylpyridinium chloride (CAS Reg. No. 123-03-05) may be safely used in food in accordance with the following conditions:
(a)The additive meets the specifications of the United States Pharmacopeia (USP)/National Formulary
(NF)described in USP 30/NF 25, May 1, 2007, pp. 1700-1701, which is incorporated by reference. The Director of the Office of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain copies from the United States Pharmacopeial Convention, Inc., 12601 Twinbrook Pkwy., Rockville, MD 20852, or you may examine a copy at the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Library, Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740, or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* .
(b)The additive is used in food as an antimicrobial agent as defined in § 170.3(o)(2) of this chapter to treat the surface of raw poultry carcasses. The solution in which the additive is used to treat raw poultry carcasses shall also contain propylene glycol (CAS Reg. No. 57-55-6) complying with § 184.1666 of this chapter, at a concentration of 1.5 times that of cetylpyridinium chloride.
(c)The additive is used as follows:
(1)As a fine mist spray of an ambient temperature aqueous solution applied to raw poultry carcasses prior to immersion in a chiller, at a level not to exceed 0.3 gram cetylpyridinium chloride per pound of raw poultry carcass, provided that the additive is used in systems that collect and recycle solution that is not carried out of the system with the treated poultry carcasses; or
(2)As a liquid aqueous solution applied to raw poultry carcasses either prior to or after chilling at an amount not to exceed 5 gallons of solution per carcass, provided that the additive is used in systems that recapture at least 99 percent of the solution that is applied to the poultry carcasses. The concentration of cetylpyridinium chloride in the solution applied to the carcasses shall not exceed 0.8 percent by weight. When application of the additive is not followed by immersion in a chiller, the treatment will be followed by a potable water rinse of the carcass. Dated: November 12, 2007. Randall W. Lutter, Deputy Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. E7-23182 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 62 [Public Notice: 5998] Exchange Visitor Programs—Sanctions and Terminations AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Final rule; withdrawal. SUMMARY: On November 2, 2007, the State Department published in the **Federal Register** a final rule entitled Exchange Visitor Programs—Sanctions and Terminations. The Department amended its regulations to add to and modify the existing actions for which the Department may sanction a sponsor. The change in the regulations will streamline the review process to offer sanctioned sponsors the procedural due process rights equal to those that the Administrative Procedure Act guarantees. In addition, the Rule eliminated summary suspension and modifies program suspension to halt the activities of a sponsor that has committed a serious act of omission or commission which has or could have the effect of endangering the health, safety, or welfare of an exchange visitor, or damage the national security interests of the United States. This rule is being withdrawn because it was submitted to OMB for formal significance designation; however, it was published prior to that determination being made. Since OMB's designation was that it is significant and they would like to formally review it, OMB has requested the rule to be withdrawn in its entirety. DATES: The final rule published at 72 FR 62112, November 2, 2007, is withdrawn effective November 29, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley S. Colvin, Director, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 734, Washington, DC 20547,
(202)203-7415; or e-mail at *jexchanges@state.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On November 2, 2007, the State Department published a final rule (Amendment No. 212 (72 FR 62112)). The rule, to have become effective December 3, 2007, was intended to revise its regulations presently set forth at 22 CFR part 62 subpart D (Sanctions) and 22 CFR part 62 subpart E (Termination and Revocation of Programs). The rule, to have become effective December 3, 2007, was intended to modify the reasons for which sanctions may be imposed and provide for program termination in the case of failure to file an annual management audit, in program categories requiring such audits. The rule would also provide for termination or denial of redesignation for an entire class of designated programs, if the Department determines that they compromise the national security of the United States, or no longer further the public diplomacy mission of the Department. Reason for Withdrawal This rule was submitted to OMB for formal significance designation; however, it was published prior to that determination being made. Since OMB's designation was that it is significant and they would like to formally review it, OMB has requested the rule to be withdrawn in its entirety. Accordingly, the Department withdraws the rule “Exchange Visitor Programs—Sanctions and Terminations” published at 72 FR 62112 on November 2, 2007. Withdrawal of the rule does not preclude the Department from issuing another rule on the subject matter in the future or committing the agency to any future course of action. Issued in Washington, DC, on November 26, 2007. Thelma J. Furlong, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for A/ISS/DIR, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-23172 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-24-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 2, 27, and 90 [WT Docket No. 06-150; CC Docket No. 94-102, WT Docket No. 01-309, WT Docket No. 03-264, WT Docket No. 06-169; PS Docket No. 06-229; WT Docket No. 96-86; WT Docket No. 07-166; FCC No. 07-132] Service Rules for the 698-806 MHz Band, Revision of the Commission's Rules Regarding Public Safety Spectrum Requirements, and a Declaratory Ruling on Reporting Requirement Under the Commission's Anti-Collusion Rule; Corrections AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Correcting amendments. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)published in the **Federal Register** of August 24, 2007, a document concerning the adoption of final rules governing wireless licenses in the 698-806 MHz Band ( *i.e.* , the 700 MHz Band) (72 FR 48814). That document inadvertently failed to update sections 2.106, 27.6, 27.1333, 90.176, 90.545, 90.549, and 90.555. This document corrects the final regulations by revising these sections. DATES: Effective November 29, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Moon at
(202)418-1793, *paul.moon@fcc.gov,* Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; Peter Trachtenberg at
(202)418-7369, *peter.trachtenberg@fcc.gov,* Spectrum and Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; Jeff Cohen at
(202)418-0799, *jeff.cohen@fcc.gov,* Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a partial summary of the Federal Communications Commission's Erratum, FCC 07-132, released on October 25, 2007. This document augments another partial summary of that Erratum published in the **Federal Register** November 29, 2007. List of Subjects *47 CFR Part 2* Communications equipment, Disaster assistance, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, Television. *47 CFR Part 27* Communications common carriers, Radio, Wireless radio services. *47 CFR Part 90* Civil defense, Common carriers, Emergency medical services, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 47 CFR parts 2, 27, and 90 are corrected by making the following correcting amendments: PART 2—FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 2.106 is amended by revising footnote NG158 to read as follows: § 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations. NG158. The frequency bands 763-775 MHz and 793-805 MHz are available for assignment to the public safety services, as described in Part 90 of this chapter. PART 27—MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES 3. The authority citation for part 27 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 332, 336, and 337 unless otherwise noted. 4. Section 27.6 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: § 27.6 Service Areas.
(b)* * *
(3)Service area for Block D in the 758-763 MHz and 788-793 MHz bands is a nationwide area as defined in paragraph
(a)of this section. 5. Part 27, Subpart G is amended by revising the subpart heading to read as follows: Subpart G—Guard Band A and B Blocks (757-758/787-788 MHz and 775-776/805-806 MHz Bands). 6. Section 27.1333 is amended by revising paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 27.1333 Geographic partitioning, spectrum disaggregation, license assignment and transfer.
(b)The 700 MHz Upper D Block licensee will be permitted to assign or transfer its license subject to Commission review and prior approval. The Upper 700 MHz D Block license assignment or transfer applications are precluded from the immediate approval procedures as specified in § 1.948(j)(2). PART 90—PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES 7. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows: Authority: Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7). 8. Section 90.176 is amended by revising the section heading to read as follows: § 90.176 Coordinator notification requirements on frequencies below 512 MHz, at 769-775/799-805 MHz, or at 1427-1432 MHz. 9. Section 90.545 is amended by revising the introductory text to read as follows: § 90.545 TV/DTV interference protection criteria. Public safety base, control, and mobile transmitters in the 769-775 MHz and 799-805 MHz frequency bands must be operated only in accordance with the rules in this section, to reduce the potential for interference to public reception of the signals of existing TV and DTV broadcast stations transmitting on TV Channels 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68 or 69. 10. Section 90.549 is revised to read as follows: § 90.549 Transmitter certification. Transmitters operated in the 763-775 MHz and 793-805 MHz frequency bands must be of a type that have been authorized by the Commission under its certification procedure as required by § 90.203. 11. Section 90.555 is amended by revising paragraphs
(a)introductory text, (b)(1) and (2), and (c)(1) and
(2)to read as follows: § 90.555 Information exchange.
(a)*Prior notification.* Public safety licensees authorized to operate in the 763-775 MHz and 793-805 MHz bands may notify any licensee authorized to operate in the 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, or 788-793 MHz bands that they wish to receive prior notification of the activation or modification of the licensee's base or fixed stations in their area. Thereafter, the 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, or 788-793 MHz band licensee must provide the following information to the public safety licensee at least 10 business days before a new base or fixed station is activated or an existing base or fixed station is modified:
(b)* * *
(1)Allow a public safety licensee to advise the 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, or 788-793 MHz band licensee whether it believes a proposed base or fixed station will generate unacceptable interference;
(2)Permit 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, and 788-793 MHz band licensees to make voluntary changes in base or fixed station parameters when a public safety licensee alerts them to possible interference; and,
(c)* * *
(1)Upon request by a 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, or 788-793 MHz band licensee, public safety licensees authorized to operate radio systems in the 763-775 and 793-805 MHz bands shall provide the operating parameters of their radio system to the 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, or 788-793 MHz band licensee.
(2)Public safety licensees who perform the information exchange described in this section must notify the appropriate 746-757, 758-763, 776-787, or 788-793 MHz band licensees prior to any technical changes to their radio system. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-23097 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 27 and 90 [WT Docket No. 06-150; CC Docket No. 94-102, WT Docket No. 01-309, WT Docket No. 03-264, WT Docket No. 06-169; PS Docket No. 06-229; WT Docket No. 96-86; WT Docket No. 07-166; FCC No. 07-132] Service Rules for the 698-806 MHz Band, Revision of the Commission's Rules Regarding Public Safety Spectrum Requirements, and a Declaratory Ruling on Reporting Requirement Under the Commission's Anti-Collusion Rule; Correction AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)published in the **Federal Register** of August 24, 2007, a document concerning the adoption of final rules governing wireless licenses in the 698-806 MHz Band ( *i.e.* , the 700 MHz Band). (72 FR 48814) This document corrects and amends portions of that document. DATES: Effective November 29, 2007, except for the amendments to §§ 27.14, 27.15, and 27.50 which contain information collection requirements that have not been approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The Commission will publish a document in the **Federal Register** announcing the effective date. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Moon at
(202)418-1793, *paul.moon@fcc.gov* , Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; Peter Trachtenberg at
(202)418-7369, *peter.trachtenberg@fcc.gov* , Spectrum and Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; Jeff Cohen at
(202)418-0799, *jeff.cohen@fcc.gov* , Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document is a partial summary of the Federal Communications Commission's Erratum, FCC 07-132, released on October 25, 2007. This document augments another partial summary of that Erratum published in the **Federal Register** November 29, 2007. This correction document changes the paragraphs referenced on page 48842, second column, line 2, and corrects rules governing §§ 27.14, 27.15, 27.50, and 90.531. In FR doc. 07-4123 published in the **Federal Register** of August 24, 2007, (72 FR 48814) the following corrections are made: 1. On page 48842, in the second column, line 2 is corrected to read “specified in paragraphs 225 and 226,”. 2. On page 48846, in the first column, in § 27.14, the first sentence of paragraph
(a)is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(a)AWS and WCS licensees, with the exception of WCS licensees holding authorizations for Block A in the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, Block C, C1, or C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands, or Block D in the 758-763 MHz and 788-793 MHz bands, must, as a performance requirement, make a showing of “substantial service” in their license area within the prescribed license term set forth in § 27.13. * * * 3. On page 48846, in the first column, § 27.14(e) is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(e)Comparative renewal proceedings do not apply to WCS licensees holding authorizations for Block A in the 698-704 MHz, 728-734 MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, Block C in the 710-716 MHz and 740-746 MHz bands, Block D in the 716-722 MHz band, Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, Block C, C1, or C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands, or Block D in the 758-763 MHz and 788-793 MHz bands. Each of these licensees must file a renewal application in accordance with the provisions set forth in § 1.949, and must make a showing of substantial service, independent of its performance requirements, as a condition for renewal at the end of each license term. 4. On page 48846, in the first column, the sixth line of § 27.14(g) is corrected to read “MHz bands, or EA authorizations for”. 5. On page 48846, in the second column, the final sentence of § 27.14(g)(1) is corrected to read “In addition, an EA or CMA licensee that provides signal coverage and offers service at a level that is below this interim benchmark may lose authority to operate in part of the remaining unserved areas of the license.” 6. On page 48846, in the second column, the eighteenth line of § 27.14(g)(2) is corrected to read “this end-of-term benchmark may be”. 7. On page 48846, in the second column, § 27.14(g)(3) is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(g)* * *
(3)For licenses under paragraph
(g)of this section, the geographic service area to be made available for reassignment must include a contiguous area of at least 130 square kilometers (50 square miles), and areas smaller than a contiguous area of at least 130 square kilometers (50 square miles) will not be deemed unserved. 8. On page 48846, in the second and third column, § 27.14(h) introductory text is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(h)WCS licensees holding REAG authorizations for Block C in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands or REAG authorizations for Block C2 in the 752-757 MHz and 782-787 MHz bands shall provide signal coverage and offer service over at least 40 percent of the population in each EA comprising the REAG license area no later than February 17, 2013 (or within four years of initial license grant, if the initial authorization in a market is granted after February 17, 2009), and shall provide such service over at least 75 percent of the population of each of these EAs by the end of the license term. For purposes of compliance with this requirement, licensees should determine population based on the most recently available U.S. Census Data. 9. On page 48846, in the third column, line 16 of § 27.14(h)(1) is corrected to read “this interim benchmark may lose”. 10. On page 48846, in the third column, line 23 of § 27.14(h)(2) is corrected to read “this end-of-term benchmark within any”. 11. Section 27.14 is corrected by adding paragraph (h)(3) to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(h)* * *
(3)For licenses under paragraph (h), the geographic service area to be made available for reassignment must include a contiguous area of at least 130 square kilometers (50 square miles), and areas smaller than a contiguous area of at least 130 square kilometers (50 square miles) will not be deemed unserved. 12. On page 48846, in the third column, § 27.14(i) introductory text is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(i)WCS licensees holding EA authorizations for Block A in the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz bands, cellular market authorizations for Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, or EA authorizations for Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, if the results of the first auction in which licenses for such authorizations in Blocks A, B, and E are offered do not satisfy the reserve price for the applicable block, as well as EA authorizations for Block C1 in the 746-752 MHz and 776-782 MHz bands, are subject to the following: 13. On page 48847, in the first column, line 16 of § 27.14(i)(1) is corrected to read “service at a level that is below this”. 14. On page 48847, in the first column, line 25 of § 27.14(i)(2) is corrected to read “this end-of-term benchmark may be”. 15. On page 48847, in the first column, § 27.14(i)(3) is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(i)* * *
(3)For licenses under paragraph (i), the geographic service area to be made available for reassignment must include a contiguous area of at least 130 square kilometers (50 square miles), and areas smaller than a contiguous area of at least 130 square kilometers (50 square miles) will not be deemed unserved. 16. On page 48847, in the second and third column, § 27.14(k) is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(k)WCS licensees holding authorizations in the spectrum blocks enumerated in paragraphs (g), (h), or (i), including any licensee that obtained its license pursuant to the procedures set forth in subsection (j), shall demonstrate compliance with performance requirements by filing a construction notification with the Commission, within 15 days of the expiration of the applicable benchmark, in accordance with the provisions set forth in § 1.946(d). The licensee must certify whether it has met the applicable performance requirements. The licensee must file a description and certification of the areas for which it is providing service. The construction notifications must include electronic coverage maps, supporting technical documentation and any other information as the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau may prescribe by public notice. 17. On page 48847, in the third column, § 27.14(l) is corrected to read as follows: § 27.14 Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.
(l)WCS licensees holding authorizations in the spectrum blocks enumerated in paragraphs (g), (h), or
(i)of this section, excluding any licensee that obtained its license pursuant to the procedures set forth in subsection
(j)of this section, shall file reports with the Commission that provide the Commission, at a minimum, with information concerning the status of their efforts to meet the performance requirements applicable to their authorizations in such spectrum blocks and the manner in which that spectrum is being utilized. The information to be reported will include the date the license term commenced, a description of the steps the licensee has taken toward meeting its construction obligations in a timely manner, including the technology or technologies and service(s) being provided, and the areas within the license area in which those services are available. Each of these licensees shall file its first report with the Commission no later than February 17, 2011 and no sooner than 30 days prior to this date. Each licensee that meets its interim benchmarks shall file a second report with the Commission no later than February 17, 2016 and no sooner than 30 days prior to this date. Each licensee that does not meet its interim benchmark shall file this second report no later than on February 17, 2015 and no sooner than 30 days prior to this date. 18. On page 48847, in the third column, the second line of § 27.14(m) is corrected to read “authorization for the D Block in the 758-763”. 19. On page 48847, in the third column, the third line of § 27.14(m) is corrected to read “MHz and 788-793 MHz bands (the Upper 700”. 20. On page 48848, in the first column, the sixth line of § 27.14(m)(4) is corrected to read “expiration of the applicable benchmark, in”. 21. On page 48848, in the first column, the tenth line of § 27.14(m)(4) is corrected to read “the applicable performance requirement”. § 27.15 [Corrected] 22. On page 48848, in the second column, the eighth line of § 27.15(d) is corrected to read “MHz band, Blocks C, C1, or C2 in the”. 23. On page 48848, in the second column, the tenth line of § 27.15(d) is corrected to read “or Block D in the 758-763 MHz and”. 24. On page 48848, in the second column, the sixth line of § 27.15(d)(1)(ii) is corrected to read “MHz band, or Blocks C, C1, or C2 in”. 25. On page 48848, in the third column, the first sentence of § 27.15(d)(2)(i) is corrected to read as follows: § 27.15 Geographic partitioning and spectrum disaggregation.
(d)* * *
(2)*Disaggregation* .
(i)Except for WCS licensees holding authorizations for Block A in the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, Blocks C, C1, or C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands, or Block D in the 758-763 MHz and 788-793 MHz bands, the following rules apply to WCS and AWS licensees holding authorizations for purposes of implementing the construction requirements set forth in § 27.14. * * * 26. On page 48848, in the third column, the sixth line of § 27.15(d)(2)(ii) is corrected to read “MHz band, or Blocks C, C1, or C2 in”. § 27.50 [Corrected] 27. On page 48849, in the second column, § 27.50(b) introductory text is corrected to read as follows: § 27.50 Power and antenna height limits.
(b)The following power and antenna height limits apply to transmitters operating in the 746-763 MHz, 775-793 MHz and 805-806 MHz bands: * * * § 90.531 [Corrected] 28. On page 48860, third column, line 63, the amendatory language of § 90.531 is corrected by removing amendatory instruction (d). Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-23096 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 635 [Docket No. 070803437-7666-02] RIN 0648-AV93 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Commercial Shark Management Measures AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This final rule establishes the 2008 first trimester season commercial quotas for large coastal sharks (LCS), small coastal sharks (SCS), and pelagic sharks based on over- or underharvests from the 2007 first trimester season. This action provides advance notice of quotas and season dates for the Atlantic commercial shark fishery. It also ensures the measures in this action are in place until they are replaced by those implemented under Amendment 2 to the Highly Migratory Species
(HMS)Consolidated Fishery Management Plan
(FMP)even if Amendment 2 is finalized after the start of the second trimester season (May 1, 2008). As such, this action constitutes the regulatory action to determine quotas and season lengths for LCS, SCS and pelagic sharks for the 2008 second trimester season. However, if Amendment 2 to the HMS FMP is unexpectedly delayed beyond the end of the 2008 second trimester season, NMFS may consider a rulemaking for the 2008 third trimester seasons. NMFS would announce any additional action for the second and third seasons in a future **Federal Register** notice. DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 2008. The Atlantic commercial shark fishing season opening and closing dates and quotas for the 2008 first and second trimester seasons are provided in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . ADDRESSES: For copies of the Final Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/FRFA), please write to Highly Migratory Species Management Division, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, or at
(301)713-1917 (fax). Copies are also available from the HMS website at *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/* or from *www.regulations.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LeAnn Southward Hogan or Michael Clark by phone: 301-713-2347 or by fax: 301-713-1917. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Atlantic shark fishery is managed under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The Consolidated HMS FMP for Atlantic Sharks, Tunas, Swordfish and Billfish is implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. Currently, the Atlantic shark annual commercial quotas, with the exception of pelagic sharks, are split among three regions based on historic landings (1999 - 2003). Consistent with 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(iii) and (iv), the annual LCS baseline quota (1,017 mt dw) is split among the three regions as follows: 52 percent to the Gulf of Mexico, 41 percent to the South Atlantic, and 7 percent to the North Atlantic. The annual SCS baseline quota (454 mt dw) is split among the three regions as follows: 48 percent to the Gulf of Mexico, 49 percent to the South Atlantic, and 3 percent to the North Atlantic. The regional quotas for LCS and SCS are divided equally between the trimester seasons in the South Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, and according to historical landings in the North Atlantic. Consistent with 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(vi), any over- or underharvest in a given region from the 2007 first trimester season will be carried over to the 2008 first trimester season in that region. As stated in the proposed rule, existing regulations do not allow underharvests of pelagic sharks to be carried forward to the next fishing management period. Therefore, the 2008 first trimester pelagic shark quotas do not need to be reduced consistent with the current regulations at 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(vi)(B). The 2008 first trimester season quotas for pelagic, blue, and porbeagle sharks are proposed to be 162.7 mt dw (358,688 lb dw), 91 mt dw (200,619 lb dw), and 30.7 mt dw (67,681 lb dw), respectively. The pelagic shark season would open on January 1, 2008 and would close when quotas are projected to be reached with a notification filed at the Office of the Federal Register by the AA, consistent with 50 CFR 635.28(b)(2). If Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP is not final and effective by the start of the 2008 second trimester, the pelagic shark fishery would open on May 1, 2008, with the baseline quotas. On October 1, 2007 (72 FR 55729), NMFS published a proposed rule that examined the regional adjusted quotas and proposed season lengths for the 2008 first trimester season for LCS, SCS and pelagic sharks managed under the Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS analyzed three alternatives for adjusting regional trimester quotas and other management measures based on the over- and underharvests that occurred in the LCS and SCS fisheries in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions during the 2007 first trimester season. Information regarding these alternatives was provided in the preamble of the proposed rule and is not repeated here. Response to Comments Comments on the proposed rule are summarized below, together with NMFS' responses. *Comment 1:* NMFS received several comments in support of alternative 2, which would combine the LCS regions and quotas and open the LCS season on January 1 through January 6. *Response:* NMFS does not prefer alternative 2 because of the negative consequences of establishing a single combined region with a substantially shortened season. These consequences include derby-style fishing and safety at sea concerns for all regions if fishermen have only six days to fish starting January 1, when weather conditions are potentially poor. Additionally, establishing a substantially shortened season (six days) and opening the waters in all regions could lead to decreased fishing efficiency and resultant decreased survival rates for bycatch. Also, the LCS overharvest that has occurred in recent years could continue if alternative 2 is implemented, causing negative ecological impacts through potential overharvests of overfished species in multiple regions. Furthermore, the six day season in alternative 2 may cause a temporary glut of shark products in the market. This glut would likely reduce the ex-vessel price of shark products. Additionally, as fishermen would likely try to land as much shark as possible in as short a time as possible, fishing operations would likely be inefficient, thus reducing the quality of the shark products landed. Overall, market gluts and reduced shark product quality would likely minimize any economic benefits fishermen would gain if the season were open for six days. Combining the regions would likely have negative economic impacts on regions that do no have sharks present year round. The North Atlantic region may be disadvantaged as a result of combining the three regions into one region because sharks are only present in this region certain times of the year. Dealers in all regions, but particularly in the North Atlantic regions, would also be affected, possibly even more so than vessels, as the likelihood of having quality, fresh shark products would be decreased. *Comment 2:* NMFS received a comment stating that NMFS has violated National Standards 1 and 2 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. *Response:* National Standard 1 requires NMFS to establish conservation and management measures to prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery for the United States fishing industry. Because of the overfished nature of certain shark species and the recent overharvests experienced in this fishery, NMFS believes that optimum yield requires a closure as the available quota would result in derby fishing that may compromise safety and efficiency while potentially resulting in excessive fishing mortality. NMFS must close the LCS fishery in all regions during the 2008 first trimester. The closure would also provide the most ecological benefits and help rebuild overfished sandbar and dusky shark populations, and reduce fishing pressure on other LCS species. Amendment 1 to the FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks established a rebuilding plan for LCS that incorporated the results of the 2002 LCS stock assessment and established optimum yield for the LCS fishery by setting baseline LCS quotas. The LCS closure may help offset the amount of overharvests that need to be accounted for in Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP to achieve optimum yield per the results of the 2006 LCS stock assessments. National Standard 2 requires that conservation and management measures be based upon the best scientific information available. The baseline LCS quotas and quota adjustments that NMFS proposed in this rulemaking were established in Amendment 1 to the FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish and Sharks and are based on the 2002 LCS stock assessment. Due to recent LCS overharvests during the first trimester season, the adjusted LCS quotas for the 2008 first trimester season are significantly reduced. The small amount of available LCS quota would lead to substantially shortened seasons or closures during the 2008 first trimester season. Although the 2002 LCS stock assessment was the best available science when the current LCS baseline quotas were established, NMFS also considered the results of the 2006 LCS stock assessment when determining the most appropriate course of action for the LCS fishery in this rulemaking. This rulemaking does not propose changes to the LCS baseline quotas. Overall, the 2008 first trimester baseline quotas are based on the best available science when those quotas were established, which is the 2002 LCS stock assessment and the adjustments are based on the best available landings data in recent years. Changes to the LCS baseline quotas, as proposed in Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP, are based on the 2006 LCS stock assessment. The results from the 2006 LCS stock assessment were also considered as part of this rulemaking. *Comment 3:* NMFS received a comment stating that NMFS violated National Standard 4 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act by deducting state landings from federal quotas. *Response:* National Standard 4 requires that conservation and management measures shall not discriminate between residents of different States. If it becomes necessary to allocate or assign fishing privileges among various United States fishermen, such allocation shall be
(A)fair and equitable to all such fishermen;
(B)reasonably calculated to promote cooperation; and
(C)carried out in such manner that no particular individual, corporation, or other entity acquires an excessive share of such privileges. This action does not discriminate between residents of different States because the LCS closure will apply to all regions and the SCS and pelagic shark fisheries will open in all regions on January 1, 2008. In addition, consistent with the regulations at 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(vi)(C), sharks taken and landed from state waters are counted against the fishery quota for the applicable region and time period. National Standard 3 states that fish stocks shall be managed as a unit throughout its range. Therefore, deducting state landings from federal quotas is necessary to manage stocks throughout the range and does not discriminate between residents of different states. Some residents may be impacted differently but this measure is needed to prevent overfishing. These landings are also included when assessing the stock. The shark fishery is not the only fishery where NMFS deducts state landings from Federal quotas. Other fisheries in the southeast region such as snapper/grouper and reef fish fisheries also deduct state landings from federal quotas, consistent with 50 CFR 622.42. However, to improve consistency between state and federal regulations, NMFS is actively working with the Atlantic States Marine Fishery Commission and, as part of Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP, wrote letters to all states comparing their regulations with Federal regulations. *Comment 4:* NMFS received a comment stating that the Agency failed to monitor the quota and the 2008 LCS quota should default to the 2003 emergency rule LCS quota of 1,714 mt dw. *Response:* The draft Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP includes measures to improve reporting and quota monitoring. Such measures are not addressed in this rulemaking which only establishes quotas and season lengths based on adjustments to baseline quotas. NMFS used the best information available when it became available to establish the quotas and season lengths in this rulemaking. The 2003 emergency rule LCS quota was put into place temporarily while Amendment 1 to the FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish and Sharks was being finalized. The LCS baseline quotas that were finalized in Amendment 1 to the FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish and Sharks were based on the best available science at the time, which was the 2002 LCS stock assessment. Therefore, NMFS would not default to the 2003 emergency rule LCS quota because that quota was temporary and did not include the full range of analyses and public comment that was included in Amendment 1 to the FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish and Sharks. NMFS accounts for over- and underharvests when adjusting the trimester season quotas and has for a number of years, and this rule does not propose a change to this management measure. *Comment 5:* NMFS received a comment stating that the overall quota for all shark species should be zero. *Response:* The purpose of this rulemaking is to adjust trimester quotas based on over- and underharvests from the previous year, not to reanalyze the overall shark quotas and management measures, which is being done in Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS is reexamining quotas and other management measures in Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP. *Comment 6:* NMFS received a comment stating that NMFS has created an economic disaster from failure to manage the fishery and that the Secretary of Commerce should provide economic relief to the small businesses affected by shark quota reductions. *Response:* Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act at Sec. 312 (16 U.S.C. 1861a), at the request of a Governor, the Secretary of Commerce can determine whether there is a commercial fishery failure due to a fishery resource disaster as a result of
(A)natural causes;
(B)man-made causes beyond the control of fishery managers to mitigate through conservation and management measures, including regulatory restrictions (including those imposed as a result of a judicial action) imposed to protect human health or the marine environment; or
(C)undetermined causes. Due to the language contained in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS is currently reviewing these criteria and anticipates doing a rulemaking on them in the near future. At this time, because NMFS has not received a request from a Governor, NMFS is not considering a disaster determination for the Atlantic shark fishery. Changes to the Proposed Rule NMFS is not changing the proposed rule published on October 1, 2007 (72 FR 55729) based upon public comments NMFS received for the aforementioned reasons. As a result, the provisions published in the proposed rule are adopted as final. Final Fishing Season Notification and Quotas for the 2008 First Trimester Season The final opening and closing dates and quotas for the 2008 first and second trimester season for LCS, SCS, and pelagic sharks are provided in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. Table 1. Final Seasons and Quotas for LCS, SCS and Pelagic Sharks for the First Trimester of 2008. All quotas are in metric tons, dressed weight. Species Group (Annual Quota) Region (Allocation) 2008 1st Tri. opening date 2008 1st Tri. closing date 2008 1st Tri. Adjusted Quota Large Coastal Sharks (1,017) Gulf of Mexico (52 %) Closed N/A South Atlantic (41 %) North Atlantic (7 %) Small Coastal Sharks
(454)Gulf of Mexico (48 %) January 1, 2008 To be determined as necessary 73.2 (161,377 lb dw) South Atlantic (49 %) 354.9 (782,413 lb dw) North Atlantic (3 %) 19.3 (42,549 lb dw) Blue Sharks
(273)No regional quotas January 1, 2008 To be determined as necessary 91.0 (200,618 lb dw) Porbeagle sharks
(92)30.7 (67,681 lb dw) Pelagic Sharks other than Porbeagle or blue
(488)162.7 (358,688 lb dw) Table 2. Final Seasons and Quotas for LCS, SCS and Pelagic Sharks for the Second Trimester of 2008. All quotas are in metric tons, dressed weight. Species Group (Annual Quota) Region (Allocation) 2008 2nd Tri. opening date 2008 2nd Tri. closing date 2008 2nd Tri. Adjusted Quota Large Coastal Sharks (1,017) Gulf of Mexico (52 %) CLOSED N/A South Atlantic (41 %) North Atlantic (7 %) Small Coastal Sharks
(454)Gulf of Mexico (48 %) May 1, 2008 To be determined as necessary 72.6 (160,054 lb dw) South Atlantic (49 %) 74.1 (163,361 lb dw) North Atlantic (3 %) 12.0 (26,455 lb dw) Blue Sharks
(273)No regional quotas May 1, 2008 To be determined as necessary 91.0 (200,618 lb dw) Porbeagle sharks
(92)30.7 (67,681 lb dw) Pelagic Sharks other than Porbeagle or blue
(488)162.7 (358,688 lb dw) Classification NMFS has determined that this action is consistent with section 304(b)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, including the National Standards, and other applicable law. This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. In compliance with Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA)was prepared for this rule. The FRFA analyzes the anticipated economic impacts of the preferred actions and any significant alternatives to the final rule that could minimize economic impacts on small entities. A summary of the FRFA is below. The full FRFA and analysis of economic and ecological impacts, are available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES ). Section 604(a)(1) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the Agency to state the objective and need for the rule. The objective of the rulemaking is to ensure that the season lengths and quotas for the first and second trimester seasons of 2008 for LCS, SCS, and pelagic sharks are in place by January 1, 2008, until they are replaced by those implemented under draft Amendment 2 of the Consolidated HMS FMP. There will be no regulatory action to determine quotas and season lengths for LCS, SCS, and pelagic sharks for the 2008 second trimester season even if Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP is finalized after May 1, 2008, the start of the second trimester season. This rule does not change the overall annual base quotas. Section 604(a)(2) of the Regulatory Flexibility Actrequires the Agency to summarize significant issues raised by the public in response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary of the Agency's assessment of such issues, and a statement of any changes made as a result of the comments. The IRFA was done as part of the draft EA for the 2008 first trimester season Atlantic commercial shark management measures. NMFS did not receive any comments specific to the IRFA. However, NMFS did receive comments related to the overall economic impacts of the proposed rule. Those comments and NMFS's responses to them are mentioned above in the preamble for this rule. Section 604(a)(3) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the Agency to describe and provide an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply. This rule could directly affect commercial shark fishermen on the Atlantic Ocean in the United States. NMFS considers all HMS permit holders to be small entities because they either had gross receipts less than $3.5 million for fish-harvesting, gross receipts less than $6.0 million for charter/party boats, or 100 or fewer employees for wholesale dealers. These are the Small Business Administration's size standards for defining a small versus large business entity in this industry. There are approximately 529 (231 directed and 298 incidental) shark permit holders. Additionally, approximately 269 commercial shark dealers could be indirectly affected by this proposed rule. Other small entities involved in HMS fisheries such as processors, bait houses, and gear manufacturers might also be indirectly affected by the final regulations. More information regarding the number of small entities involved in the fishery and their locations can be found in Chapters 3 and 6 of Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP. Section 604(a)(4) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the Agency to describe the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the final rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which would be subject to the requirements of the report or record. None of the alternatives considered for this final rule would result in additional reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance requirements. Section 604(a)(5) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the Agency to describe the steps taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes. Additionally, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(4)) lists four general categories of “significant” alternatives that would assist an agency in the development of significant alternatives. These categories of alternatives are: • Establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; • Clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; • Use of performance rather than design standards; and • Exemptions from coverage of the rule for small entities. As noted earlier, NMFS considers all permit holders in this fishery to be small entities. In order to meet the objectives of this final rule, consistent with Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS cannot exempt small entities or change the reporting requirements only for small entities. Thus, there are no alternatives discussed that fall under the first and fourth categories described above. In addition, none of the alternatives considered would result in additional reporting or compliance requirements (category two above). NMFS does not know of any performance or design standards that would satisfy the aforementioned objectives of this rulemaking while, concurrently, complying with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. As described below, NMFS analyzed three different alternatives in this final rulemaking and provides justification for selection of the preferred alternatives to achieve the desired objective. The alternatives included: maintain existing procedures for LCS and SCS quota management (alternative 1, No Action), combine the LCS regions and quotas and maintain status quo for SCS (alternative 2), and close all regions to LCS fishing during the 2008 first trimester season until Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP effective and maintain modified status quo for SCS (alternative 3, preferred). NMFS preferred alternative 3 because it would provide the most ecological benefits to overfished sandbar and dusky shark populations and reduce fishing pressure on other LCS species. In addition, the ecological benefits of keeping the LCS fishery closed in all regions outweighs the potential economic impacts associated with the closure. Alternative 1 is considered the no action alternative since it would maintain existing procedures for addressing regional trimester over- and underharvests of LCS and SCS when establishing the regional quotas and seasons for the first trimester season of 2008. This alternative is not preferred in part because it could result in negative ecological impacts for LCS species compared to the preferred alternative because it would allow the LCS season to open in the Gulf of Mexico and North Atlantic regions for a short time period. As described below, this alternative would also result in derby fishing and market gluts. It is also important to note that the unexpected magnitude of the 2006 first trimester overharvest would result in no commercial fishing for LCS in the South Atlantic region during the first trimester of 2008 for the second consecutive year since the available adjusted quota of 16.3 mt dw would be taken in approximately one day. If not for the overharvests in 2006 and 2007, the LCS 2008 first trimester base quota allocation would have been 138.9 mt dw in the South Atlantic region. Instead, the adjusted quota under the no action alternative, would be 16.3 mt dw, which is 122.6 mt dw less than it would have been under the base quota allocation. Because of this small 2008 adjusted quota, no fishing season is preferred due to safety at sea concerns, potential derby fishing conditions and further overharvests of overfished shark species. Therefore, under this alternative, the South Atlantic region would be closed during the 2008 first trimester season. Based on the ex-vessel prices per pound dw by region in 2006 of $0.46 per pound dw of LCS flesh and $16.20 per pound for shark fins in the South Atlantic region, the closure would lead to a loss in revenue of approximately $7,121 for LCS flesh (95 percent of the 16.3 mt dw) and $13,122 for shark fins (based on the 5 percent shark fin to carcass ratio). While these revenue reductions alone may not appear to be significant, it should be noted that the 2007 first trimester season in the South Atlantic region was also closed. Therefore, the 2008 first trimester closure would be the second consecutive year this region was closed, possibly leading to continued disrupted revenue flows and negative economic impacts. If not for the 125.1 mt dw overharvest in the first trimester of 2007 in the Gulf of Mexico region, the 2008 first trimester available quota would have been 176.1 mt of LCS in the Gulf of Mexico region. Due to this overharvest, the adjusted LCS quota is 51 mt dw in the Gulf of Mexico region. To estimate the value of changes in revenues from the 2008 available quota, the 2006 ex-vessel prices were used to calculate the “extra” revenues generated from the overharvest in the first trimester of 2007. Based on the ex-vessel prices per pound dw by region in 2006 of $0.47 per pound dressed weight of LCS flesh and $20.65 per pound for shark fins in the Gulf of Mexico region, the value of the 125.1 mt dw reduction from the baseline quota allocation is approximately $55,855 for LCS flesh (95 percent of the quota weight) and $129,166 for shark fins (based on the 5 percent shark fin to carcass ratio). With a 2008 adjusted quota of 51 mt dw, the Gulf of Mexico region would have a short season that would last for five days. Using the ex-vessel prices as above for the Gulf of Mexico region, the value of this 51 mt dw adjusted quota for the first trimester of 2008 is approximately $22,772 for LCS flesh (95 percent of the quota weight) and $52,658 for shark fins (based on the 5 percent shark fin to carcass ratio). Therefore the estimated revenue for the 2008 first trimester season would be approximately $75,430. While there may be slight positive economic impacts as a result of a limited LCS season in the Gulf of Mexico coupled with a South Atlantic LCS closure causing prices to increase, the intense fishing period may also cause a temporary glut in the market, and therefore, a reduction in the ex-vessel price of shark products or less efficient fishing operations thus reducing the quality of the shark products landed. Overall, NMFS expects that the small amount of LCS quota available and short season would likely result in negative economic impacts in the Gulf of Mexico region. The LCS quota in the North Atlantic region for the first trimester season of 2008 would be 10.7 mt dw. The ex-vessel prices only provide the value of LCS flesh in the North Atlantic region and not for shark fins; therefore an average of $18.43 was taken of the ex-vessel price for shark fins in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions to calculate approximate revenue from the available quota. The approximate value of the 10.7 mt dw adjusted quota for the 2008 first trimester season in the North Atlantic region would be $13,415. Under alternative 1, the estimated total value of the adjusted 2008 first trimester LCS quota is $75,430 for the Gulf of Mexico region and $13,415 for the North Atlantic region. Due to the LCS closure in the South Atlantic region, under alternative 1, a negative economic impact totaling $20,243 in lost revenues would occur. The estimated total overall revenue under alternative 1 for all regions would be $68,602. Some of the impacts from these reduced revenues might be mitigated somewhat for vessels that can fish for SCS and pelagic sharks or in other HMS and non-HMS fisheries. However, these opportunities would likely be limited and result in additional costs associated with adjusting current fishing practices. With regards to SCS, alternative 1 would maintain existing procedures for addressing regional trimester over- and underharvests for SCS when establishing the regional quotas and seasons for the first trimesters of 2008. There were no overharvests of SCS in any region during the 2007 first trimester season. No change in economic impacts would be realized in the North Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico regions since these regions would be open, with ample quota, during the first trimester of 2008 under the no action alternative. Based on the ex-vessel price per pound of SCS in the North Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico regions potential revenue for flesh would be $0.43, $0.55, and $0.53, respectively. Potential revenue from SCS may help offset lost revenue in the LCS fishery due to short seasons and a closure. Alternative 2 would combine the North Atlantic, South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions for the LCS fishery into one region. Combining the 2008 first trimester baseline quota for all three regions would result in a baseline quota of 317.8 mt dw. Accounting for the 2007 first trimester overharvests in all three regions of 239.8 mt dw, would result in an adjusted quota of 78 mt dw. NMFS used the 2005 total ex-vessel annual revenue data for these calculations because region specific data was not available for all regions in 2006. Based on total ex-vessel annual revenues in all regions combined in 2005 of $0.48 per pound dress weight of flesh and $17.94 per pound of shark fins, the value of the 239.8 mt dw reduction from the baseline quota allocation in all the regions is approximately $109,349 for LCS flesh (95 percent of the quota weight) and $215,101 for shark fins (based on the 5 percent shark fin to carcass ratio). Therefore, the 2007 first trimester overharvest in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions is estimated to have a direct revenue impact on the LCS commercial fishery, when combining the regions, of approximately $324,450. The value of the 78 mt dw combined quota that would allow the season to be open for six days is approximately $35,568 for LCS flesh (95 percent of the quota weight) and $69,966 for shark fins (based on the 5 percent shark fin to carcass ratio). Therefore, the estimated revenue for the LCS 2008 first trimester season under alternative 2, with all regions combined would be approximately $105,534. Derby style fishing conditions and safety at sea concerns may occur as a result of the shortened season causing negative social impacts. The six day season may cause a temporary glut of shark products in the market and therefore a reduction in the ex-vessel price of shark products or less efficient fishing operations thus reducing the quality of the shark products landed. Under these conditions, it is likely the estimated revenue for all regions would be less than $105,534. Combining the regions would likely have negative economic impacts on regions that do not have sharks present year round. The North Atlantic region may be disadvantaged as a result of combining the three regions into one region. Dealers in all regions, but particularly in the North Atlantic region, would also be affected, possibly even more so than vessels, as the likelihood of having shark products consistently would be decreased. Overall, negative economic impacts would result from the small amount of LCS quota available and short season in all regions. NMFS did not prefer this alternative because negative consequences of establishing a single region combined with a substantially shortened season might include derby-style fishing and safety at sea concerns, as well as decreased fishing efficiency with resulting decreased survival rates for bycatch. Additionally, negative ecological impacts to overfished shark species could occur if all regions were combined and opened for a short time period. Under alternative 2, the SCS fishery would remain the same as in the no action alternative and no adverse economic impacts are expected since these regions would be open, with ample quota, throughout the entire first trimester of 2008. Alternative 3, the preferred alternative would close the LCS fishery in the North Atlantic, South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions for the entire 2008 first and second trimester seasons. The SCS and pelagic shark fisheries would be open in all three regions on January 1, 2008, and no adverse economic impacts are expected since these regions would be open, with ample quota, throughout the first trimester of 2008. If Amendment 2 to the Consolidated HMS FMP is not finalized and effective before the start of the 2008 second trimester season the SCS and pelagic shark fisheries will open in all regions on May 1, 2008 with the baseline quotas. Closing the LCS fishery in all three regions would have slightly more negative economic impacts than the no action alternative but this was chosen due to the result in positive ecological impacts for overfished sandbar and dusky sharks, protected species and other LCS species compared to the no action alternative. Under this alternative, the South Atlantic region would be closed during the 2008 first trimester season similar to alternative 1. However, unlike alternative 1, the Gulf of Mexico region would be closed. The estimated lost revenue as a result of this closure would be approximately $75,430, which would be the approximate revenue lost due to all regions being closed to LCS fishing during the 2008 first trimester season. The North Atlantic region would also be closed under this alternative but this closure is not expected to have a significant economic impact because LCS are not typically in the North Atlantic region during the first trimester. Due to the small landings in this region during the first trimester, it is not expected that the North Atlantic would benefit economically from the 10.7 mt dw of quota available for the 2008 first trimester. From 2004-2007 only an average of 0.4 mt dw of LCS was landed in this region during the entire first trimester season. Therefore, closing all three regions to LCS fishing as in the final rule would have only a slightly different economic impact than the no action alternative. Atlantic shark fishermen may pursue other options as a result of closing the LCS fishery for the 2008 first and second trimesters including transferring fishing effort to other fisheries for which they are permitted, acquiring new permits to participate in other fisheries or relinquishing their permits and leaving the fishing industry. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635 Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, Imports, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Treaties. Dated: November 26, 2007. Samuel D. Rauch III Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. For reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 635 is amended as follows: PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES 1. The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 *et seq.* ; 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* 2. In § 635.27, paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(vi)(A) introductory text are revised to read as follows: § 635.27 Quotas.
(b)* * *
(1)* * *
(i)*Fishing seasons.* The commercial quotas for large coastal sharks, small coastal sharks, and pelagic sharks will be split among three fishing seasons: January 1 through April 30, May 1 through August 31, and September 1 through December 31. NMFS may consider merging or closing any of the fishing seasons pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)(vi) of this section.
(vi)* * *
(A)NMFS will adjust the next year's fishing season quotas for large coastal, small coastal, and pelagic sharks to reflect actual landings during any fishing season in any particular region. For example, a commercial quota underharvest or overharvest in the fishing season in one region that begins January 1 will result in an equivalent increase or decrease in the following year's quota for that region for the fishing season that begins January 1. NMFS may consider merging or closing any of the fishing seasons and relevant quotas in any region when there is limited available quota in one or more seasons. [FR Doc. E7-23160 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 72 229 Thursday, November 29, 2007 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-0091; Airspace Docket No. 07-AWP-5] Proposed Modification of Class E Airspace; Hollister, CA AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify the Class E airspace area at Hollister, CA. Establishment of an Area Navigation
(RNAV)Global Positioning System
(GPS)Standard Instrument Approach Procedure
(SIAP)at Hollister Municipal Airport, Hollister, CA, has made this proposal necessary. Additional controlled airspace is needed for the safety and management of aircraft executing the new RNAV
(GPS)SIAPs at Hollister Municipal Airport, Hollister, CA. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 20590. Telephone
(202)366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2007-0091; Airspace Docket No. 07-AWP-5, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation Administration, System Support Group, Western Service Area, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone
(425)917-6726. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2007-0091 and Airspace Docket No. 07-AWP-5) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov.* Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2007-0091 and Airspace Docket No. 07-AWP-5.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Availability of NPRMs An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov.* Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at *http://www.faa.gov* or the **Federal Register** 's Web page at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.* You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Regional Air Traffic Division, Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service Area, System Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,
(202)267-9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by modifying Class E airspace at Hollister, CA. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft using the new RNAV
(GPS)SIAP to Runway 31 at Hollister Municipal Airport. Additional controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface is necessary for the safety and management of aircraft operations at Hollister Municipal Airport, Hollister, CA. Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9R, signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in this Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this proposed regulation:
(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. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes additional controlled airspace at Hollister Municipal Airport, Hollister, CA. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 15, 2007 and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005—Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth. AWP CA E5 Hollister, CA [Amended] Hollister Municipal Airport, CA (Lat. 36°53′36″ N., Long. 121°24′37″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Hollister Municipal Airport and within 2 miles each side of the 142° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 13.5 miles southeast of the airport. Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 13, 2007. Clark Desing, Manager, System Support Group, Western Service Area. [FR Doc. E7-23173 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-0060; Airspace Docket No. 07-ACE-1] Proposed Establishment of Low Altitude Area Navigation Routes (T-Routes); St. Louis, MO AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish two low altitude Area Navigation
(RNAV)routes, designated T-251 and T-272, in the St. Louis, MO, terminal area. T-routes are low altitude Air Traffic Service routes, based on RNAV, for use by aircraft that have instrument flight rules
(IFR)approved Global Positioning System (GPS)/Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS)equipment. The FAA is proposing this action to enhance safety and improve the efficient use of the navigable airspace in the St. Louis, MO, terminal area. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001; telephone:
(202)366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2007-0060 and Airspace Docket No. 07-ACE-1 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Rohring, Airspace and Rules Group, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:
(202)267-8783. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2007-0060 and Airspace Docket No. 07-ACE-1) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* . Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2007-0060 and Airspace Docket No. 07-ACE-1.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Availability of NPRMs An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* . Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at *http://www.faa.gov* , or the **Federal Register** 's Web page at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html* . You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Central Service Center, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,
(202)267-9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish two low altitude RNAV routes in the St. Louis, MO, terminal area. The routes, designated as T-251 and T-272, would be depicted on the appropriate IFR En Route Low Altitude charts. These T-routes are only intended for use by GPS/GNSS equipped aircraft and are being proposed to enhance safety, and to facilitate the more flexible and efficient use of the navigable airspace for en route IFR operations transitioning through and around the St. Louis Class B airspace area. Low altitude RNAV routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order 7400.9R signed August 15, 2007 and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The low altitude RNAV routes listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this proposed regulation:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation
(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. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes low altitude Area Navigation routes (T-routes) at St. Louis, MO. Environmental Review The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 311a, 311b, and 311k. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.R, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 15, 2006 and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6011—Area Navigation Routes. **T-251 Farmington, MO to RIVRS, IL [New]** FARMINGTON, MO
(FAM)VORTAC (Lat. 37°40′24″ N., long. 90°14′03″ W.) FORISTELL, MO
(FTZ)VORTAC (Lat. 38°41′40″ N., long. 90°58′17″ W.) RIVRS, IL INT (Lat. 39°25′21″ N., long. 90°55′56″ W.) * * * * * * * **T-272 Hallsville, MO to Vandalia, IL [New]** HALLSVILLE, MO
(HLV)VORTAC (Lat. 39°06′49″ N., long. 92°07′42″ W.) VANDALIA, IL
(VLA)VORTAC (Lat. 39°05′37″ N., long. 89°09′45″ W.) * * * * * * * Issued in Washington, DC, on November 23, 2007. Paul Gallant, Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. [FR Doc. E7-23175 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-155669-04] RIN 1545-BE73 Information Reporting for Lump-Sum Timber Sales AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This document contains proposed regulations that provide guidance regarding the information reporting requirements contained in section 6045(e) of the Internal Revenue Code
(Code)on sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum (outright) payments. The proposed regulations amend § 1.6045-4 of the Income Tax Regulations to require real estate reporting persons, as defined in section 6045(e)(2) of the Code, to report lump-sum payments received by sellers (landowners) for sales or exchanges of standing timber. This action is being taken to make the reporting requirements for lump-sum sales of standing timber consistent with the reporting requirements applicable to pay-as-cut timber sales. The proposed regulations do not change the information reporting requirements that currently apply to sales or exchanges of standing timber for pay-as-cut (contingent) payments under section 6050N of the Code. DATES: Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by February 27, 2008. ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-155669-04), room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-155669-04), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, or via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at *http://www.regulations.gov* (IRS REG-155669-04). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the proposed regulation, Julie Hanlon-Bolton of the Office of Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration), at
(202)622-7028; for questions concerning submissions of comments, contact Kelly Banks at
(202)622-7180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background This document contains a proposed amendment to the Income Tax Regulations under section 6045(e). The amendment imposes information reporting requirements on sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum payments, commonly referred to as lump-sum or outright timber sales. A lump-sum contract provides for a pre-set, fixed, and non-contingent payment in exchange for the right to cut and remove designated trees. In these transactions, sellers of standing timber receive fixed payments that are not based on the amount of the timber actually cut. The sellers do not retain any economic interest in the timber and bear no risk of loss upon execution of the sales contract. Sales or exchanges of standing timber for contingent payments, commonly referred to as pay-as-cut timber sales, allow purchasers to cut designated trees in exchange for a payment that is based on a specified rate for each unit of timber actually cut and measured. In these transactions, sellers of standing timber receive payments that are contingent on the amount of timber actually cut. The sellers retain an economic interest in the timber and continue to bear economic risk associated with the sales contract until the timber is actually cut and removed. Because the sellers of standing timber who enter into pay-as-cut transactions retain an economic interest until the timber is actually cut and removed, the payments are characterized as timber royalties reportable under section 6050N on Form 1099-S, “Proceeds from Real Estate Transactions.” See Announcement 90-129, 1990-48 IRB 10. However, currently, no information reporting obligation applies to a sale or exchange of standing timber for a lump-sum payment. The information reporting requirements of section 6050N do not apply to a sale or exchange of timber for a lump-sum payment because the seller retains no economic interest and bears no economic risk of loss in the timber upon execution of the sales contract. Recognizing the disparate treatment in the reporting of timber sale and exchange transactions, the Treasury Department has reconsidered the information reporting requirements under section 6045(e) as they apply to lump-sum sales or exchanges of standing timber and has decided to amend the regulations to require information reporting for these transactions. Currently, section 6045(e) requires a “real estate reporting person,” as defined in section 6045(e)(2), to make an information return and furnish a statement to the transferor with respect to a real estate transaction that consists in whole or in part of the sale or exchange of “reportable real estate.” Section 1.6045-4(b)(2) defines “reportable real estate” as, among other things, any present or future ownership interest in land. Section 1.6045-4(c)(2)(i) provides that no return of information is required with respect to a sale or exchange of an interest in timber, provided that the sale or exchange of such property is not related to the sale or exchange of reportable real estate. The preamble to § 1.6045-4 provides background information concerning the exception for timber sales in § 1.6045-4(c)(2)(i), stating in pertinent part as follows: The proposed regulations provided an exception from the reporting requirements for transactions involving natural resources, including standing timber. Section 6050N of the Code requires reporting for certain royalty payments, including timber royalties, but not for other transactions involving timber. The IRS believes that the disparity in the reporting requirements for different forms of timber transactions may be inappropriate. However, this issue was not addressed in the public comments and was not considered at the public hearing. Accordingly, the final regulations contain the exception for natural resource transactions, including standing timber. The IRS will open a new regulations project to consider the expansion of the reporting requirements to include sales and exchanges of standing timber. Any requirements for the reporting of standing timber will apply only to transactions occurring after the issuance of such requirements. See 55 FR 51282, TD 8323. The IRS has found that some taxpayers are underreporting income from lump-sum or outright sales of timber, resulting in a loss of tax revenue. Additionally, the Treasury Department and the IRS do not think that the disparate treatment of lump-sum and pay-as-cut timber transactions for information reporting purposes is in the interests of sound tax administration. Based on considerations of tax policy and sound tax administration, the Treasury Department has decided to amend the regulations under section 6045(e) to require information reporting for sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum payments. This amendment provides that sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum payments are “reportable real estate” transactions under § 1.6045-4(b)(2) and, thus, shall be reported as provided in section 6045(e) and the regulations. Paperwork Reduction Act The collection of information contained in this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). Comments on the collection of information should be sent to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for the Department of Treasury, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, with copies to the Internal Revenue Service, Attn: IRS Reports Clearance Officer, SE:W:CAR:MP:T:T:SP, Washington, DC 20224. Comments on the collection of information should be received by February 27, 2008. The Treasury Department is interested in comments on the following: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the IRS, including whether the information will have practical utility; The accuracy of the estimated burden associated with the proposed collection of information (see below); How the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected may be enhanced; How the burden of complying with the proposed collections of information may be minimized, including through the application of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and Estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of service to provide information. The collection of information affected by this proposed regulation is described in § 1.6045-4. The collection of information is mandatory. The likely respondents are for-profit corporations and small business entities. *Estimated total annual reporting burden:* 10,000 hours. *Estimated average annual burden hours per respondent:* .5 hours. *Estimated number of respondents:* 20,000. *Estimated frequency of responses:* annually. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any Internal Revenue Law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Proposed Effective Date These amendments shall apply to sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum payments completed on or after the date of publication of a Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the **Federal Register** . Special Analyses It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations. It is hereby certified that collection of information in this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based on the fact that the collection of information burden imposed by these regulations flows directly from section 6045(e) of the Code. Moreover, requiring information reporting as described in the preamble with regard to sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum payments imposes minimal burden in time or expense. Therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) is not required. The IRS invites comments on the accuracy of this certification. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business. Comments and Request for Public Hearing Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any written (a signed original and eight
(8)copies) or electronic comments that are submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS and the Treasury Department request comments on the clarity of the proposed rules and how they can be made easier to understand. All comments will be available for public inspection and copying. A public hearing may be scheduled if requested by any person who timely submits comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time and place for the hearing will be published in the **Federal Register** . Drafting Information The principal author of these regulations is Julie A. Hanlon-Bolton of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration). However, other personnel from the IRS and the Treasury Department participated in their development. List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Proposed Amendments to the Regulations Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 1—INCOME TAXES **Paragraph 1.** The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * **Par. 2.** Section 1.6045-4 is amended by: 1. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), (b)(2)(iii), and (b)(2)(iv) as paragraphs (b)(2)(i)(A), (b)(2)(i)(B), (B)(2)(i)(C), and (b)(2)(i)(D), respectively. 2. Adding paragraph (b)(2)(i)(E). 3. Redesignating paragraph (b)(2) introductory text as (b)(2)(i) introductory text. 4. Designating the undesignated text as paragraph (b)(2)(ii). 5. Adding a new last sentence at the end of newly designated paragraph (b)(2)(ii). 6. Revising paragraph (c)(2)(i) and paragraph (s). The revisions and additions read as follows: § 1.6045-4 Information reporting on real estate transactions with dates of closing on or after January 1, 1991.
(b)* * * (2)* * *
(i)* * *
(E)Any non-contingent interest in standing timber.
(ii)* * * Further, the term *ownership interest* includes any contractual interest in a sale or exchange of standing timber for a lump-sum payment that is fixed and not contingent.
(c)* * *
(2)* * *
(i)An interest in surface or subsurface natural resources (for example, water, ores, and other natural deposits) or crops, whether or not such natural resources or crops are severed from the land. For purposes of this section, the terms “natural resources” and “crops” do not include standing timber.
(s)*Effective/applicability date.* This section applies for real estate transactions with dates of closing (as determined under paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section) that occur on or after January 1, 1991. The amendments to paragraphs (b)(2)(i)(e), (b)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(i) of this section shall apply to sales or exchanges of standing timber for lump-sum payments completed after the date specified in the final regulations. Linda E. Stiff, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E7-23098 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-143397-05] RIN 1545-BE99 Partner's Distributive Share; Hearing AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public hearing on proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This document cancels a public hearing on proposed regulations providing rules concerning the application of sections 704(c)(1)(B) and 737 to distributions of property after two partnerships engage in an assets-over merger. The proposed regulations affect partnerships and their partners. DATES: The public hearing, originally scheduled for December 5, 2007, at 10 a.m., is cancelled. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Hurst of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration), at *Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of public hearing that appeared in the **Federal Register** on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 (72 FR 46932), announced that a public hearing was scheduled for December 5, 2007, at 10 a.m. in the auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The subject of the public hearing is under sections 704(c)(1)(B) and 737 of the Internal Revenue Code. The public comment period for these regulations expired on November 20, 2007. Outlines of topics to be discussed at the hearing were due on November 21, 2007. The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing instructed those interested in testifying at the public hearing to submit an outline of the topics to be addressed. As of Monday, November 26, 2007, no one has requested to speak. Therefore, the public hearing scheduled for December 5, 2007, is cancelled. Cynthia Grigsby, Acting Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E7-23192 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P 72 229 Thursday, November 29, 2007 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 26, 2007. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Rural Business-Cooperative Service *Title:* Rural Business Investment Program, 7 CFR Part 4290. *OMB Control Number:* 0570-0051. *Summary of Collection:* Section 6029 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-171) amended the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (U.S.C. 2009cc) by adding “Subtitle H—Rural Business Investment Program (RBIP).” The program is a Developmental Venture Capital program for the purpose to promote economic development and the creation of wealth and job opportunities in rural areas and among individuals living in such areas through the licensing of Rural Business Investment Companies with the mission of addressing unmet equity investment needs of small enterprises located in rural areas. USDA and Small Business Administration signed the Economy Act Agreement authorizing SBA to provide “the day to day” management and operation of the RBIP. *Need and Use of the Information:* USDA will use the information to determine eligibility for participation in the RBIP and evaluate whether applicants have accomplished the objectives and fulfilled the statutory and regulatory requirements of the RBIP. Without this collection of information would be unable to meet the requirements of the Act and effectively administer the RBIP, ensuring safety and soundness. *Description of Respondents:* Business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 108. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: Quarterly, annually. *Total Burden Hours:* 6,689. Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-23154 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XT-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 26, 2007. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Agricultural Marketing Service *Title:* Organic Handler Market Promotion Assessment Exemption. *OMB Control Number:* 0581-0216. *Summary of Collection:* Industries enter into a marketing order program under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
(AMAA)of 1937, as amended by U.S.C. 601-674. Marketing Order programs provide an opportunity for producers of fresh fruit, vegetables, and specialty crops, in specified production areas, to work together to solve marketing problems that cannot be solved individually. In 2002, section 501 of the Fair Act was amended (7 U.S.C. 7401) to exempt any person that produces and markets solely 100 percent organic products, and that does not produce any conventional or non-organic products, from paying assessments under a commodity promotion law with respect to any agricultural commodity that is produced on a certified organic farm as defined in section 2103 of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. *Need and Use of the Information:* The information collected on form FV-649, is necessary to assist the applicants in making their certifications and the committees or boards to determine an applicant's eligibility, to properly administer the assessment exemption and to verify compliance. *Description of Respondents:* Business or other for-profit; farms. *Number of Respondents:* 103. *Frequency of Responses:* Recordkeeping; reporting: On occasion; annually. *Total Burden Hours:* 52. Agricultural Marketing Service *Title:* Lamb Promotion, Research, and Information Program: Referendum Procedures. *OMB Control Number:* 0581-0227. *Summary of Collection:* The Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS)has the responsibility for the national commodity research and promotion programs. The authority for the Lamb Promotion, Research, and Information Order is established under the Commodity Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1996
(Act)(7 U.S.C. 7411 *et seq.* ). This Act establishes procedures to conduct a referendum among persons subject to assessments who, during a representative period announced by the Secretary of Agriculture, have engaged in the production, feeding, handling, or slaughter of lamb or the exportation of lamb or lamb products. *Need and Use of the Information:* The referendum, using form LS-86, is to determine whether the persons subject to assessments favor the continuation, suspension, or termination of the Order. Provision is made for voting in-person, facsimile or by mail at Farm Service Agency county offices only during the period of the referendum. *Description of Respondents:* Farms; business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 69,761. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 2,093. Agricultural Marketing Service *Title:* Farmers Market Promotion Program (FMPP). *OMB Control Number:* 0581-0235. *Summary of Collection:* The purposes of the Farmers Market Promotion Program
(FMPP)are to increase domestic consumption of agricultural commodities by improving and expanding, assisting in the improvement and expansion, and to develop or aid in the development of new domestic farmers' markets, roadside stands, community-supported agriculture programs, and other direct producer-to-consumer infrastructure. The Farmer-to-Consumer Marketing Act of 1976
(Act)directs USDA to encourage the direct marketing of agricultural commodities from farmers to consumers, and to promote the development and expansion of direct marketing of agricultural commodities from farmers to consumers. The recently authorized Farmer's Market Promotion Program
(FMPP)(7 U.S.C. 3005), section 6 of 7 U.S.C. 3004 directs the Secretary of Agriculture to “carry out a program to make grants to eligible entities for projects to establish, expand, and promote farmers' markets.” *Need and Use of the Information:* The Agricultural Marketing Service will review grant application information to determine eligibility of applicants for participation in FMPP, evaluate goals, objectives, work-plans, expected results and budget for the project. *Description of Respondents:* State, Local or Tribal Government. *Number of Respondents:* 400. *Frequency of Responses:* Recordkeeping; Reporting: One time. *Total Burden Hours:* 3,944. Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-23157 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2007-0071] National Wildlife Services Advisory Committee; Notice of Intent To Reestablish AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: We are giving notice that the Secretary of Agriculture intends to reestablish the National Wildlife Services Advisory Committee for a 2-year period. The Secretary has determined that the Committee is necessary and in the public interest. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Joanne Garrett, Director, Operational Support Staff, WS, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 87, Riverdale, MD 20737-1234;
(301)734-7921. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the National Wildlife Services Advisory Committee (Committee) is to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on policies, program issues, and research needed to conduct the Wildlife Services program. The Committee also serves as a public forum enabling those affected by the Wildlife Services program to have a voice in the program's policies. Done in Washington, DC, this 21st day of November 2007. Boyd K. Rutherford, Assistant Secretary for Administration. [FR Doc. E7-23198 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Roosevelt/Duchesne and Flaming Gorge Ranger Districts Travel Management Plan, Ashley National Forest; Duchesne, Daggett, and Summit Counties, UT and Sweetwater County, WY; Correction AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Forest Service published a document the **Federal Register** of November 9, 2007, concerning request for comments on the proposed action for the Roosevelt/Duchesne and Flaming Gorge Ranger Districts Travel Management Plan. The document identified a 45-day comment period from the date of publication. The closing date corresponds with December 24, 2007. In order to avoid the scoping comment period closing during the holidays, we are extending the comment period to 60 days from the date of the original publication, which corresponds with January 8, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris Rutledge, 435-781-5196. In the **Federal Register** of November 9, 2007, in FR Doc. 72-217, on page 63548, in the first and second column correct the DATES caption to read: DATES: The comment period on the proposed action will extend 60 days from the date of the Notice of Intent is published in the **Federal Register** . The draft environmental impact statement is expected July 2008 and the final environmental impact statement is expected November 2008. Dated: November 20, 2007. Kevin B. Elliott, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 07-5874 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 26
Traces to 26 documents
22 references not yet in our index
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 14 CFR 95
  • 21 CFR 173
  • 22 CFR 62
  • 47 CFR 2
  • 47 CFR 27
  • 47 CFR 90
  • 50 CFR 635
  • 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(iii)
  • 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(vi)
  • 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(vi)(B)
  • 50 CFR 635.28(b)(2)
  • 50 CFR 635.27(b)(1)(vi)(C)
  • 50 CFR 622.42
  • 14 CFR 71
  • 26 CFR 1
  • T.D. 8323
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • 7 CFR 4290
  • Pub. L. 107-171
  • 7 USC 3005
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final rule
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 106
C.F.R.§ 39.19
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 552
C.F.R.§ 21.29
C.F.R.§ 173.375
U.S.C.§ 348
Cite14 CFR 39
Cite1 CFR 51
Cite14 CFR 95
Cites 48 · 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.