Unknown. Final rule

18,148 words·~82 min read·/register/2008/01/10/08-63

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-2008-01-10.xml --- 73 7 Thursday, January 10, 2008 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Forest Service See Natural Resources Conservation Service Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1889-1890 E8-270 Coast Guard Coast Guard NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1891-1893 E8-212 Commerce Commerce Department See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See National Telecommunications and Information Administration Commodity Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Meetings;

Sunshine Act, 1865-1866 08-78 Defense Defense Acquisition Regulations System RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Functions Exempt from Private Sector Performance, 1826 E8-195 Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification, 1828-1830 E8-193 Lead System Integrators, 1823-1826 E8-175 New Designated Countries, 1830 E8-201 Online Representations and Certifications Application, 1822-1823 E8-177 Receiving Reports for Shipments, 1830-1831 E8-178 Ship Critical Safety Items, 1826-1828 E8-173 PROPOSED RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement:

DoD Law of War Program, 1853-1854 E8-176 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1866-1867 E8-194 Defense Defense Department See Defense Acquisition Regulations System Education Education Department NOTICES Grant Program: Professional Development for Arts Educators

(PDAE)Program, 1956-1960 E8-217 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Application for Reconsideration: Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 1896 E8-258 Hawley Products, Inc., 1897 E8-260 Application of Reconsideration: Electric Mobility Corp., 1897 E8-259 Termination of Investigation: J.H.L. Fashion Inc., New York, NY, 1897 E8-256 Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance: Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility, E8-257 1898-1899 E8-261 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities; and Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, 1916-1953 E7-25400 State Implementation Plans: California, 1819-1822 E8-171 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality Implementation Plans; Approval and Promulgation: Maryland; NOx and SO2 Emissions Limitations for Fifteen Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units, 1851-1853 E8-276 State Implementation Plans: California, 1853 E8-174 FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Boeing Model 707 Airplanes and Model 720 and 720B Series Airplanes, 1816-1817 E7-25504 Learjet Model 45 Airplanes, 1815-1816 E8-163 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Boeing Model 731-300 and -400 Series Airplanes, 1846-1848 E8-251 Boeing Model 777 Airplanes, 1844-1846 E8-271 Bombardier Model CL 600 2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes, 1842-1844 E8-250 Fokker Model F27 Mark 050 and Model 050 and Model F.28 Mark 0100, 1848-1850 E8-252 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Application: Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, 1867-1868 E8-223 Northern Natural Gas Co. and PVR Midstream LLC, 1868 E8-225 Blanket Authorization Request: Northern Natural Gas Co., 1868-1869 E8-224 Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator or Foreign Utility Company Status: NRG Cedar Bayou Development Company, LLC, et al., 1869 E8-240 Environmental Assessment: Athens Compressor Expansion Project, 1869-1871 E8-222 Filing: City of Anaheim, California, 1875 E8-233 City of Banning, California, 1875-1876 E8-235 City of Pasadena, California, 1876 E8-230 City of Riverside, California, 1875 E8-234 Pacific Gas and Electric Co., 1874-1875 E8-232 PPL Electric Utilities Corp. and Public Service Electric and Gas Co., 1874 E8-231 Filings: Missouri River Energy Services and Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency, 1876 E8-236 Issuance of Order: Citadel Energy Strategies, LLC, 1872 E8-227 Lookout Windpower, LLC and Forward Windpower, LLC, 1872-1873 E8-228 North American Energy Credit and Clearing-Finance LLC, 1873 E8-221 Ocean State Power and Ocean State Power II, 1871 E8-237 Primary Energy of North Carolina, LLC, 1873 E8-226 Waterbury Generation, LLC, 1871-1872 E8-239 Meetings: AES Sparrows Point LNG, L.C.C., Mid-Atlantic Express, L.L.C; Technical Conference, 1874 E8-229 Revised Public Utility Filing Requirements for Electric Quarterly Reports, 1876-1889 E8-184 Time Extension: California Independent System Operator Corp., 1871 E8-238 Federal Housing Federal Housing Finance Board NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 1889 08-85 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 1889 E8-262 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Transfer of Federally Assisted Land or Facility, 1911-1912 E8-281 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 90-Day Finding on Petition to List the Amargosa River Population of the Mojave Fringe-toed Lizard, 1855-1861 E8-28 NOTICES Proposed Safe Harbor Agreement for the Guam Rail on Cocos Island, Guam, 1893-1894 E8-254 Food Food and Drug Administration NOTICES International Conference on Harmonisation: Draft Guidance on Q8(R1) Pharmaceutical Development; Availability, 1890-1891 E8-213 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Oregon Coast Provincial Advisory Committee, 1862 08-60 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Minerals Management Service IRS Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Clarification to Section 6411 Regulations; Hearing, 1850 E8-220 Patented Transactions; Hearing, 1851 E8-219 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Meetings: Job Corps Advisory Committee, 1895-1896 E8-253 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Grant program: Assistance to Small Shipyards Grant Program, 1912-1913 E8-216 Minerals Minerals Management Service NOTICES Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement: Alternative Energy Development and Production and Alternate Use of Facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf, 1894-1895 E8-210 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Inseason Adjustment to the 2008 Gulf of Alaska Pollock Total Allowable Catch Amount, 1831-1841 08-63 NOTICES Ernest F. Hollings Undergraduate Scholarship Program, 1862-1864 E8-272 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Public Telecommunications Facilities Program; Closing Date, 1864-1865 E8-278 NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Southeast Supply Header Project; Southeast Supply Header, LLC, 1862 E8-298 Neighborhood Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 1899 08-73 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Spent Fuel Storage Casks; Availability of Interim Staff Guidance Documents, 1899 E8-269 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1899-1900 E8-215 Public Public Debt Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1914 08-58 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 1900-1901 E8-188 NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 1901-1903 E8-187 NYSE Arca, Inc., 1903-1904 E8-255 SBA Small Business Administration NOTICES Administrative Disaster Declaration: Massachusetts, 1904 E8-283 Interest Rates, 1905 E8-291 Presidential Disaster Declaration: Missouri; Public Assistance Only, 1905-1906 E8-286 Oregon, 1904-1905 E8-284 E8-285 Washington, 1905 E8-289 State State Department NOTICES Executive Order 13224: Teyrebazen Azadiya Kurdistan; Designation Pursuant to Section 1(b), 1906 E8-274 Request for Grant Proposals: Chilean English as a Foreign Language

(EFL)Student Teacher Program, 1906-1911 E8-299 Surface Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Release of Waybill Data, 1913 E8-209 E8-218 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Transit Administration See Maritime Administration See Surface Transportation Board Treasury Treasury Department See Internal Revenue Service See Public Debt Bureau RULES Privacy Act; Implementation, 1817-1819 E8-130 MISSING FOR: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1893 E8-282 Veterans Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Copayment for Medication, 1914 E8-211 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Environmental Protection Agency, 1916-1953 E7-25400 Part III Education Department, 1956-1960 E8-217 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. 73 7 Thursday, January 10, 2008 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-25174; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-007-AD; Amendment 39-15328; AD 2008-01-03] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Learjet Model 45 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain Learjet Model 45 airplanes. This AD requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the airplane maintenance manual to incorporate certain inspections and compliance times to detect fatigue cracking of certain principal structural elements (PSEs). This AD results from new and more restrictive life limits and inspection intervals for certain PSEs. We are issuing this AD to ensure that fatigue cracking of various PSEs is detected and corrected; such fatigue cracking could adversely affect the structural integrity of these airplanes. DATES: This AD becomes effective February 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Litke, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Services Branch, ACE-118W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone

(316)946-4127; fax

(316)946-4107. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion The FAA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to certain Learjet Model 45 airplanes. That supplemental NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on June 18, 2007 (72 FR 33415). That supplemental NPRM proposed to require revising the Airworthiness Limitations section

(ALS)of the airplane maintenance manual to incorporate certain inspections and compliance times to detect fatigue cracking of certain principal structural elements (PSEs). Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the single comment received. Request To Clarify Paragraph

(f)of the Supplemental NPRM Averitt Air states that the supplemental NPRM lists Chapter 4 of the Learjet 45 Maintenance Manual, Revision 38, dated April 24, 2006, as a means of compliance with the supplemental NPRM. Averitt points out that the maintenance manual is currently at Revision 39, with Revision 40 coming soon. Averitt states that as the supplemental NPRM is currently worded, with each revision to the maintenance manual the operator will have to review Chapter 4 of the maintenance manual to ensure no changes have been made. Averitt also points out that each operator is required by Federal Aviation Regulations

(FARs)to comply with the latest revision of the airworthiness limitations for his aircraft. Averitt questions the issuance of the AD at this time. Averitt states that the manufacturer of Learjet Model 45 airplanes is proactive in advising the operator of revisions to the maintenance manual. We infer that Averitt would like us to put words in the AD that allow for the use of later revisions of the maintenance manual. As Averitt notes, operators must comply with the terms of the ALS, as specified in sections 43.16 (for persons maintaining products) and 91.403 (for operators) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.16 and 14 CFR 91.403). However, for the FAA to require compliance with any new or more restrictive life limits and inspections that the manufacturer or the FAA might impose in the ALS, we must engage in rulemaking; if we do not engage in rulemaking, the revised limitations in the maintenance manual cannot be made mandatory. We do, however, agree with Averitt's request to allow accomplishing the AWL revision in accordance with later revisions. We have revised paragraph

(f)of this AD to allow later revisions of the maintenance manuals as acceptable methods of compliance if they are approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Conclusion We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. We also determined that this change will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance There are about 347 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This AD affects about 258 airplanes of U.S. registry. The actions take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of this AD for U.S. operators is $20,640, or $80 per airplane. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **2008-01-03 Learjet:** Amendment 39-15328. Docket No. FAA-2006-25174; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-007-AD. Effective Date

(a)This AD becomes effective February 14, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Learjet Model 45 airplanes, certificated in any category; serial numbers (S/Ns) 45-002 through 45-302 inclusive, and S/Ns 45-2001 through 45-2049 inclusive. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from new and more restrictive life limits and inspection intervals for certain principal structural elements (PSEs). We are issuing this AD to ensure that fatigue cracking of various PSEs is detected and corrected; such fatigue cracking could adversely affect the structural integrity of these airplanes. Compliance

(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance

(AMOC)according to paragraph

(g)of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular

(AC)25.1529-1. Revise the Airworthiness Limitations Section

(f)Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the airplane maintenance manual

(AMM)to include new life limits and inspection intervals according to a method approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Incorporating the applicable chapters specified in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD in the AMM is one approved method for doing the revision. Accomplishing the revision in accordance with a later approved revision of the applicable maintenance manual is an acceptable method of compliance if the revision is approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO, FAA. Thereafter, no alternative life limits or inspection intervals may be used for the affected PSEs, unless the limit or interval is part of a later approved AMM revision or the limit or interval is approved as an alternative method of compliance

(AMOC)in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph

(g)of this AD.

(1)For Learjet Model 45 airplanes, S/Ns 45-002 through 45-302 inclusive: Chapter 4 of the Learjet 45 Maintenance Manual, Revision 38, dated April 24, 2006.

(2)For Learjet Model 45 airplanes, S/Ns 45-2001 through 45-2049 inclusive: Chapter 4 of the Learjet 40 Maintenance Manual, Revision 6, dated April 24, 2006. Note 2: After an operator complies with the requirements of paragraph

(f)of this AD, that paragraph does not require that operators subsequently record accomplishment of those requirements each time an action is accomplished according to that operator's FAA-approved maintenance inspection program. AMOCs (g)(1) The Manager, Wichita ACO, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

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

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

(h)None. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-163 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28828; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-010-AD; Amendment 39-15258; AD 2007-23-12] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 707 Airplanes and Model 720 and 720B Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an error in an existing airworthiness directive

(AD)that was published in the **Federal Register** on November 13, 2007 (72 FR 63800). The error resulted in the wrong appendix information. This AD applies to all Boeing Model 707 airplanes and Model 720 and 720B series airplanes. This AD requires accomplishing an airplane survey to define the configuration of certain system installations, and repair of any discrepancy found. This AD also requires modifying the fuel system by installing lightning protection for the fuel quantity indication system (FQIS), ground fault relays for the fuel boost pumps, and additional power relays for the center tank fuel pumps and uncommanded on-indication lights at the flight engineer's panel. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathrine Rask, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)917-6505; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 12, 2007, the FAA issued AD 2007-23-12, amendment 39-15258 (72 FR 63800, November 13, 2007), for all Boeing Model 707 airplanes and Model 720 and 720B series airplanes. The AD requires accomplishing an airplane survey to define the configuration of certain system installations, and repair of any discrepancy found. The AD also requires modifying the fuel system by installing lightning protection for the fuel quantity indication system (FQIS), ground fault relays for the fuel boost pumps, and additional power relays for the center tank fuel pumps and uncommanded on-indication lights at the flight engineer's panel. As published, the AD included Appendix 1. That appendix, as published, contained information not intended for the AD. The correct appendix appears below as Appendix 1. Appendix 1 of the AD, as corrected, contains the Model 707 SFAR 88 survey areas. The appendix is for informational use and provides highlights of the general content of the required survey to assist operators in developing an acceptable survey plan. Operators may wish to use the appendix as an aid to implementing the airplane survey. No other part of the regulatory information has been changed; therefore, the final rule is not republished in the **Federal Register** . The effective date of this AD remains December 18, 2007. § 39.13 [Corrected] In the **Federal Register** of November 13, 2007, on pages 63803 and 63804, Appendix 1 of AD 2007-23-12 is corrected to read as follows: Appendix 1. Model 707 SFAR 88 Survey Areas Model 707 SFAR-88 Survey To support the development of the modifications required by this AD, a survey of the airplane is required to identify the current systems configuration, potential locations for new components, and potential wiring routes. The survey should examine the following areas of the airplane: flight deck, electrical equipment (E/E) bay, mix bay, left and right wing-to-body areas, left and right wing leading edges, and inside the fuel tanks. The report should consist of part numbers of the fuel quantity indication system

(FQIS)components and fuel pumps, schematics for the FQIS and fuel pump control systems, and photos with dimensions and body and/or wing stations identified depicting the information below. Video, sketches or marked up drawings may also be acceptable.

(1)Flight Deck • Places for new circuit breakers that may be installed on the P1, P2, P3, P4 and/or P5 panels. • Places for new indication lights that may be installed in the lower P11 panel. • Photos of the flight deck area above and below the engineer's panel and on the opposite side showing the existing wire bundle routing with the ceiling and side panels removed. This could be used to route additional wire bundles to the E/E bay. • Part number(s) of the FQIS indicators installed in the P11 panel. • Verify if a remote trimmer is installed for this indicator.

(2)E/E Bay • Photos of any location within the E/E bay where there is enough space to install an electrical junction box, up to a 22 x 12 x 4.0 inch area. Possible locations are along the body structure and beneath the cabin floor.

(3)Mix Bay • Photos showing the tubing and duct routing from the wing section. • Photos of the current wire bundles in the mix bay. • Photos for the installation of an electrical junction box, up to a 9 x 6 x 6 inch area. • Photos from both inside the aircraft fuselage showing the wire routing and pressure vessel penetration.

(4)Leading Edge • Photos of the FQIS connectors on the front spar for all fuel tanks. • Photos of the front spar from the reserve tank to the center tank. Photos should show tubing installations, existing wire harnesses, pneumatic ducts, etc. • Photos of areas between the engine struts, outboard of engine 1 and 4, and between the inboard strut and side of body with a free 9 x 3 x 5 inch accessible area. New FQIS wire routing should have a minimum of 2 inch separation from existing wires, a new location for FQIS spar penetration connectors may be necessary. • Photos of the front spar and seal ribs with in the strut area with the access panels removed.

(5)Wing to Body (Un-Pressurized Wire Penetrations) • Photos of the existing wire bundle penetrations through the pressure vessel and a 3 foot radius area around the existing wire bundle penetrations in the wing to body fairing (view from the front spar looking inboard).

(6)Fuel Tanks (Non-Explosion Proof Equipment Is Generally Not Allowed Inside Fuel Tanks) • Photos of the FQIS probes and the wiring for the probes. • Photos along the wiring to the spar penetration. • Photos of the internal tank structure and plumbing. If, while accomplishing the survey, any discrepancy with the structure, fuel system, or other systems is found, repairs must be accomplished prior to further flight in accordance with this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 19, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-25504 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Secretary 31 CFR Part 1 Privacy Act; Implementation AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Treasury. ACTION: Interim rule. SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the Department of the Treasury amends this part to exempt a new Internal Revenue Service

(IRS)system of records entitled “IRS 42.005—Whistleblower Office Records” from certain provisions of the Privacy Act. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. Comments must be received no later than February 11, 2008. You may also submit comments through the Federal rulemaking portal at *http://www.regulations.gov* (follow the instructions for submitting comments). ADDRESSES: Please submit comments to the Director, Whistleblower Office, SE:WO, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. Comments will be made available for inspection at the IRS Freedom of Information Reading Room (Room 1621), at the above address. The telephone number for the Reading Room is

(202)622-5164. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Whitlock, Director,

(202)622-0351, Whistleblower Office, SE:WO, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), the head of an agency may promulgate rules to exempt a system of records from certain provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a if the system is investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes. The IRS is hereby giving notice of an interim rule to exempt “Treasury/IRS 42.005 Whistleblower Office Records” from certain provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). The proposed exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) is from provisions (c)(3), (d)(1)-(4), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G)-(I), and

(f)because the system contains investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes. The following are the reasons why this system of records maintained by the IRS is exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) of the Privacy Act of 1974:

(1)5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3). These provisions of the Privacy Act provide for the release of the disclosure accounting required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(1) and

(2)to the individual named in the record at his/her request. The reasons for exempting this system of records from the foregoing provisions are:

(i)The release of disclosure accounting would put the subject of an investigation on notice that an investigation exists and that such person is the subject of that investigation.

(ii)Such release would provide the subject of an investigation with an accurate accounting of the date, nature, and purpose of each disclosure and the name and address of the person or agency to which disclosure was made. The release of such information to the subject of an investigation would provide the subject with significant information concerning the nature of the investigation and could result in the alteration or destruction of documentary evidence, the improper influencing of witnesses, and other activities that could impede or compromise the investigation.

(iii)Release to the individual of the disclosure accounting would alert the individual as to which agencies were investigating the subject and the scope of the investigation and could aid the individual in impeding or compromising investigations by those agencies.

(2)5 U.S.C. 552a(d)(1)-(4), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), and (f). These provisions of the Privacy Act relate to an individual's right to be notified of:

(i)The existence of records pertaining to such individual,

(ii)Requirements for identifying an individual, who requested access to records,

(iii)The agency procedures relating to access to and amendment of records,

(iv)The content of the information contained in such records, and

(v)The civil remedies available to the individual in the event of an adverse determination by an agency concerning access to or amendment of information contained in record systems. The reasons for exempting this system of records from the foregoing provisions are that notifying an individual (at the individual's request) of the existence of an investigative file pertaining to such individual or to granting access to an investigative file pertaining to such individual could:

(i)Interfere with investigative and enforcement proceedings,

(ii)Deprive co-defendants of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication,

(iii)Constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of others,

(iv)Disclose the identity of confidential sources and reveal confidential information supplied by such sources. Disclose investigative techniques and procedures

(3)5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1). This provision of the Privacy Act requires each agency to maintain in its records only such information about an individual as is relevant and necessary to accomplish a purpose of the agency required to be accomplished by statute or executive order. The reasons for exempting this system of records from the foregoing are as follows:

(i)The IRS will limit the system to those records that are needed for compliance with the provisions of Title 26. However, an exemption from the foregoing is needed because, particularly in the early stages of an investigation, it is not possible to determine the relevance or necessity of specific information.

(ii)Relevance and necessity are questions of judgment and timing. What appears relevant and necessary when first received may subsequently be determined to be irrelevant or unnecessary. It is only after the information is evaluated that the relevance and necessity of such information can be established with certainty.

(4)5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(I). This provision of the Privacy Act requires the publication of the categories of sources of records in each system of records. The reasons an exemption from this provision has been claimed, are as follows:

(i)Revealing categories of sources of information could disclose investigative techniques and procedures.

(ii)Revealing categories of sources of information could cause sources who supply information to investigators to refrain from giving such information because of fear of reprisal, or fear of breach of promises of anonymity and confidentiality. These regulations are being published as an interim final rule because the amendments do not impose any requirements on any member of the public. These amendments are the most efficient means for the Treasury Department to implement its internal requirements for complying with the Privacy Act. Accordingly, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3), the Department of the Treasury finds good cause that prior notice and other public procedures with respect to this rule are unnecessary, and good cause for making this interim final rule effective 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, it has been determined that this interim final rule is not a significant regulatory action, and therefore, does not require a regulatory impact analysis. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, do not apply. List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1 Privacy. Part 1, subpart C of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 1—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 31 U.S.C. 321. Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552 as amended. Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. 2. Section 1.36 paragraph (g)(1)(viii) is amended by adding the following text to the table in numerical order. § 1.36 Systems exempt in whole or in part from provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a and this part.

(g)* * *

(1)* * *

(viii)* * * Number Name of system * * * * * IRS 42.005 Whistleblower Office Records. * * * * * Dated: December 21, 2007. Peter B. McCarthy, Assistant Secretary for Management and Chief Financial Officer. [FR Doc. E8-130 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2007-1104; FRL-8512-7] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of nitrogen (NO X ) emissions from internal combustion engines and stationary gas turbines. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). DATES: This rule is effective on March 10, 2008 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 11, 2008. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the **Federal Register** to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2007-1104, by one of the following methods: 1. *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* *www.regulations.gov.* Follow the on-line instructions. 2. *E-mail:* *steckel.andrew@epa.gov.* 3. *Mail or deliver:* Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. *Instructions:* All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. *www.regulations.gov* is an “anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at *www.regulations.gov* and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco Dóñez, EPA Region IX,

(415)972-3956, *Donez.Francisco@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. The State's Submittal A. What rules did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of these rules? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? II. EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria? C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules D. Public Comment and Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State's Submittal A. What rules did the State submit? Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California Air Resources Board. Table 1.—Submitted Rules Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted SJVAPCD 4702 Internal Combustion Engines—Phase 2 01/18/07 05/08/07 SMAQMD 413 Stationary Gas Turbines 03/24/05 09/05/07 On July 23, 2007 and October 16, 2007, respectively, EPA determined that these rule submittals met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. B. Are there other versions of these rules? The SJVAPCD first adopted Rule 4702 on August 21, 2003. That version was submitted to EPA on October 9, 2003, and approved on May 18, 2004 (69 FR 28061). The SJVAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved version on June 16, 2005 and April 20, 2006, and CARB submitted them to us on October 20, 2005 and October 5, 2006. The SMAQMD first adopted Rule 413 on May 6, 1995, and EPA approved the rule into the SIP on March 1, 1996 (61 FR 7992). The SMAQMD adopted revisions to Rule 413 on May 1, 1997 and CARB submitted them to us on May 18, 1998. We approved those revisions into the SIP on February 11, 1999 (64 FR 6803). While we can act on only the most recently submitted version of each rule, we have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals. C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? NO X helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control NO X emissions. SJVAPCD Rule 4702 limits emissions of NO X , carbon monoxide (CO), and volatile organic compounds

(VOC)from internal combustion engines. Changes from the SIP-approved version include the following: • Rule 4702 now applies to compression-ignited engines, transportable engines, and engines in agricultural operations. The compliance date for agricultural engines is January 1, 2009. • The amended rule contains new exemptions for engines used to propel instruments of husbandry, engines used exclusively to power mobile agricultural equipment, engines used to power wind machines for crop protection, and certain de-rated engines. • The amended rule establishes requirements for District certification of exhaust control systems. These changes are meant to reduce the overall number of source tests required for Rule 4702 compliance, without affecting emission reductions. • The amended rule allows the use of a portable NO X analyzer for agricultural spark-ignited engines, to show initial compliance with Rule 4702 emissions standards until a source test can be arranged. • The amended rule allows representative testing for spark-ignited engines, and specifies requirements for that testing. SMAQMD Rule 413 limits emissions of NO X from stationary gas turbines. Amended Rule 413 extends the startup exemption for turbines with a rated output greater than or equal to 160 MW, and which are part of a combined cycle process, to up to 4 hours following a shutdown of the associated steam turbine of 72 hours or more; and up to 3 hours following a shutdown of the associated steam turbine of between 8 and 72 hours. It also allows a 6-hour averaging period for compliance with NO X limits for gas turbines with a rated output greater than 100 MW, and which are part of a combined cycle process, during a transient increase in emissions. EPA's technical support documents

(TSDs)have more information about these rules. II. EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVAPCD and the SMAQMD both regulate serious ozone nonattainment areas (see 40 CFR part 81.305), so Rule 4702 and Rule 413 must implement Reasonably Available Control Technology

(RACT)for control of NO X emissions (see CAA 182(b)(2),

(c)and 182(f)). Both areas also regulate PM-10 nonattainment areas (see 40 CFR 81.305). The SJVAPCD is a serious PM-10 nonattainment area, so Rule 4702 must implement Best Available Control Measures (BACM), including Best Available Control Technology (BACT), for control of NO X emissions (see CAA 189(b)(1)(B) and 189(e)). The SMAQMD is a moderate PM-10 nonattainment area, so Rule 413 must implement Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), including RACT, for control of NO X emissions (see CAA 189(a)(1)(C) and 189(e)). Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate enforceability, BACM/BACT and RACM/RACT requirements consistently include the following: 1. “State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,” (the NO X Supplement), 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992. 2. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook). 3. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). 4. EPA Memorandum to Regional Administrators from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation: “State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions during Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown,” September 20, 1999. 5. “Clean Air Act National Testing Guidance,” EPA, September 30, 2005. 6. “Alternative Control Techniques Document—NO X Emissions from Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines,” EPA, EPA-453/R-93-032, July 1993. 7. “Alternative Control Techniques Document—NO X Emissions from Stationary Gas Turbines,” EPA, EPA-453/R-93-007, January 1993. 8. State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992). 9. State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994). B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria? We believe these rules are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, BACM/BACT, RACM/RACT, and SIP relaxations. The inclusion of agricultural, transportable, and compression-ignited engines in SJVAPCD Rule 4702 clearly strengthens the rule, and the added exemptions are supported by District staff analysis. The representative testing provisions in Rule 4702 are based on EPA's “Clean Air Act National Testing Guidance,” and contain appropriate requirements to assure the achievement of emissions limits. The use of portable NO X analyzers allowed in Rule 4702 is a reasonable manner of checking compliance before the required performance of a full source test. The Rule 4702 requirements for certification of exhaust control systems are adequate to ensure control of emissions while simplifying rule compliance and enforcement. In our prior action to approve Rule 4702 into the SIP, we concluded that Rule 4702 implemented BACM/BACT as required for serious PM-10 nonattainment areas under CAA sections 189(b)(1)(B) and 189(e) for NO X emissions from non-agricultural stationary internal combustion engines. See 69 FR 7098, 7102 (February 12, 2004) (proposed rule); 69 FR 28061 (May 18, 2004) (final rule). Revised Rule 4702 continues to implement BACM/BACT for these engines. In addition, these revisions satisfy SJVAPCD's commitment to apply BACT-level controls to agricultural engines, consistent with its Amended 2003 PM-10 Plan. (The “Amended 2003 PM-10 Plan” is the San Joaquin Valley Plan to Attain Federal Standards for Particulate Matter 10 Microns and Smaller, as revised and supplemented by the plan amendments SJVAPCD adopted and submitted to EPA in December 2003. See 69 FR 30006, May 26, 2004, for the final rule approving these plan amendments into the California SIP.) As to SMAQMD Rule 413, while the extension of allowable startup periods and the provision for short-term excursions appear to relax the rule, these changes apply to only a small subset of the permitted plants in the District that cannot feasibly meet the current SIP rule's requirements during these limited periods. All of these sources have installed BACT-level NO X emission controls in accordance with SMAQMD's New Source Review

(NSR)requirements. New turbines covered by the revised exemptions (i.e., combined-cycle turbines with capacities exceeding 100 MW) will also be subject to BACT for control of NO X emissions. These revisions to Rule 413 only provide limited flexibility to address operational necessities at large turbines during narrowly defined periods, and do not alter the control technology requirements that apply to these sources. In our prior actions to approve Rule 413 into the SIP, we concluded that this rule implemented RACT for NO X control as required for serious ozone nonattainment areas under CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f). See 61 FR 7992 (March 1, 1996); 64 FR 6803 (February 11, 1999). Revised Rule 413 continues to implement RACT for control of NO X emissions, as a precursor to both ozone and PM-10, from stationary gas turbines. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation of these rules. C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules EPA has no recommendations to further improve these rules. D. Public Comment and Final Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this **Federal Register** , we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we receive adverse comments by February 11, 2008, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the **Federal Register** to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on March 10, 2008. This will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 10, 2008. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: December 5, 2007. Jane Diamond, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(350)(i)(C) and (c)(352) to read as follows: § 52.220 Identification of plan.

(c)* * *

(350)* * *

(i)* * *

(C)San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. ( *1* ) Rule 4702, adopted on August 21, 2003 and amended on January 18, 2007.

(352)New and amended regulations were submitted on September 5, 2007, by the governor's designee.

(i)Incorporation by reference.

(A)Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. ( *1* ) Rule 413, adopted on April 6, 1995 and amended on March 24, 2005. [FR Doc. E8-171 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 204, 212, and 252 RIN 0750-AF55 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; DoD Representations and Certifications in the Online Representations and Certifications Application (DFARS Case 2006-D032) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: DoD has issued a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to address the DFARS provisions included in the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). Use of ORCA eliminates the need for offerors to repetitively submit the same information in response to Government solicitations. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Felisha Hitt, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Telephone 703-602-0310; facsimile 703-602-7887. Please cite DFARS Case 2006-D032. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background Subpart 4.12 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR)requires prospective contractors to complete electronic annual representations and certifications in ORCA, in conjunction with required registration in the Central Contractor Registration database. FAR 4.1202 prescribes use of the solicitation provision at 52.204-8, Annual Representations and Certifications; provides a list of the FAR representations and certifications in ORCA; and provides direction to the contracting officer to exclude those representations and certifications from solicitations that contain the clause at FAR 52.204-7, Central Contractor Registration. Similarly, this DFARS rule contains a list of the DFARS representations and certifications in ORCA, and provides direction to the contracting officer to exclude those representations and certifications when using the provision at FAR 52.204-8. In addition, the DFARS rule contains a substitute paragraph

(c)for use with the provision at FAR 52.204-8 to permit inclusion of information relating to both the FAR and the DFARS. An offeror must include information in paragraph

(c)only if changes to the offeror's annual representations and certifications apply to a particular solicitation. DoD published a proposed rule at 72 FR 6515 on February 12, 2007. DoD received comments from one respondent. A discussion of the comments is provided below. 1. *Comment:* The respondent suggested administrative changes to the organization of the contents of ORCA to enhance the certification process. *DoD Response:* The comment is outside the scope of this DFARS case. However, the comment has been forwarded to the Government officials responsible for managing the ORCA system. 2. *Comment:* The respondent recommended revision of the introductory statement at 204.1202(2), from “Do not include the following representations and certifications” to “Do not include the following representations and certifications in solicitations and contracts.” *DoD Response:* DoD believes that the direction in the introductory statement is clear as written, and that the additional phrase is unnecessary. 3. *Comment:* The respondent recommended amendment of the second sentence in the introductory text at 212.301(f) pertaining to commercial item solicitations, to change “may” to “shall” with regard to direction to the contracting officer to consider the information in ORCA. *DoD Response:* DoD has retained “may” in this sentence to provide flexibility to the contracting officer in the review of representations and certifications. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD has prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis consistent with 5 U.S.C. 604. A copy of the analysis may be obtained from the point of contact specified herein. The analysis is summarized as follows: The objective of the rule is to maintain a centralized location for the representation and certification information required by the DFARS, thereby eliminating the need for offerors to submit the same information to various DoD offices in response to individual solicitations. The rule will apply to prospective DoD contractors registered in the Central Contractor Registration database. FAR 4.1102 requires that prospective contractors be registered in the database before the award of a contract or agreement, with certain exceptions. Administrative personnel that have general knowledge of the contractor's business should be able to enter the applicable representation and certification information into ORCA. The rule is expected to have a positive impact on small business concerns by reducing administrative burdens. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection requirements of the representations and certifications addressed in this rule that require offerors to provide specific fill-in information have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Numbers 0704-0229, 0704-0245, and 0704-0259. This rule does not impose information collection requirements beyond those already required by existing DFARS representations and certifications. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 204, 212, and 252 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204, 212, and 252 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 204, 212, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 204—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS 2. Subpart 204.12 is added to read as follows: Subpart 204.12—Annual Representations and Certifications 204.1202 Solicitation provision and contract clause. When using the provision at FAR 52.204-8, Annual Representations and Certifications—

(1)Use the provision with 252.204-7007, Alternate A, Annual Representations and Certifications; and

(2)Do not include the following representations and certifications:

(i)252.209-7005, Reserve Officer Training Corps and Military Recruiting on Campus.

(ii)252.212-7000, Offeror Representations and Certifications—Commercial Items.

(iii)252.216-7003, Economic Price Adjustment—Wage Rates or Material Prices Controlled by a Foreign Government.

(iv)252.225-7000, Buy American Act—Balance of Payments Program Certificate.

(v)252.225-7020, Trade Agreements Certificate.

(vi)252.225-7031, Secondary Arab Boycott of Israel.

(vii)252.225-7035, Buy American Act—Free Trade Agreements—Balance of Payments Program Certificate.

(viii)252.225-7042, Authorization to Perform.

(ix)252.229-7003, Tax Exemptions (Italy).

(x)252.229-7005, Tax Exemptions (Spain).

(xi)252.239-7011, Special Construction and Equipment Charges.

(xii)252.247-7022, Representation of Extent of Transportation by Sea. PART 212—ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS 3. Section 212.301 is amended by adding paragraph

(f)introductory text to read as follows: 212.301 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

(f)The following additional provisions and clauses apply to DoD solicitations and contracts for the acquisition of commercial items. If the offeror has completed the provisions listed in paragraph (f)(i) or

(ii)of this section electronically as part of its annual representations and certifications at *https://orca.bpn.gov* , the contracting officer may consider this information instead of requiring the offeror to complete these provisions for a particular solicitation. PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 4. Section 252.204-7007 is added to read as follows: 252.204-7007 Alternate A, Annual Representations and Certifications. Alternate A, Annual Representations and Certifications (JAN 2008) As prescribed in 204.1202, substitute the following paragraph

(c)for paragraph

(c)of the provision at FAR 52.204-8:

(c)The offeror has completed the annual representations and certifications electronically via the Online Representations and Certifications Application

(ORCA)Web site at *https://orca.bpn.gov/* . After reviewing the ORCA database information, the offeror verifies by submission of the offer that the representations and certifications currently posted electronically have been entered or updated within the last 12 months, are current, accurate, complete, and applicable to this solicitation (including the business size standard applicable to the NAICS code referenced for this solicitation), as of the date of this offer, and are incorporated in this offer by reference (see FAR 4.1201); except for the changes identified below [ *offeror to insert changes, identifying change by clause number, title, date* ]. These amended representation(s) and/or certification(s) are also incorporated in this offer and are current, accurate, and complete as of the date of this offer. FAR/DFARS clause No. Title Date Change Any changes provided by the offeror are applicable to this solicitation only, and do not result in an update to the representations and certifications posted on ORCA. [FR Doc. E8-177 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 207, 209, 234, 235, and 252 RIN 0750-AF80 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Lead System Integrators (DFARS Case 2006-D051) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments. SUMMARY: DoD has issued an interim rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement Section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Section 807 places limitations on contractors acting as lead system integrators in the acquisition of major DoD systems. Such contractors may have no direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems unless an exception applies. DATES: *Effective date:* January 10, 2008. *Comment date:* Comments on the interim rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before March 10, 2008, to be considered in the formation of the final rule. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DFARS Case 2006-D051, using any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: dfars@osd.mil* . Include DFARS Case 2006-D051 in the subject line of the message. • *Fax:* 703-602-7887. • * Mail:* Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Michael Benavides, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-3402. Comments received generally will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Benavides, 703-602-1302. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background This interim rule implements Section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364). Section 807 provides that, with certain exceptions, no entity performing lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system by DoD may have any direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems. The interim rule adds DFARS policy, and a corresponding solicitation provision and contract clause, to implement the requirements of Section 807 of Public Law 109-364. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD does not expect this rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* , because application of the rule is limited to contractors performing lead system integrator functions for major DoD systems. Therefore, DoD has not performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. DoD invites comments from small businesses and other interested parties. DoD also will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subparts in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be submitted separately and should cite DFARS Case 2006-D051. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply, because the rule does not impose any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* D. Determination To Issue an Interim Rule A determination has been made under the authority of the Secretary of Defense that urgent and compelling reasons exist to publish an interim rule prior to affording the public an opportunity to comment. This interim rule implements Section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364). Section 807 places limitations on contractors acting as lead system integrators in the acquisition of major DoD systems. Such contractors may have no direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems unless an exception applies. Section 807 requires DoD to update the acquisition regulations to address these limitations. Comments received in response to this interim rule will be considered in the formation of the final rule. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 207, 209, 234, 235, and 252 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, 48 CFR parts 207, 209, 234, 235, and 252 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 207, 209, 234, 235, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 207—ACQUISITION PLANNING 2. Section 207.106 is amended by adding paragraph (S-71) to read as follows: 207.106 Additional requirements for major systems. (S-71) See 209.570 for policy applicable to acquisition strategies that consider the use of lead system integrators. PART 209—CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS 3. Subpart 209.5 is added to read as follows: Subpart 209.5—Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest Sec. 209.570 Limitations on contractors acting as lead system integrators. 209.570-1 Definitions. 209.570-2 Policy. 209.570-3 Procedures. 209.570-4 Solicitation provision and contract clause. Subpart 209.5—Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest 209.570 Limitations on contractors acting as lead system integrators. 209.570-1 Definitions. *Lead system integrator,* as used in this section, is defined in the clause at 252.209-7007, Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators. See PGI 209.570-1 for additional information. 209.570-2 Policy.

(a)Except as provided in paragraph

(b)of this subsection, 10 U.S.C. 2410p prohibits any entity performing lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system by DoD from having any direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems.

(b)The prohibition in paragraph

(a)of this subsection does not apply if—

(1)The Secretary of Defense certifies to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that—

(i)The entity was selected by DoD as a contractor to develop or construct the system or element concerned through the use of competitive procedures; and

(ii)DoD took appropriate steps to prevent any organizational conflict of interest in the selection process; or

(2)The entity was selected by a subcontractor to serve as a lower-tier subcontractor, through a process over which the entity exercised no control. 209.570-3 Procedures. In making a responsibility determination before awarding a contract for the acquisition of a major system, the contracting officer shall—

(a)Determine whether the prospective contractor meets the definition of “lead system integrator”;

(b)Consider all information regarding the prospective contractor's direct financial interests in view of the prohibition at 209.570-2(a); and

(c)Follow the procedures at PGI 209.570-3. 209.570-4 Solicitation provision and contract clause.

(a)Use the provision at 252.209-7006, Limitations on Contractors Acting as Lead System Integrators, in solicitations for the acquisition of a major system when the acquisition strategy envisions the use of a lead system integrator.

(b)Use the clause at 252.209-7007, Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators—

(1)In solicitations that include the provision at 252.209-7006; and

(2)In contracts when the contractor will fill the role of a lead system integrator for the acquisition of a major system. PART 234—MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION 4. Section 234.004 is added to read as follows: 234.004 Acquisition strategy. See 209.570 for policy applicable to acquisition strategies that consider the use of lead system integrators. PART 235—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING 5. Section 235.008 is added to read as follows: 235.008 Evaluation for award. See 209.570 for limitations on the award of contracts to contractors acting as lead system integrators. PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 6. Sections 252.209-7006 and 252.209-7007 are added to read as follows: 252.209-7006 Limitations on Contractors Acting as Lead System Integrators. As prescribed in 209.570-4(a), use the following provision: Limitations on Contractors Acting As Lead System Integrators (JAN 2008)

(a)*Definitions. Lead system integrator, lead system integrator with system responsibility,* and *lead system integrator without system responsibility,* as used in this provision, have the meanings given in the clause of this solicitation entitled “Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators” (DFARS 252.209-7007).

(b)*General.* Unless an exception is granted, no contractor performing lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system by the Department of Defense may have any direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems.

(c)*Representations.*

(1)The offeror represents that it does [ ] does not [ ] propose to perform this contract as a lead system integrator with system responsibility.

(2)The offeror represents that it does [ ] does not [ ] propose to perform this contract as a lead system integrator without system responsibility.

(3)If the offeror answered in the affirmative in paragraph (c)(1) or

(2)of this provision, the offeror represents that it does [ ] does not [ ] have any direct financial interest as described in paragraph

(b)of this provision with respect to the system(s), subsystem(s), system of systems, or services described in this solicitation.

(d)If the offeror answered in the affirmative in paragraph (c)(3) of this provision, the offeror should contact the Contracting Officer for guidance on the possibility of submitting a mitigation plan and/or requesting an exception.

(e)If the offeror does have a direct financial interest, the offeror may be prohibited from receiving an award under this solicitation, unless the offeror submits to the Contracting Officer appropriate evidence that the offeror was selected by a subcontractor to serve as a lower-tier subcontractor through a process over which the offeror exercised no control.

(f)This provision implements the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 2410p, as added by section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364). (End of provision) 252.209-7007 Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators. As prescribed in 209.570-4(b), use the following clause: Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators (JAN 2008)

(a)*Definitions.* As used in this clause—

(1)*Lead system integrator* includes *lead system integrator with system responsibility* and *lead system integrator without system responsibility.*

(2)*Lead system integrator with system responsibility* means a prime contractor for the development or production of a major system if the prime contractor is not expected at the time of award, as determined by the Contracting Officer, to perform a substantial portion of the work on the system and the major subsystems.

(3)*Lead system integrator without system responsibility* means a contractor under a contract for the procurement of services whose primary purpose is to perform acquisition functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions (see section 7.503(d) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation) with regard to the development or production of a major system.

(b)*Limitations.* The Contracting Officer has determined that the Contractor meets the definition of lead system integrator with [ ] without [ ] system responsibility. Unless an exception is granted, the Contractor shall not have any direct financial interest in the development or construction of any individual system or element of any system of systems while performing lead system integrator functions in the acquisition of a major system by the Department of Defense under this contract.

(c)*Agreement.* The Contractor agrees that during performance of this contract it will not acquire any direct financial interest as described in paragraph

(b)of this clause, or, if it does acquire or plan to acquire such interest, it will immediately notify the Contracting Officer. The Contractor further agrees to provide to the Contracting Officer all relevant information regarding the change in financial interests so that the Contracting Officer can determine whether an exception applies or whether the Contractor will be allowed to continue performance on this contract. If a direct financial interest cannot be avoided, eliminated, or mitigated to the Contracting Officer's satisfaction, the Contracting Officer may terminate this contract for default for the Contractor's material failure to comply with the terms and conditions of award or may take other remedial measures as appropriate in the Contracting Officer's sole discretion.

(d)Notwithstanding any other clause of this contract, if the Contracting Officer determines that the Contractor misrepresented its financial interests at the time of award or has violated the agreement in paragraph

(c)of this clause, the Government may terminate this contract for default for the Contractor's material failure to comply with the terms and conditions of award or may take other remedial measures as appropriate in the Contracting Officer's sole discretion.

(e)This clause implements the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 2410p, as added by section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364). (End of clause) [FR Doc. E8-175 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 207 and 237 RIN 0750-AF87 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Functions Exempt From Private Sector Performance (DFARS Case 2007-D019) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: DoD has issued a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to address procedures for preparation of the written determination required by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), that none of the functions to be performed by contract are inherently governmental. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Benavides, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP(DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Telephone 703-602-1302; facsimile 703-602-7887. Please cite DFARS Case 2007-D019. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background This final rule amends the DFARS to address procedures for preparation of the written determination required by FAR 7.503(e), that none of the functions to be performed by contract are inherently governmental. The rule requires DoD personnel to prepare the determination using DoD Instruction 1100.22, Guidance for Determining Workforce Mix, and to also include a determination that none of the functions to be performed are exempt from private sector performance, as addressed in DoD Instruction 1100.22. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act This rule will not have a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors, or a significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of DoD. Therefore, publication for public comment under 41 U.S.C. 418b is not required. However, DoD will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subparts in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should cite DFARS Case 2007-D019. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply, because the rule does not impose any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 207 and 237 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, 48 CFR parts 207 and 237 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 207 and 237 continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 207—ACQUISITION PLANNING 2. Section 207.503 is amended by adding paragraph

(e)to read as follows: 207.503 Policy.

(e)The written determination required by FAR 7.503(e), that none of the functions to be performed by contract are inherently governmental—

(i)Shall be prepared using DoD Instruction 1100.22, Guidance for Determining Workforce Mix; and

(ii)Shall include a determination that none of the functions to be performed are exempt from private sector performance, as addressed in DoD Instruction 1100.22. PART 237—SERVICE CONTRACTING 3. Section 237.102 is added to read as follows: 237.102 Policy.

(c)In addition to the prohibition on award of contracts for the performance of inherently governmental functions, contracting officers shall not award contracts for functions that are exempt from private sector performance. See 207.503(e) for the associated documentation requirement. [FR Doc. E8-195 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 209, 217, and 246 RIN 0750-AF86 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Ship Critical Safety Items (DFARS Case 2007-D016) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments. SUMMARY: DoD has issued an interim rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement Section 130 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Section 130 requires DoD to establish a quality control policy for the procurement, modification, repair, and overhaul of ship critical safety items. DATES: *Effective date:* January 10, 2008. *Comment date:* Comments on the interim rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before March 10, 2008, to be considered in the formation of the final rule. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DFARS Case 2007-D016, using any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: dfars@osd.mil.* Include DFARS Case 2007-D016 in the subject line of the message. • *Fax:* 703-602-7887. • *Mail:* Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Michael Benavides, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-3402. Comments received generally will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Benavides, 703-602-1302. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background This interim rule implements Section 130 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364). Section 130 requires DoD to prescribe in regulations a quality control policy for the procurement of ship critical safety items and the modification, repair, and overhaul of those items. Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) contained a similar requirement applicable to aviation critical safety items, which is implemented in DFARS 209.270-1 through 209.270-4. This interim rule amends DFARS 209.270-1 through 209.270-4 and related text to address ship critical safety items as well as aviation critical safety items. The rule identifies the responsibilities of the head of the design control activity with regard to quality control of critical safety items and related services. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD does not expect this rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* , because the rule primarily relates to internal DoD responsibilities for ensuring quality control of ship critical safety items. In addition, the Navy already has implemented stringent quality control programs with regard to such items. Therefore, DoD has not performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. DoD invites comments from small businesses and other interested parties. DoD also will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subparts in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be submitted separately and should cite DFARS Case 2007-D016. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply, because the rule does not impose any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* D. Determination To Issue an Interim Rule A determination has been made under the authority of the Secretary of Defense that urgent and compelling reasons exist to publish an interim rule prior to affording the public an opportunity to comment. This interim rule implements Section 130 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364). Section 130 requires DoD to prescribe in regulations a quality control policy for the procurement of ship critical safety items and the modification, repair, and overhaul of those items. Comments received in response to this interim rule will be considered in the formation of the final rule. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 209, 217, and 246 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, 48 CFR parts 209, 217, and 246 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 209, 217, and 246 continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 209—CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS 2. Sections 209.202, 209.270, and 209.270-1 are revised to read as follows: 209.202 Policy. (a)(1) Except for aviation or ship critical safety items, obtain approval in accordance with PGI 209.202(a)(1) when establishing qualification requirements. See 209.270 for approval of qualification requirements for aviation or ship critical safety items. 209.270 Aviation and ship critical safety items. 209.270-1 Scope. This section—

(a)Implements—

(1)Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136); and

(2)Section 130 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Pub. L. 109-364); and

(b)Prescribes policy and procedures for qualification requirements in the procurement of aviation and ship critical safety items and the modification, repair, and overhaul of those items. 3. Section 209.270-2 is amended by revising the definition of “Design control activity” and adding a definition of “Ship critical safety item” to read as follows: 209.270-2 Definitions. *Design control activity* —(1) With respect to an aviation critical safety item, means the systems command of a military department that is specifically responsible for ensuring the air worthiness of an aviation system or equipment in which an aviation critical safety item is to be used; and

(2)With respect to a ship critical safety item, means the systems command of a military department that is specifically responsible for ensuring the seaworthiness of a ship or ship equipment in which a ship critical safety item is to be used. *Ship critical safety item* means any ship part, assembly, or support equipment containing a characteristic the failure, malfunction, or absence of which could cause—

(1)A catastrophic or critical failure resulting in loss of or serious damage to the ship; or

(2)An unacceptable risk of personal injury or loss of life. 4. Section 209.270-3 is revised to read as follows: 209.270-3 Policy.

(a)The head of the contracting activity responsible for procuring an aviation or ship critical safety item may enter into a contract for the procurement, modification, repair, or overhaul of such an item only with a source approved by the head of the design control activity.

(b)The approval authorities specified in this section apply instead of those otherwise specified in FAR 9.202(a)(1), 9.202(c), or 9.206-1(c), for the procurement, modification, repair, and overhaul of aviation or ship critical safety items. 5. Section 209.270-4 is amended by revising paragraph

(a)to read as follows: 209.270-4 Procedures.

(a)The head of the design control activity shall—

(1)Identify items that meet the criteria for designation as aviation or ship critical safety items. See additional information at PGI 209.270-4;

(2)Approve qualification requirements in accordance with procedures established by the design control activity; and

(3)Qualify and identify aviation and ship critical safety item suppliers and products. PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS 6. Section 217.7502 is amended in paragraph (b)(2) by revising the last sentence to read as follows: 217.7502 General.

(b)* * *

(2)* * * See 209.270 for requirements applicable to replenishment parts for aviation or ship critical safety items. PART 246—QUALITY ASSURANCE 7. Section 246.407 is amended by revising paragraph (S-70) to read as follows: 246.407 Nonconforming supplies or services. (S-70) The head of the design control activity is the approval authority for acceptance of any nonconforming aviation or ship critical safety items or nonconforming modification, repair, or overhaul of such items (see 209.270). Authority for acceptance of minor nonconformances in aviation or ship critical safety items may be delegated as determined appropriate by the design control activity. See additional information at PGI 246.407. 8. Section 246.504 is revised to read as follows: 246.504 Certificate of conformance. Before authorizing a certificate of conformance for aviation or ship critical safety items, obtain the concurrence of the head of the design control activity (see 209.270). [FR Doc. E8-173 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 239 and 252 RIN 0750-AF52 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification (DFARS Case 2006-D023) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: DoD has issued a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to address training requirements that apply to contractor personnel who perform information assurance functions for DoD. Contractor personnel accessing information systems must meet applicable training and certification requirements. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Felisha Hitt, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Telephone 703-602-0310; facsimile 703-602-7887. Please cite DFARS Case 2006-D023. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background This final rule implements requirements of the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3541, *et seq.* ); DoD Directive 8570.1, Information Assurance Training, Certification, and Workforce Management; and DoD Manual 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program. The rule contains a clause for use in contracts involving contractor performance of information assurance functions. The clause requires the contractor to ensure that personnel accessing information systems are properly trained and certified. DoD published a proposed rule at 71 FR 2644 on January 22, 2007. Seven sources submitted comments on the proposed rule. A discussion of the comments is provided below: 1. *Comment:* One respondent recommended a change to DFARS 239.7102-3(b) to allow contractors to meet information assurance training certification requirements in a manner suitable to the service or agency chief information officer. *DoD Response:* Basic information assurance training certification requirements have been established by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration/DoD Chief Information Officer. These requirements are applicable DoD-wide. However, in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3541, *et seq.* , and DoD policy, departments and agencies may establish additional requirements as needed. 2. *Comment:* One respondent stated that DoD Manual 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program, already requires contractors to comply with DoD Directive 8570.1, Information Assurance Training, Certification, and Workforce Management. *DoD Response:* DoD Directive 8570.1 requires the development of DFARS clauses to reflect the requirements of the Directive relating to contracts and contractors. This DFARS rule provides a uniform means of specifying the training and certification requirements in DoD contracts. 3. *Comment:* One respondent suggested that DoD address some of the information assurance training restrictions encountered by capable contractors attempting to gain compliance with the new training and certification requirements. *DoD Response:* DoD is not aware of any information assurance training restrictions. DoD training is provided by the National Defense University and other training sources such as the Defense Information Systems Agency computer-based training module. Training is also available in multiple commercial venues outside of the DoD training structure. 4. *Comment:* One respondent expressed concern as to how the new training and certification requirements will affect competition of future service contracts, specifically when the contractor already has its personnel trained and certified on unique programs and systems and other competitors have not worked on those systems. The respondent further questioned whether the Government will fund and provide training and certification to contractors who wish to compete for follow-on service contracts. *DoD Response:* Having an appropriately trained workforce is one of many ways prospective contractors can become competitive for any acquisition. Information assurance training is available through a variety of sources and is available to all prospective contractors. In accordance with FAR 31.205-44, the costs of training and education that are related to the field in which the employee is working or may reasonably be expected to work are allowable (with exceptions). 5. *Comment:* One respondent questioned how the new certification requirements reconcile with Section 813 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-398). *DoD Response:* Section 813 of Public Law 106-398 discusses the appropriate use of requirements for experience and education of contractor personnel in the procurement of information technology services. DoD needs the assurance that a contractor is qualified to perform the information system security functions required to protect DoD networks, as permitted by Section 813(b). The training certifications required by this DFARS rule provide that assurance to DoD. 6. *Comment:* One respondent suggested that DFARS 239.7103(b) be clarified to identify any thresholds, breadth of coverage, and applicability, and include examples of when to use the clause. *DoD Response:* DFARS 239.7103(b) specifies that the clause at 252.239-7001 must be used in solicitations and contracts involving performance of information assurance functions as described in DoD 8570.01-M. The contracting officer will rely on the requiring activity to identify information assurance requirements and to ensure that the certification status of all contractor personnel complies with DoD 8570.01-M. 7. *Comment:* One respondent suggested that the effective date of the rule allow a period of time for contractor and DoD training certification in order to effectively implement the requirements. *DoD Response:* The rule is effective upon publication, and will apply to solicitations issued on or after the effective date, consistent with the implementation plan in DoD 8570.01-M. 8. *Comment:* One respondent suggested that the rule include guidance on requirements of DoD 8570.01-M relating to modification of existing contracts, the designated approving authority, waivers, and reporting requirements. *DoD Response:* A paragraph has been added to the DFARS companion resource, Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI), to inform contracting officers of the phased implementation plan in DoD 8570.01-M, which addresses modification of existing contracts. The other issues raised by the respondent apply primarily to requirements personnel and need not be addressed in the DFARS or PGI. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD has prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis consistent with 5 U.S.C. 604. A copy of the analysis may be obtained from the point of contact specified herein. The analysis is summarized as follows: This final rule amends the DFARS to implement DoD Directive 8570.1, Information Assurance Training, Certification, and Workforce Management, and DoD Manual 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program, with regard to DoD contractor personnel. The DoD Directive and Manual are based on the provisions of the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3541, *et seq.* ), which requires proper training and oversight of personnel with information security responsibilities. The objective of the rule is to ensure that contractor personnel who have access to DoD information systems are properly trained and managed. The rule will apply to entities that perform information assurance functions for DoD. Approximately 83 small business concerns fall into this category annually. DoD contractors performing information assurance functions will be required to ensure that personnel accessing information systems have the proper and current information assurance certification to perform information assurance functions, in accordance with DoD 8570.01-M. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply, because the rule does not impose any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 239 and 252 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, 48 CFR parts 239 and 252 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 239 and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 239—ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 2. Section 239.7102-1 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(5) and

(6)and adding paragraphs (a)(7) and

(8)to read as follows: 239.7102-1 General.

(a)* * *

(5)DoD Directive 8500.1, Information Assurance;

(6)DoD Instruction 8500.2, Information Assurance Implementation;

(7)DoD Directive 8570.1, Information Assurance Training, Certification, and Workforce Management; and

(8)DoD Manual 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program. 3. Section 239.7102-3 is added to read as follows: 239.7102-3 Information assurance contractor training and certification.

(a)For acquisitions that include information assurance functional services for DoD information systems, or that require any appropriately cleared contractor personnel to access a DoD information system to perform contract duties, the requiring activity is responsible for providing to the contracting officer—(1) A list of information assurance functional responsibilities for DoD information systems by category (e.g., technical or management) and level (e.g., computing environment, network environment, or enclave); and

(2)The information assurance training, certification, certification maintenance, and continuing education or sustainment training required for the information assurance functional responsibilities.

(b)After contract award, the requiring activity is responsible for ensuring that the certifications and certification status of all contractor personnel performing information assurance functions as described in DoD 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program, are in compliance with the manual and are identified, documented, and tracked.

(c)The responsibilities specified in paragraphs

(a)and

(b)of this section apply to all DoD information assurance duties supported by a contractor, whether performed full-time or part-time as additional or embedded duties, and when using a DoD contract, or a contract or agreement administered by another agency (e.g., under an interagency agreement).

(d)See PGI 239.7102-3 for guidance on documenting and tracking certification status of contractor personnel, and for additional information regarding the requirements of DoD 8570.01-M. 4. Section 239.7103 is revised to read as follows: 239.7103 Contract clauses.

(a)Use the clause at 252.239-7000, Protection Against Compromising Emanations, in solicitations and contracts involving information technology that requires protection against compromising emanations.

(b)Use the clause at 252.239-7001, Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification, in solicitations and contracts involving contractor performance of information assurance functions as described in DoD 8570.01-M. PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 252.239-7000 [Amended] 5. Section 252.239-7000 is amended in the introductory text by removing “239.7103” and adding in its place “239.7103(a)”. 6. Section 252.239-7001 is added to read as follows: 252.239-7001 Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification. As prescribed in 239.7103(b), use the following clause: Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification (JAN 2008)

(a)The Contractor shall ensure that personnel accessing information systems have the proper and current information assurance certification to perform information assurance functions in accordance with DoD 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program. The Contractor shall meet the applicable information assurance certification requirements, including—

(1)DoD-approved information assurance workforce certifications appropriate for each category and level as listed in the current version of DoD 8570.01-M; and

(2)Appropriate operating system certification for information assurance technical positions as required by DoD 8570.01-M.

(b)Upon request by the Government, the Contractor shall provide documentation supporting the information assurance certification status of personnel performing information assurance functions.

(c)Contractor personnel who do not have proper and current certifications shall be denied access to DoD information systems for the purpose of performing information assurance functions. (End of clause) [FR Doc. E8-193 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Part 252 RIN 0750-AF57 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; New Designated Countries (DFARS Case 2006-D062) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: DoD has adopted as final, without change, an interim rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement with respect to the Dominican Republic. The rule also includes Bulgaria and Romania on the list of countries covered by the World Trade Organization Government Procurement Agreement. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy Williams, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Telephone 703-602-0328; facsimile 703-602-7887. Please cite DFARS Case 2006-D062. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background DoD published an interim rule at 72 FR 14242 on March 27, 2007, to implement the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement with respect to the Dominican Republic, and to add Bulgaria and Romania to the list of countries covered by the World Trade Organization Government Procurement Agreement. DoD received no comments on the interim rule. Therefore, DoD has adopted the interim rule as a final rule without change. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* Although the rule opens up DoD procurement to the products of Bulgaria, the Dominican Republic, and Romania, there will be no significant impact on U.S. small businesses. DoD applies the trade agreements to only those non-defense items listed at DFARS 225.401-70, and procurements that are set aside for small businesses are exempt from application of the trade agreements. C. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule affects the certification and information collection requirements in the provisions at DFARS 252.225-7020 and 252.225-7035, currently approved under Office of Management and Budget Control Number 0704-0229. The impact, however, is negligible. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 252 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Interim Rule Adopted as Final Without Change Accordingly, the interim rule amending 48 CFR Part 252, which was published at 72 FR 14242 on March 27, 2007, is adopted as a final rule without change. [FR Doc. E8-201 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Part 252 and Appendix F to Chapter 2 RIN 0750-AF53 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Receiving Reports for Shipments (DFARS Case 2006-D024) AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: DoD has issued a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to address requirements for the distribution of material inspection and receiving reports under DoD contracts. The rule clarifies that two copies of the receiving report must be distributed with each shipment. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 10, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Benavides, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062. Telephone 703-602-1302; facsimile 703-602-7887. Please cite DFARS Case 2006-D024. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background The clause at DFARS 252.246-7000, Material Inspection and Receiving Report, contains requirements for preparing and furnishing material inspection and receiving reports to the Government. Contractors can satisfy material inspection and receiving report requirements by using DD Form 250, in a manner and to the extent required by DFARS Appendix F, or by using the Wide Area WorkFlow-Receipt and Acceptance (WAWF-RA) electronic form. This rule clarifies that two copies of the receiving report (paper copies of either the DD Form 250 or the WAWF-RA report) must be distributed with the shipment in accordance with DFARS Appendix F. Such clarification is needed to ensure proper identification of all shipments. DoD published a proposed rule at 71 FR 65769 on November 9, 2006. Three sources submitted comments on the proposed rule. A discussion of the comments is provided below. 1. *Comment:* One respondent stated that the rule would increase administrative costs by significantly increasing paperwork creation, administration, and coordination. The respondent recommended that, at a minimum, alternative language be added to allow the use of contractor format DD Form 250 material inspection and receiving reports instead of WAWF-RA report printing. *DoD Response:* Contractors presently are responsible for distributing DD Form 250 in accordance with DFARS Appendix F, Part 4, F-401, using the instructions in Tables 1 and 2, which require distribution of two copies with each shipment. Therefore, the requirement for contractors to print copies of the WAWF-RA report instead of the DD Form 250 will not significantly increase the cost or effort of preparing shipping documents. Only the forms already in WAWF-RA must be printed; thus this should not be a significant administrative burden. However, to allow flexibility, DoD has amended the rule to incorporate the respondent's recommendation that contractors be allowed to use the DD Form 250 instead of a printed WAWF-RA form. 2. *Comment:* One respondent stated that the requirement for two paper copies to be distributed with shipments would create unnecessary costs and additional administrative burdens for many vendors and would unnecessarily duplicate the electronic process, thwarting the goal of the WAWF-RA being a paperless system. The respondent further suggested that this and similar issues be addressed through the DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and Information

(PGI)web page rather than as a change to the DFARS. *DoD Response:* Printed copies of the receiving report are needed for each shipment to eliminate costly stocking, payment, and frustrated cargo issues now affecting both DoD and contractors. As noted in the response to Comment 1, contractors already are responsible for distributing copies of DD Form 250 with the shipment. Therefore, this rule will not significantly increase the cost or effort of preparing shipping documents. The respondent's recommendation to address this issue through PGI is not a feasible solution, since this issue relates to contractor requirements, whereas PGI addresses internal DoD procedures and guidance. 3. *Comment:* One respondent stated that the WAWF-RA receiving report does not include the unique identification

(UID)tab, where the contractor lists UIDs and serial numbers for items requiring them. *DoD Response:* The respondent's comment has been noted; however, the content of the WAWF-RA receiving report is outside the scope of this DFARS rule. This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act DoD certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* , because the rule makes no significant change to DoD policy for preparation and use of material inspection and receiving reports. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection requirements for DoD material inspection and receiving reports have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget, under Control Number 0704-0248, for use through March 31, 2008. List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 252 Government procurement. Michele P. Peterson, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. Therefore, 48 CFR part 252 and Appendix F to chapter 2 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 252 and Appendix F to subchapter I continues to read as follows: Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1. PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 2. Section 252.246-7000 is amended by revising the clause date and paragraph

(b)to read as follows: 252.246-7000 Material Inspection and Receiving Report. Material Inspection and Receiving Report (JAN 2008)

(b)Contractor submission of the material inspection and receiving information required by Appendix F of the Defense FAR Supplement by using the Wide Area WorkFlow-Receipt and Acceptance (WAWF-RA) electronic form (see paragraph (b)(1) of the clause at 252.232-7003) fulfills the requirement for a material inspection and receiving report (DD Form 250). Two copies of the receiving report (paper copies of either the DD Form 250 or the WAWF-RA report) shall be distributed with the shipment, in accordance with Appendix F, Part 4, F-401, Table 1, of the Defense FAR Supplement. 3. Appendix F to chapter 2 is amended in Part 4, Section F-401, by revising paragraph

(a)to read as follows: Appendix F—Material Inspection and Receiving Report F-401 Distribution

(a)The contractor is responsible for distributing the DD Form 250, including mailing and payment of postage. Use of the Wide Area WorkFlow-Receipt and Acceptance (WAWF-RA) electronic form satisfies the distribution requirements of this section, except for the copies required to accompany shipment. [FR Doc. E8-178 Filed 1-9-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 070213032-7032-01] RIN 0648-XE84 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Inseason Adjustment to the 2008 Gulf of Alaska Pollock Total Allowable Catch Amount AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason adjustment; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS is adjusting the 2008 total allowable catch

(TAC)amounts for pollock in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary because NMFS has determined these TACs are incorrectly specified. This action will ensure the GOA pollock TACs do not exceed the appropriate amount based on the best available scientific information for pollock in the GOA. This action is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska Area (FMP). DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), January 7, 2008, until the effective date of the 2008 and 2009 final harvest specifications for GOA groundfish, unless otherwise modified or superceded through publication of a notification in the **Federal Register** . Comments must be received at the following address no later than 4:30 p.m., A.l.t., January 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0648-XE84, by any one of the following methods: • Mail to: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802 • Hand delivery to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, Alaska • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal *http://www.regulations.gov* • FAX to 907-586-7557, Attn: Ellen Sebastian Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to *http://www.regulations.gov* without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Hogan, 907-586-7228. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the Gulf of Alaska

(GOA)according to the FMP prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. The 2008 TAC of pollock in the GOA was set at 81,467 metric tons

(mt)by the 2007 and 2008 harvest specification for groundfish in the GOA (72 FR 9676, March 5, 2007). The 2008 pollock TAC in Statistical Area 610 in the GOA was set at 30,308 mt. The 2008 pollock TAC in Statistical Area 620 in the GOA was set at 25,313 mt. The 2008 pollock TAC in Statistical Area 630 in the GOA was set at 17,995 mt. The 2008 pollock TAC in the West Yakutat District was set at 1,694 mt. In December 2007, the Council recommended a 2008 pollock TAC of 60,180 mt for the GOA. The Council recommended the following apportionments by area for the 2008 pollock TAC: 17,602 mt for Statistical Area 610, 19,181 mt for Statistical Area 620, 13,640 mt for Statistical Area 630, and 1,517 mt for the West Yakutat District. These amounts are less than the pollock TACs as established by the 2007 and 2008 harvest specification for groundfish in the GOA (72 FR 9676, March 5, 2007). The TACs recommended by the Council are based on the Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation report (SAFE), dated November 2007, which NMFS has determined is the best available scientific information for this fishery. Steller sea lions occur in the same location as the pollock fishery and are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Pollock is a principal prey species for Steller sea lions in the GOA. The seasonal apportionment of pollock harvest is necessary to ensure the groundfish fisheries are not likely to cause jeopardy of extinction or adverse modification of critical habitat for Steller sea lions. The regulations at § 679.20(a)(5)(iv) specifies how the pollock TAC shall be apportioned. In accordance with § 679.25(a)(2)(i)(B), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has determined that, based on the November 2007 SAFE report for this fishery, the current GOA pollock TACs are incorrectly specified. Consequently, the Regional Administrator is adjusting the 2008 pollock TAC to 60,180 mt in the GOA. The Regional Administrator is also adjusting the 2008 pollock TAC to 17,602 mt in Statistical Area 610, to 19,181 mt in Statistical Area 620, to 13,640 mt in Statistical Area 630, and to 1,517 mt in the West Yakutat District. Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(iv), Tables 2, 6, 14, and 17 of the 2007 and 2008 final harvest specifications for groundfish in the GOA (72 FR 9676, March 5, 2007) are revised for the 2008 pollock TACs consistent with this adjustment. Pursuant to § 679.92(b), Table 17 of the 2008 final harvest specifications for groundfish in the GOA (72 FR 71802, December 19, 2007) is revised for the 2008 annual pollock TACs in the GOA consistent with this adjustment. BILLING CODE 3510-22-S ER10JA08.000 ER10JA08.001 ER10JA08.002 ER10JA08.003 ER10JA08.004 ER10JA08.005 ER10JA08.006 ER10JA08.007 ER10JA08.008 ER10JA08.009 Classification This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would allow for harvests that exceed the appropriate allocations for pollock based on the best scientific information available. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of December 13, 2007, and additional time for prior public comment would result in conservation concerns for the ESA-listed Stellersea lions. The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment. Under § 679.25(c)(2), interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this action to the above address until January 22, 2008. This action is required by § 679.22 and § 679.25 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: January 4, 2008. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 08-63 Filed 1-7-08; 2:11 pm]

Connectionstraces to 25

Traces to 25 documents