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

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2008-04-15 · PROPOSED RULES · Agency Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry NOTICES Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority, 20293 E8-7855 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Animal and Plan · Unknown

Unknown. Final rule

53,872 words·~245 min read·/register/2008/04/15/08-1127

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-2008-04-15.xml --- 73 73 Tuesday, April 15, 2008 Contents Agency Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry NOTICES Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority, 20293 E8-7855 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service See Forest Service Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RULES Importation of Uncooked Pork and Pork Products; Correction, 20366-20367 Z8-6800 Census Census Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20244-20245 E8-8012 Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20293-20297 E8-7969 E8-7970 E8-7971 E8-7973 Meetings: Advisory Committee to the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 20297 E8-8039 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control/Initial Review Group, 20297 E8-7975 Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority, 20297-20304 E8-7823 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department RULES Medicare and Medicaid Programs:
Conditions for Coverage for End-Stage Renal Disease Facilities, 20370-20484 08-1102 Medicare Program: Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Presciption Drug Benefit, 20486-20509 08-1120 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20304-20305 E8-7817 E8-7946 E8-7947 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 20306-20309 E8-7944 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NC, 20172-20173 E8-7931 Safety Zone:
Colorado River, Parker, AZ, 20173-20175 E8-7937 PROPOSED RULES Escort Vessels in Certain U.S. Waters, 20232-20234 E8-7935 Safety Zones: Fireworks Displays within the Fifth Coast Guard District, 20223-20232 E8-7936 Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors, Baltimore, MD, 20220-20223 E8-7938 NOTICES Meetings: Navigation Safety Advisory Council, 20318 E8-7940 Commerce Commerce Department See Census Bureau See Economic Development Administration See Foreign-Trade Zones Board See Industry and Security Bureau See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20243-20244 E8-8007 E8-8008 Environmental Statements; Intent: Bay Delta Conservation Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, CA, 20326-20329 E8-8010 Defense Defense Department See Navy Department NOTICES 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification, 20258-20262 E8-7860 Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees, 20262-20263 E8-7988 Economic Economic Development Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20245 E8-8011 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20266-20267 E8-7943 Election Election Assistance Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 20267 E8-7932 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship, 20331-20332 E8-7905 Native American Employment and Training Council, 20332 E8-7906 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Meetings: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, 20267 E8-8072 EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans:
Virginia, 20175-20177 E8-7876 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Iowa, 20177-20179 E8-7815 PROPOSED RULES Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans: Maryland, 20234-20236 E8-8005 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Iowa, 20236 E8-7782 Executive Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Model A330-200 Airplanes etc.; Correction, 20367 Z8-4671 Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH
(TAE)Model TAE 125-02-99 Engines, 20159-20161 E8-8118 Class D Airspace: Jacksonville NAS, FL 20161 E8-7671 Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF, FL, 20162 E8-7668 Class D and E Airspace: Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL, 20163-20164 E8-7669 Use of Radar in Instrument Approach Procedures, 20164 E8-7966 PROPOSED RULES Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft: Modifications to Rules for Sport Pilots and Flight Instructors With a Sport Pilot Rating, 20181-20201 08-1127 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20267-20270 E8-7919 E8-7954 Application: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP, 20279 E8-7957 Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC, 20279-20280 E8-7952 Combined Notice of Filings, 20280-20284 E8-7942 E8-7961 Environmental Assessement; Availability: New York State Electric and Gas Corp., 20284-20285 E8-7956 Filing: American Electric Power, 20278-20279 E8-7955 Ameren Services Companies; Withdrawn, 20288 E8-7910 Dan River Hydropower, LLC, 20270-20271 E8-7924 Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 20275-20278 E8-7913 Dynegy Midwest Generation, Inc., 20285 E8-7953 Loyalhanna Watershed Association, Inc., 20284 E8-7927 Mahoning Creek Hydroelectric Company, LLC, 20271-20272 E8-7923 Metro Hydroelectric Company, LLC, 20272-20273 E8-7921 Stoughton Water Power Company, LLC, 20273-20274 E8-7925 Sutton Hydroelectric Company, LLC, 20285-20287 E8-7914 Twin Lakes Canal Company, 20274-20275 E8-7922 Form No. 552 Technical Conference, 20270 E8-7926 Inquiry on Adequacy of FERC Financial Forms, 20285 E8-7918 Intent to Prepare an Envronmental Assessement: MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C.; Arkoma Connector Pipeline Project, 20287-20288 E8-7951 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Meetings: Motorcyclist Advisory Council, 20357-20358 E8-7941 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities, 20288-20289 E8-7994 Fiscal Fiscal Service NOTICES Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: AXIS Reinsurance Co., 20358 E8-7976 Plaza Insurance Company, 20358-20359 E8-7886 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Designation of Critical Habitat; Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis), 20237-20241 E8-7689 NOTICES Environmental Statements; Availabiity: Trempealeau National Wildlife Refuge, WI, 20329 E8-7911 Environmental Statements; Intent: Bay Delta Conservation Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, CA, 20326-20329 E8-8010 Incidental Take Permit: San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan in San Mateo County, CA, 20324-20326 E8-8051 Food Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Antimicrobial resistance; Public Hearing; Request for Comments, 20309-20311 08-1129 Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Application: Foreign-Trade Zone 122; Haliburton Energy Sevices, Inc., (Barite Grinding and Milling), Corpus Christi, TX, 20246 E8-8032 Foreign-Trade Zone 2; New Orleans, LA; Haliburton, Energy Services, Inc., 20246 E8-8042 Foreign-Trade Zone 26; Atlanta, GA; Kia Motors Manufacturing Georgia, Inc. (Motor Vehicles) 20247 E8-8034 Foreign-Trade Zone 26; Atlanta, GA; Noramco, Inc. (Pharmaceutical Intermediate Manufacturing), Athens, Georgia, 20247-20248 E8-8030 Foreign-Trade Zone 87; Lake Charles, LA; Haliburton Energy Services, Inc.; (Barite Grinding and Milling), Westlake, LA, 20248 E8-8036 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Statements; Availability, etc.: Ochoco National Forest, Paulina Ranger District; Oregon; Upper Beaver Creek, 20242-20243 E8-7838 GSA General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20289 E8-8062 Health Health and Human Services Department See Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Children and Families Administration See Food and Drug Administration See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department See National Institutes of Health See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Meetings: National Toxicology Program Board of Scientific Counselors, 20289-20291 E8-7831 Solicitation of Nominations for Membership on the Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability, 20292-20293 E8-7986 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services See U.S. Customs and Border Protection Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee, 20248-20249 E8-7909 Inspector Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department NOTICES Privacy Act of 1974; New OIG Privacy Act System of Records: Litigation Files, 20311-20314 E8-7987 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Land Management Bureau See Minerals Management Service See Reclamation Bureau IRS Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Determination of Minimum Required Pension Contributions, 20203-20220 08-1133 Guidance Regarding Deduction and Capitalization of Expenditures Related to Tangible Property; Correction, 20367 Z8-4466 Guidance Regarding Foreign Base Company Sales Income; Correction, 20201-20203 E8-8031 Income Taxes: Hybrid Retirement Plans; Correction, 20367 Z7-25025 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, E8-8075 20359-20361 E8-8076 E8-8077 E8-8079 Meetings: Advisory Committee to the Internal Revenue Service, 20361 E8-8074 International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China; (2005-2006), 20249-20250 E8-8046 Frontseating Service Valves from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 20250-20256 E8-8006 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Filing of Plats of Survey; Nevada, 20330 E8-7915 Public Land Order: Alaska, 20330-20331 E8-8019 Utah, 20331 E8-8018 Minerals Minerals Management Service RULES Incorporate American Petroleum Institute Hurricane Bulletins, 20166-20170 E8-7777 Outer Continental Shelf Regulations; Technical Corrections, 20170-20172 E8-7776 National Credit National Credit Union Administration NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 20332 E8-8035 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: National Cancer Institute, 20314 E8-7929 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 20315-20316 E8-7807 National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, 20316 E8-7917 E8-7920 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 20317 E8-7930 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 20316-20317 E8-7928 National Institute on Aging, 20315 E8-7799 E8-7803 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20256 E8-8009 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings: Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee, 20332 E8-7907 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Meetings: Chief of Naval Operations Executive Panel, 20263 E8-7972 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 20263-20266 E8-7982 E8-7984 E8-7992 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal, 20333 E8-7989 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 20333 08-1134 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Grant of Interim Extension of the Term of U.S. Patent No. 4,650,787; Sanvar, 20256-20257 E8-8058 Submissions Regarding Correspondence and Regarding Attorney Representation, 20257-20258 E8-7980 Pension Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing and Paying Benefits, 20164-20166 E8-7939 Personnel Personnel Management Office RULES Suitability, 20149-20159 E8-7964 PROPOSED RULES Competitive Area, 20180-20181 E8-7968 Presidential Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS *Special observances:* National Crime Victims’ Rights Week (Proc. 8237), 20519-20522 08-1137 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Government agencies and employees: National Science and Technology Council; Designation to Carry Out Requirements of the America COMPETES Act (Memorandum of April 10, 2008), 20523 08-1138 Public Public Debt Bureau See Fiscal Service Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Environmental statements; Intent: Bay Delta Conservation Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, CA, 20326-20329 E8-8010 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission RULES Electronic Filing and Revision of Form D; Correction, 20367 Z8-3545 Revisions To Form S-11 To Permit Historical Incorporation By Reference, 20512-20518 E8-7967 NOTICES Application for an Order, 20334-20341 E8-8028 Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Futures Association: Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Amendments; Interpretive Notice Regarding Compliance Rule 2-9: FCM and IB Anti-Money Laundering Program, 20341-20342 E8-7959 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Chicago Board Options Exchange, 20342-20344 E8-7933 NYSE Arca, Inc, 20344-20349 E8-7934 State State Department NOTICES Bureau of Political-Military Affairs: Directorate of Defense Trade Controls; Notifications to the Congress of Proposed Commercial Export Licenses, 20349-20357 E8-8065 Policy on Review Time for License Applications, 20357 E8-8070 U.S. National Commission for UNESCO Notice of Open Advisory Committee Teleconference Meeting, 20357 E8-8154 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20317-20318 E8-7977 Meetings: Advisory Committee for Women's Services, 20318 E8-7950 Thrift Thrift Supervision Office NOTICES Amendment of a Savings Association Charter, 20362 E8-8016 General Reporting and Recordkeeping by Savings Associations, 20362-20363 E8-8014 Mutual to Stock Conversion Application, 20363 E8-8015 Toxic Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Agency See Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration Treasury Treasury Department See Fiscal Service See Internal Revenue Service See Thrift Supervision Office U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 20318-20319 E8-7963 Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Accreditation and Approval as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory: Bennett Testing Service, Inc., 20319 E8-8027 Camin Cargo Control, Inc., 20319-20320 E8-8025 Inspectorate America Corporation, 20320 E8-8021 E8-8038 Intertek USA, Inc., E8-8043 20320-20323 E8-8045 Saybolt LP, 20321-20323 E8-7995 E8-8017 E8-8022 E8-8024 E8-8026 E8-8040 Approval as a Commercial Gauger: Freeboard International, 20323 E8-8057 Intertek USA, Inc., 20323 E8-8054 Inspectorate America Corp., 20324 E8-7998 SGS North America, Inc., 20324 E8-8000 Veterans Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Adjudication Procedures Manual, M21-1: Rescission of Provisions Related to Exposure to Herbicides Based on Receipt of the Vietnam Service Medal, 20363-20365 E8-7912 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 20370-20484 08-1102 Part III Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 20486-20509 08-1120 Part IV Securities and Exchange Commission, 20512-20518 E8-7967 Part V Executive Office of the President, Presidential Documents, 20519-20523 08-1137 08-1138 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 73 Tuesday, April 15, 2008 Rules and Regulations OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Part 731 RIN 3206-AL08 Suitability AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: In support of its mission to ensure the Federal Government has an effective civilian workforce, the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM)is issuing final regulations governing Federal employment suitability. The final regulations authorize agencies to debar from employment for up to three years those found unsuitable, extend the suitability process to those applying for or who are in positions that can be non-competitively converted to the competitive service, provide additional procedural protections for those found unsuitable for Federal employment, and clarify the scope of authority for the Merit Systems Protection Board
(MSPB)to review actions taken under the regulations. The changes also make the regulations more readable. DATES: *Effective Date:* The rule is effective June 16, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary D. Wahlert by telephone at
(202)606-2930; by FAX at
(202)606-2613; or by e-mail at *CWRAP@opm.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Introduction On January 18, 2007, OPM published at 72 FR 2203
(2007)proposed amendments to the regulations in part 731 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), to modify and more precisely define and clarify the regulations' coverage, the procedural requirements for taking suitability actions, the respective authorities of OPM and agencies, and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB or Board) review of suitability actions. OPM also proposed various revisions to make the regulations more readable. The public comment period on the proposed amendments ended on March 19, 2007. OPM received comments from five Federal agencies or departments and from three unions. Of the agency comments, three were received from security offices, two from human resources offices, and one from a legal office. OPM has carefully considered the comments received. Coverage OPM proposed to amend the regulations to provide that part 731 also applies to persons who can be noncompetitively converted to the competitive service because of service in their excepted service positions. OPM noted that the expansion of the regulation's scope to include suitability determinations of persons applying for, entering, or employed in the excepted service when that appointment can lead to their noncompetitive conversion to the competitive service is consistent with OPM's suitability authority. The process for employing this limited group of persons in the competitive service is a continuous one, beginning with initial appointment to the excepted service and ending in (noncompetitive) conversion to the competitive service. Because these persons can (and most do) enter into the competitive service as a result of their excepted service appointment, albeit through a longer process than others appointed directly, they should be treated in the same manner as those appointed directly, including the same review of their suitability for employment. Already, under part 302 of this chapter, persons in the excepted service are subject to investigation and disqualifying factors similar to those found in part 731. OPM believes that procedural protections should be extended to this limited group of persons in the excepted service. One commenter had doubts about OPM's statutory authority to extend suitability to persons in the excepted service, notwithstanding OPM's statement that to do so would be consistent with OPM's suitability authority. OPM has carefully reviewed its authority under statute and Executive Order (E.O.) and again has concluded it does have the required authority. Under rules II and V of E.O. 10577, as amended, OPM has the authority to regulate standards of fitness for entry in the competitive service, to investigate suitability for the competitive service, and to establish investigative requirements for competitive service appointments. Section 1103(a)(5)(A) of title 5, U.S. Code, requires OPM to execute, administer, and enforce these rules. The law does not contemplate that the suitability standards and other requirements for appointment to a competitive service position would not apply because of the means by which an applicant initially enters service. While the positions at issue here do not begin in the competitive service, they end up in the competitive service if converted. The triggering events for this method of entering the competitive service are the persons' appointments to the excepted service. Because of the continuity of this method, from appointments in the excepted service to conversions to the competitive service, OPM concludes that OPM's suitability authority applies to these persons and applies as soon as they are appointed to the excepted service position. Accordingly, there is no requirement that the positions must have been converted before the incumbents are subject to investigation and determinations as to fitness for Federal employment. Thus, OPM declines to adopt a commenter's recommendation that the regulations be revised to state that suitability determinations for persons in these positions can only take place upon “application to a competitive appointment” or when the conversion is “imminent.” Several commenters asked for examples of positions in the excepted service from which persons may be noncompetitively converted to the competitive service. While this is not a complete list of positions, some are under the Federal Career Intern Program, the Veterans Recruitment Appointment Program, the Student Career Experience Program, and the Presidential Management Fellows Program. One commenter asked what authority would permit the removal of an excepted service employee for suitability reasons such as misconduct prior to appointment. As we stated in our proposed rule, the revised regulations clarify that they apply to persons who can be noncompetitively converted to service because of employment in an excepted service position. The purpose of these positions is to lead to a competitive appointment and, therefore, should be treated in the same way for suitability purposes as those who are appointed directly into the competitive service. One commenter wondered what the advantage would be of having an excepted service position if it is covered by the suitability rules. OPM's proposal identified just a limited category of excepted service employees that would be covered by part 731, i.e., those whose excepted service appointment can lead to their noncompetitive conversion to the competitive service. All other excepted service positions are not covered by the suitability rules. However, other excepted service positions are subject to qualification standards which may include disqualifying factors under 5 CFR part 302. At any rate, most persons in excepted service positions already have other employee protections, whether or not they are covered by suitability rules. OPM proposed to add definitions of *suitability action* and *suitability determination* to § 731.101 to help the reader better understand the coverage of part 731. One commenter suggested that the definition of “suitability action” be reworded so that it would be parallel to the definition of “suitability determination” and thus clarify the distinction between the two. OPM notes that the construction of the definitions differs because the processes differ. One (suitability actions) concerns the type of actions taken, such as debarment or removal, once a person is determined to be unsuitable and the other (suitability determinations) concerns the process of initially deciding whether a person is suitable. OPM believes that its initial proposed language better draws that distinction and the suggestion is not adopted. OPM proposed at § 731.104(c) that persons in intermittent, seasonal, per diem and temporary positions, with less than 180 days aggregate service, are not subject to the investigative requirements of part 731. With respect to seasonal employees, one commenter wondered whether the 180 days aggregate service meant 180 days per year or an aggregate of 180 days in all their employment. OPM's response is that the 180 days means 180 days per year. OPM has modified § 731.104(c) accordingly. OPM also has modified the punctuation in this section to clarify that the phrase “with less than 180 days aggregate service per year” applies to each of the types of positions noted: intermittent, seasonal, per diem and temporary positions. Another commenter expressed concern that the rule would allow such persons access to facilities and information without investigation for six months because agencies would not be able to investigate them under the revised rule. That was not the intent. Rather, OPM's intent is to more fully identify those types of positions for which incumbents are not subject to investigation as mandated by part 731. As the proposed rule states, an agency “must conduct such checks as it deems appropriate to ensure the suitability of the person.” To accomplish such checks, some agencies may choose to investigate these persons in the same manner as it would those actually covered by part 731, but they are not required to do so. The checks required by § 731.104(c) need not rise to the level required for an investigation under part 731. Likewise, the coverage requirements for suitability purposes of these persons do not prevent agencies from conducting other pre-employment checks, such as an investigation for eligibility for an identity credential under Homeland Security Presidential Directive No.12—a concern expressed by another commenter. Moreover, E.O. 10450 authorizes investigations for all civilian officers and employees, including, under some circumstances, those in intermittent, temporary, or seasonal positions. Finally, as explained in the proposed regulations, OPM believes this change is necessary to maintain consistency between this part, which concerns suitability, and part 732 of this chapter, which governs positions of national security. OPM also proposed to clarify the definition of *material* in § 731.101 by saying that a statement may be material whether or not OPM or an agency relies upon it. OPM noted that the added language was not intended to change, but rather to reinforce, the meaning of the current definition in that a “material” statement does not actually have to influence or affect an official decision by OPM or an agency. This is not a new concept since the former regulations at § 731.105(c) stated: “A statement may be a material statement even if an agency does not rely upon it.” Two commenters recommended that the definition be modified. One of these commenters stated that the proposed definition would undercut the commonly accepted legal meaning of “material” by setting the threshold for what may be material too low. The other commenter suggested that the definition be modified to state that, in order for it to be material, a statement must “likely” influence a decision rather than just be “capable of” influencing a decision. OPM believes that in many cases, a statement that is capable of influencing a decision is also likely to be relied on by OPM or an agency. However, as OPM explained in the proposed rule, a “material” statement “does not actually have to influence or affect an official decision by OPM or an agency.” In some situations, such as those involving false experience or educational claims, whether the experience or education was likely to influence a decision on the person's eligibility for employment may have no relationship to the materiality of the false statement, i.e., whether the false statement is capable of influencing, affects, or has a natural tendency to affect, an official decision even if OPM or an agency does not rely upon it. In such situations, OPM would be concerned with the individual's lack of honesty in the employment process. Accordingly, OPM has not adopted the suggestions. Another commenter wondered how the definition of “material” relates to the statement in the proposed rule's supplementary information discussion that “Factors not relied upon by OPM or agencies in individual cases may not be considered by MSPB.” OPM notes that this statement referred to the specific suitability factors provided in § 731.202(b) and the additional considerations provided in § 731.202(c), not statements that may or may not be material under the definition of this part and may or may not be used by the agency or OPM. While there is no statutory right to appeal actions taken under the procedures set forth in part 731, OPM has provided for such appeals by regulation. This appeal right does not extend to any other employment action that an agency takes outside of the procedures set forth in part 731. In this regard, OPM proposed changes to the regulations that would reaffirm and clarify that there is no right to appeal an agency's decision to object to or request to pass over an employment candidate under part 332 of this chapter, regardless of the basis for the agency's request, including an applicant's fitness or character as discussed in OPM's Delegated Examining Operations Handbook. OPM also proposed changes that would clarify that an agency's reason(s) for not hiring someone is not an appropriate basis to determine whether a person may appeal the agency's action as a suitability action. OPM also proposed a concurrent change that would remove “denial of appointment” as a suitability action under this part. In other words, non-selection for a position is not an appealable suitability action. While one commenter thought the proposed changes concerning objections and pass overs cleared up much confusion, other commenters thought the changes could be clearer. One commenter noted that objections and pass overs may be different from suitability determinations, but that permitting an agency to “label” its action as one or the other elevates “form over substance.” The commenter believed this would allow agencies to make *de facto* suitability determinations without following procedural requirements. The commenter recommended that agencies not be allowed to “label” their actions. OPM declines to limit agencies' authority in this manner. Agencies typically identify the authority under which they take actions and this in turn informs MSPB of the appropriate review authority, if any, to be used in the event those actions are appealed. A common example occurs when agencies identify the authority for or “label” the actions taken under 5 U.S.C. chapters 43 and 75. Performance-based actions may be taken under either authority, but agencies choose which authority to use and MSPB then knows which review standard to apply. Another commenter recommended that, instead of “pass over of a preference eligible,” the regulations refer to “pass over of an applicant.” OPM is not adopting this recommendation because it would conflict with statutory and regulatory language describing pass overs. Upon closer examination of the regulation referred to by the commenter (5 CFR 332.406), it is apparent that the proposed rule at part 731 could be modified to refer precisely to pass over requests and objections. That is, part 332 discusses objections to eligibles and pass overs of preference eligibles as two categories of actions. Therefore, OPM has clarified the regulations to refer to “objections to eligibles” in §§ 731.101(a) and 731.203(b) rather than simply “objections.” The same commenter also recommended that the reference to decisions by OPM concerning pass over requests be changed to reflect agency delegated authority by referring to decisions by OPM and agencies. OPM agrees this change would properly describe who makes these types of decisions and has modified § 731.101(a) accordingly. Finally, another commenter stated it was their understanding that OPM's current position is that “objections/pass overs may be based either on qualifications or suitability—and that non-selections for suitability reasons are NOT suitability actions and are not covered by Part 731.” OPM confirms those understandings. One commenter stated that OPM should eliminate employees and appointees who have successfully completed twelve months of Federal service from coverage of the suitability regulations. The commenter stated that this change would eliminate the “collision” between OPM suitability regulations and the statutes that govern employees who have completed their probationary periods. The commenter also argued that this change would preserve agencies' discretion to take adverse actions and avoid the hardship when OPM initiates action to remove a long-term employee for suitability reasons when the agency may want to keep that employee. OPM declines to make these changes to the regulations for a number of reasons. As an initial matter, there is no collision of employee rights upon completion of a probationary period and OPM's suitability regulations. Suitability actions for persons who have become employees as defined by this part can be initiated only by OPM, and the bases for judging a person unsuitable and removing that person after the first year of employment are limited to material intentional false statement, deception or fraud in examination or appointment; refusal to furnish testimony; or a statutory or regulatory bar to employment. The commenter's recommendation would eliminate OPM's ability to take appropriate suitability actions merely because the individual has been employed for 12 months. However, mere completion of 12 months of service cannot shield a person from the consequences of, for example, making material, intentional false statements in order to obtain a position with the Federal Government. This would undermine the integrity of the Federal employment process. Procedures A number of commenters expressed support for the proposed additional procedural protections for persons who may be subject to an unfavorable suitability determination or action. One commenter asked what role a representative would have under these protections. OPM expects the role would be similar to that of a representative in other administrative actions, i.e., that a properly-designated representative would have the authority to act on behalf of the person he or she represents, including corresponding on behalf of the person and being responsible for meeting deadlines. A commenter suggested that representatives designated under the regulations be allowed reasonable official time to review materials and prepare responses to proposed actions. While the regulations do not require the grant of official time, they do not preclude the agency from authorizing official time for a representative. This is consistent with other OPM Governmentwide regulations, at 5 CFR parts 432 and 752, that also do not provide official time for representatives. Therefore, the suggestion to include an official time provision for representatives in the regulations is not adopted. Authorities The final rule permits an agency to debar from employment with that agency any person it finds unsuitable for up to three years, as opposed to a period of one year as provided in the current regulations. While OPM changed this rule to give agencies the same flexibility when deciding the appropriate length of debarment as OPM, one commenter suggested that objective criteria be published as to when debarment would be appropriate beyond one year. OPM intends to provide this type of information as part of its guidance issuances referenced in § 731.102(c). The same commenter also suggested that criteria and examples be given of when it would be appropriate to impose an additional debarment period. An additional debarment period, that is, a new debarment action based on a new suitability determination, may be warranted where there is a strong nexus between the reasons for the suitability determination and the agency mission or position duties. For example, an additional debarment period might be appropriate where a person convicted of embezzlement continues to apply for fiduciary positions and does not report the conviction on the relevant questionnaire; where a person guilty of sexual crimes applies for positions dealing with the public where contact with children reasonably is expected; where an arsonist applies for firefighter positions; and where those with lengthy criminal histories want to work in law enforcement positions. Again, OPM intends to provide such information as part of its guidance referenced in § 731.102(c). Another commenter asked how long an additional debarment period can be. An additional debarment period can be imposed only if an agency makes a new suitability determination. If it again finds the person unsuitable, the new debarment period could be imposed for up to three years. One commenter expressed concern that an agency may improperly implement its debarment authority; however, the rule at § 731.103(f) calls for the revocation of an agency's delegation of suitability authority if its actions fail to conform to this rule or any of OPM's guidance. In response to the comments on additional debarment periods, OPM has revised the language in sections 731.204(b) and 731.205(b) of the final rule to state more clearly that upon expiration of a debarment period, if the person formerly debarred again becomes subject to OPM's or an agency's suitability jurisdiction, *e.g.* , by applying for a position in the competitive service, a new suitability determination must be made under 5 CFR part 731 before an additional period of debarment can be imposed. In § 731.103(g), OPM proposed to eliminate the requirement that agencies with delegated authority seek prior approval from OPM before taking action under other authorities, such as part 315, part 359, or part 752 of this chapter, in cases involving evidence of material, intentional false statement in examination or appointment, or deception or fraud in examination or appointment; or refusal to furnish testimony. While agencies would still be required to notify OPM if they have taken, or plan to take, such action (and could have their delegated authority withdrawn under § 731.103(f) for failure to conform to this part or OPM issuances), one commenter suggested that oversight of agencies' use of this authority should be mandated and that the results of oversight be made public. Under its statutory oversight mandate, OPM will continue to conduct reviews of agency suitability programs and agency use of delegated authority, including whether agencies are properly using their delegated authority under this section. Reports on such reviews are provided to the agency reviewed so that necessary corrective actions may be taken. One commenter wondered why an agency under § 731.103(g) would be required to notify OPM if it has already taken or plans to take such an action under other authorities. The answer is that OPM may determine it appropriate to debar that person from all Federal employment even though the agency has taken action to remove the person under other authority if the person, for example, provided material, intentional false statements in connection with the employment process. To further clarify the scope of the reporting requirement, OPM is providing at § 731.103(g), that agencies are required to report to OPM only in cases involving material, intentional false statement in examination or appointment, or deception or fraud in examination or appointment; or refusal to furnish testimony as required by § 5.4 of this title. Also, corresponding changes referring back to § 731.103(g) are being inserted into §§ 731.105(e) and 731.203(f) for the same reason. This commenter also suggested that proposed § 731.103(c) be modified to state more clearly that agencies exercising their delegated authority must do so in accordance with OPM regulations and issuances. The commenter stated that following OPM issuances would “increase government wide uniformity and consistency in making suitability determinations and taking suitability actions.” OPM agrees and has modified this section in the final rule accordingly. OPM proposed modifications to § 731.202 to clarify that OPM or agencies with delegated authority to make suitability determinations and take suitability actions have the authority to rely on the additional suitability considerations contained in paragraph
(c)of § 731.202 at their sole discretion. Factors not relied upon by OPM or agencies in individual cases could not be considered by MSPB. One commenter believed that this limitation of MSPB's review “further erodes the concept of mitigation” and “precludes the Board from a full and fair review of OPM and/or agency action.” OPM strongly disagrees. Under the suitability regulations, MSPB has no authority to mitigate an agency's action in the same way it does not have authority to mitigate performance-based actions taken under chapter 43 of title 5 of the United States Code. In such cases, MSPB can only affirm or reverse the agency's action. With regard to the fullness and fairness of MSPB's review, the regulations are intended to insure a full and fair review by explicitly stating in the final regulations that MSPB must review each specification and each charge in all suitability appeals. However, OPM has revised section 731.202(c) of the final rule to state that OPM or an agency “must” consider “any” of the additional considerations to the extent OPM or the relevant agency, in its sole discretion, deems “any” of them pertinent to the individual case. This is to state more clearly that an agency need not consider all of the additional considerations, but must consider those that it deems pertinent. As the MSPB's review is limited to the agency's determination, however, the MSPB cannot consider, as aggravating or mitigating factors, additional considerations that the agency did not deem pertinent. OPM proposed to clarify in paragraph
(d)of § 731.103 that agencies may choose to begin preliminary suitability reviews for all applicants at any time during the hiring process. One commenter concurred with the proposal, stating that the ability to begin suitability reviews in the early stages of the recruitment process would facilitate that agency's ability to make timely selections. Another commenter said that this is a change from OPM guidance in 1994 that the suitability process be initiated late in the recruitment process. In more recent guidance, however, OPM stated that agencies may begin the process “at any time during the hiring process” (see OPM Memorandum for Chief Human Capital Officers entitled “Initiating Suitability Determinations” and dated May 9, 2005). The regulations codify the most recent OPM guidance. Merit Systems Protection Board Review In the proposed rule, OPM discussed the basis for concluding that the procedures an agency decides to use to take an action, e.g., objecting to an eligible under 5 CFR part 332 or taking a suitability action under this part, determine whether an agency's action may be appealed. The Board recognized this clear distinction in *Vislisel* v. *OPM* , 29 M.S.P.R. 679
(1986)when it observed that a sustained objection is an agency-initiated procedure separate and apart from a suitability determination under part 731. *Id.* at 682. In *Edwards* v. *Department of Justice* , 87 M.S.P.R. 518 (2001), the Board abandoned its approach in *Vislisel* , holding that, in deciding whether an action was an appealable suitability determination, “what matters is the substance of the action, not the form.” *Id.* at 522. OPM noted that this is an incorrect reading of the authority that OPM conferred upon the Board and proposed to adjust the suitability regulations accordingly. Consequently, OPM concluded that, when adjudicating an appeal of an agency action, the Board must assess the agency's action under the procedures elected by the agency and may not hold the agency to standards relating to a legal authority that the agency did not invoke. The Board may not create an appeal right where neither Congress nor OPM has expressly granted it. *King* v. *Jerome* , 42 F.3d 1371, 1374 (Fed. Cir. 1994). OPM proposed changes to the regulations to reflect this conclusion. One commenter stated that OPM's proposed changes would administratively overrule *Edwards* and that change would be tampering with what is now settled MSPB precedent. While agreeing that the proposed change would overrule *Edwards* , OPM is not “tampering” with MSPB precedent. Rather, OPM is correcting case law that is clearly erroneous and well beyond the intent of Congress—which is that MSPB's jurisdiction is limited to actions appealable under “any law, rule, or regulation” as provided by 5 U.S.C. 7701(a). OPM strongly disagrees that this stands on its head the decision in *Lovshin* v. *Navy* , 767 F.2d, 8326 (Fed. Cir. 1985), which provides an agency may choose whether to use 5 U.S.C. chapter 43 or 5 U.S.C. chapter 75 to take a performance-based action. Just as in *Lovshin* , when the choice is between using suitability authority or some other authority, whatever action taken under the chosen authority is subject to review. Another commenter agreed with the notion that MSPB cannot hold an agency to standards relating to a legal authority the agency did not invoke and concluded that an agency's action “should rise or fall on how that agency characterizes the action, not how MSPB *could* characterize the agency's action.” OPM agrees and notes that this is precisely our rationale for clarifying the authority of MSPB. Finally, OPM strongly disagrees with one commenter's claim that OPM is “setting up a system that it and agencies will be free to manipulate without a check by MSPB.” OPM has carefully structured a system that protects the rights of persons by providing for MSPB review of agency actions. Whatever action an agency chooses to take, there is a process for ensuring the rights of those affected are protected. OPM proposed to eliminate the provision under the current regulations that requires MSPB to remand a case to OPM or an agency if fewer than all the charges in an appeal are sustained. While one commenter concurred, stating that eliminating the remand would be important, several other commenters objected to the proposal, stating, among other things, that the change would be capricious, and that it and other changes proposed would transform MSPB into a “rubber stamp” without meaningful review authority. Several commenters were concerned that eliminating the remand and requiring MSPB to sustain only one charge in order to uphold an agency's suitability action might preclude MSPB from considering, or at least not obligate MSPB to consider, all charges and specifications once one charge is sustained and might lead to multiple proceedings. One commenter suggested that the regulations require MSPB to consider all charges and specifications. Another commenter noted that, in 2000, when OPM first proposed that an agency's suitability action must be affirmed by MSPB even if some of the charges are not sustained, OPM “answered its critics by also providing for remands by MSPB.” OPM carefully considered these comments and concluded that some changes to the final regulations at § 731.501 are appropriate. For example, while OPM would expect MSPB to review all matters raised in any appeal before it, we have modified the final rule to state explicitly that MSPB must review all charges and all specifications in each appeal. In addition and upon further reflection, OPM concludes that the remand process can be retained in a manner that would help eliminate confusion under the current regulations. Accordingly, OPM has modified the final rule so that remand decisions, as suggested by a commenter, are held in abeyance pending a final decision by MSPB or the courts as appropriate. This should help eliminate the current confusion about when a person can file a petition for review of an initial decision by MSPB and eliminates the current confusion generated when an agency is simultaneously reviewing a case on remand while MSPB is considering a petition for review. The expected reduction in confusion and the assurance that all charges and specifications will be considered should help encourage confidence in the appeal process. Readability Commenters supported the changes in the regulations intended to make them more readable, with one commenter stating that the proposed changes do not appear to affect the substance of the regulations. OPM determined however that one proposed change did affect the substance of the regulations with respect to periodic reinvestigations. Specifically, in the proposed regulation, OPM inadvertently deleted section 731.106(d), which provided that agencies relying on authorities such as the Computer Security Act and OMB Circular A-130 Revised may require employees in certain public trust positions to undergo periodic reinvestigation. Accordingly, that section has been reinserted into this final regulation. Sections 731.106(d) and
(e)have been redesignated as sections 731.106(e) and (f). Miscellaneous Comments One commenter wanted to know how OPM would notify agencies about persons debarred by OPM. In that commenter's experience, the agency had never been notified about any debarment in the last ten years. The process for notifying agencies is beyond the scope of this rule and will not be addressed further. One commenter believes that, because the proposed regulations state that OPM or an agency with delegated authority cannot take a suitability action against a person who is not covered by the regulations, the regulations imply that an agency may take a suitability action against any person who is covered and may do so at any time. That is an incorrect inference. While OPM can take a suitability action against a person who is an applicant, appointee, or employee, as those terms are defined in this part, an agency may take a suitability action only against an applicant or appointee. An agency may not take a suitability action against an employee. Moreover, the basis on which OPM may take a suitability action against an employee is limited to charges of material, intentional false statement or deception or fraud in examination or appointment; refusal to furnish testimony as required by § 5.4 of this title; or statutory or regulatory bar. One commenter discussed establishing an internal agency process for interfacing with OPM concerning that agency's actions, particularly debarment actions. Agencies' internal processes are outside the scope of the proposed amendments to the regulations and are not further addressed here. A commenter stated that a person who is a member of a collective bargaining unit covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement should have the discretion to file a grievance under the parties' negotiated grievance procedure or to appeal to MSPB. This commenter also believes that the scope of review ought to extend to the “propriety of the agency's action.” These topics are outside the scope of the proposed regulations and therefore have not been considered. Another commenter requested a number of revisions to the proposed rule in order to avoid inconsistencies with laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The commenter believes certain proposed changes to the rules provide agencies with the sole discretion over whether and how to consider a person's misconduct in ways that could conflict with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The commenter also believes that agencies' authority to debar persons for three years at a time as proposed could conflict with section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act. With regard to the Title VII concern, the commenter stated that to the extent a suitability determination could be made solely based on a person's conviction or arrest record, it would violate settled law under Title VII disallowing a categorical bar from employment of all individuals with arrest or conviction records, because such a bar has a disparate impact on certain classes of people. OPM notes that the suitability rules do not provide for categorical bars from employment on the basis of a conviction or arrest record. The specific factors listed in the regulations, such as criminal or dishonest conduct, are to be considered in conjunction with any of the additional considerations the agency deems pertinent, and in light of the standard in § 731.201 that the action cannot be taken unless it will “protect the integrity or promote the efficiency of the service.” Further, as discussed previously, a negative suitability determination can only be made in accordance with the procedural requirements of the suitability rules, including affording a person the right to answer any charges. Finally, if the person is determined to be unsuitable, he or she may seek administrative review by MSPB and ultimately judicial review. As with any appeal to the Board, the person may raise affirmative defenses, including allegations that the action appealed is discriminatory. OPM disagrees with the suggestion that the Board would be prevented from considering affirmative defenses like these simply because an agency would not be required under the proposed rule to link a determination of unsuitability with a particular position in the Government. With regard to the Rehabilitation Act (Act), the commenter stated that agencies using alcohol abuse and the illegal use of drugs in making suitability determinations would have to do so in accordance with the Act. For example, if the person has the disability of alcoholism (as opposed to simply abusing alcohol), the Act would have to be followed. The commenter also states that, under the proposed rule, if a person were debarred for a period of three years for alcohol abuse or illegal use of drugs, he or she would be prevented, in violation of the Act, from demonstrating later that he or she can perform the essential duties of a position with or without reasonable accommodation. OPM notes that current alcohol abusers and illegal drug users are not covered by the Rehabilitation Act. See 29 U.S.C. 705(20)(c). OPM also notes that the regulation does not prevent a debarred person from claiming that he or she later has become suitable upon conclusion of the debarment period. To the extent the commenter is suggesting that the Rehabilitation Act requires a shortening of the debarment period for persons who may later become covered individuals, OPM disagrees. The debarment penalty is imposed based on the contemporaneous conduct of the person at the time of the negative suitability determination, not because of any disability of the person. However, as noted above, OPM has revised the language in sections 731.204(b) and 731.205(b) of the final rule to clarify that upon expiration of a debarment period, if the person formerly debarred again becomes subject to OPM's or an agency's suitability jurisdiction, e.g., by applying for a position in the competitive service, a new suitability determination must be made under 5 CFR part 731 before an additional period of debarment can be imposed. OPM has further revised section 731.202(b)(5) of the final rule to clarify that alcohol abuse of a nature and duration that suggests that the applicant or appointee would be prevented from performing the duties of the position in question, or would constitute a direct threat to the property or safety of the applicant or appointee or others, can only be the basis of a negative suitability determination in the absence of “evidence of substantial rehabilitation.” The commenter suggested a number of changes to the suitability factors provided at § 731.202(b) as a means to avoid what the commenter viewed as inconsistencies with laws enforced by EEOC. These factors have been in effect for many years and have resulted in a legally-sound and uniform body of case law governing the application of the factors Governmentwide. OPM does not wish to undermine that case law by changing these factors. Therefore, with the exception of the revision to section 731.202(b)(5) noted above, OPM is not revising the specific factors in section 731.202(b). Other suggested changes, including the limitation of agency debarment authority to one year, are also not adopted. While not adopting the suggestions, OPM strongly emphasizes to agencies that any actions taken under OPM's suitability rules must be taken in accordance with applicable laws, including those enforced by the EEOC. Technical Amendments OPM has made technical amendments to the Authorities for this part by deleting the following citations: “5 U.S.C. 7701” and “E.O. 12731, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306.” These are deleted since they do not provide legal bases for 5 CFR part 731. OPM has also inserted “as amended” following the citation to E.O. 10577. OPM also moved the language defining “covered position” in section 731.101(a) to “Definitions” in section 731.101(b) for easy reference. Finally, in section 731.105(a), OPM deleted the citation to paragraph
(a)of section 731.104 because the correct reference is to all of section 731.104. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Review The Office of Management and Budget has reviewed the final rule in accordance with Executive Order 12866. Regulatory Flexibility Act I certify that these regulations will not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they will affect Federal agencies, employees, and applicants only. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 731 Administrative practices and procedures, Government employees. Office of Personnel Management. Linda M. Springer, Director. Accordingly, OPM is revising 5 CFR part 731 to read as follows: PART 731—SUITABILITY Subpart A—Scope Sec. 731.101 Purpose. 731.102 Implementation. 731.103 Delegation to agencies. 731.104 Appointments subject to investigation. 731.105 Authority to take suitability actions. 731.106 Designation of public trust positions and investigative requirements. Subpart B—Suitability Determinations and Actions 731.201 Standard. 731.202 Criteria for making suitability determinations. 731.203 Suitability actions by OPM and other agencies. 731.204 Debarment by OPM. 731.205 Debarment by agencies. Subpart C—OPM Suitability Action Procedures 731.301 Scope. 731.302 Notice of proposed action. 731.303 Answer. 731.304 Decision. Subpart D—Agency Suitability Action Procedures 731.401 Scope. 731.402 Notice of proposed action. 731.403 Answer. 731.404 Decision. Subpart E—Appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board 731.501 Appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Subpart F—Savings Provision 731.601 Savings provision. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, 7301; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218, as amended, 5 CFR, parts 1, 2 and 5. Subpart A—Scope § 731.101 Purpose.
(a)The purpose of this part is to establish criteria and procedures for making determinations of suitability and for taking suitability actions regarding employment in covered positions (as defined in paragraph
(b)of this section) pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3301, E.O. 10577 (3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218), as amended, and 5 CFR 1.1, 2.1(a) and 5.2. Section 3301 of title 5, United States Code, directs consideration of “age, health, character, knowledge, and ability for the employment sought.” E.O. 10577 (codified in relevant part at 5 CFR 1.1, 2.1(a) and 5.2) directs OPM to examine “suitability” for competitive Federal employment. This part concerns only determinations of “suitability,” that is, those determinations based on a person's character or conduct that may have an impact on the integrity or efficiency of the service. Determinations made and actions taken under this part are distinct from objections to eligibles or pass overs of preference eligibles, and OPM's and agencies' decisions on such requests, made under 5 U.S.C. 3318 and 5 CFR 332.406, as well as determinations of eligibility for assignment to, or retention in, sensitive national security positions made under E.O. 10450 (3 CFR, 1949-1953 Comp., p. 936), E.O. 12968, or similar authorities.
(b)*Definitions.* In this part: *Applicant* means a person who is being considered or has been considered for employment. *Appointee* means a person who has entered on duty and is in the first year of a subject-to-investigation appointment (as defined in § 731.104). *Covered position* means a position in the competitive service, a position in the excepted service where the incumbent can be noncompetitively converted to the competitive service, and a career appointment to a position in the Senior Executive Service. *Days* means calendar days unless otherwise specified in this part. *Employee* means a person who has completed the first year of a subject-to-investigation appointment. *Material* means, in reference to a statement, one that is capable of influencing, affects, or has a natural tendency to affect, an official decision even if OPM or an agency does not rely upon it. *Suitability action* means an outcome described in § 731.203 and may be taken only by OPM or an agency with delegated authority under the procedures in subparts C and D of this part. *Suitability determination* means a decision by OPM or an agency with delegated authority that a person is suitable or is not suitable for employment in covered positions in the Federal Government or a specific Federal agency. § 731.102 Implementation.
(a)An investigation conducted for the purpose of determining suitability under this part may not be used for any other purpose except as provided in a Privacy Act system of records notice published by the agency conducting the investigation.
(b)Under OMB Circular No. A-130 Revised, issued November 20, 2000, agencies are to implement and maintain a program to ensure that adequate protection is provided for all automated information systems. Agency personnel screening programs may be based on procedures developed by OPM. The Computer Security Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-235) provides additional requirements for Federal automated information systems.
(c)OPM may set forth policies, procedures, criteria, standards, quality control procedures, and supplementary guidance for the implementation of this part in OPM issuances. § 731.103 Delegation to agencies.
(a)Subject to the limitations and requirements of paragraphs
(f)and
(g)of this section, OPM delegates to the heads of agencies authority for making suitability determinations and taking suitability actions (including limited, agency-specific debarments under § 731.205) in cases involving *applicants* for and *appointees* to covered positions in the agency.
(b)When an agency, acting under delegated authority from OPM, determines that a Governmentwide debarment by OPM under § 731.204(a) may be an appropriate action, it must refer the case to OPM for debarment consideration. Agencies must make these referrals prior to any proposed suitability action, but only after sufficient resolution of the suitability issue(s), through subject contact or investigation, to determine if a Governmentwide debarment appears warranted.
(c)Agencies exercising authority under this part by delegation from OPM must adhere to OPM requirements as stated in this part and OPM's issuances described in § 731.102(c). Agencies must also implement policies and maintain records demonstrating that they employ reasonable methods to ensure adherence to these OPM issuances.
(d)Agencies may begin to determine an applicant's suitability at any time during the hiring process. Because suitability issues may not arise until late in the application/appointment process, it is generally more practical and cost-effective to first ensure that the applicant is eligible for the position, deemed by OPM or a Delegated Examining Unit to be among the best qualified, and/or within reach of selection. However, in certain circumstances, such as filling law enforcement positions, an agency may choose to initiate a preliminary suitability review at the time of application. Whether or not a person is likely to be eligible for selection, OPM must be informed in all cases where there is evidence of material, intentional false statements, or deception or fraud in examination or appointment, and OPM will take a suitability action where warranted.
(e)When an agency, exercising authority under this part by delegation from OPM, makes a suitability determination or changes a tentative favorable placement decision to an unfavorable decision, based on an OPM report of investigation or upon an investigation conducted pursuant to OPM-delegated authority, the agency must:
(1)Ensure that the records used in making the determination are accurate, relevant, timely, and complete to the extent reasonably necessary to ensure fairness to the person in any determination;
(2)Ensure that all applicable administrative procedural requirements provided by law, the regulations in this part, and OPM issuances as described in § 731.102(c) have been observed;
(3)Consider all available information in reaching its final decision on a suitability determination or suitability action, except information furnished by a non-corroborated confidential source, which may be used only for limited purposes, such as information used to develop a lead or in interrogatories to a subject, if the identity of the source is not compromised in any way; and
(4)Keep any record of the agency suitability determination or action as required by OPM issuances as described in § 731.102(c).
(f)OPM may revoke an agency's delegation to make suitability determinations and take suitability actions under this part if an agency fails to conform to this part or OPM issuances as described in § 731.102(c).
(g)OPM retains jurisdiction to make final determinations and take actions in all suitability cases where there is evidence that there has been a material, intentional false statement, or deception or fraud in examination or appointment. OPM also retains jurisdiction over all suitability cases involving a refusal to furnish testimony as required by § 5.4 of this chapter. Agencies must refer these cases to OPM for suitability determinations and suitability actions under this authority. Although no prior approval is needed, notification to OPM is required if the agency wants to take, or has taken, action under its own authority (5 CFR part 315, 5 CFR part 359, or 5 CFR part 752) in cases involving material, intentional false statement in examination or appointment, or deception or fraud in examination or appointment; or refusal to furnish testimony as required by § 5.4 of this title. In addition, paragraph
(a)of this section notwithstanding, OPM may, in its discretion, exercise its jurisdiction under this part in any case it deems necessary. § 731.104 Appointments subject to investigation.
(a)To establish a person's suitability for employment, appointments to covered positions identified in § 731.101 require the person to undergo an investigation by OPM or by an agency with delegated authority from OPM to conduct investigations. Certain appointments do not require investigation. Except when required because of position risk level (high, moderate, or low) changes, a person in a covered position, who has undergone a suitability investigation, need not undergo another one simply because the person has been:
(1)Promoted;
(2)Demoted;
(3)Reassigned;
(4)Converted from career-conditional to career tenure;
(5)Appointed or converted to an appointment in a covered position if the person has been serving continuously with the agency for at least 1 year in one or more positions under an appointment subject to investigation; or
(6)Transferred, provided the person has served continuously for at least 1 year in a position subject to investigation. (b)(1) Either OPM or an agency with delegated suitability authority may investigate and take a suitability action against an applicant, appointee, or employee in accordance with § 731.105. There is no time limit on the authority of OPM or an agency with delegated suitability authority to conduct the required investigation of an applicant who has been appointed to a position. An employee does not have to serve a new probationary or trial period merely because his or her appointment is subject to investigation under this section. An employee's probationary or trial period is not extended because his or her appointment is subject to investigation under this section.
(2)The subject to investigation condition also does not eliminate the need to conduct investigations required under § 731.106 for public trust positions when the required investigation commensurate with the risk level of the position has not yet been conducted.
(3)Suitability determinations must be made for all appointments that are subject to investigation.
(c)Positions that are intermittent, seasonal, per diem, or temporary, not to exceed an aggregate of 180 days per year in either a single continuous appointment or series of appointments, do not require a background investigation as described in § 731.106(c)(1). The employing agency, however, must conduct such checks as it deems appropriate to ensure the suitability of the person. § 731.105 Authority to take suitability actions.
(a)Neither OPM nor an agency acting under delegated authority may take a suitability action in connection with any application for, or appointment to, a position that is not subject to investigation or check under § 731.104.
(b)OPM may take a suitability action under this part against an *applicant* or *appointee* based on any of the criteria of § 731.202;
(c)Except as limited by § 731.103(g), an agency, exercising delegated authority, may take a suitability action under this part against an *applicant* or *appointee* based on the criteria of § 731.202;
(d)OPM may take a suitability action under this part against an *employee* based on the criteria of § 731.202(b)(3), (4), or (8).
(e)An agency may not take a suitability action against an *employee* . Nothing in this part precludes an agency from taking an adverse action against an employee under the procedures and standards of part 752 of this chapter or terminating a probationary employee under the procedures of part 315 or part 359 of this chapter. An agency must notify OPM to the extent required in § 731.103(g) if it wants to take, or has taken, action under these authorities. § 731.106 Designation of public trust positions and investigative requirements.
(a)*Risk designation* . Agency heads must designate every covered position within the agency at a high, moderate, or low risk level as determined by the position's potential for adverse impact to the efficiency or integrity of the service. OPM will provide an example of a risk designation system for agency use in an OPM issuance as described in § 731.102(c).
(b)*Public Trust positions* . Positions at the high or moderate risk levels would normally be designated as “Public Trust” positions. Such positions may involve policy making, major program responsibility, public safety and health, law enforcement duties, fiduciary responsibilities or other duties demanding a significant degree of public trust, and positions involving access to or operation or control of financial records, with a significant risk for causing damage or realizing personal gain.
(c)*Investigative requirements* .
(1)Persons receiving an appointment made subject to investigation under this part must undergo a background investigation. OPM is authorized to establish minimum investigative requirements correlating to risk levels. Investigations should be initiated before appointment but no later than 14 calendar days after placement in the position.
(2)All positions subject to investigation under this part must also receive a sensitivity designation of Special-Sensitive, Critical-Sensitive, or Noncritical-Sensitive, when appropriate. This designation is complementary to the risk designation, and may have an effect on the position's investigative requirement. Sections 732.201 and 732.202 of this chapter detail the various sensitivity levels and investigation types. Detailed procedures for determining investigative requirements for all positions based upon risk and sensitivity will be established in an OPM issuance as described in § 731.102(c).
(3)If suitability issues develop prior to the required investigation, OPM or the agency may conduct an investigation sufficient to resolve the issues and support a suitability determination or action, if warranted. If the person is appointed, the minimum level of investigation must be conducted as required by paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(d)*Suitability reinvestigations* . Agencies, relying on authorities such as the Computer Security Act of 1987 and OMB Circular No. A-130 Revised (issued November 20, 2000), may require incumbents of certain public trust positions to undergo periodic reinvestigations. The appropriate level of any reinvestigation will be determined by the agency, but may be based on supplemental guidance provided by OPM.
(e)*Risk level changes* . If a person moves to a higher risk level position, or if the risk level of his or her position itself is changed, the person may remain in or encumber the position. Any upgrade in the investigation required for the new risk level should be initiated within 14 calendar days after the move or the new designation is final.
(f)*Completed investigations* . Any suitability investigation completed by an agency under provisions of paragraph
(d)of this section must result in a determination by the employing agency. The subject's employment status (i.e., applicant, appointee, or employee as defined in § 731.101) will determine the applicable agency authority and procedures to be followed in any action taken. Subpart B—Suitability Determinations and Actions § 731.201 Standard. The standard for a suitability action defined in § 731.203 and taken against an applicant, appointee, or employee is that the action will protect the integrity or promote the efficiency of the service. § 731.202 Criteria for making suitability determinations.
(a)*General* . OPM, or an agency to which OPM has delegated authority, must base its suitability determination on the presence or absence of one or more of the specific factors (charges) in paragraph
(b)of this section.
(b)*Specific factors* . In determining whether a person is suitable for Federal employment, only the following factors will be considered a basis for finding a person unsuitable and taking a suitability action:
(1)Misconduct or negligence in employment;
(2)Criminal or dishonest conduct;
(3)Material, intentional false statement, or deception or fraud in examination or appointment;
(4)Refusal to furnish testimony as required by § 5.4 of this chapter;
(5)Alcohol abuse, without evidence of substantial rehabilitation, of a nature and duration that suggests that the applicant or appointee would be prevented from performing the duties of the position in question, or would constitute a direct threat to the property or safety of the applicant or appointee or others;
(6)Illegal use of narcotics, drugs, or other controlled substances without evidence of substantial rehabilitation;
(7)Knowing and willful engagement in acts or activities designed to overthrow the U.S. Government by force; and
(8)Any statutory or regulatory bar which prevents the lawful employment of the person involved in the position in question.
(c)*Additional considerations* . OPM and agencies must consider any of the following additional considerations to the extent OPM or the relevant agency, in its sole discretion, deems any of them pertinent to the individual case:
(1)The nature of the position for which the person is applying or in which the person is employed;
(2)The nature and seriousness of the conduct;
(3)The circumstances surrounding the conduct;
(4)The recency of the conduct;
(5)The age of the person involved at the time of the conduct;
(6)Contributing societal conditions; and
(7)The absence or presence of rehabilitation or efforts toward rehabilitation. § 731.203 Suitability actions by OPM and other agencies.
(a)For purposes of this part, a suitability action is one or more of the following:
(1)Cancellation of eligibility;
(2)Removal;
(3)Cancellation of reinstatement eligibility; and
(4)Debarment.
(b)A non-selection, or cancellation of eligibility for a specific position based on an objection to an eligible or pass over of a preference eligible under 5 CFR 332.406, is *not* a suitability action even if it is based on reasons set forth in § 731.202.
(c)A suitability action may be taken against an applicant or an appointee when OPM or an agency exercising delegated authority under this part finds that the applicant or appointee is unsuitable for the reasons cited in § 731.202, subject to the agency limitations of § 731.103(g).
(d)OPM may require that an appointee or an employee be removed on the basis of a material, intentional false statement, deception or fraud in examination or appointment; refusal to furnish testimony as required by § 5.4 of this chapter; or a statutory or regulatory bar which prevents the person's lawful employment.
(e)OPM may cancel any reinstatement eligibility obtained as a result of a material, intentional false statement, deception or fraud in examination or appointment.
(f)An action to remove an appointee or employee *for suitability reasons* under this part is not an action under part 315, 359, or 752 of this chapter. Where behavior covered by this part may also form the basis for an action under parts 315, 359, or 752 of this chapter, an agency may take the action under part 315, 359, or 752 of this chapter, as appropriate, instead of under this part. An agency must notify OPM to the extent required in § 731.103(g) if it wants to take, or has taken, action under these authorities.
(g)Agencies do not need approval from OPM before taking unfavorable suitability actions. However, they are required to report to OPM all unfavorable suitability actions taken under this part within 30 days after they take the action. Also, all actions based on an OPM investigation must be reported to OPM as soon as possible and in no event later than 90 days after receipt of the final report of investigation. § 731.204 Debarment by OPM.
(a)When OPM finds a person unsuitable for any reason listed in § 731.202, OPM, in its discretion, may, for a period of not more than 3 years from the date of the unfavorable suitability determination, deny that person examination for, and appointment to, covered positions.
(b)OPM may impose an additional period of debarment following the expiration of a period of OPM or agency debarment, but only after the person again becomes an applicant, appointee, or employee subject to OPM's suitability jurisdiction, and his or her suitability is determined in accordance with the procedures of this part. An additional debarment period may be based in whole or in part on the same conduct on which the previous suitability action was based, when warranted, or new conduct.
(c)OPM, in its sole discretion, determines the duration of any period of debarment imposed under this section. § 731.205 Debarment by agencies.
(a)Subject to the provisions of § 731.103, when an agency finds an applicant or appointee unsuitable based upon reasons listed in § 731.202, the agency may, for a period of not more than 3 years from the date of the unfavorable suitability determination, deny that person examination for, and appointment to, either all, or specific covered, positions within that agency.
(b)The agency may impose an additional period of debarment following the expiration of a period of OPM or agency debarment, but only after the person again becomes an applicant or appointee subject to the agency's suitability jurisdiction, and his or her suitability is determined in accordance with the procedures of this part. An additional debarment period may be based in whole or in part on the same conduct on which the previous suitability action was based, when warranted, or new conduct.
(c)The agency, in its sole discretion, determines the duration of any period of debarment imposed under this section.
(d)The agency is responsible for enforcing the period of debarment and taking appropriate action if a person applies for, or is inappropriately appointed to, a position at that agency during the debarment period. This responsibility does not limit OPM's authority to exercise jurisdiction itself and take any action OPM deems appropriate. Subpart C—OPM Suitability Action Procedures § 731.301 Scope. This subpart covers OPM-initiated suitability actions against an *applicant, appointee,* or *employee* . § 731.302 Notice of proposed action.
(a)OPM will notify the applicant, appointee, or employee (hereinafter, the “respondent”) in writing of the proposed action, the charges against the respondent, and the availability of review, upon request, of the materials relied upon. The notice will set forth the specific reasons for the proposed action and state that the respondent has the right to answer the notice in writing. The notice will further inform the respondent of the time limit for the answer as well as the address to which an answer must be made.
(b)The notice will inform the respondent that he or she may be represented by a representative of the respondent's choice and that if the respondent wishes to have such a representative, the respondent must designate the representative in writing.
(c)OPM will serve the notice of proposed action upon the respondent by mail or hand delivery no less than 30 days prior to the effective date of the proposed action to the respondent's last known residence or duty station.
(d)If the respondent encumbers a position covered by this part on the date the notice is served, the respondent is entitled to be retained in a pay status during the notice period.
(e)OPM will send a copy of the notice to any employing agency that is involved. § 731.303 Answer.
(a)*Respondent's answer* . A respondent may answer the charges in writing and furnish documentation and/or affidavits in support of the answer. To be timely, a written answer must be submitted no more than 30 days after the date of the notice of proposed action.
(b)*Agency's answer* . An employing agency may also answer the notice of proposed action. The time limit for filing such an answer is 30 days from the date of the notice. In reaching a decision, OPM will consider any answer the agency makes. § 731.304 Decision. The decision regarding the final suitability action will be in writing, be dated, and inform the respondent of the reasons for the decision and that an unfavorable decision may be appealed in accordance with subpart E of this part. OPM will also notify the respondent's employing agency of its decision. If the decision requires removal, the employing agency must remove the appointee or employee from the rolls within 5 work days of receipt of OPM's final decision. Subpart D—Agency Suitability Action Procedures § 731.401 Scope. This subpart covers agency-initiated suitability actions against an *applicant* or *appointee* . § 731.402 Notice of proposed action.
(a)The agency must notify the applicant or appointee (hereinafter, the “respondent”) in writing of the proposed action, the charges against the respondent, and the availability for review, upon request, of the materials relied upon. The notice must set forth the specific reasons for the proposed action and state that the respondent has the right to answer the notice in writing. The notice must further inform the respondent of the time limit for the answer as well as the address to which such answer must be delivered.
(b)The notice must inform the respondent that he or she may be represented by a representative of the respondent's choice and that if the respondent wishes to have such a representative, the respondent must designate the representative in writing.
(c)The agency must serve the notice of proposed action upon the respondent by mail or hand delivery no less than 30 days prior to the effective date of the proposed action to the respondent's last known residence or duty station.
(d)If the respondent is employed in a position covered by this part on the date the notice is served, the respondent is entitled to be retained in a pay status during the notice period. § 731.403 Answer. A respondent may answer the charges in writing and furnish documentation and/or affidavits in support of the answer. To be timely, a written answer must be submitted no more than 30 days after the date of the notice of proposed action. § 731.404 Decision. The decision regarding the final action must be in writing, be dated, and inform the respondent of the reasons for the decision and that an unfavorable decision may be appealed in accordance with subpart E of this part. If the decision requires removal, the employing agency must remove the appointee from the rolls within 5 work days of the agency's decision. Subpart E—Appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board § 731.501 Appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
(a)*Appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board* . When OPM or an agency acting under delegated authority under this part takes a suitability action against a person, that person may appeal the action to the Merit Systems Protection Board (hereinafter “Board”).
(b)*Decisions by the Merit Systems Protection Board* .
(1)If the Board finds that one or more of the charges brought by OPM or an agency against the person is supported by a preponderance of the evidence, regardless of whether all specifications are sustained, it must affirm the suitability determination. The Board must consider the record as a whole and make a finding on each charge and specification in making its decision.
(2)If the Board sustains fewer than all the charges, the Board must remand the case to OPM or the agency to determine whether the suitability action taken is appropriate based on the sustained charge(s). However, the agency must hold in abeyance a decision on remand until the person has exhausted all rights to seek review of the Board's decision, including court review.
(3)Once review is final, OPM or an agency will determine whether the action taken is appropriate based on the sustained charges and this determination will be final without any further appeal to the Board.
(c)*Appeal procedures* . The procedures for filing an appeal with the Board are found at part 1201 of this title. Subpart F—Savings Provision § 731.601 Savings provision. No provision of the regulations in this part is to be applied in such a way as to affect any administrative proceeding pending on June 16, 2008. An administrative proceeding is deemed to be pending from the date of the agency or OPM “notice of proposed action” described in §§ 731.302 and 731.402. [FR Doc. E8-7964 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6326-39-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0304; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-08-AD; Amendment 39-15470; AD 2008-06-52] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH
(TAE)Model TAE 125-02-99 Engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: This document publishes in the **Federal Register** an amendment adopting emergency airworthiness directive
(AD)2008-06-52 that was sent previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of certain TAE Model TAE 125-02-99 engines. This AD requires, before further flight, replacing the high-pressure fuel line and installing a high-pressure fuel line support. This AD results from reports of in-flight engine shutdown incidents on airplanes equipped with TAE 125-02-99 engines. We are issuing this AD to prevent an in-flight engine shutdown or engine fire due to a cracked fuel line. DATES: This AD becomes effective April 30, 2008 to all persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately effective by emergency AD 2008-06-52, issued on March 12, 2008, which contained the requirements of this amendment. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of April 30, 2008. We must receive any comments on this AD by June 16, 2008. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this AD. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *Hand Delivery:* Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. Contact Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14 D-09350, Lichtenstein, Germany, telephone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-55; e-mail: *info@centurion-engines.com* , for the service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Yang, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail *jason.yang@faa.gov* ; telephone
(781)238-7747; fax
(781)238-7199. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 12, 2008, the FAA issued emergency AD 2008-06-52, that applies to TAE model TAE 125-02-99 engines with a serial number from 02-02-1500 through 02-02-2279. That AD requires, before further flight, replacing the high-pressure fuel line and installing a high-pressure fuel line support. That AD resulted from reports of in-flight engine shutdown incidents on airplanes equipped with TAE 125-02-99 engines. This was found to be the result of a cracked high-pressure fuel line between the high-pressure pump and fuel rail. These cracks were caused by excessive vibration of the fuel line. This condition, if not corrected, could result in an in-flight engine shutdown or engine fire due to a cracked fuel line. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of TAE Service Bulletin
(SB)No. TM TAE 125-1005 P1, Revision 1, dated February 11, 2008, and SB No. TM TAE 125-1005 P1, Revision 2, dated March 6, 2008. Those SBs describe procedures for installing a new high-pressure fuel line and a high-pressure fuel line bracket. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD Since the unsafe condition described is likely to exist or develop on other engines of the same type design, we issued emergency AD 2008-06-52 to prevent an in-flight engine shutdown or engine fire due to a cracked fuel line. This AD requires, before further flight, replacing the high-pressure fuel line and installing a high-pressure fuel line support. You must use the service information described previously to perform the actions required by this AD. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD, we have found that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable, and that good cause existed to make the AD effective immediately on March 12, 2008, to all known U.S. owners and operators of certain TAE 125-02-99 engines. These conditions still exist, and we are publishing the AD in the **Federal Register** as an amendment to Section 39.13 of part 39 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to make it effective to all persons. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment. However, we invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include “AD Docket No. FAA-2008-0304; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-08-AD” in the subject line of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might suggest a need to modify it. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of the Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including, if provided, the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78). Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a summary of the costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the address listed under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive: **2008-06-52 Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH:** Amendment 39-15470. Docket No. FAA-2008-0304; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-08-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective April 30, 2008, to all persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately effective by emergency AD 2008-06-52, issued March 12, 2008, which contained the requirements of this amendment. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH
(TAE)model TAE 125-02-99 engines with a serial number
(SN)from 02-02-1500 through 02-02-2279. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Cessna 172 and (Reims-built) F172 series (STC No. SA01303WI); and Diamond DA42 airplanes. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from reports of in-flight engine shutdown incidents on airplanes equipped with TAE 125-02-99 engines. This was found to be the result of a cracked high-pressure fuel line between the high-pressure pump and fuel rail. These cracks were caused by excessive vibration of the fuel line. We are issuing this AD to prevent an in-flight engine shutdown or engine fire due to a cracked fuel line. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed before the next flight after the effective date of this AD, unless the actions have already been done. Corrective Action
(f)Before the next flight, install a new high-pressure fuel line and a high-pressure fuel line bracket using TAE Service Bulletin
(SB)No. TM TAE 125-1005 P1, Revision 2, dated March 6, 2008, or TAE SB No. TM TAE 125-1005 P1, Revision 1, dated February 11, 2008. Alternative Methods of Compliance
(g)The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Special Flight Permits
(h)We are limiting special flight permits to relocating the airplane to the next maintenance station, to a maximum flight duration of 2 hours, and to visual flight rules. Related Information
(i)EASA Emergency Airworthiness Directive
(EAD)No. 2008-0056R1-E, dated March 11, 2008, and EASA EAD No. 2008-0027-E, dated February 13, 2008, also address the subject of this AD.
(j)Contact Jason Yang, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: *jason.yang@faa.gov* ; telephone:
(781)238-7747; fax:
(781)238-7199, for more information about this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference
(k)You must use the service information specified in Table 1 of this AD to perform the actions required by this AD. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the documents listed in Table 1 of this AD in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You can get a copy from Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14 D-09350, Lichtenstein, Germany, telephone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-55; e-mail: *info@centurion-engines.com* . You may review copies at the FAA, New England Region, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Table 1.—Incorporation by Reference Service Bulletin No. Page Revision Date TM TAE 125-1005 P1, Total Pages—6 ALL 1 February 11, 2008. TM TAE 125-1005 P1, Total Pages—6 ALL 2 March 6, 2008. Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 10, 2008. Peter A. White, Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-8118 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29057; Airspace Docket 07-ASO-20] Amendment of Class D Airspace; Jacksonville NAS, FL AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action amends the Class D airspace at Jacksonville NAS, FL. An evaluation determined the Class D airspace should be modified and extended to join the Jacksonville Cecil Field Class D airspace area. This rule increases the safety, efficiency and management of the National Airspace System at Jacksonville NAS. DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 05, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daryl Daniels, System Support, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone
(404)305-5581. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On December 10, 2007, the FAA published in the **Federal Register** a NPRM to amend the Class D at Jacksonville NAS, FL (72 FR 69639). The current Class D airspace supporting IFR operations must be extended to contain operations at Jacksonville NAS. This action provides the additional controlled airspace, extending upward from the surface of the Earth to support IFR operations between Jacksonville NAS and Jacksonville Cecil Field. The airspace is also adjusted to allow neighboring Jacksonville Herlong Airport adequate airspace for its operation. Interested parties were invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views or arguments, as they may have desired on the proposal to the FAA. Minor adjustments were made to the airspace's description to enhance charting. No comments objecting to the proposal were received. The Rule This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class D airspace at Jacksonville NAS, FL, by providing the additional controlled airspace, extending upward from the surface of the Earth to support IFR operations between Jacksonville NAS and Jacksonville Cecil Field excluding that airspace within a 1.8-mile radius of the Jacksonville Herlong Airport. Class D airspace designations for airspace areas extending upwards from the surface of the Earth are published in Paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9R, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. Agency Findings The regulations adopted herein will 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 various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore,
(1)is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the Class D airspace at Jacksonville NAS. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASO FL D Jacksonville NAS, FL [Revised] Jacksonville NAS, FL (Lat. 30°14′09″ N., long. 81°40′50″ W.) Jacksonville TACAN (Lat. 30°14′05″ N., long. 81°40′30″ W.) Herlong Airport (Lat. 30°16′40″ N., long. 81°48′21″ W.) That airspace extending upward from the surface of the Earth, to and including 2,600 feet MSL, within a 5.3-mile radius of Jacksonville NAS and within 1 mile north and 2.5 miles south of the Jacksonville TACAN 270 radial, extending from the 5.3-mile radius to 6.5 miles west of the TACAN; excluding that airspace within a 1.8-mile radius of the Herlong Airport. Issued in College Park, Georgia, on March 27, 2008. Mark D. Ward, Manager, System Support Group, Eastern Service Center. [FR Doc. E8-7671 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29058; Airspace Docket 07-ASO-21] Amendment of Class D Airspace; Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF, FL AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This notice amends the Class D airspace at Jacksonville Whitehouse Naval Out Lying Field (NOLF), FL. An evaluation determined the Class D airspace should be reduced at Jacksonville NOLF. This rule increases the safety and efficiency of the National Airspace System by modifying its dimensions with adjacent Jacksonville Cecil Field Class D airspace and the Herlong Airport. DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 05, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daryl Daniels, System Support, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone
(404)305-5581. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On December 10, 2007, the FAA published in the **Federal Register** a NPRM to amend the Class D airspace at Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF, FL (72 FR 69638). Airspace evaluation identified the ability to reduce the size of the current Class D airspace while continuing to provide adequate support for the numerous Standard Instrument Approach Procedures
(SIAP)at Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF. The airspace was adjusted to allow neighboring Herlong Airport adequate airspace for its operations and a demarcation line was established between Jacksonville Whitehouse and Jacksonville Cecil's Class D Airspace. Interested parties were invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views or arguments, as they may have desired on the proposal to the FAA. No comments objecting to the proposal were received. The Rule This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class D airspace at Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF, FL by reducing the Class D airspace area from a 5-mile radius to a 4.3-mile radius of Whitehouse NOLF excluding that airspace within a 1.8-mile radius of Herlong Airport and that airspace south of the demarcation line between Jacksonville Whitehouse's and Cecil Field's Class D airspace. Class D airspace designations are published in Paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9R, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. Agency Findings The regulations adopted herein will 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 various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore,
(1)is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the Class D airspace at Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASO FL D Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF, FL [Revised] Whitehouse NOLF, FL (Lat. 30°21′01″ N., long. 81°52′59″ W.) Cecil Field (Lat. 30°13′07″ N., long. 81°52′36″ W.) Herlong Airport (Lat. 30°16′40″ N., long. 81°48′21″ W.) That airspace extending upward from the surface of the Earth, to and including 2,600 feet MSL, within a 4.3-mile radius of Whitehouse NOLF, excluding that airspace within a 1.8-mile radius of Herlong Airport and that airspace south of a line from lat. 30°17′00″ N., long. 81°50′24″ W. to lat. 30°17′00″ N., long. 81°54′47″ W., which abuts the Jacksonville Cecil Field Class D airspace. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific days and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory. Issued in College Park, Georgia, on February 26, 2008. Mark D. Ward, Manager, System Support Group, Eastern Service Center. [FR Doc. E8-7668 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29055; Airspace Docket 07-ASO-19] Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action amends the Class D airspace and establishes Class E airspace at Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL. An evaluation determined the Class D airspace should be modified and a required Class E surface airspace extension be established. This rule increases the safety and efficiency of the National Airspace System enhancing operations with adjacent Jacksonville Whitehouse Naval Out Lying Field (NOLF), Jacksonville Naval Air Station
(NAS)and the Jacksonville Herlong Airport. This action additionally supports the Standard Instrument Approach Procedures at Cecil Field by the establishment of a Class E4 airspace extension to the Class D. DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 05, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daryl Daniels, System Support, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone
(404)305-5581. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On December 10, 2007, the FAA published in the **Federal Register** a NPRM to amend the Class D and E airspace at Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL (72 FR 69640). Airspace evaluation identified the ability to reduce the size of the current Class D airspace while continuing to provide adequate support for the Standard Instrument Approach Procedures
(SlAP)and by the establishment a Class E surface area at Jacksonville Cecil Field. The airspace was also adjusted to allow neighboring Herlong Airport adequate airspace for its operations and a demarcation line was established between Jacksonville Cecil's and Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF's Class D Airspace. This action will establish permanent geographic dimensions for the Class D airspace which will be independent of the surrounding airports Class D/Tower operation. Interested parties were invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views or arguments, as they may have desired on the proposal to the FAA. Minor adjustments were made to the description to enhance charting. No comments objecting to the proposal were received. The Rule This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class D airspace and establishes Class E4 airspace at Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL by reducing the Class D airspace area to a 4.3-mile radius of Cecil Field excluding:
(1)That airspace within a 1 .8-mile radius of Herlong Airport,
(2)that airspace north of the demarcation line between Jacksonville Cecil Field's and Jacksonville Whitehouse's Class D airspace, and
(3)that airspace designated as the Jacksonville NAS Class D airspace. Additionally, this action provides controlled airspace extending upwards for the surface of the Earth to support the VHF Omnidirectional Range
(VOR)Runway
(RWY)9 Standard Instrument Approach Procedure
(SlAP)at Cecil Field. Class D and E4 airspace designations for airspace areas extending upwards from the surface of the Earth are published in Paragraph 5000 and 6004 of FAA Order 7400.9R, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E4 airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. Agency Findings The regulations adopted herein will 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 various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore,
(1)is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the Class D and establishes Class E4 airspace at Jacksonville Cecil Field. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; ED. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASO FL D Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL [Revised] Cecil Field, FL (Lat. 30°13′07″ N., long. 81°52′36″ W.) Jacksonville NAS, FL (Lat. 30°14′09″ N., long. 81°40′50″ W.) Whitehouse NOLF, FL (Lat. 30°21′01″ N., long. 81°52′59″ W.) Herlong Airport (Lat. 30°16′40″ N., long. 81°48′21″ W.) That airspace extending upward from the surface of the Earth, to and including 2,600 feet MSL, within a 4.3-mile radius of Cecil Field; excluding that airspace within the Jacksonville NAS Class D airspace area, excluding that airspace north of a line from lat. 30°17′00″ N., long. 81°50′24″ W. to lat. 30°17′00″ N., long. 81°54′47″ W., which abuts the Jacksonville Whitehouse NOLF Class D airspace, and excluding that airspace within a 1.8-mile radius of Herlong Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific days and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory. Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area. ASO FL E4 Jacksonville Cecil Field, FL [New] Cecil Field, FL (Lat. 30°13′07″ N., long. 81°52′36″ W.) Cecil VOR (Lat. 30°12′47″ N., long. 81°53′27″ W.) That airspace extending upward from the surface of the Earth within 2.4 miles each side of the Cecil VOR 286 radial extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 7 miles west of the VOR. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific days and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory. Issued in College Park, Georgia, on March 27, 2008. Mark D. Ward, Manager, System Support Group, Eastern Service Center. [FR Doc. E8-7669 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 135 Use of Radar in Instrument Approach Procedures AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. SUMMARY: This final rule corrects an inaccurate cross-reference citation in one of the FAA regulations. This correction is necessary to direct the reader to the actual paragraph that addresses the use of radar in instrument approaches. DATES: This rule is effective April 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Pratte, 135 Air Carrier Operations Branch, AFS-250, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone No.
(202)493-4971; e-mail *dennis.pratte@faa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Section 135.211 was added to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations on October 10, 1978 (43 FR 46783). Paragraph (a)(2) of this section originally contained a cross-reference to paragraph
(f)of 14 CFR 91.116, which addressed the use of radar in instrument approach procedures for landings. On August 18, 1989, 14 CFR part 91 was revised (54 FR 34294). As part of the revision, the information previously contained in § 91.116 transferred to § 91.175. The information formerly in § 91.116(f) became § 91.175(i). A second amendment on that same day amended § 135.211(a)(2) to change the cross-reference from § 91.116 to § 91.175 (54 FR 34332). However, the Regional Air Cargo Carriers Association informed the FAA that the reference to paragraph
(f)was not changed to paragraph (i), as it should have been. As a result, the current regulations mistakenly refer readers to paragraph
(f)of § 91.175, which addresses the minimum weather conditions for takeoffs under instrument flight rules, instead of paragraph
(i)of § 91.175, which addresses the use of radar in instrument approach procedures for landings. This inaccurate cross-reference may cause confusion for pilots who are looking for the guidance on the use of radar when landing. Therefore, the FAA is amending § 135.211(a)(2) to correct this cross-reference. Technical Amendment This technical amendment will correct the cross-reference in § 135.211(a)(2) to properly refer to § 91.175(i). Justification for Immediate Adoption Because this action corrects an incorrect paragraph reference, the FAA finds that notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) is unnecessary. For the same reason, the FAA finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this rule effective upon publication. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 135 Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety. The Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, part 135, as follows: PART 135—OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 1. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 45101-45105. § 135.211 [Amended] 2. Amend § 135.211(a)(2) by removing the citation “§ 91.175(f)” and adding in its place the citation “§ 91.175(i)”. Issued in Washington, DC, on April 9, 2008. Pamela Hamilton-Powell, Director, Office of Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E8-7966 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION 29 CFR Parts 4022 and 4044 Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing and Paying Benefits AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation's regulations on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans and Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans prescribe interest assumptions for valuing and paying benefits under terminating single-employer plans. This final rule amends the regulations to adopt interest assumptions for plans with valuation dates in May 2008. Interest assumptions are also published on the PBGC's Web site ( *http://www.pbgc.gov* ). DATES: Effective May 1, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine B. Klion, Manager, Regulatory and Policy Division, Legislative and Regulatory Department, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202-326-4024. (TTY/TDD users may call the Federal relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4024.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PBGC's regulations prescribe actuarial assumptions—including interest assumptions—for valuing and paying plan benefits of terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The interest assumptions are intended to reflect current conditions in the financial and annuity markets. Three sets of interest assumptions are prescribed:
(1)A set for the valuation of benefits for allocation purposes under section 4044 (found in Appendix B to Part 4044),
(2)a set for the PBGC to use to determine whether a benefit is payable as a lump sum and to determine lump-sum amounts to be paid by the PBGC (found in Appendix B to Part 4022), and
(3)a set for private-sector pension practitioners to refer to if they wish to use lump-sum interest rates determined using the PBGC's historical methodology (found in Appendix C to Part 4022). This amendment
(1)adds to Appendix B to Part 4044 the interest assumptions for valuing benefits for allocation purposes in plans with valuation dates during May 2008,
(2)adds to Appendix B to Part 4022 the interest assumptions for the PBGC to use for its own lump-sum payments in plans with valuation dates during May 2008, and
(3)adds to Appendix C to Part 4022 the interest assumptions for private-sector pension practitioners to refer to if they wish to use lump-sum interest rates determined using the PBGC's historical methodology for valuation dates during May 2008. For valuation of benefits for allocation purposes, the interest assumptions that the PBGC will use (set forth in Appendix B to part 4044) will be 5.81 percent for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 4.88 percent thereafter. These interest assumptions represent an increase (from those in effect for April 2008) of 0.17 percent for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 0.17 percent for all years thereafter. The interest assumptions that the PBGC will use for its own lump-sum payments (set forth in Appendix B to part 4022) will be 3.25 percent for the period during which a benefit is in pay status and 4.00 percent during any years preceding the benefit's placement in pay status. These interest assumptions represent no change from those in effect for April 2008. For private-sector payments, the interest assumptions (set forth in Appendix C to part 4022) will be the same as those used by the PBGC for determining and paying lump sums (set forth in Appendix B to part 4022). The PBGC has determined that notice and public comment on this amendment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This finding is based on the need to determine and issue new interest assumptions promptly so that the assumptions can reflect current market conditions as accurately as possible. Because of the need to provide immediate guidance for the valuation and payment of benefits in plans with valuation dates during May 2008, the PBGC finds that good cause exists for making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than 30 days after publication. The PBGC has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866. Because no general notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2). List of Subjects 29 CFR Part 4022 Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 29 CFR Part 4044 Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions. In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR parts 4022 and 4044 are amended as follows: PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN TERMINATED SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 4022 continues to read as follows: Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b, 1341(c)(3)(D), and 1344. 2. In appendix B to part 4022, Rate Set 175, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for PBGC Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate annuity rate (percent) Deferred annuities (percent) i <sup>t</sup> i <sup>2</sup> i <sup>3</sup> n <sup>1</sup> n <sup>2</sup> * * * * * * * 175 05-1-08 06-1-08 3.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 175, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix C to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for Private-Sector Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate annuity rate (percent) Deferred annuities (percent) i <sup>1</sup> i <sup>2</sup> i <sup>3</sup> n <sup>1</sup> n <sup>2</sup> * * * * * * * 175 05-1-08 06-1-08 3.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 4. The authority citation for part 4044 continues to read as follows: Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), 1341, 1344, 1362. 5. In appendix B to part 4044, a new entry for May 2008, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest Rates Used to Value Benefits For valuation dates occurring in the month— The values of i <sup>t</sup> are: i <sup>t</sup> for t = i <sup>t</sup> for t = i <sup>t</sup> for t = * * * * * * * May 2008 .0581 1-20 .0488 >20 N/A N/A Issued in Washington, DC, on this 7th day of April 2008. Vincent K. Snowbarger, Deputy Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. [FR Doc. E8-7939 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Minerals Management Service 30 CFR Part 250 [Docket ID: MMS-2007-OMM-0060] RIN 1010-AD48 Incorporate American Petroleum Institute Hurricane Bulletins AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The direct final rule will incorporate by reference three American Petroleum Institute hurricane bulletins into MMS's regulations. The three bulletins supplement the American Petroleum Institute's Recommended Practice 2A-WSD, *Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design* , which contains engineering design principles and good practices for new platforms and assessments of existing platforms. These bulletins are needed to increase survivability during hurricane events by imposing more stringent design and assessment criteria for both new and existing structures located within particular Gulf of Mexico areas. By increasing survivability during hurricane conditions, fewer platforms will be damaged, thereby, protecting critical oil and gas resources and making those resources available after hurricane events. DATES: *Effective Date:* This rule becomes effective on May 15, 2008. The incorporation by reference of the publication listed in the regulation was approved by the Director of the Federal Register on May 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk Malstrom, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs, Regulations and Standards Branch, at
(703)787-1751. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background After the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons, there was significant damage to the oil and gas infrastructure. There were 123 fixed structures destroyed, one floating facility destroyed, and significant damage to dozens of other fixed and floating structures. The offshore oil and gas industry operating in the Gulf of Mexico
(GOM)realized that there was a disparity in the metocean criteria in American Petroleum Institute's
(API)Recommended Practice
(RP)2A-WSD, *Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design* , for the central GOM. The metocean criteria are the standards to which structures are designed and assessed to withstand certain meteorological events involving wind, wave, current, and surge. Following the 2005 hurricane season, MMS, the API, and other industry representatives worked collectively to produce the API hurricane bulletins to increase the survivability of Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS)structures during hurricanes. Each hurricane bulletin updates criteria contained within current MMS incorporated-by-reference API documents. The MMS will incorporate the following API Bulletins in § 250.901: • BULLETIN 2INT-MET, *Interim Guidance on Hurricane Conditions in the Gulf of Mexico* , updates hurricane metocean conditions (wind, wave, current, and surge) documented in Sections 2.3.4.c and 17.6.2.a of API RP 2A-WSD. • BULLETIN 2INT-DG, *Interim Guidance for Design of Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions,* contains guidance on how to utilize the updated metocean conditions in Bulletin 2INT-MET for designing new offshore structures required in the following API design documents: RP 2A-WSD; RP 2FPS, *Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Floating Production Systems; RP 2RD, Design of Risers for Floating Production Systems and Tension-Leg Platforms; RP 2SK, Design and Analysis of Stationkeeping Systems for Floating Structures; RP 2T, Planning Designing and Constructing Tension Leg Platforms; and* BULLETIN 2TD, *Guidelines for Tie-downs on Offshore Production Facilities for Hurricane Season* . • BULLETIN 2INT-EX, *Interim Guidance for Assessment of Existing Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions* , gives guidance on how to utilize the updated metocean conditions in Bulletin 2INT-MET for the assessment of existing offshore structures required in the following API design documents: RP 2A-WSD; RP 2FPS; RP 2RD; RP 2SK; RP 2T; and BULLETIN 2TD. You may inspect these bulletins at the Minerals Management Service, 381 Elden Steet, Room 3313, Herndon, Virginia; or at the National Archives and Records Administration. You may obtain these bulletins from API, 1220 L Street, NW., Washington, DC. The MMS uses standards, specifications, and recommended practices developed by standard-setting organizations and the oil and gas industry as a means of establishing requirements for activities on the OCS. This practice, known as incorporation by reference, allows us to incorporate the provisions of technical standards into the regulations. The legal effect of incorporation by reference is the material is treated as if the entire document were published in the **Federal Register** . This material, like any other properly issued regulation, has the force and effect of law. We hold operators/lessees accountable for complying with the documents incorporated by reference in our regulations. We currently incorporate by reference 93 private-sector consensus standards into the offshore operating regulations. The regulations at 1 CFR part 51 govern how we and other Federal agencies incorporate various documents by reference. These regulations implement the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(a), which allows agencies to incorporate by reference material “reasonably available to the class of persons affected thereby.” Agencies may only incorporate a document by reference by publishing the document title, date, edition, author, publisher, and publication identification number in the **Federal Register** . Agencies must also gain approval from the Director of the Federal Register for each publication incorporated by reference. Incorporation by reference of a document or publication is limited to the specific edition, supplement, or addendum cited in the regulations. Under 30 CFR 250.198(a)(2), MMS may update documents incorporated by reference without an opportunity for public comment when we determine that the revisions to a document result in safety improvements, or represent new industry standard technology and do not impose undue cost or burden on the affected parties. The MMS has reviewed these three API bulletins and determined the new editions must be incorporated into the regulations to increase platform survivability and environmental safety. These API bulletins update current MMS incorporated documents and will not impose undue cost or burden on the offshore oil and gas industry. Lessees and operators in the GOM are already using the criteria and guidelines contained in these bulletins to ensure that their new and existing facilities are better designed to meet potential hurricane conditions. Because the regulated community is already using the criteria contained in these bulletins and participated in their development, MMS finds that the incorporation of these bulletins by reference is a minor, technical amendment in which the public is not particularly interested, so that notice and comment on the rulemaking is not necessary under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). Also, the final rule amends an incorrect citation located in § 250.901(d). The incorrectly referenced standard was superseded by another standard, and the chart in § 250.901(d) was not updated with the correct citation. Procedural Matters Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order (E.O.) 12866) This final rule is not a significant rule as determined by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)and is not subject to review under E.O. 12866.
(1)This final rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities.
(2)This final rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
(3)This final rule will not alter the budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of their recipients.
(4)This final rule will not raise novel legal or policy issues. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The changes in this final rule will affect lessees and operators of leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the OCS. This could include about 130 active Federal oil and gas lessees. Small lessees that operate under this rule fall under the Small Business Administration's
(SBA)North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes 211111, Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Extraction, and 213111, Drilling Oil and Gas Wells. For these NAICS code classifications, a small company is one with fewer than 500 employees. Based on these criteria, an estimated 70 percent of these companies are considered small. Nevertheless, changes in this final rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities because it will not impose undue cost or burden (on the offshore oil and gas industry). Both large and small operators have already begun using and implementing the criteria and guidelines contained in these bulletins. The cost of implementing the standards set forth in these documents is not an undue burden because the resulting assessments and design changes are small when compared to costs of repairing or decommissioning a damaged or destroyed platform. Your comments are important. The Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were established to receive comments from small businesses about Federal agency enforcement actions. The Ombudsman will annually evaluate the enforcement activities and rate each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on the actions of MMS, call 1-888-734-3247. You may comment to the Small Business Administration without fear of retaliation. Disciplinary action for retaliation by an MMS employee may include suspension or termination from employment with the DOI. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act The final rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This final rule: a. Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. c. Will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This final rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The final rule will not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required. Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 12630) Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this final rule will not have significant takings implications. The final rule is not a governmental action capable of interference with constitutionally protected property rights. A takings implication assessment is not required. Federalism (E.O. 13132) Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this final rule will not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. This final rule will not substantially and directly affect the relationship between the Federal and State governments. To the extent that State and local governments have a role in OCS activities, this final rule will not affect that role. A Federalism Assessment is not required. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) This final rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988. Specifically, this rule:
(a)Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation; and
(b)Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175) Under the criteria in E.O. 13175, we have evaluated this final rule and determined that it has no potential effects on federally recognized Indian tribes. There are no Indian or tribal lands in the OCS. Paperwork Reduction Act The proposed revisions do not contain any information collection subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA)and does not require a submission to OMB for review and approval under section 3507(d) of the PRA. National Environmental Policy Act This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The MMS has analyzed this rule under the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act and 516 Departmental Manual 2.3A and determined that it falls within the categorical exclusion for “regulations * * * that are an administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature and whose environmental effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis (516 DM 2, App. 1.10). The MMS completed a Categorical Exclusion Review for this action and concluded that none of the exceptional circumstances set forth in 516 DM 2 Appendix 2, exist, therefore, preparation of an environmental analysis or environmental impact statement will not be required. Data Quality Act In developing this rule, we did not conduct or use a study, experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Data Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554, app. C section 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153-154). Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211) This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in E.O. 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required. List of Subjects in 30 CFR 250 Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental protection, Public lands—mineral resources, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: March 20, 2008. C. Stephen Allred, Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management. For the reasons stated in the preamble, Minerals Management Service
(MMS)amends 30 CFR part 250 as follows: PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 1. The authority citation for part 250 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 43 U.S.C. 1334. 2. In § 250.198, the following changes are made in the table in paragraph (e): A. Add entries in alphanumerical order for API Bulletin 2INT-DG, API Bulletin 2INT-EX, and API Bulletin 2INT-MET as set forth below; B. Revise entries in alphanumerical order for ACI Standard 318-95, ACI 357R-84, ANSI/AISC 360-05, API RP 2A-WSD, API RP 2FPS, API RP 2RD, API RP 2SK, API RP 2SM, API RP 2T, ASTM Standard C 33-99a, ASTM Standard C 94/C 94M-99, ASTM Standard C 150-99, ASTM Standard C 330-99, ASTM Standard C 595-98, AWS D1.1:2000, AWS D1.4-98, AWS D3.6M:1999, NACE Standard MR0175-2003, and NACE Standard RP0176-2003. § 250.198 Documents incorporated by reference.
(e)* * * Title of documents Incorporated by reference at ACI Standard 318-95, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-95) and Commentary (ACI 318R-95) § 250.901(a), (d). ACI 357R-84, Guide for the Design and Construction of Fixed Offshore Concrete Structures, 1984; reapproved 1997 § 250.901(a), (d). ANSI/AISC 360-05, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings § 250.901(a), (d). * * * * * * * API Bulletin 2INT-DG, Interim Guidance for Design of Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions, May 2007 § 250.901(a), (d). API Bulletin 2INT-EX, Interim Guidance for Assessment of Existing Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions, May 2007 § 250.901(a), (d). API Bulletin 2INT-MET, Interim Guidance on Hurricane Conditions in the Gulf of Mexico, May 2007 § 250.901(a), (d). * * * * * * * API RP 2A-WSD, Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design, Twenty-first Edition, December 2000; Errata and Supplement 1, December 2002; Errata and Supplement 2, October 2005, API Stock No. G2AWSD § 250.901(a), (d); § 250.908(a); § 250.920(a), (b), (c), (e). * * * * * * * API RP 2FPS, RP for Planning, Designing, and Constructing, Floating Production Systems § 250.901(a), (d). API RP 2RD, Recommended Practice for Design of Risers for Floating Production Systems
(FPSs)and Tension-Leg Platforms (TLPs), First Edition, June 1998; reaffirmed May 2006, API Stock No. G02RD1 § 250.800(b)(2); § 250.901(a), (d); § 250.1002(b)(5). API RP 2SK, Recommended Practice for Design and Analysis of Stationkeeping Systems for Floating Structures, Third Edition, October 2005, API Stock No. G2SK03 § 250.800(b)(3); § 250.901(a), (d). API RP 2SM, Recommended Practice for Design, Manufacture, Installation, and Maintenance of Synthetic Fiber Ropes for Offshore Mooring, First Edition, March 2001, API Stock No. G02SM1 § 250.901(a), (d). API RP 2T, Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Tension Leg Platforms, Second Edition, August 1997, API Stock No. G02T02 § 250.901(a), (d). * * * * * * * ASTM Standard C 33-99a, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates § 250.901(a), (d). ASTM Standard C 94/C 94M-99, Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete § 250.901(a), (d). ASTM Standard C 150-99, Standard Specification for Portland Cement § 250.901(a), (d). ASTM Standard C 330-99, Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete § 250.901(a), (d). ASTM Standard C 595-98, Standard Specification for Blended Hydraulic Cements § 250.901(a), (d). AWS D1.1:2000, Structural Welding Code—Steel § 250.901(a), (d). AWS D1.4-98, Structural Welding Code—Reinforcing Steel § 250.901(a), (d). AWS D3.6M:1999, Specification for Underwater Welding § 250.901(a), (d). NACE Standard MR0175-2003, Item No. 21302, Standard Material Requirements, Metals for Sulfide Stress Cracking and Stress Corrosion Cracking Resistance in Sour Oilfield Environments § 250.901(a), § 250.490(p)(2). NACE Standard RP0176-2003, Item No. 21018, Standard Recommended Practice, Corrosion Control of Steel Fixed Offshore Structures Associated with Petroleum Production § 250.901(a), (d). 3. Amend § 250.901 as follows: A. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(4) through (a)(20) as (a)(7) through (a)(23), respectively, B. Add new paragraphs (a)(4), (5), and (6), C. Revise redesignated paragraphs (a)(7) and (a)(23), and D. Revise paragraph
(d)The additions and revisions read as follows: § 250.901 What industry standards must your platform meet?
(a)* * *
(4)American Petroleum Institute
(API)Bulletin 2INT-DG, Interim Guidance for Design of Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions, (incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198);
(5)API Bulletin 2INT-EX, Interim Guidance for Assessment of Existing Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions, (incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198);
(6)API Bulletin 2INT-MET, Interim Guidance on Hurricane Conditions in the Gulf of Mexico, (incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198);
(7)API Recommend Practice
(RP)2A-WSD, RP for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design (incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198);
(23)NACE Standard RP0176-2003, Item No. 21018, Standard Recommended Practice, Corrosion Control of Steel Fixed Offshore Structures Associated with Petroleum Production.
(d)The following chart summarizes the applicability of the industry standards listed in this section for fixed and floating platforms: Industry standard Applicable to * * *
(1)ACI Standard 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete, Plus Commentary; Fixed and floating platform, as appropriate.
(2)ANSI/AISC 360-05, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings;
(3)API Bulletin 2INT-DG, Interim Guidance for Design of Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions;
(4)API Bulletin 2INT-EX, Interim Guidance for Assessment of Existing Offshore Structures for Hurricane Conditions;
(5)API Bulletin 2INT-MET, Interim Guidance on Hurricane Conditions in the Gulf of Mexico;
(6)API RP 2A-WSD, RP for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design;
(7)ASTM Standard C33-99a, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates;
(8)ASTM Standard C94/C94M-99, Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete;
(9)ASTM Standard C150-99, Standard Specification for Portland Cement;
(10)ASTM Standard C330-99, Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete;
(11)ASTM Standard C 595-98, Standard Specification for Blended Hydraulic Cements;
(12)AWS D1.1, Structural Welding Code—Steel;
(13)AWS D1.4, Structural Welding Code—Reinforcing Steel;
(14)AWS D3.6M, Specification for Underwater Welding;
(15)NACE Standard RP 0176-2003, Standard Recommended Practice (RP), Corrosion Control of Steel Fixed Offshore Platforms Associated with Petroleum Production;
(16)ACI 357R, Guide for the Design and Construction of Fixed Offshore Concrete Structures; Fixed platforms.
(17)API RP 14J, RP for Design and Hazards Analysis for Offshore Production Facilities; Floating platforms.
(18)API RP 2FPS, RP for Planning, Designing, and Constructing, Floating Production Systems;
(19)API RP 2RD, Design of Risers for Floating Production Systems
(FPSs)and Tension-Leg Platforms (TLPs);
(20)API RP 2SK, RP for Design and Analysis of Station Keeping Systems for Floating Structures;
(21)API RP 2T, RP for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Tension Leg Platforms;
(22)API RP 2SM, RP for Design, Manufacture, Installation, and Maintenance of Synthetic Fiber Ropes for Offshore Mooring. [FR Doc. E8-7777 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Minerals Management Service 30 CFR Parts 250, 270, 281, and 282 [Docket ID: MMS-2007-OMM-0070] RIN 1010-AD49 Outer Continental Shelf Regulations—Technical Corrections AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document makes minor technical changes to regulations that were published in various **Federal Register** documents and are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. These changes will correct various citations and typographical errors in 30 CFR parts 250, 270, 281, and 282. DATES: Effective on April 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl Blundon, Regulatory Specialist at
(703)787-1607, fax
(703)787-1555, or e-mail *cheryl.blundon@mms.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Background:* The technical corrections in this document affect all offshore operators, lessees, pipeline right-of-way holders, and permittees. The corrections are necessary to correct citation and typographical errors, and to add or change a few words for clarification. Obsolete information is being removed, since the grace period that was written into the initial rule is no longer valid. Also, when some rules were previously written in “plain English,” words were inadvertently dropped that are now being put back. This will make the regulations easier to read, understand, and follow. This document corrects regulations in 30 CFR parts 250, 270, 281, and 282 to reflect these changes. Because this rule makes no substantive change in any rule or requirement and has no significant impact on industry or the public, MMS, for good cause, finds that notice and public comment are unnecessary pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Furthermore, MMS, for good cause, finds that no period of time is necessary to enable industry or the public to come into compliance with this rule; and therefore provides that the rule is effective upon this publication pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d). Procedural Matters Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order (E.O.) 12866) This final rule is not a significant rule as determined by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)and is not subject to review under E.O. 12866.
(1)This final rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities.
(2)This final rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
(3)This final rule will not alter the budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of their recipients.
(4)This final rule will not raise novel legal or policy issues. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). Your comments are important to us. The Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were established to receive comments from small business about Federal agency enforcement actions. The Ombudsman will annually evaluate the enforcement activities and rate each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on the actions of MMS, call 1-888-734-3247. You may comment to the Small Business Administration without fear of retaliation. Disciplinary action for retaliation by an MMS employee may include suspension or termination from employment with the Department of the Interior. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act This final rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This final rule: a. Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. c. Will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This final rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. This final rule will not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) is not required. Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 12630) Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this final rule does not have significant takings implications. This rule is not a governmental action capable of interference with constitutionally protected property rights. A Takings Implication Assessment is not required. Federalism (E.O. 13132) Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. This rule will not substantially and directly affect the relationship between the Federal and State governments. To the extent that State and local governments have a role in OCS activities, this rule will not affect that role. A Federalism Assessment is not required. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) This rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988. Specifically, this rule:
(a)Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation; and
(b)Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175) Under the criteria in E.O. 13175, we have evaluated this final rule and determined that it has no potential effects on federally recognized Indian tribes. There are no Indian or tribal lands in the OCS. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA)provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information and assigns a control number, you are not required to respond to the collection of information. This final rule does not contain any new information collection requirements subject to the PRA, nor does it affect any previously approved collections; therefore, the rule does not require a submittal to OMB for review and approval under section 3507(d) of the PRA. Any information collection burdens referenced in this rulemaking are already approved under OMB Control Numbers 1010-0114, expiration November 30, 2010; 1010-0151, expiration July 31, 2008; 1010-0059, expiration February 28, 2009; 1010-0149 expiration March 31, 2008; 1010-0128 expiration August 31, 2009; and 1010-0086 expiration December 31, 2010, respectively. National Environmental Policy Act This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The MMS has analyzed this rule under the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act and 516 Departmental Manual 2, Appendix 1.10. and determined that it falls within the categorical exclusion for “regulations * * * that are of an administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature and whose environmental effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis.” The MMS completed a Categorical Exclusion Review for this action and concluded that the rulemaking does not represent an exception to the established criteria for categorical exclusion; therefore, preparation of an environmental analysis or environmental impact statement will not be required. Data Quality Act In developing this rule, we did not conduct or use a study, experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Data Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554, app. C section 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153-154). Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211) This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in E.O. 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required. Determination To Not Issue a Proposed Rule The MMS has determined that the good cause exception in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) applies to this rule. The good cause exception allows an agency to dispense with the notice and public procedure when the agency finds for good cause that those requirements are impractical, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. Because this rule merely makes technical changes, it makes an administrative change and public comment is unnecessary. Determination To Make Rule Effective Immediately Because this rule makes technical changes only, MMS has determined it appropriate to make the rule effective immediately, as allowed under 5 U.S.C. 553(d). List of Subjects 30 CFR Part 250 Administrative practice and procedures, Continental shelf, Environmental protection, Oil and gas exploration, Public lands—minerals resources, Public lands—rights-of-way. 30 CFR Part 270 Continental shelf, Nondiscrimination, Oil and gas exploration. 30 CFR Part 281 Administrative practice and procedure, Continental shelf, Mineral royalties, Public lands—mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 30 CFR Part 282 Administrative practice and procedure, Continental shelf, Public lands—mineral resources. Dated: March 28, 2008. C. Stephen Allred, Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management. For the reasons stated above, MMS amends 30 CFR parts 250, 270, 281, and 282 as follows: PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 1. The authority citation for part 250 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 43 U.S.C. 1334. § 250.107 [Amended] 2. In § 250.107(a)(2), after the word “equipment” add the words “and work areas”. § 250.260 [Amended] 3. In § 250.260(a), the citation “15 CFR 930.76(d)” is revised to read “15 CFR 930.76(c)”. § 250. 803 [Amended] 4. In § 250.803 the following additions are made: A. In § 250.803(b)(8), in the first sentence, after the phrase “API RP 14G” add the parenthetical phrase “(incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198)”. B. In § 250.803(b)(9)(i), in the last sentence, after the phrase “API RP 500” and the phrase “API RP 505” add the parenthetical phrase “(incorporated by reference as specified in § 250.198)”. 5. In § 250.806(c), revise the second sentence to read as follows: § 250.806 Safety and pollution prevention equipment quality assurance requirements.
(c)* * * If you want MMS to evaluate other quality assurance programs, submit relevant information about the program and reasons for recognition by MMS to the Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs; Minerals Management Service; MS-4020; 381 Elden Street, Herndon, Virginia 20170-4817. § 250.900 [Amended] 6. In § 250.900(a), in the first sentence, after the word “You,” add the word “must”. § 250.1201 [Amended] 7. In § 250.1201, remove the definition of *Calibration* , revise the definition of *Surface commingling* , and add in alphabetical order a new definition of *Verification/Calibration* , to read as follows: § 250.1201 Definitions. *Surface commingling* —the surface mixing of production from two or more leases and/or unit participating areas prior to royalty measurement. *Verification/Calibration* —testing and correcting, if necessary, a measuring device to ensure compliance with industry accepted, manufacturer's recommended, or regulatory required standard of accuracy. § 250.1202 [Amended] 8. In § 250.1202(k)(3) and (4), in the first sentence, after the word “Prove”, add the word “operating”. § 250.1204 [Amended] 9. In § 250.1204(b)(1), after the word “months” insert the parenthetical phrase “(1 time every 60 days)”. § 250.1301 [Amended] 10. Amend § 250.1301 by revising paragraphs
(b)and
(c)to read as follows: § 250.1301 What are the requirements for unitization?
(b)*Compulsory unitization.* The Regional Supervisor may require you and other lessees to unitize operations of a reasonably delineated and productive reservoir if unitized operations are necessary to:
(1)Prevent waste;
(2)Conserve natural resources; or
(3)Protect correlative rights, including Federal royalty interests.
(c)*Unit area.* The area that a unit includes is the minimum number of leases that will allow the lessees to minimize the number of platforms, facility installations, and wells necessary for efficient exploration, development, and production of mineral deposits, oil and gas reservoirs, or potential hydrocarbon accumulations common to two or more leases. A unit may include whole leases or portions of leases. § 250.1502 [Amended] 11. Remove § 250.1502. § 250.1629 [Amended] 12. In §§ 250.1629(b)(1) and (b)(1)(i), after the phrase “I, IV, and VIII of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME)Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code” add the parenthetical phrase “(incorporated by reference as specified in 30 CFR 250.198)”. PART 270—NONDISCRIMINATION IN THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 13. The authority citation for part 270 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1863. § 270.6 [Amended] 14. In § 270.6, revise the last sentence to read as follows: § 270.6 Process. * * * If either the complainant or the person(s) alleged to have wrongfully discriminated fail to provide such written notice within a reasonable period of time, the Regional Director must proceed in accordance with the provisions of 30 CFR 250, subpart N. PART 281—LEASING OF MINERALS OTHER THAN OIL, GAS, AND SULPHUR IN THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 15. The authority citation for part 281 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1334. § 281.0 [Amended] 16. In § 281.0, the last sentence is revised to read “An applicant must respond to obtain or retain a benefit.” § 281.26 [Amended] 17. In § 281.26 revise the second sentence of paragraph
(e)and revise paragraph
(i)to read as follows: § 281.26 Payments.
(e)* * * The single responsible person shall be designated as the payor for the lease and shall be so identified on the Solid Minerals Production and Royalty Report (P & R) (MMS-4430) in accordance with § 210.201of this title. * * *
(i)All payors must submit payments and payment forms and maintain auditable records in accordance with 30 CFR Chapter II, Subchapter A—Minerals Revenue Management. PART 282—OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF FOR MINERALS OTHER THAN OIL, GAS, AND SULPHUR 18. The authority citation for part 282 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 43 U.S.C 1334. § 282.40 [Amended] 19. Revise § 282.40, paragraph (f), to read as follows: § 282.40 Bonds.
(f)For the purposes of this section there are three areas:
(1)The Gulf of Mexico and the area offshore the Atlantic Ocean;
(2)The area offshore the Pacific Coast States of California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii; and
(3)The area offshore the coast of Alaska. [FR Doc. E8-7776 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [USCG-2008-0241] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NC; Bridge Inspection AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations. SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District, has issued a temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the Cape Fear River Memorial Bridge, mile 26.8 at Wilmington, NC. Under this deviation, a one-hour advance notice is required for bridge openings, to allow bridge inspectors time to remove test equipment connected to operating components used in bridge openings. DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on April 28, 2008, to 11:59 p.m. on May 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0241 and are available online at *www.regulations.gov* . They are also available for inspection or copying at two locations: The Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, and the Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-5004 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary S. Heyer, Bridge Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at
(757)398-6629. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: North Carolina Department of Transportation, who owns and operates the Cape Fear River Memorial Bridge, requested a deviation from the operating regulations to facilitate inspection of the bridge. In the closed position to navigation, the drawbridge has a vertical clearance of 65 feet above mean high water. The current operating regulations set out in 33 CFR 117.823 allow the draw need not open for the passage of vessel from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the second Saturday of July of every year, and from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on the second Sunday of November of every year; and require the draw to open on signal at all other times in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5. The Cape Fear River Memorial Bridge is inspected annually on varying dates. During this inspection, vessel operators with mast height lower than 65 feet will continue to be able to transit through the drawbridge. There are not alternate routes for vessels with a mast height greater than 65 feet. To allow bridge inspectors time to remove test equipment connected to operating components used in bridge openings, a one-hour advance notice will be required for bridge openings beginning at 6 a.m. on Monday, April 28, 2008, until and including 11:59 p.m. on Thursday, May 8, 2008. The Coast Guard reviewed the bridge logs provided by NCDOT for April and May in 2007 which revealed that vessel traffic is primarily commercial with a small amount of recreational. The number of bridge openings for commercial traffic averages about 25 openings per month, with about two openings per month for recreational craft. The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterway via maritime advisories of the restriction for bridge openings so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation. In addition, qualified personnel will be on-site to open the drawbridge for vessels in the event of an emergency. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. We analyzed this temporary deviation under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The environmental impact that this temporary deviation will have is minimal because the drawbridges being closed to vessels to perform routine maintenance, will not result in a change in functional use, or an impact on a historically significant element or setting. Dated: April 7, 2008. Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Chief, Bridge Administration Branch Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E8-7931 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2007-0145] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Colorado River, Parker, AZ AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone within in the Lake Moolvalya region on the navigable waters of the Colorado River in Parker, Arizona for the Bluewater Resort and Casino ‘Spring Classic’ Boat Race. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m. on April 11, 2008, through 6 p.m on April 13, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket CG-2007-0145 and are available for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, 2710 N. Harbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92101-1064 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MST3 Kristen Beer, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA at
(619)278-7233. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On February 7, 2008, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)entitled Safety Zone; Colorado River, Parker, AZ in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 7229). We received no comments on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Delaying this rule would be contrary to the public interest of ensuring the safety of spectators and vessels during this event and immediate action is necessary to prevent possible loss of life or property. Background and Purpose The Southern California Speedboat Club is sponsoring the Bluewater Resort and Casino ‘Spring Classic’ Boat Race, which is held on the Lake Moolvalya region on the Colorado River in Parker, Arizona. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels, and other users of the waterway. This event involves powerboats racing along a circular track. The size of the boats varies from 12 to 22 feet. Approximately 85 boats will participate in this event. The sponsor will provide two water rescue and two patrol vessels to patrol this event. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based on the size and location of the safety zone. Commercial vessels will be hindered by the safety zone. Recreational vessels will not be allowed to transit through the designated safety zone during the specified times. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing in a portion of the Lower Colorado River from 6 a.m. on April 11, 2008, through 6 p.m. on April 13, 2008. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the rule will be in effect for only 12 hours for a period of three
(3)days. Before the effective period, we will submit an inclusion in the Local Notice to Mariners. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standard The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A final “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add new § 165.T11-001 to read as follows: § 165.T11-001 Safety Zone; Colorado River, Parker, AZ.
(a)*Location.* The following area is a temporary safety zone: The portion of the Colorado River from Headgate Dam to 0.5 nautical miles north of Bluewater Marina, Parker, Arizona.
(b)*Enforcement Period.* This safety zone will be enforced each day from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. from April 11, 2008, through April 13, 2008. If the need for the safety zone ends before the scheduled termination time, the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety zone.
(c)*Definitions.* The following definition applies to this section: *Designated representative,* means any commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and local, State, and Federal law enforcement vessels who have been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port, New York.
(d)*Regulations.*
(1)In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transit through, or anchoring within this zone by all vessels is prohibited, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative.
(2)Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety zone may request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander. The Patrol Commander may be contacted via VHF-FM channel 16.
(3)All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated representative.
(4)Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed.
(5)The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local agencies. Dated: March 17, 2008. C.V. Strangfeld, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port. [FR Doc. E8-7937 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1139; FRL-8554-6 ] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Control of Volatile Organic Compound
(VOCs)Emissions From the Kraft Foods Global, Inc.—Bakery Located in Henrico County, VA AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan
(SIP)revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. This revision pertains to a federally enforceable State operating permit containing terms and conditions for the control of emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs)from the Kraft Foods Global, Inc.—Richmond Bakery located in Henrico County, Virginia. The submittal is for the purpose of meeting the requirements for reasonably available control technology
(RACT)in order to implement the maintenance plan for the Richmond 8-hour ozone maintenance area. EPA is approving the revision to the Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective on May 15, 2008. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1139. All documents in the docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* Web site. Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia, 23219. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Shandruk,
(215)814-2166, or by e-mail at *shandruk.irene@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On January 31, 2008 (73 FR 5781), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPR)for the Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR proposed approval of Virginia's SIP revision for the purpose of meeting RACT requirements in order to implement the maintenance plan for the Richmond 8-hour ozone maintenance area. The formal SIP revision was submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality on October 29, 2007. Other specific requirements of RACT and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No comments were received on the NPR. II. Summary of SIP Revision The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality is requesting that a revision to the Commonwealth's SIP concerning a federally enforceable State operating permit containing terms and conditions for the control of emissions of VOCs from the Kraft Foods Global, Inc.—Richmond Bakery located in Henrico County, Virginia be approved. The purpose of this revision is for meeting the requirements for RACT in order to implement the maintenance plan for the Richmond 8-hour ozone maintenance area. III. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the Commonwealth of Virgina In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit) “privilege” for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and information about the content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to documents or information
(1)that are generated or developed before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment;
(2)that are prepared independently of the assessment process;
(3)that demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or environment; or
(4)that are required by law. On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege to documents and information “required by law,” including documents and information “required by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval,” since Virginia must “enforce Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less stringent than their Federal counterparts. * * *” The opinion concludes that “[r]egarding § 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of these programs could not be privileged because such documents and information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval.” Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that “[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal law,” any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute, regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12, 1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since “no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.” Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 of the Clean Air Act is likewise unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law. Other specific requirements of the SIP revision and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR. IV. Final Action Virginia has met the requirements concerning a federally enforceable State operating permit containing terms and conditions for the control of emissions of VOCs from the Kraft Foods Global, Inc.—Richmond Bakery located in Henrico County, Virginia, and EPA is therefore approving Virginia's revision for the purpose of this revision is for meeting the requirements for RACT in order to implement the maintenance plan for the Richmond 8-hour ozone maintenance area. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ); • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ); • 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); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General 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 action 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). 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. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the following types of rules: rules of particular applicability; rules relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). Because this is a rule of particular applicability, EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding this action under section 801. C. Petitions for Judicial Review 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 June 16, 2008. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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 approving Virginia's SIP revision pertaining to a federally enforceable State operating permit containing terms and conditions for the control of emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs)from the Kraft Foods Global, Inc.—Richmond Bakery located in Henrico County, Virginia 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, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: April 3, 2008. William T. Wisniewski, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart VV—Virginia 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(d)is amended by adding the entry for Kraft Food Global, Inc.—Richmond Bakery at the end of the table to read as follows: § 52.2420 Identification of plan.
(d)* * * EPA-Approved Source-Specific Requirements Source name Permit/order or registration number State effective date EPA approval date 40 CFR part 52 citation * * * * * * * Kraft Foods Global, Inc.—Richmond Bakery Registration No. 50703 9/19/07 4/15/08 [Insert page number where the document begins] 52.2420(d)(8) [FR Doc. E8-7876 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2008-0241; FRL-8553-1] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Iowa AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to the Iowa State Implementation Plan submitted on January 16, 2008. The revision includes changes to the definition of “permitting authority” in each of Iowa's rules used for compliance with EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule. Iowa's SIP revision is in response to EPA's request of Iowa to revise the definitions to ensure that all allowances issued in the EPA Budget Trading Programs can be traded and used for compliance with the allowance-holding requirement in any State in the program. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 16, 2008, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 15, 2008. If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2008-0241, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail:* *jay.michael@epa.gov* . 3. *Mail:* Michael Jay, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 4. *Hand Delivery or Courier:* Deliver your comments to Michael Jay, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2008-0241. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* , your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in advance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Jay at
(913)551-7460, or by e-mail at *jay.michael@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following questions: What is a SIP? What is the Federal approval process for a SIP? What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me? What is being addressed in this document? Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? What action is EPA taking? What is a SIP? Section 110 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA)requires states to develop air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria pollutants. These pollutants are: Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to us for approval and incorporation into the Federally-enforceable SIP. Each Federally-approved SIP protects air quality primarily by addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations. What is the Federal approval process for a SIP? In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the Federally-enforceable SIP, states must formally adopt the regulations and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements. This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking body. Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the state submits it to us for inclusion into the SIP. We must provide public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by us. All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA under section 110 of the CAA are incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)at title 40, part 52, entitled “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans.” The actual state regulations which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR outright but are “incorporated by reference,” which means that we have approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date. What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me? Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP is primarily a state responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in section 304 of the CAA. What is being addressed in this document? The SIP revision addresses changes to the definition of “permitting authority” in each of Iowa's rules for compliance with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), that include the following: 567-34.201 for the annual NO <sup>X</sup> trading program, 567-34.210 for the annual SO <sup>2</sup> trading program, and 567-34.221 for the ozone season trading program. Each rule has been revised to specify that the definition of “permitting authority” shall mean the definition contained in the corresponding EPA CAIR model rule for purposes of its use in the definitions of “allocate or allocation” and in all other references it shall mean the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). Iowa has made these revisions to its State rules in response to an EPA letter request sent to the IDNR on February 17, 2007. This SIP revision is necessary to ensure that all allowances issued in the EPA Budget Trading Programs are fungible and can be traded and used for compliance with the allowance-holding requirement in any State in the program. By revising the definition of “permitting authority” to be consistent with the EPA CAIR model rules when used in the definitions of “allocate or allocation,” the IDNR ensures that allowances issued by permitting authorities other than the IDNR, such as States other than Iowa, can be used for compliance with Iowa's CAIR rules. EPA has reviewed Iowa's revised definitions and has found that Iowa has successfully incorporated EPA's recommended changes. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical support document which is part of this docket, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations. What action is EPA taking? EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the Iowa SIP submitted on January 16, 2008. We are processing this action as a direct final action because the revisions make changes to the existing rules which are noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ); • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ); • 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); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. 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 action 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 16, 2008. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: April 3, 2008. William Rice, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 40 CFR part 52 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 Q—Iowa 2. In § 52.820(c) the table is amended by revising the entries for 567-34.201, 567-34.210, and 567-34.221 to read as follows: § 52.820 Identification of plan.
(c)* * * EPA-Approved Iowa Regulations Iowa citation Title State effective date EPA approval date Explanation Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission [567] * * * * * * * Chapter 34—Provisions for Air Quality Emissions Trading Programs * * * * * * * 567-34.201 CAIR NO X annual trading program provisions 11/28/2007 4/15/2008 [ *insert FR page number where the document begins* ] * * * * * * * 567-34.210 CAIR SO 2 trading program 11/28/2007 4/15/2008 [ *insert FR page number where the document begins* * * * * * * * 567-34.221 CAIR NO X ozone season trading program general provisions 11/28/2007 4/15/2008 [ *insert FR page number where the document begins* * * * * * * * [FR Doc. E8-7815 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 73 73 Tuesday, April 15, 2008 Proposed Rules OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Part 351 RIN 3206-AL64 Competitive Area AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comments. SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM)is issuing proposed regulations that provide agencies with the option of establishing a reduction in force
(RIF)competitive area comprised only of pay band positions. An agency would have this option only when the competitive area would otherwise include pay band positions and other positions not covered by a pay band system. DATES: We will consider comments received on or before May 15, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3206-AL64, by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • E-mail: *employ@opm.gov.* Include “RIN 3206-AL64” in the subject line of the message. • Fax:
(202)606-2329. • Mail: Angela Bailey, Deputy Associate Director for Talent and Capacity Policy, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Room 6551, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415-9700. • Hand Delivery/Courier: OPM, Room 6551, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC, 20415. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Mahoney by telephone on 202-606-0960, by FAX on 202-606-2329, by TDD on 202-418-3134, or by e-mail at *employ@opm.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 351.402(b) of OPM's regulations presently provides that an agency must define a RIF competitive area solely on the basis of the agency's organizational unit(s) and geographical location. Once defined, the competitive area includes all employees covered by that definition. OPM is adding new section 351.402(e) to provide that when a competitive area defined under section 351.402(b) includes both pay band positions and positions not covered by a pay band, the agency may, at its discretion, define a competitive area, that is otherwise consistent with section 351.402(b), to include either only pay band positions or only positions not covered by a pay band system. In a related change, OPM is revising section 351.403(a)(2) to clarify how an agency establishes RIF competitive levels for pay band positions and for other positions. Explanation OPM's regulations cover RIF competition involving positions under different pay schedules. For example, section 351.203 includes the RIF definition of “Representative Rate” for traditional General Schedule
(GS)and Federal Wage System
(FWS)positions, and for alternative pay schedule positions (e.g., pay band, unclassified, and negotiated rate positions). The RIF regulations also cover how an agency determines the retention standing of employees in GS/FWS positions and in positions with an alternative pay schedule. In a recent review of the RIF regulations, and as more and more agencies move portions of their workforces into alternative systems, OPM found that significant inconsistencies may result when a RIF competitive area includes pay band positions and positions covered by the General Schedule
(GS)or Federal Wage System (FWS). For example, a pay band personnel system may also include specific staffing, classification, pay, and performance management provisions that differ significantly from the GS and/or FWS system. These distinctions between pay band and other positions could be magnified when all of the positions are included in the same RIF competitive area. To establish a RIF competitive level to determine which employee is released from the present position, section 351.403(a)(2) provides that the agency use the official position description that documents the duties, responsibilities, and qualifications tied to each competing employee's official position of record. Consistent with the regulations, a RIF competitive level for GS or FWS employees only includes interchangeable positions having the same grade, classification series, work schedule, type of service (e.g., competitive or excepted), and additional criteria covered in section 5 CFR 351.403. However, in a pay band system a single pay band may combine multiple grades and classification series that are documented on a single generic official position description. In operation, the agency may, and in some cases does, supplement this position description with other documentation to distinguish actual work assignments among the pay band positions. A separate competitive area for pay band positions eliminates the requirement to create position descriptions that must conform to those in another personnel system ( *e.g.,* GS and/or FWS). Sections 351.701(b) and
(c)provide that a GS or FWS competitive service employee has potential “bump” and “retreat” rights to positions in the competitive area that are no more than three grades or grade-intervals below the employee's official position of record. Section 351.701(c) also provides a preference eligible with a compensable service-connected disability of 30% or more with a potential retreat right of up to five grades or grade-intervals from the employee's official position of record. However, the compensation architecture of a pay band system does not equate efficiently to the grade/grade-interval structure used to determine the assignment rights of GS or FWS employees. These differences may make it difficult for an agency to determine equivalent assignment rights from pay band to GS/FWS positions or vice versa. A separate competitive area for pay band positions eliminates these difficulties in determining the potential assignment rights of pay band and GS/FWS employees who are released from a retention register by RIF and makes it easier to make comparisons. Revisions to Competitive Level Section 351.403(a)(2) is renumbered as section 351.403(a)(2)(i) and revised to clarify that, except as provided in new section 351.403(a)(2)(ii) for pay band positions, competitive level determinations are based on each employee's official position of record (including the official position description), not the employee's personal qualifications. New section 351.403(a)(2)(ii) provides that to establish a competitive level comprised of pay band positions, an agency may supplement an employee's official position description with other applicable records that document the employee's actual duties and responsibilities. Revisions to Competitive Area New section 351.402(e) provides that when a competitive area defined under section 351.402(b) includes pay band positions and positions not covered by a pay band, the agency may, at its discretion, define a competitive area otherwise consistent with section 351.402 to include only pay band positions. Section 351.402(b) is revised to include a reference to new section 351.402(e). Examples of Separate Competitive Area for Pay Band Positions Example 1 Under section 351.402(b) an agency defines its activities in Memphis and Vicksburg to be in the same competitive area. At present this competitive area would include GS, FWS, and pay band positions. At its option the agency may apply new section 351.402(e) and define a separate competitive area that includes only its pay band positions in Memphis and Vicksburg. Under section 351.402(e), the competitive area for pay band positions must otherwise conform to section 351.402(b), that is, be based on the same organizational unit and geographical location as the remaining positions (i.e., the GS and FWS positions in the original competitive area). Example 2 Under current regulations, an agency defines its headquarters to be one competitive area that includes GS, FWS, and pay band positions. At its option the agency may apply new section 351.402(e) and define a separate competitive area that includes only its pay band positions in the headquarters. Under section 351.402(e) the competitive area for pay band positions must still be based on the same organizational unit and geographical location as the remaining positions, that is the GS and FWS positions that were in the original competitive area (the entire headquarters). Regulatory Flexibility Act I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it affects only certain Federal employees. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Review This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 351 Administrative practice and procedure, Government employees. Office of Personnel Management. Linda M. Springer, Director. Accordingly, OPM proposes to amend part 351 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 351—REDUCTION IN FORCE 1. The authority citation for part 351 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3502, 3503; sec. 351.801 also issued under E.O. 12828, 58 FR 2965. 2. In § 351.402, paragraph
(b)is revised, and paragraph
(e)is added, to read as follows: § 351.402 Competitive area.
(b)A competitive area must be defined solely in terms of the agency's organizational unit(s) and geographical location and, except as provided in paragraph
(e)of this section, it must include all employees within the competitive area so defined. A competitive area may consist of all or part of an agency. The minimum competitive area is a subdivision of the agency under separate administration within the local commuting area.
(e)When a competitive area defined under paragraph
(b)of this section includes pay band positions and positions not covered by a pay band, the agency may, at its discretion, define a separate (and additional) competitive area, otherwise consistent with paragraph
(b)of this section, to include only pay band positions. The original competitive area would then include only the remaining positions, i.e., those positions not covered by a pay band. 3. In § 351.403, paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as follows: § 351.403 Competitive level.
(a)* * * (2)(i) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section for pay band positions, competitive level determinations are based on each employee's official position of record (including the official position description), not the employee's personal qualifications.
(ii)To establish a competitive level comprised of pay band positions, an agency may supplement an employee's official position of record with other applicable records that document the employee's actual duties and responsibilities. [FR Doc. E8-7968 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-39-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Parts 43, 61, 91, and 141 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29015; Notice No. 08-03] RIN 2120-AJ10 Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft; Modifications to Rules for Sport Pilots and Flight Instructors With a Sport Pilot Rating AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to amend its rules for sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating. The FAA believes these changes are necessary to address airman certification issues that have arisen since regulations for the operation of light-sport aircraft were implemented. These changes would align the certification requirements for sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating with those requirements currently applicable to other airmen certificates. DATES: Send your comments on or before August 13, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by docket number FAA 2007-29015 using any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Mail:* Send comments to the Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • *Hand Delivery or Courier:* Bring comments to the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • *Fax:* Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at 202-493-2251. For more information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Privacy:* We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit *http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov* . *Docket:* To read background documents or comments received, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* at any time and follow the online instructions for accessing the docket. Or, go to the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning this proposed rule, contact Larry L. Buchanan, Light-Sport Aviation Branch, AFS-610, Regulatory Support Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169; telephone
(405)954-6400; Mailing address: Light-Sport Aviation Branch, AFS-610; P.O. Box 25082; Oklahoma City, OK 73125. For legal questions concerning this proposed rule, contact Paul Greer, Regulations Division, AGC-200, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone
(202)267-3073. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in this preamble under “VI. Additional Information,” we discuss how you can comment on this proposal and how we will handle your comments. Included in this discussion is related information about the docket, privacy, and the handling of proprietary or confidential business information. We also discuss how you can get a copy of this proposal and related rulemaking documents. Authority for This Rulemaking The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator, including the authority to issue, rescind, and revise regulations. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447—Safety Regulation. Under section 44701, the FAA is charged with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations necessary for safety. Under section 44703, the FAA issues an airman certificate to an individual when we find, after investigation, that the individual is qualified for, and physically able to perform the duties related to, the position authorized by the certificate. In this NPRM, the FAA is proposing to amend the training, qualification, certification, and operating requirements for sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating. These changes are intended to ensure that these airmen have the training and qualifications necessary to enable them to operate light-sport aircraft safely. For this reason, the proposed changes are within the scope of the FAA's authority and are a reasonable and necessary exercise of our statutory obligations. Guide to Terms and Acronyms Frequently Used in This Document AGL—Above Ground Level ATC—Air Traffic Control CAS—Calibrated Airspeed DPE—Designated Pilot Examiner MSL—Mean Sea Level NDPER—National Designated Pilot Examiner Registry PTS—Practical Test Standards VFR—Visual Flight Rules V <sup>H</sup> —Maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum continuous power Table of Contents I. Background II. Discussion of the Proposed Regulatory Requirements A. Overview B. Discussion of Specific Proposals 1. Replace sport pilot privileges with aircraft category and class ratings on all pilot certificates 2. Replace sport pilot flight instructor privileges with aircraft category ratings on all flight instructor certificates 3. Remove current provisions for the conduct of proficiency checks by flight instructors and include provisions for the issuance of category and class ratings by designated pilot examiners 4. Place all requirements for flight instructors under a single subpart (subpart H) of part 61 5. Require 1 hour of flight training on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments for student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to operate an airplane with a maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum continuous power (V <sup>H</sup> ) greater than 87 knots calibrated airspeed
(CAS)and sport pilots operating airplanes with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS 6. Remove the requirement for persons exercising sport pilot privileges and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating to carry their logbooks while in flight 7. Remove the requirement that persons exercising sport pilot privileges have an aircraft make-and-model endorsement to operate a specific set of aircraft while adding provisions for endorsements for the operation of powered parachutes with elliptical wings and aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS 8. Remove the requirement for all flight instructors to log at least 5 hours of flight time in a make and model of light-sport aircraft before providing training in any aircraft from the same set of aircraft in which that training is given 9. Permit persons exercising sport pilot privileges and the privileges of a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate to fly up to an altitude of not more than 10,000 feet mean sea level
(MSL)or 2,000 feet above ground level (AGL), whichever is higher 10. Permit private pilots to receive compensation for production flight testing of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft intended for certification in the light-sport category under § 21.190 11. Revise student sport pilot solo cross-country navigation and communication flight training requirements 12. Clarify cross-country distance requirements for private pilots seeking to operate weight-shift-control aircraft 13. Revise aeronautical experience requirements at towered airports for persons seeking to operate a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft as a private pilot 14. Remove the requirement for pilots with only a powered parachute or a weight-shift-control aircraft rating to take a knowledge test for an additional rating at the same certificate level 15. Revise the amount of hours of flight training an applicant for a sport pilot certificate must log within 60 days prior to taking the practical test 16. Remove expired ultralight transition provisions and limit the use of aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles 17. Add a requirement for student pilots to obtain endorsements identical to those proposed for sport pilots in §§ 61.324 and 61.327 18. Clarify that an authorized instructor must be in a powered parachute when providing flight instruction to a student pilot 19. Remove the requirement for aircraft certificated as experimental aircraft in the light-sport category to comply with the applicable maintenance and preventive maintenance requirements of part 43 when those aircraft have been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category 20. Require aircraft owners or operators to retain a record of the current status of applicable safety directives for special light-sport aircraft 21. Provide for the use of aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category in training courses approved under part 141 22. Revise the minimum safe-altitude requirements for powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft III. Paperwork Reduction Act IV. International Compatibility V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses A. Economic Assessment B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination C. International Trade Impact Assessment D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism F. Environmental Analysis G. Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use VI. Additional Information I. Background On July 27, 2004, the FAA issued the “Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft” final rule (69 FR 44772). That rule established the certification and qualification requirements for sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating in part 61. The rule also established requirements for the certification, operation, maintenance, and manufacture of light-sport aircraft. Since the adoption of that rule, the FAA has been evaluating the process for certificating pilots and flight instructors conducting operations in light-sport aircraft and has determined that changes to these certification requirements are necessary to align the certification requirements for sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating with those requirements currently applicable to other airmen certificates and to better serve the sport pilot and light-sport aircraft community. Through experience gained by the FAA inspector workforce and information provided by organizations and individual aircraft owners in the light-sport community, the agency believes it has a critical understanding of where the 2004 rule may not adequately reflect the needs of the flying community or may not provide sufficient regulatory oversight. II. Discussion of the Proposed Regulatory Requirements II. A. Overview As stated in the preamble of the 2004 final rule, the FAA adopted the regulations “to allow individuals to experience sport and recreational aviation in a manner that is safe for the intended operations, but not overly burdensome” (69 FR 44774; July 27, 2004). The FAA remains committed to this philosophy. Since the implementation of the 2004 final rule, the FAA's Light-Sport Aviation Branch inspector workforce has had informal discussions with organizations and individuals in the light-sport community about the rule's effectiveness. As a result of these discussions, and through experience gained in administering the 2004 final rule, the FAA has reviewed the current regulations and believes that some provisions are unnecessary or redundant and should be modified. The agency has identified a number of areas where it believes it can provide relief to the light-sport community without compromising safety. These include— • Removing all requirements applicable to “sets of aircraft,” to include all requirements for specific endorsements to operate an aircraft within a particular set of aircraft; • Removing the requirement for all sport pilot flight instructors to log at least 5 hours of flight time in a particular make and model of light-sport aircraft before providing training in the same set of aircraft; • Eliminating the current requirement for flight training at an airport with an operating control tower to be in a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft for those persons seeking privileges to operate those aircraft; • Eliminating the requirement for sport pilots to be trained in the use of radios for VFR navigation and communication when the aircraft intended to be used by the pilot is not equipped with such instruments; • Lowering of the amount of hours of flight training that an applicant for a sport pilot certificate must log within 60 days prior to taking the practical test; • Eliminating provisions that would require a person exercising sport pilot privileges and flight instructors with a sport rating to carry his or her logbook while in flight; • Permitting a person exercising sport pilot privileges to fly above 10,000 feet MSL when that altitude is less than 2,000 feet above the surface and proposing less restrictive requirements for the operation of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft in other than congested areas; • Permitting private pilots to receive compensation for production flight testing of powered parachutes or weight-shift-control aircraft; • Removing the current requirement for experimental aircraft certificated in the light-sport category to comply with the applicable maintenance and preventive maintenance requirements of part 43 when those aircraft have been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category; and • Providing for the use of aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category in training courses approved under part 141. In addition, the FAA's inspector workforce has observed an apparent lack of standardization in the administration of practical tests leading to the issuance of category and class privileges for sport pilot applicants. This lack of standardization has resulted in the FAA's experiencing difficulties in obtaining documentation that those practical tests were successfully completed. When documentation that a person has been awarded privileges to operate a specific category and class of aircraft is not on file with the FAA, it may be difficult for that person to demonstrate that those privileges have been awarded, especially if that person's logbook is lost, destroyed, or unavailable. The agency, therefore, is proposing to— • Replace sport pilot privileges with aircraft category and class ratings on all pilot certificates; • Replace flight instructor privileges with aircraft category ratings on all flight instructor certificates; and • Remove current provisions for the conduct of proficiency checks by flight instructors and include provisions for the issuance of category and class ratings by designated pilot examiners. By placing privileges to operate a category and class of aircraft as a rating on a person's sport pilot certificate, the FAA would provide sport pilots with enhanced recognition of their skills and better integrate them into the wider aviation community. This action may not only facilitate further growth in the light-sport industry but may also lead to broader international recognition of these certificates. Lastly, after review of the current regulations, the FAA is proposing the following changes, which the agency believes are necessary to enhance safety— • Require one hour of flight training on the control and maneuvering of an aircraft solely by reference to instruments for sport pilots operating airplanes with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS and also for student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to operate an airplane with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS because operators of these aircraft are more likely to encounter instrument meteorological conditions than operators of other categories of aircraft; • Require a specific endorsement for sport pilots and student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate for the operation of a powered parachute with an elliptical wing and for an aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS in order to retain current safety requirements that would be deleted if the FAA adopts the proposal to remove the requirement that persons exercising sport pilot privileges have an aircraft make-and-model endorsement to operate a specific set of aircraft; and • Require that aircraft owners/operators retain a record of the current status of applicable safety directives for special light-sport aircraft, which, upon further consideration, the FAA believes would close a gap in the 2004 rule. These and other proposed amendments are discussed in further detail below. The FAA notes that some sections the FAA is proposing to be amended in this NPRM were also proposed to be amended in a separate rulemaking action, “Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification,” published in the **Federal Register** on February 7, 2007. That February 7, 2007, NPRM, however, did not address sport pilot issues. The specific sections proposed to be revised by this NPRM may therefore be further revised in the final rule if the amendments proposed by the February 7, 2007 rulemaking action become final prior to the proposals contained in this NPRM. II.B. Discussion of Specific Proposals This proposed rule would— 1. Replace sport pilot privileges with aircraft category and class ratings on all pilot certificates. 2. Replace sport pilot flight instructor privileges with aircraft category ratings on all flight instructor certificates. 3. Remove current provisions for the conduct of proficiency checks by flight instructors and include provisions for the issuance of category and class ratings by designated pilot examiners. 4. Place all requirements for flight instructors under a single subpart (subpart H) of part 61. 5. Require 1 hour of flight training on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments for student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to operate an airplane with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS and sport pilots operating airplanes with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS. 6. Remove the requirement for persons exercising sport pilot privileges and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating to carry their logbooks while in flight. 7. Remove the requirement that persons exercising sport pilot privileges have an aircraft make-and-model endorsement to operate a specific set of aircraft while adding specific regulatory provisions for endorsements for the operation of powered parachutes with elliptical wings and aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS. 8. Remove the requirement for all flight instructors to log at least 5 hours of flight time in a make and model of light-sport aircraft before providing training in any aircraft from the same set of aircraft in which that training is given. 9. Permit persons exercising sport pilot privileges and the privileges of a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate to fly up to an altitude of not more than 10,000 feet mean sea level
(MSL)or 2,000 feet above ground level (AGL), whichever is higher. 10. Permit private pilots to receive compensation for production flight testing powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft intended for certification in the light-sport category under § 21.190. 11. Revise student sport pilot solo cross-country navigation and communication flight training requirements. 12. Clarify cross-country distance requirements for private pilots seeking to operate weight-shift-control aircraft. 13. Revise aeronautical experience requirements at towered airports for persons seeking to operate a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft as a private pilot. 14. Remove the requirement for pilots with only a powered parachute or a weight-shift-control aircraft rating to take a knowledge test for an additional rating at the same certificate level. 15. Revise the amount of hours of flight training an applicant for a sport pilot certificate must log within 60 days prior to taking the practical test. 16. Remove expired ultralight transition provisions and limit the use of aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles. 17. Add a requirement for student pilots to obtain endorsements identical to those proposed for sport pilots in §§ 61.324 and 61.327. 18. Clarify that an authorized instructor must be in a powered parachute when providing flight instruction to a student pilot. 19. Remove the requirement for aircraft certificated as experimental aircraft in the light-sport category to comply with the applicable maintenance and preventive maintenance requirements of part 43 when those aircraft have been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. 20. Require aircraft owners or operators to retain a record of the current status of applicable safety directives for special light-sport aircraft. 21. Provide for the use of aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category in training courses approved under part 141. 22. Revise the minimum safe-altitude requirements for powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft. II.B.1. Replace sport pilot privileges with aircraft category and class ratings on all pilot certificates (§§ 61.1, 61.3, 61.5, 61.7, 61.23, 61.31, 61.51, 61.52, 61.63, 61.87, 61.303, 61.309, 61.311, 61.313, 61.317, and 61.321) Currently, to obtain additional aircraft category and class privileges at the sport pilot level, the holder of a pilot certificate must complete a proficiency check administered by an authorized instructor. Upon successful completion of that proficiency check, that person receives a logbook endorsement from the instructor who administered the proficiency check. That endorsement permits the person completing the proficiency check to exercise sport pilot privileges in the category and class of aircraft in which the proficiency check was administered. Consistent with the FAA's system for issuing all other pilot certificates and ratings, the FAA is proposing to require a person seeking privileges to operate an additional category and class of light-sport aircraft as a sport pilot to obtain the appropriate category and class rating. These ratings would be issued after the completion of a practical test typically administered by an FAA-designated pilot examiner (DPE). The practice of obtaining privileges to operate a light-sport aircraft after completion of a proficiency check by an authorized instructor would be discontinued. Privileges to operate light-sport aircraft would be indicated as ratings on a person's pilot certificate rather than by an endorsement in a person's logbook. As a result of experience gained in administering the July 2004 final rule, the FAA recognizes that authorized instructors are generally not trained to administer tests leading to the issuance of certificate privileges, and that the FAA does not have procedures in place (such as those used for DPEs) to oversee that activity. Currently, authorized instructors are not required to receive training in the administration of proficiency checks or practical tests; however, DPEs tasked with administering practical tests normally complete a course consisting of 40 hours of initial training prior to receiving their designation as pilot examiners. These examiners are directly supervised by an aviation safety inspector and must complete recurrent training consisting of a 10-hour online course and 4 hours of individual training in addition to completing a flight evaluation from an aviation safety inspector every year prior to renewal of their designation. A DPE's designation can be terminated if the FAA determines that person cannot administer a practical test in accordance with the Practical Test Standards (PTS). Under the current system of administering proficiency checks, authorized instructors are not directly supervised by any FAA personnel. The FAA cannot (absent certificate action) restrict the ability of an authorized instructor to administer a proficiency check leading to the issuance of additional sport pilot privileges, even if the performance of the authorized instructor in administering proficiency checks is substandard. Additionally, the FAA is experiencing difficulties in obtaining documentation from authorized instructors indicating that proficiency checks have been successfully completed. These difficulties significantly hinder the ability of a person to demonstrate that privileges to operate a specific category and class of aircraft have been awarded if that person's logbook containing the appropriate endorsements for the operation of that category and class of aircraft is lost, destroyed, or otherwise unavailable. Issuance of sport pilot certificates with category and class ratings would conform to the procedures for the issuance of other pilot certificates and standardizes the manner in which additional privileges are granted. The proposal would place no additional burden on current holders of sport pilot (or other) certificates with category and class privileges obtained through instructor endorsements, provided that the FAA has a record of those endorsements. To facilitate compliance with the rule, the FAA would reissue pilot certificates with the category and class ratings corresponding to the privileges previously granted through instructor endorsements. Persons receiving these certificates would have to take no action to accomplish the exchange of their pilot certificates. If the FAA does not have a record that a pilot has been granted privileges through an instructor endorsement, that pilot would have to complete an airman certificate and/or rating application (FAA Form 8710-11) and present it, along with evidence of the endorsement, to a designated pilot examiner or FAA inspector, and the FAA would then issue that person a certificate with corresponding category and class ratings. For some individuals, this may result in travel time and transportation cost if there is no closely located DPE or Flight Standards District Office (FSDO). Persons intending to exercise the privileges of their current pilot certificates granted through an endorsement would be required to obtain a new pilot certificate with corresponding category and class ratings within 2 years of the effective date of the final rule. In addition, the PTS for the sport pilot certificate would not be revised to introduce any requirements as a result of this proposed change. The proposal would place no burden on current holders of these certificates, as the FAA would adopt a procedure for certificate replacement. II.B.2. Replace sport pilot flight instructor privileges with aircraft category ratings on all flight instructor certificates (§§ 61.181, 61.183, 61.185, 61.187, 61.191, 61.195, and part 61 subpart K) For reasons similar to those discussed immediately above, the FAA is proposing to require a person holding a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating to obtain sport pilot instructor ratings indicating appropriate category and class privileges. These new ratings would be specifically listed on that person's flight instructor certificate. This change would also apply to flight instructors with other than a sport pilot rating who have privileges to provide instruction in light-sport aircraft obtained through an instructor endorsement. Currently, for a flight instructor to obtain privileges to provide instruction leading to the issuance of a sport pilot certificate in an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft, or to the issuance of a private pilot certificate in a powered parachute or a weight-shift-control aircraft, the holder of that certificate must complete a proficiency check administered by an authorized instructor. Upon successful completion of that proficiency check, that person receives a logbook endorsement from the instructor who administered the proficiency check. That endorsement permits the person completing the proficiency check to provide instruction as a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating in the category and class of aircraft in which the proficiency check was administered. Consistent with the FAA's system for issuing ratings for other flight instructor certificates, the FAA proposes that a flight instructor seeking to provide training to operate an additional category and class of a light-sport aircraft obtain appropriate category and class ratings. Those ratings would be specifically listed on that person's flight instructor certificate. These ratings would be issued after the completion of a practical test administered by a DPE. The practice of obtaining privileges to provide training in a light-sport aircraft after completion of a proficiency check by an authorized instructor would be discontinued. Privileges to provide training in these light-sport aircraft would be indicated as ratings on that person's flight instructor certificate rather than as an endorsement in that person's logbook. As stated in II.B.1., authorized instructors are neither trained to administer tests leading to the issuance of certificate privileges nor directly supervised by FAA personnel. The FAA is also experiencing difficulties in obtaining documentation from authorized instructors when administering proficiency checks to flight instructors seeking additional privileges. Issuance of flight instructor certificates with sport pilot category and class ratings would generally conform to the procedures for the issuance of other ratings on the flight instructor certificate and standardize the manner in which additional flight instructor privileges are granted. The proposal would place no additional burden on current holders of flight instructor certificates with a sport pilot rating or other instructors with flight instructor privileges issued through an instructor endorsement, provided that the FAA has a record of these endorsements. To facilitate compliance with the rule, the FAA would reissue flight instructor certificates with the category and class ratings corresponding to the privileges previously granted through instructor endorsements. This action would occur at the time the flight instructor applies for renewal or reinstatement of his or her flight instructor certificate, which may occur as much as 27 calendar months after the effective date of the rule. If the FAA does not have a record that a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating has been granted privileges through an instructor endorsement, that flight instructor would have to complete an airman certificate and/or rating application (FAA Form 8710-11) and present it, along with evidence of the endorsement, to a designated pilot examiner or FAA inspector. The FAA would then issue that person a flight instructor certificate with corresponding sport pilot category and class ratings. For some individuals, this may result in travel time and transportation cost if there is no closely located DPE or FSDO. To limit the burden placed on future applicants for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, the FAA would retain the provisions of current § 61.419, which do not require an applicant who seeks to obtain privileges to provide training in an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft to take an additional knowledge test. These provisions would be codified in proposed § 61.191(c), which would not require a person who applies for an additional sport pilot rating on a flight instructor certificate to pass a knowledge test on the areas listed in proposed § 61.185(a)(2)(ii). II.B.3. Remove current provisions for the conduct of proficiency checks by authorized flight instructors and include provisions for the issuance of category and class ratings by designated pilot examiners (§ 61.413) At this time, flight instructors with a sport pilot rating may perform proficiency checks leading to the issuance of privileges equivalent to those of ratings. These checks are performed without any additional training, and the FAA has observed that there is little standardization in the administration of these checks and the completion of the documentation necessary for the issuance of additional sport pilot privileges. Flight instructors receive no training in the administration of proficiency checks and their actions in conducting these tests are not supervised or reviewed by the FAA. To correct these deficiencies, the FAA is proposing to remove § 61.413(i) to no longer permit flight instructors to administer proficiency checks leading to the issuance of sport pilot privileges. Privileges currently obtained in this manner would be replaced with privileges obtained through the issuance of a rating issued by a DPE specifically trained to administer practical tests. II.B.4. Place all requirements for flight instructors under a single subpart (subpart H) of part 61 (Part 61 subpart H heading, §§ 61.5, 61.181, 61.183, 61.185, 61.186, 61.187, 61.189, 61.191, 61.193, 61.195, 61.197, 61.199, and §§ 61.401 through 61.431) The FAA is proposing to move the requirements for flight instructors with a sport pilot rating currently found in part 61 subpart K (§§ 61.401 through 61.431) to current part 61 subpart H. All flight instructor requirements would be located in one subpart. This action would standardize certification requirements for all flight instructors. The FAA recognizes that many of the requirements contained in subpart K for flight instructors with a sport pilot rating are identical to those contained in subpart H for flight instructors with other ratings. If the proposed changes for flight instructors currently certificated under subpart K are adopted, the privileges and limitations of those flight instructors and the methods by which they are certificated would be so similar to those of flight instructors currently certificated under subpart H that separate subparts for the certification of all flight instructors would no longer be necessary. The FAA believes that eliminating redundancies caused by the retention of two separate subparts would clarify requirements applicable to all flight instructors. This change would significantly reduce confusion experienced by the flight instructor community, especially among those flight instructors currently certificated under subpart H who intend to provide training to persons seeking sport pilot certificates. In addition, the change would provide all flight instructors with a single source of information for their certification requirements and the privileges and limitations applicable to their certificates. The following table shows the proposed relocation of the subpart K requirements to subpart H. Subpart K—Flight instructors with a sport pilot rating Subpart H—Flight instructors other than flight instructors with a sport pilot rating Subpart heading—Removed Subpart heading revised. § 61.401 What is the purpose of this subpart? § 61.181 Applicability. § 61.403 What are the age, language, and pilot certificate requirements for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.183 Eligibility requirements. § 61.405 What tests do I have to take to obtain a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.183(f) Eligibility requirements. § 61.407 What aeronautical knowledge must I have to apply for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.185 Aeronautical knowledge. § 61.409 What flight proficiency requirements must I meet to apply for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.187 Flight proficiency. § 61.411 What aeronautical experience must I have to apply for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.186 Aeronautical experience requirements for persons applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating. § 61.413 What are the privileges of my flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.193 Flight instructor privileges. § 61.415 What are the limits of my flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications. § 61.417 Will my flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating list aircraft category and class ratings? § 61.5 Certificates and ratings issued under this part. § 61.419 How do I obtain privileges to provide training in an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft? § 61.191 Additional flight instructor ratings. § 61.421 May I give myself an endorsement? § 61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications. § 61.423 What are the recordkeeping requirements for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? § 61.189 Flight instructor records. § 61.425 How do I renew my flight instructor certificate? § 61.197 Renewal of flight instructor certificates. § 61.427 What must I do if my flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating expires? § 61.199 Expired flight instructor certificates and ratings. § 61.429 May I exercise the privileges of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating if I hold a flight instructor certificate with another rating? §§ 61.189 Flight instructor records, 61.193 Flight instructor privileges, and 61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications. § 61.431 Are there special provisions for obtaining a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating for persons who are registered ultralight instructors with an FAA-recognized ultralight organization? Removed. II.B.5. Require 1 hour of flight training on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments for student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to operate an airplane with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS and sport pilots operating airplanes with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS (§§ 61.89, 61.93, and 61.327) Current regulations require student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to receive and log flight training in the control and maneuvering of an aircraft solely by reference to flight instruments. This training must be received before conducting a solo cross-country flight or any flight greater than 25 nautical miles from the airport from where the flight originated. It also must be received prior to making a solo flight and landing at any location other than the airport of origination. These requirements are detailed in § 61.93 and are applicable to persons seeking a student pilot certificate to operate any category and class of aircraft. That section, however, does not specify any minimum flight training time to meet these requirements. In addition, current regulations for the issuance of a sport pilot certificate do not require an applicant to receive flight training on the control and maneuvering of any aircraft solely by reference to instruments. The FAA is concerned that persons exercising student or sport pilot privileges in airplanes with a maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum continuous power (V H ) greater than 87 knots calibrated airspeed
(CAS)may inadvertently encounter conditions less than those specified for VFR operations due to their greater speed and range. Operators of these aircraft are more likely to encounter instrument meteorological conditions than operators of other categories of aircraft. In order to enhance the ability of these pilots to appropriately react to the possibility of encountering instrument meteorological conditions and the potential consequences of attempting continued visual flight rule
(VFR)flight in instrument meteorological conditions, the FAA is proposing to require persons operating an airplane with a V H greater than 87 knots CAS to receive and log 1 hour of flight training on the control and maneuvering of an aircraft solely by reference to instruments. The FAA recognizes that persons may currently be authorized to operate aircraft with a V H greater than 87 knots CAS. To provide those persons with a reasonable period of time to obtain this training, the agency is proposing that the training be completed by 1 year after the effective date of the final rule. This training would include straight and level flight, climbs and descents, turns to a heading, and recovery from unusual flight attitudes. Due to the slower speeds and limited capabilities of categories and classes of aircraft other than airplanes, the FAA is not proposing that this requirement be extended to operators of those categories and classes of aircraft and airplanes with a V H less than or equal to 87 knots CAS. The FAA notes that for training to be conducted solely by reference to instruments in visual meteorological conditions, it must be conducted with a view-limiting device. II.B.6. Remove the requirement for persons exercising sport pilot privileges and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating to carry their logbooks while in flight (§ 61.51) The FAA is proposing to remove the requirements in § 61.51(i)(3) and (i)(5) for persons exercising sport pilot privileges and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating to carry their logbooks while in flight. Because the FAA is proposing to issue category and class ratings for sport pilots, the requirement for a sport pilot to carry a logbook or other evidence of required authorized instructor endorsements would no longer be necessary. Similarly, because the FAA is also proposing to issue sport pilot ratings for flight instructors, the requirement for a flight instructor to carry a logbook or other evidence of required endorsements would no longer be necessary. All pilots and flight instructors are required to have their certificates in their physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that certificate. Because ratings are listed on pilot and flight instructor certificates, the proposal, if adopted, would enable the FAA to determine that a pilot or flight instructor was properly rated to operate or provide instruction in an aircraft without the need to examine that person's logbook or other documentation. Any additional endorsements required for a person to exercise sport pilot privileges need not be in that person's physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft; however, a person must present those required records for inspection upon a reasonable request, as required by § 61.51(i). Because all pilots and flight instructors will not have certificates reflecting the new ratings until 27 months after the effective date of the proposed provisions, the FAA would not implement the provisions of this section until after that time. II.B.7. Remove the requirement that persons exercising sport pilot privileges have an aircraft make-and-model endorsement to operate a specific set of aircraft while adding specific regulatory provisions for endorsements for the operation of powered parachutes with elliptical wings and aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS (§§ 61.315, 61.319, 61.324, and 61.327) To operate any aircraft within a set of aircraft, a person exercising sport pilot privileges must have a logbook endorsement from an authorized flight instructor for a specific category, class, and make and model of aircraft within that set of light-sport aircraft. This requirement is specified in current § 61.319, and the procedure for obtaining the endorsement is found in § 61.323. At the time the rules were adopted, the FAA believed that grouping makes and models of light-sport aircraft that have similar performance and operating characteristics as a set of aircraft was an effective means to permit persons exercising sport pilot privileges to operate any aircraft within that set once an endorsement to operate any aircraft within that set had been received. In implementing the 2004 final rule, the FAA developed standards for defining and establishing sets of aircraft. Sets of aircraft were developed for airplanes, weight-shift-control aircraft, powered parachutes, gyroplanes, and lighter-than-air aircraft. Airplanes, for example, were grouped into eight specific sets, with four specific sets for airplanes with a V H less than or equal to 87 knots (tricycle gear, tailwheel, ski- equipped, and float-equipped), and four identical sets for airplanes with a V H greater than 87 knots. The FAA has used this concept of grouping aircraft having similar operating characteristics successfully in the National Designated Pilot Examiner Registry (NDPER) program for training and checking pilots operating warbirds and other vintage aircraft. The FAA believed that incorporating a requirement for a specific endorsement based on a set of aircraft would ensure that any person exercising sport pilot privileges would receive additional flight training appropriate to the aircraft in which operations would be conducted. When the various sets of aircraft were being developed to implement the 2004 rule, the FAA required specific endorsements for a person to operate an aircraft within a set. For example, for a sport pilot to operate a powered parachute with an elliptical wing or an aircraft with a V H at or below 87 knots, that person must obtain a make-and-model endorsement for that set of aircraft. In addition, a specific endorsement is currently required to operate aircraft with a V H greater than 87 knots. A specific endorsement is also required to operate an aircraft equipped with a tailwheel. A proficiency check also is required to operate an airplane—single-engine land or airplane—single-engine sea. Due to the duplicative nature of currently required endorsements and proficiency checks, the FAA has determined that a specific requirement for a make-and-model endorsement to operate any aircraft within a set of aircraft is redundant, and that safety concerns can be adequately addressed using existing endorsements and the additional endorsements set forth in this NPRM. The FAA is therefore proposing to add § 61.315(c)(20) to specify that the holder of a sport pilot certificate with a powered parachute rating may not act as pilot in command of a light-sport aircraft that is a powered parachute with an elliptical wing unless that holder has met the endorsement requirements proposed in § 61.324. Additionally, the FAA is also proposing to revise § 61.315(c)(14) to require the holder of a sport pilot certificate with any category and class rating to meet the endorsement requirements proposed in § 61.327. That section would require the holder of a sport pilot certificate seeking to operate a light-sport aircraft that has a V H less than or equal to 87 knots CAS to receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor. A person receiving that training would also be required to receive a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor who provided that training certifying that he or she is proficient in the operation of those aircraft. The current endorsement to operate a light-sport aircraft with a V H greater than 87 knots CAS would be retained. The FAA believes that deleting the requirement for set-of-aircraft endorsements while having specific regulatory provisions for sport pilots to obtain endorsements to operate powered parachutes with an elliptical wing, aircraft with a V H less than or equal to 87 knots CAS, and aircraft with a V H greater than 87 knots CAS would eliminate redundant endorsement requirements and provide a level of safety equivalent to that found in the current regulation. The FAA recognizes that pilots may currently be authorized to operate powered parachutes with an elliptical wing and aircraft with a V H less than or equal to 87 knots without the endorsements specified in the proposal. The proposal would not require persons with pilot-in-command time in these aircraft prior to the effective date of the final rule to obtain these endorsements. II.B.8. Remove the requirement for all flight instructors to log at least 5 hours of flight time in a make and model of light-sport aircraft before providing training in any aircraft from the same set in which that training is given (§ 61.415) The FAA is proposing to eliminate the requirement in § 61.415(e) for flight instructors exercising the privileges of a sport pilot rating to have logged 5 hours of flight time in order to provide flight instruction in a make and model aircraft within a specific set of aircraft. The FAA has determined that the aeronautical experience requirements for the issuance of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating and the endorsements necessary to exercise those privileges are sufficient for an instructor to safely provide flight instruction in any aircraft for which that instructor has privileges. If an appropriately rated flight instructor has the required endorsements to operate a specific aircraft, the FAA believes that an additional requirement to obtain 5 hours of aeronautical experience imposes an unnecessary burden on the flight instructor and should not be required to safely provide instruction in that aircraft. The requirement for a flight instructor to log additional aeronautical experience based on the specific set of aircraft in which the person intends to provide instruction would also no longer be necessary if the proposal to eliminate the requirement in § 61.319 for a person exercising sport pilot privileges to have a make and model endorsement to operate any aircraft within a specific set of aircraft is adopted. II.B.9. Permit persons exercising sport pilot privileges and the privileges of a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate to fly up to an altitude of not more than 10,000 feet MSL or 2,000 feet AGL, whichever is higher (§§ 61.89 and 61.315) Section 61.89 describes the general limitations for student pilots. Paragraph (c)(3) of that section states that a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft at an altitude of more than 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL). Section 61.315(c)(11) places the same limitation on sport pilots. The FAA is proposing to revise §§ 61.89(c)(3) and 61.315(c)(11) by adding the words “or 2,000 feet AGL [above ground level], whichever is higher.” This revision would allow sport pilots and student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to operate in mountainous areas higher than 10,000 feet MSL when such operations are less than 2,000 feet AGL. The FAA believes that the current regulations unnecessarily burden sport pilots and students seeking sport pilot certificates who operate light-sport aircraft in areas of high elevation. These operations can be performed safely because student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate and sport pilots are currently trained in proper preflight preparation procedures, which include training in aeromedical factors, such as the effects of hypoxia. In addition, these pilots receive training in reduced aircraft performance at high-density altitudes and in the effect of operations at higher altitudes. These pilots are required to demonstrate knowledge of these factors during the practical test. Additionally, many of the new light-sport aircraft are capable of operating above 10,000 feet MSL. By providing sport pilots with the ability to better utilize the capabilities of these aircraft and operate at higher altitudes in mountainous terrain, the proposed revision should assist in reducing the risks associated with mountain flying. By restricting operations above 10,000 feet MSL to no more than 2,000 feet AGL, sport pilots operating light-sport aircraft should not impose a hazard to high-performance aircraft that routinely operate at higher altitudes. II.B.10. Permit private pilots to receive compensation for production flight testing of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft intended for certification in the light-sport category in § 21.190 (§ 61.113) The FAA is proposing to add § 61.113(h) to allow a private pilot to act as pilot in command for compensation or hire when conducting a production flight test in a powered parachute or a weight-shift-control aircraft intended for certification in the light-sport category under § 21.190. The 2004 final rule created two new categories of aircraft-powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft. The final rule also permitted the manufacture of these aircraft for certification in the light-sport category under § 21.190. During the manufacturing process, these aircraft must undergo a production flight test. For other categories of aircraft, these production flight tests are carried out by persons with at least a commercial pilot certificate who can receive compensation for the conduct of this activity. The final rule, however, did not create ratings at the commercial pilot level for these two new categories of aircraft. Since private pilots under the current rule cannot receive compensation when conducting production flight tests, the regulations currently do not provide a means for a pilot conducting production flight tests of powered parachutes or weight-shift-control aircraft to be compensated for that activity. The FAA recognizes both the need for production flight tests of these aircraft and the fact that persons conducting these flight tests may be compensated. The proposal therefore would provide a means for appropriately rated pilots with sufficient experience to conduct these flight tests for compensation or hire. The FAA maintains that these operations should be conducted by a person who holds at least a private pilot certificate with the appropriate category and class rating. As reflected in current operating limitations for special light-sport aircraft, the FAA believes that pilots conducting a production flight test should have a minimum of 100 hours pilot-in-command time in the same category of aircraft as that undergoing a production flight test. The provisions of this rule would only apply to powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft intended for certification under § 21.190. It would not permit private pilots to be compensated for conducting test flights of other aircraft that are not intended for certification under § 21.190 (e.g., experimental amateur-built aircraft that meet the definition of “light-sport aircraft” or aircraft intended for certification as experimental light-sport aircraft under § 21.191(i)). II.B.11. Revise student sport pilot solo cross-country navigation and communication flight training requirements (§ 61.93) The FAA is proposing to amend § 61.93(e)(9), (e)(12), (h)(9), (k)(9), and (k)(11) regarding maneuvers and procedures for cross-country flight training in a single-engine airplane, a gyroplane, and an airship. The amendment would except student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate from the requirement to receive and log flight training on the use of radios for VFR navigation and two-way communications, unless this equipment is installed in the aircraft used for the solo cross-country flight. In addition, the amendment would except student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate from the requirement to receive and log flight training on control and maneuvering solely by reference to flight instruments, unless operating an airplane with a V H greater than 87 knots CAS. Since sport pilots are not required to be trained in the use of radios for VFR navigation, two-way communications, and flight by reference to instruments, the FAA has determined that student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate should not be required to receive training in those maneuvers and procedures unless operating an airplane with a V H greater than 87 knots CAS. II.B.12. Clarify cross-country distance requirements for private pilots seeking to operate weight-shift-control aircraft (§ 61.109) Currently § 61.109(j)(2)(i) specifies that a person applying for a private pilot certificate with a weight-shift-control rating must log “one cross-country flight over 75 nautical miles total distance” at night with an authorized instructor. Although paragraph (j)(2)(i) uses the term “cross-country flight,” persons applying for this rating frequently have overlooked the provisions of § 61.1(b)(3)(ii)(B), which states that for purposes of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for a private pilot certificate with a weight-shift-control rating, cross-country time includes a point of landing at least a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure. To ensure that persons applying for a private pilot certificate with a weight-shift-control rating complete a cross-country flight that meets the requirements of both §§ 61.1 and 61.109(j), the FAA is proposing to add language in § 61.109(j), consistent with § 61.1, to indicate that the cross-country flight must include a point of landing that is a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure. The proposal merely clarifies the existing regulation and would not add any new requirement. II.B.13. Revise the aeronautical experience requirements at towered airports for persons seeking to operate a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft as a private pilot (§ 61.109) The FAA is proposing to revise the aeronautical experience requirements for a private pilot certificate with a powered parachute rating in § 61.109(i)(4)(ii) and for a weight-shift-control aircraft rating in § 61.109(j)(4)(iii). These paragraphs currently state that training for powered parachute and weight-shift-control aircraft ratings must include at least 3 takeoffs and landings (with each landing involving a flight in a traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating control tower. These paragraphs also require that the takeoffs and landings be performed in the specific category of aircraft for which a rating is sought while in solo flight. The FAA is proposing to permit these takeoffs and landings to be performed in any category of aircraft and in either solo or dual flight. Currently, many persons seeking to obtain ratings in powered parachutes or weight-shift-control aircraft experience difficulty in conducting operations at tower-controlled airports. These aircraft frequently experience difficulty operating in the traffic pattern with other categories and classes of aircraft due to their slower speeds, flight characteristics, and operating limitations. This proposal would allow persons seeking these ratings to conduct operations at tower-controlled airports without the burden of having to conduct these operations in a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft while in solo flight. This proposal would provide applicants with additional flexibility in obtaining the aeronautical experience necessary to conduct operations at tower-controlled airports. An applicant would not only be permitted to obtain the necessary aeronautical experience in the category of aircraft for which a rating is sought while in solo flight, but also in dual flight in any category of aircraft. II.B.14. Remove the requirement for pilots with only powered parachute and weight-shift-control aircraft ratings to take a knowledge test for an additional rating at the same certificate level (§ 61.63) The FAA is proposing to amend § 61.63(b)(5) and (c)(5) to permit persons who hold powered parachute and weight-shift-control aircraft category ratings to apply for a pilot certificate with an additional category or class rating without taking an additional knowledge test. Knowledge tests for applicants for category or class ratings for powered aircraft at the same certificate level address identical aeronautical knowledge areas. Persons who hold a category rating for a powered aircraft (other than powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft) are not currently required to take a knowledge test when applying for an additional category or class rating for a powered aircraft at their certificate level. The 2004 final rule created two additional categories and classes of powered aircraft. In that rule, applicants who hold category ratings for powered parachutes or weight-shift-control aircraft seeking additional category and class ratings were not provided the same relief as that provided to persons who hold category and class ratings for other powered aircraft. The FAA is therefore proposing to amend § 61.63 to provide applicants who hold category ratings for powered parachutes or weight-shift-control aircraft with this relief. II.B.15. Revise the amount of hours of flight training an applicant for a sport pilot certificate must log within 60 days prior to taking the practical test (§ 61.313) Current § 61.313 requires an applicant for a sport pilot certificate to log at least “3 hours of flight training on those areas of operation specified in § 61.311 preparing for the practical test, within 60 days before the date of the test.” In developing the aeronautical experience requirements for the issuance of the sport pilot certificate, the FAA based this requirement on the corresponding aeronautical experience requirements for the issuance of higher-level pilot certificates. Those certificates, however, require applicants to log more flight time than is required for the issuance of a sport pilot certificate and to prepare for testing on a higher number of tasks. Due to the lower number of hours required for a person to apply for a sport pilot certificate and the lower number of tasks for which preparation is necessary, the number of hours currently required to be logged within 60 days before the date of the practical test is proportionately higher than that required for other certificates. Accordingly, the FAA is proposing to reduce the number of hours that must be logged in preparation for the practical test within 60 days of that test from 3 hours to 2 hours, for aircraft other than gliders. For gliders, the FAA is proposing to reduce the aeronautical experience that must be logged in preparation for the practical test from 3 hours to 3 training flights. The FAA believes that these proposed changes would better correspond to the time required to prepare for the practical test and recognize the unique characteristics of gliders. The FAA, however, is not reducing the total number of hours required for the issuance of any category and class of sport pilot certificate. II.B.16. Remove expired ultralight transition provisions and limit the use of aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles (§§ 61.52, 61.301, 61.309, 61.311, 61.313, 61.329, and 61.431) Current §§ 61.329 and 61.431 describe special provisions for obtaining sport pilot certificates and flight instructor certificates with a sport pilot rating for persons who are registered with FAA-recognized ultralight organizations. These sections were intended to provide a means for pilots and flight instructors who received training from an FAA-recognized ultralight organization to transition to sport pilot certificates and flight instructor certificates with a sport pilot rating. As provided in the rules, the transition period for obtaining a sport pilot certificate expired on January 31, 2007, and the transition period for obtaining a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating expired on January 31, 2008. Because January 31, 2007, and January 31, 2008, have passed, the FAA is proposing to remove § 61.329 (except for the ultralight pilot record provisions of paragraph (a)(2)(iv), which will be transferred to § 61.52) and § 61.431. In addition, the FAA intends to amend §§ 61.309, 61.311, and 61.313 to remove references to § 61.329. The reference to the expired transition provisions in § 61.301(a)(7) would also be removed. Additionally, the proposal would revise § 61.52(a) and
(b)to permit persons to use aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles to meet the requirements for certain airman certificates and ratings and also to meet the provisions of § 61.69 until January 31, 2012. The FAA originally adopted the provisions of current § 61.52 to facilitate the process for operators of ultralight vehicles to obtain airman certificates established by the 2004 rule and to meet the requirements of § 61.69. The FAA did not intend for these transition provisions to be indefinite in duration. Since operators of ultralight vehicles should have transitioned to the new airman certificates prior to the date of this proposal, or have used their aeronautical experience to meet the provisions of § 61.69, the FAA believes that retaining the provisions for the use of aeronautical experience in § 61.52 is no longer warranted. The FAA recognizes, however, that operators of ultralight vehicles may have acquired aeronautical experience in ultralight vehicles with the intent of obtaining airman certificates established by the 2004 rule, or to meet the experience requirements of § 61.69. To provide these persons with a sufficient amount of time to use this aeronautical experience to obtain the new certificates, or meet the requirements of § 61.69, the FAA is proposing a date of January 31, 2012, after which the provisions of § 61.52 may no longer be used. II.B.17. Add a requirement for student pilots to obtain endorsements identical to those proposed for sport pilots in proposed §§ 61.324 and 61.327 (§ 61.89) In § 61.89, the FAA is proposing to add paragraphs (c)(5) and (c)(6) to require student pilots seeking sport pilot certificates to obtain endorsements identical to those specified in proposed §§ 61.327 (to operate a light-sport aircraft based on V <sup>H</sup> ) and 61.324 (to operate a powered parachute with an elliptical wing), respectively. Currently, sport pilots are required to obtain specific endorsements for the operation of particular light-sport aircraft. These endorsements have not been required for student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate because these student pilots are required to have a specific make-and-model endorsement for each aircraft they operate. If a student pilot does not obtain the endorsements required for holders of sport pilot certificates, the student pilot is precluded from operating the corresponding light-sport aircraft upon issuance of the sport pilot certificate. By requiring student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate to receive these identical endorsements while exercising student pilot privileges, the FAA would ensure that newly certificated sport pilots would be able to continue to operate those aircraft in which they have exercised pilot-in-command privileges as student pilots. II.B.18. Clarify that an authorized instructor must be in a powered parachute when providing flight instruction to a student pilot (§ 61.313) In § 61.313(g)(1), which describes the requirements for logging aeronautical experience to obtain powered parachute category land or sea class ratings, the FAA is proposing to add the words “from an authorized instructor in a powered parachute aircraft” to clarify that an authorized instructor must be in the aircraft for a student pilot to log flight training time. The FAA is concerned that there is confusion in the sport pilot community whether paragraph (g)(1) allows for “radio flight training” (i.e., flight training when an authorized instructor is not in the aircraft), which was not the FAA's intent. The proposed change would be consistent with other provisions for logging the aeronautical experience necessary to apply for a sport pilot certificate and would clarify that all flight training must be received from an authorized instructor in flight in an aircraft, as specified in § 61.1(b)(6). Also in § 61.313(g)(1), the FAA is changing the words “at least 2 hours of solo flight training” to “at least 2 hours of solo flight time.” The word “training” implies that an instructor should be in the aircraft, which is not appropriate in a solo flight time requirement. II.B.19. Remove the requirement for aircraft certificated as experimental aircraft in the light-sport category to comply with the applicable maintenance and preventive maintenance requirements of part 43 when those aircraft have been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category (§ 43.1) Currently, aircraft that have been issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category must continue to meet the applicable maintenance and preventive maintenance requirements of part 43 when those aircraft are subsequently certificated as experimental light-sport aircraft under § 21.191(i)(3). A manufacturer may produce a special light-sport aircraft for certification under the provisions of § 21.190 and the maintenance provisions of part 43 will apply to that aircraft. The manufacturer may continue to produce that same aircraft as an aircraft kit under the provisions of § 21.191(i)(2), and part 43 will not apply to the maintenance of that aircraft. However, that same aircraft, when originally certificated under § 21.190 and subsequently re-certificated as an experimental light-sport aircraft under the provisions of § 21.191(i)(3) must continue to comply with the provisions of part 43. Additionally, these rules preclude non-certificated persons from performing maintenance on aircraft originally certificated under § 21.190 and subsequently re-certificated under § 21.191(i)(3), even though these experimental aircraft are restricted to personal use. When originally proposing these rules, the FAA's intent was to have identical maintenance requirements for all aircraft certificated under § 21.191(i) regardless of whether they were previously certificated in another category. The current maintenance rules for these aircraft, however, negate the underlying rationale for originally adopting the provisions of § 21.191(i)(3). The FAA is therefore proposing to amend § 43.1 to remove the requirement for aircraft certificated as experimental aircraft in the light-sport category to comply with the requirements of part 43 when those aircraft have been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. The proposal would conform maintenance requirements for aircraft certificated under § 21.191(i) to the original intent of the 2004 final rule. II.B.20. Require aircraft owners or operators to retain a record of the current status of applicable safety directives for special light-sport aircraft (§ 91.417) Currently § 91.327(b)(4) specifies that no person may operate an aircraft that has a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category unless the owner or operator complies with each safety directive applicable to the aircraft that corrects an existing unsafe condition. Although owners and operators must comply with these safety directives, there currently is no requirement to retain a record of the current status of applicable safety directives or transfer of that information at the time of sale of the aircraft. Without a requirement to retain and transfer this information, owners, operators, and FAA safety inspectors are not able to easily determine whether maintenance actions critical to flight safety have been accomplished on special light-sport aircraft. This requirement should have been included in the 2004 final rule. The FAA is therefore proposing to revise § 91.417(a)(2)(v) to require owners or operators to retain these records. These records must be transferred in accordance with the provisions of § 91.419. II.B.21. Provide for use of aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category in training courses approved under part 141 (§ 141.39) When the 2004 final rule was issued, the FAA did not revise part 141 to provide for the use of light-sport aircraft in courses approved under that part. Since that time, the FAA has received requests for special light-sport aircraft to be used in courses approved under part 141. Although special light-sport aircraft are not type-certificated aircraft, they are designed, manufactured, and certificated in accordance with consensus standards that have been accepted by the FAA. When part 141 was originally adopted, the FAA did not contemplate the use of aircraft manufactured in accordance with consensus standards. Since these aircraft are manufactured in accordance with FAA-accepted consensus standards, the FAA believes that these aircraft provide an acceptable level of safety for use in part 141 training courses. To be used in a course approved under part 141, the aircraft also would have to be properly equipped for performing the tasks specified in the training course in which the aircraft would be used. The FAA is therefore proposing to revise § 141.39(b) to permit the use of special light-sport aircraft in training courses that are approved under part 141. II.B.22. Revise minimum safe-altitude requirements for powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft, and balloons (§ 91.119) Currently pilots of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft must remain at least 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet when operating over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open-air assembly of persons. When operating over other than congested areas, powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft must be operated at an altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except when operating over open water or sparsely populated areas. When operating over these areas, these aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. The restrictions specified for operations over congested areas and other than congested areas are not applicable when necessary for the takeoff or landing of the aircraft. While the FAA believes that current operating restrictions for powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft over congested areas are appropriate, the agency believes that current restrictions on the operation of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft over other than congested areas are overly restrictive. The FAA recognizes that the operational characteristics (lower maximum gross weights, slower speeds, and lower climb rates) of powered parachutes and weight-shift control aircraft enable them to safely operate over other than congested areas at altitudes lower than those at which other aircraft are routinely operated. Additionally, many of these aircraft have been designed with the intent of conducting operations at altitudes below those permitted by the current regulation. Requiring these aircraft to operate at altitudes more appropriate to other categories and classes of aircraft significantly decreases their utility to owners and operators. In the event of a forced landing, the slower speeds, lower weights, and greater maneuverability of these aircraft allow for shorter landing distances and lower impact forces. The FAA is therefore proposing to amend § 91.119 to allow powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft to be operated over other than congested areas at less than 500 feet above the surface, provided the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface. III. Paperwork Reduction Act Information collection requirements associated with the proposed amendments to part 61 to replace sport pilot privileges with aircraft category and class ratings on all pilot certificates and to replace sport pilot flight instructor privileges with aircraft category ratings on all flight instructor certificates have been approved previously by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) and assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0690. This rulemaking action would ensure that sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating are in compliance with the FAA's existing requirement that a record of their logbook endorsements are on file with the FAA. Information collection requirements associated with the proposed amendment to § 91.419 to require owners and operators of special light-sport aircraft (SLSAs) to retain a record of the current status of applicable safety directives and transfer that information at the time of the sale of that aircraft would be a new information collection requirement. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted the information requirements associated with this proposal to the Office of Management and Budget for its review. A summary of those requirements is as follows. *Use:* The information will be used to enable safety inspectors, in situations such as accident investigations, to determine whether required maintenance actions were accomplished on SLSAs. *Respondents:* There are currently 927 registered SLSAs (expected to increase by 75 aircraft every 2 years). However, the FAA does not know the exact numbers of owners and operators. The FAA expects the number of owners and operators would be fewer than 927. *Frequency:* Owners and operators of SLSAs would retain and transfer records on the status of safety directives only when safety directives have been issued on their SLSAs. The FAA estimates that it would take an owner operator 2 hours per year to comply with the requirement. *Annual Burden Estimate* There would be no annualized cost to the Federal government. For owners and operators, the total hour burden would be 21,540 hours over a 10-year period. The average number of hours each year would be 2,154, computed as follows: Year Number of SLSA aircraft Hours per aircraft Total hour burden 2008 927 2 1,854 2009 927 2 1,854 2010 1002 2 2,004 2011 1002 2 2,004 2012 1077 2 2,154 2013 1077 2 2,154 2014 1152 2 2,304 2015 1152 2 2,304 2016 1227 2 2,454 2017 1227 2 2,454 Total 21,540 Average 2,154 The total cost burden, assuming the value of an owner or operator's time is $31.50 per hour, would be $678,510 ($467,646 discounted). The annualized cost would be $66,584 per year ($467,646 multiplied by 0.14238 (the capital recovery factor)). The agency is soliciting comments to—
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of collecting information on those who are to respond, including by using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Individuals and organizations may send comments on the information collection requirement by June 16, 2008, and should direct them to the address listed in the Addresses section at the end of this preamble. Comments also should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for FAA, New Executive Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20053. According to the 1995 amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for this information collection will be published in the ** Federal Register ** , after the Office of Management and Budget approves it. IV. International Compatibility In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO)Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices that correspond to these proposed regulations. V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses V.A. Economic Assessment Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. standards, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this proposed rule. We suggest readers seeking greater detail read the full regulatory evaluation, a copy of which we have placed in the docket for this rulemaking. In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined that this proposed rule:
(1)Has benefits that justify its costs,
(2)is not an economically “significant regulatory action” as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
(3)is not “significant” as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures;
(4)would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities;
(5)would not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States; and
(6)would not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector by exceeding the threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized below. *Costs and Benefits:* The total cost of this rule would be approximately $8.2 million ($5.8 million, discounted). Much of this cost ($4.3 million) is attributed to new training requirements for sport pilots who fly aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS. Another substantial portion of the cost ($3.0 million) is attributed to changes to the way in which sport pilot practical exams are administered. Benefits include increased safety for sport pilots flying in conditions requiring navigation by reference to instruments, the ability for pilots of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft to fly at lower altitudes in other-than-congested areas, and the ability for sport pilots to possess certificates with ratings similar to those of other pilots. V.B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354)(RFA) establishes “as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given serious consideration.” The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA. However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be clear. This proposed rule would impose minimal costs on individuals who are or are in the process of becoming sport pilots. Most of these individuals fly for sport or recreation, and therefore the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply to them. However, the rule would impose costs on flight instructors with sport pilot ratings who provide instruction as a business endeavor, and in this case the Regulatory Flexibility Act does apply. The estimated 390 current instructors who have already filed the correct paperwork with the FAA would pay nothing. The estimated 210 instructors who have not filed the proper paperwork would incur a one-time cost of approximately $130 each, which the FAA does not consider a significant cost. Therefore, the FAA certifies that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of flight instructors with a sport pilot rating engaged in a business endeavor. The FAA requests comments from affected entities on this finding and determination. V.C. International Trade Impact Assessment The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this proposed rule and has determined that it would have no significant impact on international trade. V.D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation with the base year 1995) in any one year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a “significant regulatory action.” The FAA currently uses an inflation-adjusted value of $128.1 million in lieu of $100 million. This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate. V.E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, and, therefore, would not have federalism implications. V.F. Environmental Analysis FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has determined this proposed rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 307(k) and involves no extraordinary circumstances. V.G. Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use The FAA has analyzed this NPRM under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under the executive order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. VI. Additional Information Comments Invited The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, please send only one copy of written comments, or if you are filing comments electronically, please submit your comments only one time. We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive. Availability of Rulemaking Documents You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the Internet by— 1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal ( *http://www.regulations.gov* ); 2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at *http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/* ; or 3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html* . You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling
(202)267-9680. Be sure to identify the docket number, notice number, or amendment number of this rulemaking. You may access all documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, from the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in paragraph (1). List of Subjects 14 CFR Part 43 Aircraft, Aviation safety. 14 CFR Part 61 Aircraft, Airmen, Recreation and recreation areas, Teachers. 14 CFR Part 91 Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 14 CFR Part 141 Airmen, Educational facilities, Schools. The Proposed Amendments In consideration of the foregoing, the FAA proposes to amend parts 43, 61, 91, and 141 of title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR parts 43, 61, 91, and 141) as follows: PART 43—MAINTENANCE, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE, REBUILDING, AND ALTERATION 1. The authority citation for part 43 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44703, 44705, 44707, 44711, 44713, 44717, 44725. 2. Amend § 43.1 by revising paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 43.1 Applicability.
(b)This part does not apply to any aircraft for which the FAA has issued an experimental certificate, unless the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworthiness certificate, other than a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category, for that aircraft. PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND INSTRUCTORS 3. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709-44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302. 4. Amend § 61.1 by revising paragraphs (b)(3)(iii) introductory text and (b)(3)(iv) introductory text to read as follows: § 61.1 Applicability and definitions.
(b)* * *
(3)* * *
(iii)For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for a sport pilot certificate (except for a powered parachute rating), time acquired during a flight conducted in an appropriate aircraft that—
(iv)For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for a sport pilot certificate with a powered parachute rating or a private pilot certificate with a powered parachute category rating, time acquired during a flight conducted in an appropriate aircraft that— 5. Amend § 61.3 by revising paragraphs (c)(2)(i), (c)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(iv), and (c)(2)(v) introductory text to read as follows: § 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
(c)* * *
(2)* * *
(i)Is exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking a pilot certificate with a glider category rating or a balloon class rating;
(ii)Is exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking a sport pilot certificate with other than glider or balloon ratings and holds a current and valid U.S. driver's license;
(iv)Is exercising the privileges of a sport pilot certificate with glider or balloon ratings;
(v)Is exercising the privileges of a sport pilot certificate with other than glider or balloon ratings and holds a current and valid U.S. driver's license. A person who has applied for or held a medical certificate may exercise the privileges of a sport pilot certificate using a current and valid U.S. driver's license only if that person— 6. Amend § 61.5 by revising paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows: § 61.5 Certificates and ratings issued under this part.
(c)* * *
(5)Sport pilot ratings—
(i)Sport pilot—airplane single-engine.
(ii)Sport pilot—weight-shift control aircraft.
(iii)Sport pilot—powered parachute.
(iv)Sport pilot—rotorcraft-gyroplane.
(v)Sport pilot—glider.
(vi)Sport pilot—lighter-than-air airship.
(vii)Sport pilot—lighter-than-air balloon. 7. Amend § 61.7 by adding paragraphs (c), (d), and
(e)to read as follows: § 61.7 Obsolete certificates and ratings.
(c)Prior to [ *TWO YEARS FROM EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE* ], the holder of a sport pilot certificate without a category and class rating whose logbook has been endorsed for sport pilot privileges in a specific category and class of aircraft may—
(1)Exercise the privileges of a sport pilot certificate with a corresponding category and class rating; and
(2)Exchange that certificate for a sport pilot certificate with a category and class rating corresponding to the privileges previously held.
(d)Prior to [ *TWO YEARS FROM EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE* ], the holder of a recreational pilot certificate or higher whose logbook has been endorsed for sport pilot privileges in a specific category and class of aircraft may—
(1)Exercise the privileges of a sport pilot with a category and class rating in an aircraft corresponding to the category and class of aircraft specified in that pilot's logbook endorsement; and
(2)Exchange that certificate for a recreational pilot certificate or higher with a category and class rating corresponding to the sport pilot privileges previously held.
(e)A flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating issued before [ *EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE* ] is equivalent to a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating and the appropriate aircraft category and class rating. A flight instructor certificate with other than a sport pilot rating held by a person who has the privileges of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating is equivalent to a flight instructor certificate with the corresponding flight instructor ratings and sport pilot category and class ratings. The holder of a flight instructor certificate who has sport pilot privileges not listed on that certificate may not exercise those privileges after [ *TWENTY SEVEN CALENDAR MONTHS FROM EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE* ]. 8. Amend § 61.23 by: a. Revising paragraph (b)(1); b. Removing paragraph (b)(2); c. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(8) as paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(7) respectively; and d. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(3)(i). The revisions read as follows: § 61.23 Medical certificates: Requirement and duration.
(b)* * *
(1)When exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking a pilot certificate with a glider category rating or balloon class rating;
(3)* * *
(i)A sport pilot-glider rating or sport pilot-lighter-than air balloon rating; or § 61.31 [Amended] 9. Amend § 61.31 by: a. Adding the word “or” after the semicolon at the end of paragraph (k)(2)(iv); b. Removing the semicolon and the word “or” at the end of paragraph (k)(2)(v) and adding a period in their place; and c. Removing paragraph (k)(2)(vi). 10. Amend § 61.51 by: a. Revising paragraphs (c)(1) and (e)(1)(i); b. Removing paragraphs (i)(3) and (i)(5); and c. Redesignating paragraph (i)(4) as (i)(3). The revision reads as follows: § 61.51 Pilot logbooks.
(c)* * *
(1)Apply for a certificate or rating issued under this part; or
(e)* * *
(1)* * *
(i)Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated; 11. Amend § 61.52 by revising paragraphs
(a)introductory text, (b), (c)(2) and (c)(3), and adding paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows: § 61.52 Use of aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles.
(a)Before January 31, 2012, a person may use aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the requirements for the following certificates and ratings issued under this part:
(b)Before January 31, 2012, a person may use aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the provisions of § 61.69.
(c)* * *
(2)Document and log that aeronautical experience in accordance with the provisions for logging aeronautical experience specified by an FAA-recognized organization and in accordance with the provisions for logging pilot time in aircraft as specified in § 61.51;
(3)Obtain the aeronautical experience in a category and class of vehicle that is appropriate to the rating sought; and
(4)Provide the FAA with a certified copy of his or her ultralight pilot records from an FAA-recognized ultralight organization, that—
(i)Document that he or she is a registered ultralight pilot with that FAA-recognized ultralight organization; and
(ii)Indicate that he or she is recognized to operate the category and class of aircraft for which sport pilot privileges are sought. 12. Amend § 61.63 by revising paragraphs (b)(5) and (c)(5) to read as follows: § 61.63 Additional aircraft ratings (other than on an airline transport pilot certificate).
(b)* * *
(5)Need not take an additional knowledge test, provided the applicant holds an airplane, rotorcraft, powered-lift, weight-shift-control aircraft, powered parachute, or airship rating at that pilot certificate level.
(c)* * *
(5)Need not take an additional knowledge test, provided the applicant holds an airplane, rotorcraft, powered- lift, weight-shift-control aircraft, powered parachute, or airship rating at that pilot certificate level. 13. Amend § 61.87 by revising the introductory text of paragraphs (d), (g), (i), (j), (l), and
(m)to read as follows: § 61.87 Solo requirements for student pilots.
(d)*Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in a single-engine airplane.* A student pilot who is receiving training for a single-engine airplane rating must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures:
(g)*Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in a gyroplane.* A student pilot who is receiving training for a gyroplane rating must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures:
(i)*Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in a glider.* A student pilot who is receiving training for a glider rating must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures:
(j)*Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in an airship.* A student pilot who is receiving training for an airship rating must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures:
(l)*Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in a powered parachute.* A student pilot who is receiving training for a powered parachute rating must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures:
(m)*Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in a weight-shift-control aircraft.* A student pilot who is receiving training for a weight-shift-control aircraft rating must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures: 14. Amend § 61.89 by: a. Revising paragraph (c)(3); b. Removing the period from the end of paragraph (c)(4) and adding a semicolon; and c. Adding paragraphs (c)(5), (c)(6), and (c)(7). The revision and additions read as follows: § 61.89 General limitations.
(c)* * *
(3)At an altitude of more than 10,000 feet MSL or 2,000 feet AGL, whichever is higher;
(5)Of a light-sport aircraft without having received the applicable ground training, flight training, and instructor endorsements specified in § 61.327
(a)and (b);
(6)Prior to conducting a cross-country flight in a light-sport aircraft without having received the applicable ground training, flight training, and instructor endorsements specified in § 61.327 (c); and
(7)Of a powered parachute with an elliptical wing without having received the ground training, flight training, and instructor endorsement specified in § 61.324. 15. Amend § 61.93 by revising paragraphs (e)(9), (e)(12), (h)(9), (k)(9), and (k)(11) to read as follows: § 61.93 Solo cross-country flight requirements.
(e)* * *
(9)Use of radios for VFR navigation and two-way communication, except that a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate must only receive and log flight training on the use of radios installed in the aircraft to be flown;
(12)Control and maneuvering solely by reference to flight instruments, including straight and level flight, turns, descents, climbs, use of radio aids, and ATC directives. For student pilots seeking a sport pilot certificate, the provisions of this paragraph only apply when receiving training for cross-country flight in an airplane that has a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS.
(h)* * *
(9)Use of radios for VFR navigation and two-way communication, except that a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate must only receive and log flight training on the use of radios installed in the aircraft to be flown; and
(k)* * *
(9)Use of radios for VFR navigation and two-way communication, except that a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate must only receive and log flight training on the use of radios installed in the aircraft to be flown;
(11)Control of the airship solely by reference to flight instruments, except for a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate; and 16. Amend § 61.109 by: a. Removing the word “and” at the end of paragraphs (i)(3) and (j)(3); b. Revising paragraphs (i)(4)(ii) and (j)(2)(i); c. Adding the word “and” to the end of paragraph (j)(4)(i); d. Removing paragraph (j)(4)(iii); and e. Adding paragraphs (i)(5) and (j)(5). The revisions and additions read as follows: § 61.109 Aeronautical experience.
(i)* * *
(4)* * *
(ii)Twenty solo takeoffs and landings to a full stop (with each landing involving a flight in a traffic pattern) at an airport; and
(5)Three takeoffs and landings (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern) in an aircraft at an airport with an operating control tower.
(j)* * *
(2)* * *
(i)One cross-country flight of over 75 nautical miles total distance that includes a point of landing that is a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure; and
(5)Three takeoffs and landings (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern) in an aircraft at an airport with an operating control tower. 17. Amend § 61.113 by: a. Amending paragraph
(a)by removing the words “paragraphs
(b)through (g)” and adding in their place the words “paragraphs
(b)through (h)”; and b. Adding paragraph
(h)to read as follows: § 61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.
(h)A private pilot may act as pilot in command for the purpose of conducting a production flight test in a light-sport aircraft intended for certification in the light-sport category under § 21.190 of this chapter, provided that—
(1)The aircraft is a powered parachute or a weight-shift-control aircraft; and
(2)The person has at least 100 hours of pilot-in-command time in the category and class of aircraft flown. Subpart H—Flight Instructors 18. Revise the heading of subpart H of part 61 to read as set forth above. § 61.181 [Amended] 19. Amend § 61.181 by removing the words “(except for flight instructor certificates with a sport pilot rating).” 20. Amend § 61.183 by revising paragraphs
(c)and
(j)to read as follows: § 61.183 Eligibility requirements.
(c)Hold—
(1)Either a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate with:
(i)An aircraft category and class rating that is appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought; and
(ii)An instrument rating, or privileges on that person's pilot certificate that are appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought, if applying for—
(A)A flight instructor certificate with an airplane category and single-engine class rating;
(B)A flight instructor certificate with an airplane category and multiengine class rating;
(C)A flight instructor certificate with a powered-lift rating; or
(D)A flight instructor certificate with an instrument rating; or
(2)At least a sport pilot certificate with a category and class rating appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought, if seeking a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.
(j)Log—
(1)At least 15 hours as pilot in command in the category and class of aircraft that is appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought, if applying for a flight instructor certificate with other than a sport pilot rating; or
(2)The aeronautical experience specified in § 61.186, if applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating; and 21. Amend § 61.185 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: § 61.185 Aeronautical knowledge.
(a)* * *
(2)The aeronautical knowledge areas for—
(i)A recreational, private, and commercial pilot certificate applicable to the aircraft category for which flight instructor privileges are sought, if applying for a flight instructor certificate with other than a sport pilot rating; or
(ii)A sport pilot certificate applicable to the aircraft category for which flight instructor privileges are sought, if applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating; and 22. Add § 61.186 to read as follows: § 61.186 Aeronautical experience requirements for persons applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating. A person applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating must meet the aeronautical experience requirements specified in the following table: A person applying for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating for . . . Must log at least . . . Which must include at least . . .
(a)Airplane category with a single-engine class rating,
(1)150 hours of flight time as a pilot,
(i)100 hours of flight time as pilot in command in a powered aircraft,
(ii)50 hours of flight time in a single-engine airplane,
(iii)25 hours of cross-country flight time,
(iv)10 hours of cross-country flight time in a single-engine airplane, and
(v)15 hours of flight time as pilot in command in a single-engine airplane that is a light-sport aircraft.
(2)[Reserved].
(b)Glider category rating,
(1)25 hours of flight time as pilot in command of a glider, 100 flights in a glider, and 15 flights as pilot in command in a glider that is a light-sport aircraft; or
(2)100 hours in heavier-than-air aircraft, 20 flights in a glider, and 15 flights as pilot in command in a glider that is a light-sport aircraft.
(c)Rotorcraft category with a gyroplane class rating,
(1)125 hours of flight time as a pilot,
(i)100 hours of flight time as pilot in command in a powered aircraft,
(ii)50 hours of flight time in a gyroplane,
(iii)10 hours of cross-country flight time,
(iv)3 hours of cross-country flight time in a gyroplane, and
(v)15 hours of flight time as pilot in command in a gyroplane that is a light-sport aircraft.
(2)[Reserved].
(d)Lighter-than-air category with an airship class rating,
(1)100 hours of flight time as a pilot,
(i)40 hours of flight time in an airship,
(ii)20 hours of flight time as pilot in command in an airship,
(iii)10 hours of cross-country flight time,
(iv)5 hours of cross-country flight time in an airship, and
(v)15 hours of flight time as pilot in command in an airship that is a light-sport aircraft.
(2)[Reserved].
(e)Lighter-than-air category with a balloon class rating,
(1)35 hours of flight time as pilot in command,
(i)20 hours of flight time in a balloon,
(ii)10 flights in a balloon, and
(iii)5 flights as pilot in command in a balloon that is a light-sport aircraft.
(2)[Reserved].
(f)Weight-shift-control aircraft category rating,
(1)150 hours of flight time as a pilot,
(i)100 hours of flight time as a pilot in command in a powered aircraft,
(ii)50 hours of flight time in a weight-shift-control aircraft,
(iii)25 hours of cross-country flight time,
(iv)10 hours of cross-country flight time in a weight-shift-control aircraft, and
(v)15 hours of flight time as a pilot in command in a weight-shift-control aircraft that is a light-sport aircraft.
(2)[Reserved].
(g)Powered-parachute category rating,
(1)100 hours of flight time as a pilot,
(i)75 hours of flight time as a pilot in command in a powered aircraft,
(ii)50 hours of flight time in a powered parachute,
(iii)15 hours of cross-country flight time,
(iv)5 hours of cross-country flight time in a powered parachute, and
(v)15 hours of flight time as pilot in command in a powered parachute that is a light-sport aircraft.
(2)[Reserved]. 23. Amend § 61.187 by adding paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows: § 61.187 Flight proficiency.
(b)* * *
(8)For a sport pilot rating with the appropriate aircraft category and class rating:
(i)Fundamentals of instructing;
(ii)Technical subject areas;
(iii)Preflight preparation;
(iv)Preflight lesson on a maneuver to be performed in flight;
(v)Preflight procedures;
(vi)Airport, seaplane base, and gliderport operations, as applicable;
(vii)Takeoffs (or launches), landings, and go-arounds;
(viii)Fundamentals of flight;
(ix)Performance maneuvers, and for gliders, performance speeds;
(x)Ground reference maneuvers (except for gliders and lighter-than-air);
(xi)Soaring techniques;
(xii)Slow flight (not applicable to lighter-than-air and powered parachutes)
(xiii)Stalls (not applicable to lighter-than-air, powered parachutes, and gyroplanes);
(xiv)Spins (applicable to airplanes and gliders);
(xv)Emergency operations;
(xvi)Tumble entry and avoidance techniques (applicable to weight-shift-control aircraft); and
(xvii)Post-flight procedures. 24. Amend § 61.191 by adding paragraph
(c)to read as follows: § 61.191 Additional flight instructor ratings.
(c)A person who applies for an additional sport pilot rating on a flight instructor certificate is not required to pass the knowledge test on the areas listed in § 61.185 (a)(2)(ii). 25. Revise § 61.193 to read as follows: 61.193 Flight instructor privileges.
(a)A person who holds a flight instructor certificate with other than a sport pilot rating is authorized, within the limits of that person's flight instructor certificate and ratings, to provide training and endorsements that are required for and relate to—
(1)A student pilot certificate;
(2)A pilot certificate;
(3)A flight instructor certificate;
(4)A ground instructor certificate;
(5)An aircraft rating;
(6)A flight review, an operating privilege, or recency-of-experience requirement of this part;
(7)A practical test; and
(8)A knowledge test.
(b)A person who holds a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating is authorized, within the limits of that person's flight instructor certificate and rating, to provide training and endorsements that are required for, and relate to—
(1)A student pilot certificate seeking a sport pilot certificate;
(2)A sport pilot certificate;
(3)A flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating;
(4)An aircraft rating for a sport pilot;
(5)A flight review;
(6)An operating privilege or recency-of-experience requirement of this part for a person exercising the privileges of a sport pilot;
(7)A practical test for a sport pilot certificate, a private pilot certificate with a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft rating, or a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating; and
(8)A knowledge test for a sport pilot certificate, a private pilot certificate with a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft rating, or a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating. 26. Amend § 61.195 by adding paragraphs (d)(7) and
(k)to read as follows: § 61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications.
(d)* * *
(7)Student pilot's certificate and logbook of a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate for solo flight in Class B, C and D airspace areas, at an airport within Class B, C, or D airspace and to, from, through or on an airport having an operational control tower, unless that flight instructor has—
(i)Given that student ground and flight training in that airspace or at that airport; and
(ii)Determined that the student is proficient to operate the aircraft safely.
(k)*Additional limitations for a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating* . A flight instructor with a sport pilot rating may only provide flight instruction in a light-sport aircraft and must have—
(1)At least a private pilot certificate with the applicable category and class ratings at any certificate level to provide training for a private pilot certificate with a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft rating;
(2)The endorsement specified in § 61.324 or be otherwise authorized to operate a powered parachute with an elliptical wing to provide training in a powered parachute with an elliptical wing;
(3)The endorsement specified in § 61.327(a) or be otherwise authorized to operate a light-sport aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS to provide training in a light-sport aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS;
(4)The endorsement specified in § 61.327(b) or be otherwise authorized to operate a light-sport aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS to provide training in a light-sport aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS; and
(5)The endorsement specified in § 61.325 or be otherwise authorized to conduct operations in Class B, C, and D airspace, at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace, and to, from, through, or at an airport having an operational control tower to provide training in this airspace and at these airports. § 61.301 [Amended] 27. Amend § 61.301 by removing paragraph (a)(7). 28. Amend § 61.303 by: a. Removing the words “light sport” adding the words “light-sport” in their place in paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(A) introductory text and (a)(2)(ii)(A) introductory text; and b. Revising the introductory text of paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A), (a)(1)(ii), (a)(1)(iii)(A), (a)(2)(i)(A), (a)(2)(ii), (a)(2)(iii)(A), (a)(3)(i)(A), (a)(3)(ii)(A), and (a)(3)(iii)(A), and paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A)( *1* ) to read as follows: § 61.303 If I want to operate a light-sport aircraft, what operating limits and endorsement requirements in this subpart must I comply with?
(a)* * * If you hold And you hold Then you may operate And
(1)* * *
(i)* * *
(A)Any light-sport aircraft for which you hold the appropriate category and class rating, ( *1* ) * * *
(ii)At least a recreational pilot certificate with a category and class rating at that certificate level or higher,
(A)* * * ( *1* ) * * *
(iii)* * *
(A)That light-sport aircraft, only if you hold the appropriate category and class rating, ( *1* ) * * *
(2)* * *
(i)* * *
(A)Any light-sport aircraft for which you hold the appropriate category and class rating, ( *1* ) * * *
(ii)At least a recreational pilot certificate with a category and class rating at that certificate level or higher,
(A)* * * ( *1* ) * * *
(iii)* * *
(A)That light-sport aircraft, only if you hold the appropriate category and class ratings, ( *1* ) * * *
(3)* * *
(i)* * *
(A)Any light-sport glider or balloon for which you hold the appropriate category and class rating, ( *1* ) * * *
(ii)* * *
(A)Any light-sport glider or balloon in that category and class, ( *1* ) You do not have to hold any of the endorsements required by this subpart, nor do you have to balloon in comply with the limitations in § 61.315.
(iii)* * *
(A)Any light-sport glider or balloon, only if you hold the glider category or balloon class rating, ( *1* ) * * * § 61.309 [Amended] 29. Amend § 61.309 introductory text by removing the words “Except as specified in § 61.329, to” and adding the word “To” to the beginning of the sentence. 30. Amend § 61.311 by revising the introductory text to read as follows: § 61.311 What flight proficiency requirements must I meet to apply for a sport pilot certificate? To apply for a sport pilot certificate you must receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor on the following areas of operation, as appropriate, for airplane single-engine land or sea, glider, gyroplane, airship, balloon, powered parachute land or sea, and weight-shift-control aircraft land or sea ratings: 31. Amend § 61.313 by: a. Removing the words “Except as specified in § 61.329, use” from the introductory text and adding the word “Use” to the beginning of the sentence; b. Removing the numeral “3” and adding in its place the numeral “2” in paragraphs (a)(1)(iv), (d)(1)(iv), (e)(1)(iv), (f)(1)(ii), (g)(1)(v) and (h)(1)(iv); c. Revising the introductory text of paragraphs
(a)through (h); d. Revising paragraph (g)(1) introductory text; and e. Revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (c)(1)(ii). The revisions read as follows: § 61.313 What aeronautical experience must I have to apply for a sport pilot certificate? If you are applying for a sport pilot certificate with . . . Then you must log at least . . . Which must include at least . . .
(a)Airplane category and single-engine land or sea class ratings,
(1)* * * * * *
(b)Glider category rating, and you have not logged at least 20 hours of flight time in heavier-than-air aircraft,
(1)* * * * * *
(ii)at least 3 training flights on those areas of operation specified in § 61.311 preparing for the practical test within 60 days before the date of the test.
(c)Glider category rating, and you have logged at least 20 hours of flight time in heavier-than-air craft,
(1)* * * * * *
(ii)at least 3 training flights on those areas of operation specified in § 61.311 preparing for the practical test within 60 days before the date of the test.
(d)Rotorcraft category and gyroplane class ratings,
(1)* * * * * *
(e)Lighter-than-air category and airship class ratings,
(1)* * * * * *
(f)Lighter-than-air category and balloon class ratings,
(1)* * * * * *
(g)Powered parachute category land or sea class ratings,
(1)12 hours of flight time in a powered parachute, including 10 hours of flight training in a powered parachute from an authorized instructor, and at least 2 hours of solo flight time in a powered parachute on the areas of operation listed in § 61.311, * * *
(h)Weight-shift-control aircraft category land or sea class ratings,
(1)* * * * * * 32. Amend § 61.315 by revising paragraphs (c)(11), (c)(14), and (c)(16) and adding paragraph (c)(20) to read as follows: § 61.315 What are the privileges and limits of my sport pilot certificate?
(c)* * *
(11)At an altitude of more than 10,000 feet MSL, or 2,000 feet AGL, whichever is higher.
(14)If the aircraft has:
(i)A V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS, unless you have met the requirements of § 61.327(a).
(ii)A V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS, unless you have met the requirements of § 61.327(b) or have logged pilot-in-command time in an aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS before (insert effective date of final rule).
(16)Contrary to any limit on your pilot certificate or airman medical certificate, or any other limit or endorsement from an authorized instructor.
(20)That is a powered parachute with an elliptical wing, unless you have met the requirements specified in § 61.324. 33. Revise § 61.317 to read as follows: § 61.317 Is my sport pilot certificate issued with aircraft category and class ratings? Your sport pilot certificate will list aircraft category and class ratings. When you successfully pass the practical test for a sport pilot certificate, regardless of the light-sport aircraft rating you seek, the FAA will issue a sport pilot certificate with the appropriate aircraft category and class rating. § 61.319 [Removed and reserved] 34. Remove and reserve § 61.319. § 61.321 [Removed and reserved] 35. Remove and reserve § 61.321. § 61.323 [Removed and reserved] 36. Remove and reserve § 61.323. 37. Add § 61.324 to read as follows: § 61.324 How do I obtain privileges to operate a powered parachute with an elliptical wing?
(a)Except as specified in paragraph
(b)of this section, if you hold a sport pilot certificate with a powered parachute rating and you seek to operate a powered parachute with an elliptical wing you must—
(1)Receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in a powered parachute with an elliptical wing; and
(2)Receive a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor who provided you with the training specified in paragraph
(a)of this section certifying that you are proficient to operate a powered parachute with an elliptical wing.
(b)The training and endorsements required by paragraph
(a)of this section are not required if you have logged flight time as pilot in command of a powered parachute with an elliptical wing prior to [ *EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE* ]. 38. Revise § 61.327 to read as follows: § 61.327 Are there specific endorsement requirements to operate light-sport aircraft based on V <sup>H</sup> ?
(a)If you hold a sport pilot certificate and you seek to operate a light-sport aircraft that has a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS you must—
(1)Receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in an aircraft that has a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS; and
(2)Receive a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor who provided the training specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section certifying that you are proficient in the operation of light-sport aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS.
(b)Except as specified in paragraph
(d)of this section, if you hold a sport pilot certificate and you seek to operate a light-sport aircraft that has a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS you must—
(1)Receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in an aircraft that has a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS; and
(2)Receive a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor who provided the training specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section certifying that you are proficient in the operation of light-sport aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS.
(c)If you hold a sport pilot certificate and you seek to operate a light-sport aircraft that is an airplane and has a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS after [ *ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE* ], you must receive and log 1 hour of flight training in a single-engine airplane that has a V <sup>H</sup> greater than 87 knots CAS on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments, including straight and level flight, climbs and descents, turns to a heading, and recovery from unusual flight attitudes.
(d)The training and endorsements required by paragraph
(b)of this section are not required if you have logged flight time as pilot in command of an aircraft with a V <sup>H</sup> less than or equal to 87 knots CAS prior to [ *EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE* ]. § 61.329 [Removed] 39. Remove § 61.329. §§ 61.401 through 61.431 (Subpart K) [Removed] 40. Remove subpart K consisting of §§ 61.401 through 61.431. PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES 41. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180). 42. Amend § 91.119 by revising paragraph
(d)to read as follows: § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
(d)*Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft* . If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—
(1)A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph
(b)or
(c)of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and
(2)A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph
(c)of this section. 43. Amend § 91.417 by revising paragraph (a)(2)(v) to read as follows: § 91.417 Maintenance records.
(a)* * *
(2)* * *
(v)The current status of applicable airworthiness directives
(AD)and safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the next action is required. PART 141—PILOT SCHOOLS 44. The authority citation for part 141 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709, 44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302. 45. Amend § 141.39 by revising paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 141.39 Aircraft.
(b)Each aircraft must be certificated with a standard airworthiness certificate, a primary airworthiness certificate, or a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category unless the Administrator determines that due to the nature of the approved course, an aircraft not having a standard airworthiness certificate, a primary airworthiness certificate, or a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category may be used; Issued in Washington, DC on April 9, 2008. James J. Ballough, Director, Flight Standards Service. [FR Doc. 08-1127 Filed 4-11-08; 8:45am]
Connectionstraces to 41
Traces to 41 documents
U.S. Code
45 references not yet in our index
  • 5 CFR 731
  • 5 CFR 302
  • 5 CFR 332.406
  • 5 CFR 332
  • 42 F.3d 1371
  • 5 CFR 1.1
  • Pub. L. 100-235
  • 5 CFR 315
  • 5 CFR 359
  • 5 CFR 752
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 14 CFR 71
  • 14 CFR 135
  • 14 CFR 91.116
  • 14 CFR 91
  • 29 CFR 4022
  • 29 CFR 4044
  • 30 CFR 250
  • Pub. L. 106-554
  • 114 Stat. 2763
  • 30 CFR 270
  • 30 CFR 281
  • 30 CFR 282
  • 33 CFR 117
  • 33 CFR 117.823
  • 42 USC 4321-4370f
  • 33 CFR 165
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • Pub. L. 104-121
  • 44 USC 3501-3520
  • 2 USC 1531-1538
  • Pub. L. 107-295
  • 40 CFR 52
  • Pub. L. 104-4
  • 40 CFR 51
  • 5 CFR 351
  • 5 CFR 351.403
  • 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)
  • Pub. L. 96-354
+ 5 more
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final rule
U.S.C.§ 7701
U.S.C.§ 705
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 1302
U.S.C.§ 3301
U.S.C.§ 3318
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
U.S.C.§ 106
C.F.R.§ 39.19
F. App'x42 F.3d 1371
Cite5 CFR 731
Cite5 CFR 302
Cites 86 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

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

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